Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tailors-Made: Heritage Governance Customization in Late Modern Canada

  • Research
  • Published:
Archaeologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Canada is not just a patchwork of varying heritage governance delineated by provincial and territorial boundaries but a maelstrom of contesting and overlapping practices and processes originating from state and non-state actors. Since the 1990s, this patchwork of governance has increasingly diffused into Indigenous and local spheres through the negotiation of formal (treaties, legislation) and semi-formal (memoranda of understanding) agreements. Ideological tensions persist between the design aspirations of resurgent Indigenisms and Canadian late modern state processes. The resurgence of Indigenous capacities and institutions with a heritage management mandate has also created Indigenous jurisdictions not premised in any nation-to-nation agreement.

Résumé

Le Canada est non seulement une mosaïque de gouvernances patrimoniales diversifiées délimitées par des territoires provinciaux et territoriaux, mais aussi un maelström de pratiques et processus contraires qui se chevauchent et qui proviennent d’acteurs étatiques ou non. Depuis les années quatre-vingt-dix, cette mosaïque s’est de plus en plus immiscée à l’intérieur des sphères autochtones et locales dans le cadre de la négociation d’ententes formelles (traités, lois) et semi-formelles (protocoles d’entente). Des tensions idéologiques persistent entre les aspirations conceptuelles des approches indigénistes en recrudescence et les récents processus contemporains de l’État canadien. La recrudescence de capacités et d’institutions autochtones dotées d’un mandat de gestion patrimoniale a aussi créé des administrations autochtones sur lesquelles nulle entente entre nations ne repose.

Resumen

Canadá no es sólo un patchwork de gobernanza variable del patrimonio delineada por los límites provinciales y territoriales sino un torbellino de prácticas y procesos que cuestionan y se solapan y que se originan a partir de actores estatales y no estatales. Desde los año 1990, este patchwork de gobernanza se ha difundido cada vez más en la esferas indígena y local mediante la negociación de acuerdos formales (tratados, legislación) y semiformales (memoranda de entendimiento). Las tensiones ideológicas persisten entre las aspiraciones de diseño de los nacientes indigenismos y los procesos del estado moderno tardío canadiense. El resurgimiento de capacidades e instituciones indígenas con un mandato de gestión del patrimonio ha creado también jurisdicciones indígenas no basadas en ningún acuerdo bilateral, nación-nación.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alfred, T. 1999. Peace, Power, Righteousness: An Indigenous Manifesto, Oxford University PressOxford.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Alfred, T. 2005. Wasáse: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom, University of Toronto PressToronto.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, M. 1984. Home and Native Land: Aboriginal Rights and the Canadian Constitution, MethuenToronto.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, M. 1998. Aboriginal and Treaty Rights in Canada: Essays on Law, Equality and Respect for Difference, UBC PressVancouver.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, M. 2014. On Being Here to Stay: Treaties and Aboriginal Rights in Canada, University of Toronto PressToronto.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, P. 2008. Lament for a First Nation: The Williams Treaties of Southern Ontario, UBC PressVancouver.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrows, J. 1999. Sovereignty’s Alchemy: An Analysis of Delgamuukw v. British Columbia. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 37(3):538–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Columbia 1999. Nisga’a Final Agreement

  • British Columbia 2007. Memorandum of Understanding: First Nation Heritage Site Conservation in Hul’qumi’num Tumuhw

  • British Columbia 2007. Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement

  • British Columbia 2009. Kunst’aa guu-Kunst’aayah Reconciliation Protocol

  • British Columbia 2009. Maa-nulth First Nations Final Agreement

  • British Columbia 2010. Treaty 8 Heritage Conservation Memorandum of Understanding

  • British Columbia 2013. Ktunaxa Nation Strategic Engagement Agreement

  • British Columbia 2013. Tahltan Central Council Strategic Engagement Agreement

  • British Columbia 2014. Stó:lō First Nations Strategic Engagement Agreement

  • British Columbia 2014. Tla’amin Nation Final Agreement

  • British Columbia 2016. Kaska Dena Council (BC First Nations)

  • British Columbia 2016. Nanwakolas Council Strategic Engagement Agreement

  • British Columbia 2016. Nenqay Deni Accord: The People’s Accord. Tsilhqot’in National Government

  • Budhwa, R. 2005. An Alternative Model for First Nations Involvement in Resource Management Archaeology. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 29(1):20–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burley, D. 1994. A Never Ending Story: Historical Developments in Canadian Archaeology and the Quest for Federal Legislation. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 18:77–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byers, D. S. 1965. The Debert Archaeological Project. Atlantic Geology 1(4):19–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Paoli, M.L. 1999. Beyond Tokenism: Aboriginal Involvement in Archaeological Resource Management in British Columbia. MA Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver

  • Dent, J. 2016. Accounts of Engagement: Conditions and Capitals of Indigenous Participation in Canadian Commercial Archaeology. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Western University, London, Ontario

