Richard Howitt

RETHINKING THE BUILDING BLOCKS: ONTOLOGICAL PLURALISM AND THE IDEA OF ‘MANAGEMENT’

ABSTRACT. The persistence of indigenous ontologies rooted in human systems that pre‐date the creation of colonial property rights and assertions of frontier conquest and dispossession unsettles the dominant idea that ‘management’ is an unproblematic and universally endorsed goal for communities, regions and nations in their environmental and development discourses. This paper argues that conceptual building blocks which render management, be it of environments, economies or people, as unquestionably good, need to be reconsidered. Drawing on diverse indigenous knowledges in Australia, particularly in relation to wildlife management, the paper examines the hidden cultural specificity of management, planning, institutional strengthening and capacity building as well as their implicit silencing of alternative narratives of the economic, environmental and cultural dimensions of social life.

Indigenous geographies I: Mere resource conflicts? The complexities in Indigenous land and environmental claims

Indigenous peoples live in challenging environments and engage in complex negotiations to access their rights. Yet research on their social mobilization often stereotypes them as victims of environmental management. We review three debates through which human geographers are beginning to engage more meaningfully with Indigenous environmentalism: the political ecology of neoliberalism; deliberation within claims settlement; and propertization of socio-ecological relations. A movement away from conflating Indigenous with local is evident in those debates, producing recognition of diversity in Indigenous motivations but also a range of challenges to geographical practice.

Weaving Indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our methods

Indigenous and sustainability sciences have much to offer one another regarding the identification of techniques and methods for sustaining resilient landscapes. Based upon the literature, and our findings, it is evident that some Indigenous peoples have maintained distinct systematic, localized, and place-based environmental knowledge over extended time periods. These long-resident knowledge systems contain extensive information regarding not only how to maintain but also to steward biodiverse ecosystems. For example, the Nisqually Tribe of western Washington State, USA blends various aspects of ecological science with their Indigenous knowledge to support the restoration and management of the Nisqually river system watershed along with its associated natural resources of biological and cultural significance. We believe these kinds of Indigenous observations and perspectives are critical for establishing or expanding collaborations with sustainability scientists. Fikret Berkes observed in his foundational text, Sacred Ecology, a “growing interest in traditional ecological knowledge since the 1980s is perhaps indicative of two things: the need for ecological insights from indigenous practices of resource use, and the need to develop a new ecological ethic in part by learning from the wisdom of traditional knowledge holders” (2012: 19). The primary focus of the papers in this special edition of Sustainability Science, including this editorial introduction, is an exploration of the intersection of Indigenous and sustainability sciences. We challenged key thinkers in these research areas to cultivate mutually conducive and appropriate principles, protocols, and practices that address humanity’s collective need to sustain landscapes that demonstrate the ability not only to maintain human life but more crucially the interrelated more-than-human biosphere. The authors were asked to address the strengths and limitations posed by both Indigenous and sustainability sciences in this endeavor. We also encouraged discussion concerning how these two scientific paradigms might collaborate, acknowledging that protocols will need to be identified, or created, to enable successful collaborations. It is our hope that this special edition might add to what Scholz and Steiner (2015) have identified as a scant literature documenting the benefits of transdisciplinary research. This special edition was inspired by an internationally diverse set of Indigenous academics, community scholars and non-Indigenous academics who participated in a National Science Foundation funded workshop entitled Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences: Diversifying our Methods (WISDOM). The next three sections & Jay T. Johnson jaytjohnson@ku.edu

Sustainability assessment : pluralism, practice and progress

Description Sustainability Assessment is an increasingly important tool for informing planning and development decisions across the globe. Required by law in some countries, strongly recommended in others, a comprehensive analysis of why Sustainability Assessment is needed and clarification of the value-laden and political nature of assessments is long overdue. Currently the writing on the subject is limited and comprises, for the most part, guidance documents and completed assessments. This book overcomes these shortcomings by simultaneously providing the knowledge, inspiration and range of assessment tools in decision-making students require to tackle Sustainability Assessment challenges nested within wide-ranging values and sustainability-grounded evidence. The collection details the current state-of-the art in relation to Sustainability Assessment theory and practice, and considers the pluralistic nature of the tool and the implications for achieving sustainable decision-making. The contributors set out the context for Sustainability Assessment and then outline some contested issues which can affect interpretations of whether the decision tool has been effective. Current practice worldwide is assessed against a consistent framework and then solutions to some of the inherent weaknesses and causes of conflict in relation to the perceived sustainability of outcomes are put forward. The book is unique in setting out state-of-the-art in terms of Sustainability Assessment practice by focusing on those countries with developing experience. It also covers emerging factors influencing effectiveness of decision-making tools and evaluates how they affect the performance of Sustainability Assessment. Written by authors among the leading university academics teaching impact assessment courses in the most acclaimed universities worldwide operating in this field, it is ideally suited for the growing numbers of courses in impact assessment education and training.

