Aboriginal Participation in Global Change Research in Northwest Territories of Canada

Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 124)


This chapter is about people. People in Canada’s North, who are neither statistics nor passive recipients of policies developed by governments on the basis of scientific research, nor, most importantly, people disconnected from the Arctic and Subarctic terrestrial, marine, or aquatic ecosystems. In contrast, Inuit (formerly called Eskimos) and Dene (Athapaskan Indians), the aboriginal peoples of Canada’s Northwest Territories, are active participants in these ecosystems. They react to the research process and to the policies that are developed from research results. Unlike scientists, they do not traditionally separate their land, sea, and freshwater worlds into discrete ecosystems. Both conceptual and practical problems with global change research occur whether aboriginal people are advisers to scientific research projects, subjects in such research, participants in research, or affected by policies for response to global change. The following touches upon some human aspects of global change research in the circumpolar region.


Aboriginal People Traditional Knowledge Indigenous Knowledge Participatory Action Research Aboriginal Land 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bielawski, E. 1988. Paleoeskimo variability: The early Arctic Small Tool tradition in the central Canadian Arctic. Am. Antiq.53: 52 – 74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bielawski, E. 1992a. Inuit indigenous knowledge and science in the North. North. Perspect.20 (l): 5 – 8.Google Scholar
  3. Bielawski, E. 1992b. Cross-cultural epistemology: Cultural readaptation through the pursuit of knowledge. Looking to the Future, Inuit Studies Occasional Papers 4:59–69. Association Inuksiutiit Katimajiit, University Laval, Ste-Foy, Quebec.Google Scholar
  4. Colorado, P. 1988. Bridging native and western science. ConvergenceVol. XXI, No. 2 and 3, pp. 49 – 69.Google Scholar
  5. Cruikshank, J. 1981. Legend and Landscape: Convergence of oral and scientific traditions in the Yukon Territory. Arctic Anthropol. XVIII–2: 67 – 93.Google Scholar
  6. Cruikshank, J. 1984. Oral tradition and scientific research: approaches to knowledge in the North. Social science in the North: communicating northern values. Occasional Publication 9, Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies.Google Scholar
  7. Denny, J.P. 1986. Cultural ecology of mathematics: Ojibway and Inuit hunters. In: Close, M.P. (ed.), Native American Mathematics(pp. 129 – 180 ). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  8. Duerden, F., and Masuzumi, B. n.d. Global change and traditional knowledge. Draft report from Global Change Workshop, Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies, Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada, May 1993.Google Scholar
  9. Feit, H.A. 1988. Self-management and state management: forms of knowing and managing northern wildlife. Traditional knowledge and renewable resource management in northern regions. Boreal Institute for Northern Studies Occasional Publication 23, pp. 72 – 91.Google Scholar
  10. Freeman, M.M.R. 1988. Ethnoscience, prevailing science and Arctic co-operation. Paper presented to the International Conference on Arctic Co-operation, Toronto.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, M.M.R. 1992. The nature and utility of traditional ecological knowledge. North. Perspect.20 (1): 9 – 12.Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, M.M.R., and Carbyn, L.N. (eds.) 1988. Traditional knowledge and renewable resource management. Boreal Institute for Northern Studies Occasional Publication 23.Google Scholar
  13. Government of the Northwest Territories. 1991. Report of the Traditional Knowledge Working Group. Yellowknife, Department of Culture and Communications.Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, M. (ed.) 1992a. Lore: Capturing Traditional Environmental Knowledge. Dene Cultural Institute and International Development Research Centre, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson, M., and Ruttan, R. 1992. Dene traditional environmental knowledge: A pilot project. In: Johnson, M. (ed.), Lore: Capturing Traditional Environmental Knowledge. Ottawa: Dene Cultural Institute and International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  16. Merculieff, L. 1990. Western society’s linear systems and aboriginal cultures: The need for two-way exchanges for the survival. Presented at the Sixth International Conference of Hunting and Gathering Societies, Fairbanks, Alaska. Commissioner’s Office, State of Alaska.Google Scholar
  17. Ryan, J., and Robinson, M.P. 1990. Implementing participatory action research in the Canadian North: A case of the Gwich’in language and cultural project. CultureX (2): 57 – 71.Google Scholar
  18. Salmond, A. 1985. Maori epistemologies. In: Overing, J. (ed.), Reason and Morality. London: Tavistock Publication.Google Scholar
  19. Sayer, A. 1984. Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London: Hutchinson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Waldram, J. 1986. Traditional knowledge systems: The recognition of indigenous history and science. Saskatchewan Indian Federated Coll. J.2 (2): 115 – 124.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1997

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations