This research explores the implications of the distinction between transactional and relational understandings of the Numbered Treaties, negotiated by Indigenous peoples and the Dominion of Canada from 1871-1921. It deconstructs representations of the Numbered Treaties as “land transactions” and challenges the associated forms of oppression that emerge from this interpretation. Drawing on oral histories of the Numbered Treaties, it argues instead that they established a framework for relationship that expressly affirmed the continuity of Indigenous legal and political orders. Further, this dissertation positions treaties as a longstanding Indigenous political institution, arguing for the resurgence of a treaty-based ethic of relationality that has multiple applications in the contemporary context. It demonstrates how a relational understanding of treaties can function as a powerful strategy of refusal to incorporation within the nation state; arguing that if treaties are understood as structures of co-existence rather than land transactions, settler colonial assertions of hegemonic authority over Indigenous peoples and lands remain illegitimate. Furthermore, it examines how a relational orientation to treaties might inspire alternatives to violent, asymmetrical, and hierarchical forms of co-existence between humans and with other living beings. To this end, it takes up the potential for treaties to inform legal and political strategies that are reflective of Indigenous philosophies of relationality, providing applied examples at the individual, intrasocietal, and intersocietal levels. / Graduate / 2018-12-18

This thesis examines the practices of Indigeneity, acts of Indigenous social and cultural traditions stemming from Teetł’it Gwich’in land-based culture in the Northwest Territories. By emphasizing Teetł’it Gwich’in philosophy, this project illustrates how Teetł’it Gwich’in practices of Indigeneity are rooted in their social, physical, and cultural relationship with the land, which are central to Gwich’in self-determination. This thesis demonstrates traditional Teetł’it Gwich’in self-governance practices are driven by cultural and social norms rooted in traditional knowledge, as well as contemporary Gwich’in-Canada relations. Utilizing knowledge collected from Teetł’it Gwich’in elders, these first-hand accounts show the connection between Canada and the Teetł’it Gwich’in through state policies that impede Teetł’it Gwich’in self-determination. By examining these challenges to their cultural practices, Teetł’it Gwich’in worldviews rooted in land-based practices is considered the basis for Gwich’in self-determination rooted in the physical and cultural landscape of Gwich’in lands. / Graduate / 0615 / 0740

This dissertation is concerned with the ways in which Māori legal traditions have changed in response to the process of negotiated settlement of historical claims against the state. The settlements agreed between Māori groups and the state provide significant opportunities and challenges for Māori communities and, inevitably, force those communities to confront questions relating to the application of their own legal traditions to these changed, and still changing, circumstances. This dissertation focuses specifically on Māori legal traditions and post-settlement governance entities. However, the intention is not to simply record changes to Māori legal traditions, but to offer some assessment as to whether these changes and adaptations support, or alternatively detract from, the two key goals of the settlement process - reconciliation and Māori self-determination. I argue that where the settlement process is compelling Māori legal traditions to develop in a way that is contrary to reconciliation and Māori self-determination, then the settlement process itself ought to be adjusted. This dissertation studies the nature of changes to Māori legal traditions in the context of the Treaty settlement process, using a framework that can be applied to Māori legal traditions in other contexts. There are many more stories of Māori legal traditions that remain to be told, including stories that drill into the detail of specific legal traditions and create pathways between an appropriate philosophical framework and the practical operation of vibrant Māori legal systems. Those stories will be vital if we in Aotearoa/New Zealand are to move towards reconciliation and Māori self-determination. The story that runs through this dissertation is one of a settlement process that undermines those objectives because of the pressures it places on Māori legal traditions. But it need not be this way. If parties to the Treaty settlement process take the objectives of self-determination and reconciliation seriously, and pay careful attention to changes to Māori legal traditions that take place in the context of that process, a different story can be told – a story in which Treaty settlements signify, not the end of a Treaty relationship, but a new beginning. / Graduate / 0398 / 0332 / 0326 / carwyn@uvic.ca

