Applied Filters
- Article
- Science and PolicyRemove filter
- Moola, FaisalRemove filter
Journal Title
Publication Date
Author
- Ban, Natalie C1
- Beaty, Carolynn1
- Beazley, Karen F1
- Cheskey, Edward1
- Claxton, Nick XEMŦOLTW1
- Cooke, Steven J1
- Coristine, Laura1
- Crawford, Lindsay1
- Darimont, Chris T1
- Davis, Rob1
- Dietz, Sabine1
- Eckert, Lauren E1
- Forbes, Graham1
- Gadallah, Fawziah ZuZu1
- Higgs, Eric1
- Johnston, Anna1
- Kendall, Peter1
- Lemieux, Christopher J1
- Mandrak, Nick1
- Owens, Cameron1
- Parker, Scott1
- Pellatt, Marlow1
- Quayle, James1
- Ray, Justina C1
Access Type
1 - 2of2
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESS
- Lauren E. Eckert,
- Nick XEMŦOLTW_ Claxton,
- Cameron Owens,
- Anna Johnston,
- Natalie C. Ban,
- Faisal Moola, and
- Chris T. Darimont
Policy-makers ideally pursue well-informed, socially just means to make environmental decisions. Indigenous peoples have used Indigenous knowledge (IK) to inform decisions about environmental management for millennia. In the last 50 years, many western societies have used environmental assessment (EA) processes to deliberate on industrial proposals, informed by scientific information. Recently EA processes have attempted to incorporate IK in some countries and regions, but practitioners and scholars have criticized the ability of EA to meaningfully engage IK. Here we consider these tensions in Canada, a country with economic focus on resource extraction and unresolved government-to-government relationships with Indigenous Nations. In 2019, the Canadian government passed the Impact Assessment Act, reinvigorating dialogue on the relationship between IK and EA. Addressing this opportunity, we examined obstacles between IK and EA via a systematic literature review, and qualitative analyses of publications and the Act itself. Our results and synthesis identify obstacles preventing the Act from meaningfully engaging IK, some of which are surmountable (e.g., failures to engage best practices, financial limitations), whereas others are substantial (e.g., knowledge incompatibilities, effects of colonization). Finally, we offer recommendations for practitioners and scholars towards ameliorating relationships between IK and EA towards improved decision-making and recognition of Indigenous rights. - OPEN ACCESS
- Sabine Dietz,
- Karen F. Beazley,
- Christopher J. Lemieux,
- Colleen St. Clair,
- Laura Coristine,
- Eric Higgs,
- Risa Smith,
- Marlow Pellatt,
- Carolynn Beaty,
- Edward Cheskey,
- Steven J. Cooke,
- Lindsay Crawford,
- Rob Davis,
- Graham Forbes,
- Fawziah (ZuZu) Gadallah,
- Peter Kendall,
- Nick Mandrak,
- Faisal Moola,
- Scott Parker,
- James Quayle,
- Justina C. Ray,
- Karen Richardson,
- Kevin Smith,
- James Snider,
- John P. Smol,
- William J Sutherland,
- Andre Vallillee,
- Lori White, and
- Alison Woodley
Horizon scanning is increasingly used in conservation to systematically explore emerging policy and management issues. We present the results of a horizon scan of issues likely to impact management of Canadian protected and conserved areas over the next 5–10 years. Eighty-eight individuals participated, representing a broad community of academics, government and nongovernment organizations, and foundations, including policymakers and managers of protected and conserved areas. This community initially identified 187 issues, which were subsequently triaged to 15 horizon issues by a group of 33 experts using a modified Delphi technique. Results were organized under four broad categories: (i) emerging effects of climate change in protected and conserved areas design, planning, and management (i.e., large-scale ecosystem changes, species translocation, fire regimes, ecological integrity, and snow patterns); (ii) Indigenous governance and knowledge systems (i.e., Indigenous governance and Indigenous knowledge and Western science); (iii) integrated conservation approaches across landscapes and seascapes (i.e., connectivity conservation, integrating ecosystem values and services, freshwater planning); and (iv) early responses to emerging cumulative, underestimated, and novel threats (i.e., management of cumulative impacts, declining insect biomass, increasing anthropogenic noise, synthetic biology). Overall, the scan identified several emerging issues that require immediate attention to effectively reduce threats, respond to opportunities, and enhance preparedness and capacity to react.