  • Devries, M. 2014. Cultural Resource Management and Aboriginal Engagement: Policy and Practice in Ontario Archaeology. Unpublished MA Thesis. Department of Anthropology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario

  • Ferris, N. 2003. Between Colonial and Indigenous Archaeologies: Legal and Extra-legal Ownership of the Archaeological Past in North America. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 27(2):154–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N., Welch, J. 2014. Beyond Archaeological Agendas: In the Service of a Sustainable Archaeology. In Transforming Archaeology: Activist Practices and Prospectspp. 215–238, edited by S Atalay, LR Clauss, R McGuireand J Welch, Left Coast PressWalnut Creek, California.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Griggs, J. and Dunsby, J. 2015. Step by Step: Final Report for the SDM in BC Project. Centre for Dialogue, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia

  • Hammond, J. 2009. Archaeology Without Reserve: Indigenous Heritage Stewardship in British Columbia. Unpublished MA Thesis, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia

  • Harris, C. 2002. Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia, UBC PressVancouver.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, H. 2007. Two Families: Treaties and Government, Purich PublishingSaskatoon, Saskatchewan.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, M. 2008. First Nations, the Heritage Conservation Act, and the Ethics of Heritage Stewardship. The Midden 40(4):8–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, M., Budhwa, R., Reimer/Yumks, R. 2009. First Nations, Forestry and the Transformation of Archaeological Practice in British Columbia, Canada. Heritage Management 2(2):199–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, G. F. 1966. The Technology and Settlement Pattern of a Paleo-Indian Site at Debert, Nova Scotia. Quaternaria 8:59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, N. 2007. Cree Narrative Memory: From Treaties to Contemporary Times. Purich Publishing, Saskatoon, SK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. 2009. Compact, Contract, Covenant: Aboriginal Treaty-Making in Canada, University of Toronto PressToronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newfoundland and Labrador 2005. Inuvialuit Final Agreement

  • Newman, D. 2009. The Duty to Consult: New Relationships with Aboriginal People, Purich PublishingSaskatoon, Saskatchewan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, D. 2014. Revisiting the Duty to Consult Aboriginal Peoples, Purich PublishingSaskatoon, Saskatchewan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, G. 2006. Decolonizing the Archaeological Landscape: The Practice and Politics of Archaeology in British Columbia. American Indian Quarterly 30(3–4):35–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, G. and Andrews, T. eds. 1997. At a Crossroads: Archaeology and First Peoples in Canada. Publication no. 24. Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia

  • Niezen, R. 2003. The Origins of Indigenism: Human Rights and the Politics of Difference, University of California PressBerkley, California.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Niezen, R. 2009. The Rediscovered Self: Indigenous Identity and Cultural Justice, McGill-Queen’s University PressMontreal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northwest Territories 1992. Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Agreement

  • Northwest Territories 1993. Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement

  • Northwest Territories 2003. Tłįchǫ Land Claims and Self-Government Agreement

  • Northwest Territories 2005. Inuvialuit Final Agreement

  • Nova Scotia 2008. Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq Chiefs and the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage. Memorandum of Understanding

  • Nunavut 1993. Nunavut Land Claims Agreement

  • Pokotylo, D., Mason, A. 2010. Archaeological Heritage Resource Protection in Canada: The Legal Basis. In Cultural Heritage Management: A Global Perspectivepp. 48–69, edited by PM Messengerand GS Smith, University Press of FloridaGainesville, Florida.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, J. .2005. These Mountains Are Our Sacred Places: The Story of the Stoney People, Fifth House PublishersMarkham, Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thom, B. 2007. Disagreement-in-principle: Negotiating the right to practice Coast Salish culture in treaty talks on Vancouver Island, BC. Paper presented at 2007 Canadian Anthropology Society Annual Meeting, Toronto

  • Treaty 7 Elders and Tribal Council, Hildebrandt, W., First Rider, D., Carter, S. 1996. The True Spirit and Original Intent of Treaty 7, McGill-Queen’s University PressMontreal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walkem, A., Bruce, H. (eds.) 2003. Box of Treasures or Empty Box? Twenty Years of Section 35, Theytus BooksPenticton, British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicken, W. C. 2002. Mi’kmaq Treaties on Trial: History, Land, and Donald Marshall Junior, University of Toronto PressToronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wobst, H. M. 2005. Power to the (Indigenous) Past and Present! Or: The Theory and Method Behind Archaeological Theory and Method. In Indigenous Archaeologies: Decolonizing Theory and Practicepp. 17–32, edited by HM Wobstand C Smith, RoutledgeLondon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukon 1993. Yukon First Nations Umbrella Final Agreement

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sustainable Archaeology at Western University/Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc., 1600 Attawandaron Rd, London, ON, N6G 3M6, Canada

    Joshua Dent

Authors
  1. Joshua Dent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua Dent.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dent, J. Tailors-Made: Heritage Governance Customization in Late Modern Canada. Arch 13, 136–152 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-017-9314-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-017-9314-x

Key Words

Search

Navigation