This dissertation is concerned with the ways in which Māori legal traditions have changed in response to the process of negotiated settlement of historical claims against the state. The settlements agreed between Māori groups and the state provide significant opportunities and challenges for Māori communities and, inevitably, force those communities to confront questions relating to the application of their own legal traditions to these changed, and still changing, circumstances. This dissertation focuses specifically on Māori legal traditions and post-settlement governance entities. However, the intention is not to simply record changes to Māori legal traditions, but to offer some assessment as to whether these changes and adaptations support, or alternatively detract from, the two key goals of the settlement process - reconciliation and Māori self-determination. I argue that where the settlement process is compelling Māori legal traditions to develop in a way that is contrary to reconciliation and Māori self-determination, then the settlement process itself ought to be adjusted. This dissertation studies the nature of changes to Māori legal traditions in the context of the Treaty settlement process, using a framework that can be applied to Māori legal traditions in other contexts. There are many more stories of Māori legal traditions that remain to be told, including stories that drill into the detail of specific legal traditions and create pathways between an appropriate philosophical framework and the practical operation of vibrant Māori legal systems. Those stories will be vital if we in Aotearoa/New Zealand are to move towards reconciliation and Māori self-determination. The story that runs through this dissertation is one of a settlement process that undermines those objectives because of the pressures it places on Māori legal traditions. But it need not be this way. If parties to the Treaty settlement process take the objectives of self-determination and reconciliation seriously, and pay careful attention to changes to Māori legal traditions that take place in the context of that process, a different story can be told – a story in which Treaty settlements signify, not the end of a Treaty relationship, but a new beginning. / Graduate / 0398 / 0332 / 0326 / carwyn@uvic.ca

Colonization within Indigenous territories has impacted Indigenous governance structures and women in leadership in different ways. In order to best understand the violence, displacement and oppression that Coast Salish women face today we need to focus on the ways that the state has attacked the powerful role that si´em slheni´ (honoured and respected woman) held within her socio-political societies prior to contact. I use an historical institutional analysis to draw out the ways that history has impacted Coast Salish people. I also utilize Diane Million’s Felt Theory (2008) by weaving Coast Salish women’s stories, experiences, and understandings of colonization within their own ancestral territories. The research question at hand is: How have Coast Salish si´em slhunlhéni´ (honoured and respected women) been impacted due to colonization historically and how are these impacts still affecting our slhunlhéni´ and our communities today? In asking this question, I hope to urge the reader to engage a territorially-based approach in dealing with the violence and displacement that Indigenous women in Canada face today. I aim to do so by illustrating what an approach based in Coast Salish history and governance would look like. I argue that if we do not choose to take up a territorial based approach, we are only furthering the erasure and silencing of Indigenous womanhood denying its resurgence. I highlight how settler statecraft has played out in Coast Salish territory and explore the myriad of ways that racist ideologies and colonial violence have taken shape within Coast Salish territories. To do so, I examine the different ways that the state has attempted to control and pathologize coastal people and illustrate the shift that has occurred in moving from Coast Salish economies to capitalism. Ultimately, I demonstrate the multi-faceted approach taken by legislative discrimination that was fueled by ideological racism that the settler colonial project depends upon in order to maintain control over Indigenous lands, waters, and people. By examining these issues, I highlight how the settler project was able to weaken slhunlhéni´ role and therefore firmly establish itself within Coast Salish territories Finally, I turn to present day reality in Coast Salish territory and argue that while there are ways the state, settlers and Indigenous people living within Coast Salish territories are attempting to address the wrongs of colonization, Coast Salish women’s voices and roles are being left out of decolonial discourse and actions. In order to liberate Coast Salish women, we need to turn back to our ancestral ways and for those who are not a descendant to these territories one must work to understand what your responsibility is to the local people and women of these lands. In this way, centering a territorially based approach to governance in all acts of resurgence and decolonial action allows for Coast Salish women to maintain authority, therefore empowering these women. Centering local laws and governance will center Indigenous women, lifting them from the displaced positions they find themselves in today. / Graduate

Contemporary events frequently call into question the status of state-recognized Native nations. For example, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) failed to pass a resolution dissolving state-recognized membership; and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported on the reality of federal funding being awarded to non-federally recognized Native nations. Although state-recognized Native nations are handicapped in their strategies and the availability of resources to assert their right to self-determine, some have persevered despite the inability to establish a direct relationship with the national government. Reconsidering federalism as it pertains to Native nations reveals opportunities for non-federally recognized Native nations to access resources and assert self-governing authority in alternative arenas outside the exclusive tribal-national government-to-government relationship. My research analyzes how two state-recognized Native nations, the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina and the Waccamaw Indian People of South Carolina, have operated as political actors; have maintained their communities; have organized politically and socially; and have asserted their right to self-determine by engaging state—and at certain times federal—politics to address needs within their communities. I used a qualitative case study approach to examine the strategies these two state-recognized Native nations have developed to engage state relationships. I argue that state-recognized Native nations are developing significant political relationships with their home states and other entities, such as federal, state, and local agencies, and nonprofits, to address issues in their communities.

