Indigenous fire stewardship enhances ecosystem diversity, assists with the management of complex resources, and reduces wildfire risk by lessening fuel loads. Although Indigenous Peoples have maintained fire stewardship practices for millennia and continue to be keepers of fire knowledge, significant barriers exist for re-engaging in cultural burning. Indigenous communities in Canada have unique vulnerabilities to large and high-intensity wildfires as they are predominately located in remote, forested regions and lack financial support at federal and provincial levels to mitigate wildfire risk. Therefore, it is critical to uphold Indigenous expertise in leading effective and socially just fire stewardship. In this perspective, we demonstrate the benefits of cultural burning and identify five key barriers to advancing Indigenous fire stewardship in Canada. We also provide calls to action to assist with reducing preconceptions and misinformation and focus on creating space and respect for different knowledges and experiences. Despite growing concerns over wildfire risk and agency-stated intentions to establish Indigenous Peoples as partners in wildfire management, power imbalances still exist. The future and coexistence with fire in Canada needs to be a shared responsibility and led by Indigenous Peoples within their territories.

Worldwide, Indigenous peoples are leading the revitalization of their/our cultures through the restoration of ecosystems in which they are embedded, including in response to increasing “megafires.” Concurrently, growing Indigenous‐led movements are calling for governments to implement Indigenous rights, titles and treaties, and many settler‐colonial governments are committing to reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and to implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Yet, despite growing recognition that just and effective conservation is only possible through partnerships with, or led by, Indigenous peoples, decolonizing approaches to restoration have received insufficient attention. However, reconciliation will be incomplete without Indigenous‐led restoration of Indigenous lands, knowledges, and cultures. In this article, we introduce the concept of “walking on two legs” to guide restoration scientists and practitioners in advancing the interconnected processes of Indigenous‐led restoration and reconciliation in Indigenous territories. As an action‐oriented framework articulated by Secwépemc Elder Ronald E. Ignace, “walking on two legs” seeks to bring Indigenous knowledges into balance with western scientific knowledge in service of upholding an Indigenous stewardship ethic that is embedded in Indigenous ways of relating to land and embodies principles of respect, reciprocity, and responsibility. Grounding this discussion in the context of fire‐adapted ecosystems of western Canada and unceded and traditional Secwépemc territory, Secwepemcúl̓ecw, we argue that walking on two legs, along with principles of reconciliation, offers a pathway to uphold respectful relationships with Indigenous peoples, knowledges, and territories through Indigenous‐led restoration.

In the context of complex intergenerational challenges such as climate change and sustainable development, it is increasingly important for scientists and policy-makers to actively engage with and support the meaningful participation of youth in policy and decision-making. This research evaluates the effectiveness and impact of the Youth in Landscapes Initiative in supporting the active participation and leadership development of youth (aged 18–30 years old) participants at the 2014 Global Landscapes Forum (GLF), an international science-policy forum. This ‘youth program’ comprised a Youth Session, skills workshops and mentoring programs to empower youth through leadership and capacity building opportunities. Results show a high demand for youth participation: 34% of GLF conference delegates expressed interest to attend the Youth Session, over 22% of GLF session organisers requested youth to take on leadership roles, and the youth program itself received over 770 applications for the ‘facilitator’ and ‘pitcher’ leadership positions. The skills-based ‘masterclasses’ successfully built the confidence and knowledge of youth participants, as shown by post-evaluation survey responses. This translated into active and substantive youth participation throughout the forum. Senior professionals connected to the program praised it highly, seeing it as an opportunity for mutual, intergenerational learning. The Youth in Landscape Initiative is presented as a model and distilled into a framework to inform future youth engagement strategies in international conferences and associated science-policy processes.

No abstract

No abstract