Indigenous geographies III Methodological innovation and the unsettling of participatory research

Working with Indigenous peoples has stretched geographers’ presumptions about appropriate modes of engagement and representation. Early feminist geography prompted methodological experimentation that exercised significant and lasting influence on the discipline. The politics of working with Indigenous peoples yields similarly significant insights about research leadership and methodological choices that are now recognized more widely. We juxtapose the prevailing ethnographic and collaborative approaches to researching Indigenous peoples against Indigenes’ preference for leading research into their lives. Ethical concerns about recent geographical research suggest a need to reconceptualize participation, action and representation.

Indigenous geographies II : the aspirational spaces in postcolonial politics - reconciliation, belonging and social provision

Required to negotiate a transcultural present in which their rights and opportunities are circumscribed by the pleadings of multicultural others, Indigenous peoples have attracted attention for their approaches to alliance-building, responsible co-existence and self-determined care. In this second report on Indigenous geographies1, we associate those projects with the geographies of hope but, recognizing that a futuristic gaze on allegedly progressive cases can lapse into naivety, we call for further postcolonial critique of the influences on those cases. We distinguish retrospective and prospective applications of postcolonial theory, suggesting that while geographers initially disregarded the latter they now exaggerate that outlook in hopeful advocacy for Indigenous alternatives. Nonetheless, we conclude with examples of reconciliation and Indigenous service provision which attest to the social significance and aspirational character of Indigenous responses, both from the margins and in the focus of everyday politics.

Can SIA empower communities

Public participation in social impact assessment (SIA) has been identified as a source of improved decision-making about resource development in several countries, with an implicit assumption that this sort of participation provides an avenue for empowerment of affected communities in these decision-making processes. This paper provides a critical discussion of the effectiveness of SIA as a means of local empowerment through case studies of resource projects in Australia, Canada, and Southeast Asia.

Some things do change: indigenous rights, geographers and geography in Australia

Abstract Using a recent editorial comment in this journal as a focus, this paper reviews the extent to which geography has been implicated in the ‘colonial project’ in Australia. It argues that recent work amongst geographers involved with indigenous Australians reflects a commitment to transcend this colonial past. The paper calls for geographers to work toward a wide‐reaching decolonisation of the discipline, and to develop a better understanding of the contemporary legacies of geographys colonial past.

The importance of process in social impact assessment: Ethics, methods and process for cross-cultural engagement

Social impact assessment (SIA) presents an important opportunity to draw cross-cultural encounters arising from project-based development efforts into wider procedures of engagement and negotiation that might address the imbalance in relationships between local communities, project proponents and states. In the SIA literature, however, ethical considerations have received relatively little explicit attention, with greater attention given to outcomes in the form of negotiated agreements and financial and employment results. This paper considers the question of SIA methods from the standpoint of recent Australian national guidelines on ethical engagement with Australian Indigenous people, and argues for much greater attention being given to process and its implications for just and sustainable outcomes in SIA research.

On Teaching and Learning Resource and Environmental Management: reframing capacity building in multicultural settings

Abstract This paper aims to improve preparation of stakeholders and affected interests for participation in natural resource management (NRM) processes. It argues that a reframing of relationships in multicultural NRM systems can improve individual and institutional capacities to think about and respond to intercultural domains. We argue that the professional toolkit needed to enhance the efficacy and openness of NRM must go beyond technical competence in science and economics to include a refined intercultural capacity amongst all involved. This does not refer to a unidirectional education of those perceived as lacking education, but a multi-directional capacity to reframe relationships, behaviours and practices. By reflecting on our diverse experiences of teaching and learning at the Comalco bauxite mine in far northern Queensland and in the university classroom in Sydney, we argue that a literacy in cultural landscapes is fundamental to this reframing of relationships. To use a metaphor that draws together a concern with both natural resources and geographical scale, it is simply not good enough to deal with both the forests and the trees: we also need to recognise the cultural landscapes in which both are embedded, and the cultural frames that give them different meanings.