Thesis (MPhil (Sustainable Development, Planning and Management))--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / The study investigates the role of indigenous governance systems in sustainable development at Moshupa, Botswana. Due to time limitations, this research study has only been able to provide a basic understanding of the role of indigenous governance systems in sustainable development. The study is primarily qualitative and generated data through the use of instruments including document analysis, focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews. A sample of thirty-five (35) respondents from both sexes, aged twenty-eight (28) years to eighty-two (82) years constitutes the study. The sample was drawn using a “snowball sampling” procedure. Specifically, some key informants were chiefs from neighbouring villages who have an impact on the history of Bakgatla-ba-ga-Mmanaana and/or Moshupa village administration (Kanye, Thamaga, Mankgodi, Molepolole, Ramotswa, and Tlokweng), village elders and traditional doctor; whilst other respondents were selected from tribal wards, village development committee, water affairs department, crèche, Botswana Police service, sub-landboard, elected political councillors, and the youth movement because of their positions and understanding of the socio-economic and ecological processes in the community. Findings of the study indicate that like in many African countries, indigenous governance in Botswana covers a broad spectrum of issues including the participation of community in the local economy, environmental issues and social relations. The study further reveals that the quality of indigenous governance, despite its short comings, has provided communities with a solid foundation to cope with unprecedented development changes; enabled communities to ...

This Master’s thesis seeks to develop a better understanding of how Indigenous voices can be included in water governance. As a starting point, social learning theory, collaborative governance and Indigenous and Canadian relations were carefully studied. Despite the large body of research on collaborative governance with First Nations and on social learning in water governance, little is known specifically about social learning processes in colonial contexts. Using grounded theory and Indigenous methodologies, this research investigates how the current approach to implementing the Province’s legal constitutional, “duty to consult” affects social learning processes and the inclusion of Indigenous people in water governance. Findings indicate that the laws and policies that have been created based on the Crown’s interpretation of Treaty 8, an agreement signed between the Fort Nelson First Nation and Canada in 1899. This duty to consult constrains social learning, as it does not allow for the flexibility needed for a reframing process that might bring the actors to a common understanding of Treaty 8, the treaty relationship and its application as such today, as a basis for future collaboration. Without reframing processes, the consultation process is perceived by the Fort Nelson First Nation, a Treaty 8 nation, to lack legitimacy and neutral facilitation. Subsequently, consultation is seen as a checkbox that must be completed, but fails to include First Nations’ knowledge, interests and concerns about impacts from development and appropriate accommodation. This research also investigates a new governance arrangement emerging in northeast BC, which changes the way Fort Nelson First Nation voices are included in decision-making. Processes of nation building and capacity building contribute to Fort Nelson First Nation’s New Approach to governance. The New Approach sees changes to the sites of authority, revenue and norms and beliefs, resulting in a governance innovation that circumvents the provincial government’s role in governance by creating a closer working relationship between industry and the Fort Nelson First Nation. The results are development planning and decisions that better reflect the Fort Nelson First Nation’s concerns and interests in the near future. / Graduate

