Advertisement

Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 883–895 | Cite as

Indigenous capacity for collaboration in Canada’s energy, forestry and mining sectors: research metrics and trends

  • Ryan Bullock
  • Denis Kirchhoff
  • Ian Mauro
  • Morrissa Boerchers
Article

Abstract

This paper examines patterns in recently published research addressing Indigenous capacity for collaborative natural resource development in Canada’s forestry, energy, and mining sectors. As Indigenous involvement in natural resource development increases, so too does the body of associated scholarship. We gathered information on several core metrics (year of publication, authorship, and gender, author affiliation, journal titles, citation counts and impacts factors, and keywords) to analyze research output, trends, and gaps. Our bibliometric analysis of 49 articles from peer-reviewed journals confirms that Indigenous natural resource development and capacity research has steadily increased over the past decade in terms of the number and range of papers, authors, institutions, and cases examined. Research output peaked in 2013 and 2015. Authorship is distributed evenly between male and female lead researchers, with teams located across southern Canada, with highest concentrations in urban population centers of British Columbia, Manitoba, and Ontario. In contrast, the research sites are located in more northern, rural, and remote locations. That communities and projects under study are not currently matched with sites of research capacity raises questions about capacity building and the nature of research “on” versus “with” Indigenous peoples. Policies and programs designed to enhance Indigenous involvement and capacity must address these asymmetries in order to be representative, effective, and responsive to current Indigenous priorities.

Keywords

Aboriginal Indigenous Capacity Energy Forestry Mining Bibliometric 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

References

  1. Allen, T., & Krogman, N. (2013). Aboriginal content in professional forestry curriculum. Aboriginal Peoples and Forest Lands in Canada, p. 279.Google Scholar
  2. Armitage, D., de Loe, R., & Plummer, R. (2012). Environmental governance and its implications for conservation practice. Conservation Letters, 5(4), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berrang-Ford, L., Pearce, T., & Ford, J. (2015). Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Regional Environmental Change, 15, 755–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bocking, S. (2016). Science and Canadian environmental policy. In D. VanNijnatten (Ed.), Canadian environmental policy and politics: The challenges of austerity and ambivalence (4th ed., pp. 97–111). Don Mills: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bone, R. (1992). The geography of the Canadian north: Issues and challenges. Toronto, Ontario: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bonnell, B. (2012). Trends in research and collaboration in the Canadian model forest network, 1993–2010. Forestry Chronicle, 88(3), 274–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behaviour. Journal of Documentation, 64, 45–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bullock, B., & Lawler, J. (2015). Community forestry research in Canada: A bibliometric perspective. Forest Policy and Economics, 59, 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castro e Silva, M. C., & Teixeira, A. A. C. (2011). A bibliometric account of the evolution of EE in the last two decades. Is ecological economics (becoming) a post-normal science? Ecological Economics, 70, 849–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coates, K., & Crowley, B. (2013). New beginnings: How Canada’s natural resource wealth could re-shape relations with Aboriginal people. Macdonald-Laurier Institute.Google Scholar
  11. Davidson-Hunt, I. J., Idrobo, C. J., Pengelly, R. D., & Sylvester, O. (2013). Anishinaabe adaptation to environmental change in northwestern Ontario: a case study in knowledge coproduction for nontimber forest products. Ecology and Society, 18(4), 44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fitzpatrick, P., & McAllister, M. L. (2015). Canadian mineral resource development: A resilient and sustainable enterprise? In B. Mitchell (Ed.), Resource and environmental management in Canada: Addressing conflict and uncertainty (5th ed., pp. 402–424). Toronto, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Galbraith, L., Bradshaw, B., & Rutherford, M. B. (2007). Towards a new supraregulatory approach to environmental assessment in Northern Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25(1), 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu, J., Yuwei, M., Zhang, L., Gan, F., & Ho, Y. (2010). A historical review and bibliometric analysis of research on lead in drinking water field from 1991 to 2007. Science of the Total Environment, 408, 1738–1744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jinha, A. (2010). Article 50 million: An estimate of the number of scholarly articles. Learned Publishing, 23, 258–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keeling, A., & Sandlos, J. (2015). Mining and communities in Northern Canada: History, politics, and memory. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
  17. Klenk, N. L., Dabros, A., & Hickey, G. M. (2010). Quantifying the research impact of the sustainable forest management network in the social sciences: A bibliometric study. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 40(11), 2248–2255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Koster, R., Baccar, K., & Lemelin, R. H. (2012). Moving from research ON, to research WITH and FOR Indigenous communities: A critical reflection on community-based participatory research. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien, 56, 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krupa, J. (2012). Identifying barriers to aboriginal renewable energy deployment in Canada. Energy Policy, 42, 710–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leipold, S. (2014). Creating forests with words—A review of forest-related discourse studies. Forest Policy and Economics, 40, 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu, X., Zhang, L., & Hong, S. (2011). Global biodiversity research during 1900–2009: A bibliometric analysis. Biodiversity Conservation, 20, 807–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human wellbeing: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  23. Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. O’Faircheallaigh, C. (2010). Aboriginal-mining company contractual agreements in Australia and Canada: Implications for political autonomy and community development. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 30(1–2), 69–86.Google Scholar
  25. Parsons, R., & Prest, G. (2003). Aboriginal forestry in Canada. The Forestry Chronicle, 79(4), 779–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rousseau, R. (2001). Are multi-authored articles cited more than single-authored ones? Are collaborations with authors from other countries more cited than collaborations within the country? A case study. In F. Havemann, R. Wagner-Döbler, & H. Kretschmer (eds.), Proceedings of the second Berlin workshop on scientometrics and informetrics, pp. 173–176.Google Scholar
  27. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). People to people, nation to nation: Highlights from the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Ottawa, ON: Minister of Supply and Services.Google Scholar
  28. Schnarch, B. (2004). Ownership, control, access, and possession (OCAP) or self-determination applied to research: A critical analysis of contemporary first nations research and some options for First Nations communities. Journal of Aboriginal Health, 1(1), 80–95.Google Scholar
  29. Song, Y., & Zhao, T. (2013). A bibliometric analysis of global forest ecology research during 2002–2011. Springerplus, 2, 204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stedman, R. C., Parkins, J. R., & Beckley, T. M. (2005). Forest dependence and community well-being in rural Canada: Variation by forest sector and region. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 35(1), 215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future: Summary of the final report of the truth and reconciliation commission of Canada. http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Honouring_the_Truth_Reconciling_for_the_Future_July_23_2015.pdf.
  32. Wellstead, A. (2007). The (post) staples economy and the (post) staples state in historical perspective. Canadian Political Science Review, 1(1), 8–25.Google Scholar
  33. Whitelaw, G., McCarthy, D., & Tsuji, L. (2009). The Victor Diamond Mine environmental assessment process: A critical first nation perspective. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27(3), 205–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wyatt, S. (2008). First nations, forest lands, and “aboriginal forestry” in Canada: From exclusion to comanagement and beyond. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 38, 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wyatt, S., Fortier, J., Natcher, D. C., Smith, M. A., & Hébert, M. (2013). Collaboration between Aboriginal peoples and the Canadian forest sector: A typology of arrangements for establishing control and determining benefits of forestlands. Journal of Environmental Management, 115, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryan Bullock
    • 1
    • 2
  • Denis Kirchhoff
    • 3
  • Ian Mauro
    • 4
  • Morrissa Boerchers
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Studies and SciencesThe University of WinnipegWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Forest Interdisciplinary ResearchThe University of WinnipegWinnipegCanada
  3. 3.School of Environment, Resources and SustainabilityUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Department of GeographyThe University of WinnipegWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations