“Two‐Eyed Seeing”: An Indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management

Abstract

Increasingly, fisheries researchers and managers seek or are compelled to “bridge” Indigenous knowledge systems with Western scientific approaches to understanding and governing fisheries. Here, we move beyond the all‐too‐common narrative about integrating or incorporating (too often used as euphemisms for assimilating) other knowledge systems into Western science, instead of building an ethic of knowledge coexistence and complementarity in knowledge generation using Two‐Eyed Seeing as a guiding framework. Two‐Eyed Seeing (Etuaptmumk in Mi’kmaw) embraces “learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing, and to use both these eyes together, for the benefit of all,” as envisaged by Elder Dr. Albert Marshall. In this paper, we examine the notion of knowledge dichotomies and imperatives for knowledge coexistence and draw parallels between Two‐Eyed Seeing and other analogous Indigenous frameworks from around the world. It is set apart from other Indigenous frameworks in its explicit action imperative—central to Two‐Eyed Seeing is the notion that knowledge transforms the holder and that the holder bears a responsibility to act on that knowledge. We explore its operationalization through three Canadian aquatic and fisheries case‐studies that co‐develop questions, document and mobilize knowledge, and co‐produce insights and decisions. We argue that Two‐Eyed Seeing provides a pathway to a plural coexistence, where time‐tested Indigenous knowledge systems can be paired with, not subsumed by, Western scientific insights for an equitable and sustainable future.

Knowledge co‐production: A pathway to effective fisheries management, conservation, and governance

“…Many areas of conservation and management interest in fisheries can be found within Indigenous territories. After enduring exploitive and paternalistic research practices involving Indigenous communities (Smith 2013), Indigenous sovereignty in research and management is becoming solidified, making respectful and reciprocal co‐production in research a moral and ethical obligation (Wilson 2008; Reid et al, in press). Researchers have great opportunity to improve on conventional research practices by applying co‐production given that it acknowledges that (1) any undertaken research must be done with Indigenous consent and partnership (ideally undertaken in response to a community‐identified need and desire and always with free, prior, and informed consent; Artelle et al 2019; also see the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; available: https://bit.ly/3fqyXsn), and (2) Indigenous communities are not considered stakeholders, but self‐determining nations with their own research leadership (Latulippe and Klenk 2020).…”

Ecology and evolutionary biology must elevate BIPOC scholars

“…2017; Reid et al . 2020). In EEB, one key example of a non‐Western cultural foundation is Etuaptmumk (Mi’kmaw for “Two‐Eyed Seeing”), an important framework used to promote the coexistence of Western and Indigenous paradigms (Barlett et al .…”

“…Already, implementation of Etuaptmumk has led to more comprehensive ecological research, particularly when dealing with conservation issues that disproportionately affect vulnerable Indigenous communities (Reid et al . 2020). For example, integrating Western and Indigenous knowledge systems has led to more complex and historically informed assessments of ecosystem change (Mantyka‐Pringle et al .…”

River conservation by an Indigenous community

“…Future studies, which should involve collaboration with Indigenous researchers, could adopt approaches to integrate Indigenous and scientific knowledge and Indigenous and Western legal and management approaches in ways that recognize and draw on both 8 . This would help to address some of the unanswered questions in Koning and colleagues' valuable study on the origins, sustainability and future of this successful network of reserves.…”