This study addresses a conceptual gap in collaborative environmental governance pertaining to the role of Indigenous peoples. Conventional collaborative approaches to environmental governance include input and resource-pooling by two or more stakeholders. This approach becomes conceptually problematic when the stakeholder view is extended to Indigenous peoples. While experiences vary widely around the world, it is common for Indigenous peoples to assert themselves as existing within self-determining nations within their traditional homelands – rather than as stakeholders or interest groups. This perspective is reflected in the Indigenous governance literature, which provides a window into how Indigenous peoples view themselves. The purpose of this doctoral research was to critically evaluate the extent to which principles and practices of collaborative environmental governance are compatible with the main tenets and advances in Indigenous governance related to self-determination. This was done through an extensive literature review and empirical study in the context of British Columbia, Canada. Through a multi-case study analysis of three regional scale cases, complemented by analysis of a single case at the provincial scale, this research analyzed assumptions and perspectives existing at the intersection of Indigenous governance and collaborative environmental governance. The regional, multi-case study concentrated on the practice of collaboration around governance for water, while the provincial case examined a water policy reform process. The key findings of this research were that non-Indigenous entities and personnel initiating or practicing collaborative environmental governance and engaged in water policy reform tended to hold a stakeholder-view of Indigenous peoples. In contrast, Indigenous peoples and leaders tended to view themselves as existing within self-determining Indigenous nations. These conflicting assumptions led to dissatisfaction for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples with regard to collaboration for water governance and water reform, in terms of both processes and outcomes. This research makes contributions to both scholarship and practice. Conceptually, the research identifies how the assumptions and approaches to collaboration within mainstream collaborative environmental governance scholarship should shift fundamentally in ways that incorporate concepts related to Indigenous governance. This conceptual shift could be applied to the breadth of empirical contexts that are discussed in existing collaborative environmental governance scholarship. The empirical findings of this research provide a robust rationale for the importance of a conceptual bridge between the collaborative environmental governance and Indigenous governance literatures. This bridge would involve creation of a body of collaborative scholarship that addresses self-determination and nationhood when theorizing on collaboration with Indigenous peoples. Additionally, it makes a practical contribution by highlighting ways in which those engaged in collaborative environmental governance and water policy reform can draw on some of the tenets of Indigenous governance scholarship. These recommendations include the following: (1) approach or involve Indigenous peoples as self-determining nations rather than one of many collaborative stakeholders or participants; (2) Identify and clarify any existing or intended (a) environmental governance processes and (b) assertions to self-determination by the Indigenous nation; (3) Create opportunities for relationship building between Indigenous peoples and policy or governance practitioners; (4) Choose venues and processes of decision making that reflect Indigenous rather than Eurocentric venues and processes; and (5) Provide resources to Indigenous nations to level the playing field in terms of capacity for collaboration or for policy reform decision making. Finally, this research suggests that positive outcomes are possible where water governance is carried out in ways that meaningfully recognize and address the perspectives of Indigenous peoples.

This study addresses a conceptual gap in collaborative environmental governance pertaining to the role of Indigenous peoples. Conventional collaborative approaches to environmental governance include input and resource-pooling by two or more stakeholders. This approach becomes conceptually problematic when the stakeholder view is extended to Indigenous peoples. While experiences vary widely around the world, it is common for Indigenous peoples to assert themselves as existing within self-determining nations within their traditional homelands – rather than as stakeholders or interest groups. This perspective is reflected in the Indigenous governance literature, which provides a window into how Indigenous peoples view themselves. The purpose of this doctoral research was to critically evaluate the extent to which principles and practices of collaborative environmental governance are compatible with the main tenets and advances in Indigenous governance related to self-determination. This was done through an extensive literature review and empirical study in the context of British Columbia, Canada. Through a multi-case study analysis of three regional scale cases, complemented by analysis of a single case at the provincial scale, this research analyzed assumptions and perspectives existing at the intersection of Indigenous governance and collaborative environmental governance. The regional, multi-case study concentrated on the practice of collaboration around governance for water, while the provincial case examined a water policy reform process. The key findings of this research were that non-Indigenous entities and personnel initiating or practicing collaborative environmental governance and engaged in water policy reform tended to hold a stakeholder-view of Indigenous peoples. In contrast, Indigenous peoples and leaders tended to view themselves as existing within self-determining Indigenous nations. These conflicting assumptions led to dissatisfaction for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples with regard to collaboration for water governance and water reform, in terms of both processes and outcomes. This research makes contributions to both scholarship and practice. Conceptually, the research identifies how the assumptions and approaches to collaboration within mainstream collaborative environmental governance scholarship should shift fundamentally in ways that incorporate concepts related to Indigenous governance. This conceptual shift could be applied to the breadth of empirical contexts that are discussed in existing collaborative environmental governance scholarship. The empirical findings of this research provide a robust rationale for the importance of a conceptual bridge between the collaborative environmental governance and Indigenous governance literatures. This bridge would involve creation of a body of collaborative scholarship that addresses self-determination and nationhood when theorizing on collaboration with Indigenous peoples. Additionally, it makes a practical contribution by highlighting ways in which those engaged in collaborative environmental governance and water policy reform can draw on some of the tenets of Indigenous governance scholarship. These recommendations include the following: (1) approach or involve Indigenous peoples as self-determining nations rather than one of many collaborative stakeholders or participants; (2) Identify and clarify any existing or intended (a) environmental governance processes and (b) assertions to self-determination by the Indigenous nation; (3) Create opportunities for relationship building between Indigenous peoples and policy or governance practitioners; (4) Choose venues and processes of decision making that reflect Indigenous rather than Eurocentric venues and processes; and (5) Provide resources to Indigenous nations to level the playing field in terms of capacity for collaboration or for policy reform decision making. Finally, this research suggests that positive outcomes are possible where water governance is carried out in ways that meaningfully recognize and address the perspectives of Indigenous peoples.