Alternative approaches to co-design: insights from indigenous/academic research collaborations

Parsons, Meg; Fisher, Karen; Nalau, Johanna

doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2016.07.001

Cited by 88 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus actors in the process must build trust between each other and understand the limitations of their expertise and how to delegate and share responsibilities accordingly (Mauser et al, 2013;Binder et al, 2015;van Kerkhoff and Lebel, 2015;Clark et al, 2016). They must also bridge their differences in perspective so that they can learn from each other to build their capacity for informed decision making in the future (Clark et al, 2016;Parsons et al, 2016). Considering the scope and challenging political circumstances within which the FWOA arose, engaging an external boundary organization 6 as a neutral facilitator may be advantageous in future cycles (Weichselgartner and Kasperson, 2010;Herrero et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beneath the Surface of the First World Ocean Assessment: An Investigation Into the Global Process’ Support for Sustainable Development

Fawkes

Cummins

2019

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beneath the Surface of the First World Ocean Assessment: An Investigation Into the Global Process’ Support for Sustainable Development

Fawkes

Cummins

2019

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The project can be characterised as collaborative in the sense that it was designed and conducted by a team involving representatives from two Traditional Owner groups in the region, the Reef Catchments NRM climate officer, an Indigenous ethnobotanist from the Tropical Indigenous Ethnobotany Centre, and a social science researcher. Project outputs were delivered to each group in accordance with the co-design (Parsons et al, 2016). Ethical clearance was granted under the National Health and Medical Research Council Act 1992 and followed the 2012 AIATSIS Guidelines for ethical research in Australian Indigenous Studies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The project followed Indigenous protocols of working together. Project outputs were delivered to each group in accordance with the co-design (Parsons et al, 2016). Working together also included regular review of how we did this work and of the language we used (Table 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protecting what is left after colonisation: embedding climate adaptation planning in traditional owner narratives

Lyons

Hill

Deshong

et al. 2020

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this case study, Traditional Owners in the Great Barrier Reef identified that protecting what is left of Indigenous material culture and socio-cultural relationships provides the best approach to climate adaptation planning. Protecting what is left supports decolonising and strengthens Indigenous customary practices and governance, thereby supporting their strategies for cultural renewal and survival. AbstractClimate change is disproportionally affecting Indigenous peoples' livelihoods across the globe. Despite this fact, climate adaptation planning and responses are not immediate concerns for most Indigenous people, whose key challenges are deeply embedded in colonial history. Through collaborative research centred on climate adaptation planning with the Yuibera and Koinmerburra Traditional Owner groups on the Great Barrier Reef catchments, we demonstrate that Traditional Owners' primary concerns are in aligning the climate adaptation opportunity with their own strategies for Indigenous cultural renewal and survival. Their Indigenous identity generates a responsibility to protect cultural landscapes, sites, and their connections with these places. In this case study, to "protect what is left" of Indigenous material culture and socio-cultural relationships emerged as the best approach to climate adaptation planning, providing both the decolonisation narrative and the means to strengthen their Indigenous practices. Planning for climate change adaptation is useful for Indigenous peoples when it supports decolonising, strengthens Indigenous customary practices, and recognises customary governance.

show abstract

“…Political issues inherent in TEK integration have been examined by numerous authors (e.g., Berkes, ; Hill et al, ; Nadasdy, ), who focus on how power relations shape the incorporation of TEK within knowledge and management frameworks, recognizing that inequitable integration may reinforce rather than break down Western cultural biases, and consequently promote further marginalization of IPs. This may result particularly when the two knowledge systems are characterized by differing underlying worldviews (Parsons, Fisher, & Nalau, ), which can lead to selective assimilation over integration (Mistry & Berardi, ), stripping TEK of its holism and cultural characteristics so that it can be fitted as discrete “data” into Western knowledge frameworks (Johnson, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Underpinningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The UN local communities and Indigenous peoples' platform: A traditional ecological knowledge‐based evaluation

Shawoo

Thornton

2019

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review evaluates the potential of the proposed local communities and Indigenous peoples’ platform to effectively engage traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) for climate policy. Specifically, we assess the platform's potential to enable greater representation and participation of Indigenous peoples (IPs) within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). An analytical framework based on the extensive TEK and environmental management literature is developed, with a set of criteria identified against which to evaluate the platform. We find that although the process of designing the platform appears to be inclusive of Indigenous views, the structure itself does not recognize the roles that unequal power relations and colonialism play in marginalizing IPs. Limited attention is paid to the institutional barriers within the UNFCCC and the drawbacks of pursuing knowledge “integration” as an end in itself. Based on this, recommendations for improving the platform structure are put forward including using a rights‐based framing, giving greater decision‐making power to IPs, and developing mechanisms to ensure the holistic integrity of TEK and build the overall resilience of climate mitigation and adaptation systems. This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Sociology/Anthropology of Climate Knowledge

show abstract

Alternative approaches to co-design: insights from indigenous/academic research collaborations

Cited by 88 publications

References 32 publications

Beneath the Surface of the First World Ocean Assessment: An Investigation Into the Global Process’ Support for Sustainable Development

Beneath the Surface of the First World Ocean Assessment: An Investigation Into the Global Process’ Support for Sustainable Development

Protecting what is left after colonisation: embedding climate adaptation planning in traditional owner narratives

The UN local communities and Indigenous peoples' platform: A traditional ecological knowledge‐based evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About