Allison Bishop 2023-03-23 Allison Bishop 2023-03-23

My starting place

This blog is the first in a three-part series. It provides background and context for my research project.

This is the first blog in a three-part series I created as my culminating assignment for a first-year class called “Transformational Change Methodologies” (a required course for the Social Practice and Transformational Change PhD program at the University of Guelph taught by Dr. Carla Rice). I have chosen to share my project publicly in the spirit of co-learning and reciprocity. While it feels vulnerable to do so, I believe we are all always in a state of becoming. With humility, I offer this messy, partial, and in-process piece.

In this blog I share a bit about myself and the broader context of my work. See the second blog for a sense of some of the theory that is guiding my inquiry and the third blog for my early thinking about my methodology and methods.

Where I come from

I am a white settler-Canadian with ancestral ties to England and Scotland. Admittedly, I don’t know much more than that about my ancestors or their relationships to the land they left to settle in what is colonially known as Canada. I was raised in Williams Treaty Territory, in what is now known as Beaverton Ontario, where my maternal family has lived for five generations. Click on the audio clip below to learn more about my childhood, or read the transcript here.

This is a photo of the Speed River, which runs through Guelph Ontario. The Speed joins with the Grand River. Land six-miles deep on either side of the Grand River was promised to the Haudenosaunee by the British after the war of 1812. Since then, most of the land in the area has been settled by non-Indigenous peoples (Hill, 2017).

Today, I am grateful to live, work, and play on the treaty lands and territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit, in what is known as Guelph, Ontario. These lands and waters have been and continue to be a gathering place for many First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples. This place is also governed by the Dish with One Spoon Covenant, a treaty to peaceably care and share for the lands and waters in the great lakes basin.

For three and a half years I've had the honour of managing the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership (CRP), an Indigenous-led SSHRC Partnership Grant that aims to 1) support the transformation of nature conservation in Canada, and 2) help Indigenous governments with the creation and implementation of Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas. Due to the efforts of grassroots Indigenous leaders and the recent national advocacy efforts of the Indigenous Circle of Experts, the policy landscape in Canada is shifting quickly in support of Indigenous-led conservation (Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, 2023a). It has been incredible to witness this change in the past few years. Increasingly, local, regional, and national scale conservation organizations are approaching the CRP seeking guidance on how they can transform their practices to better support Indigenous-led conservation. In trying to help our partners I've have found that there are not many publicly available resources that show how people and organizations are attempting to change to better partner with Indigenous governments and organizations.

I am a first-year PhD student in the Social Practice and Transformational Change program at the University of Guelph. As a non-Indigenous practitioner, the PhD process is an opportunity for me to respond to this gap and to think critically about some of the big questions and entanglements that are emerging through the work of the CRP. This is also an opportunity to focus on my responsibilities and the responsibilities of other non-Indigenous practitioners in the conservation space. My personal commitments are aligned with the decolonial project as described by Tuck and Yang (2018): the “rematriation of Indigenous land and life” (pg. 9). I see this as a life-long responsibility which I strive to approach with humility. I have stumbled and will continue to make mistakes along the way. I am deeply complicit in the systems I am seeking to change. But I take comfort in Tuck & Yang’s (2018) invitation to think about the “inner angles” in our work. Small shifts in practice and perspective that can make a big difference in where we end up down stream.

Context

Colonial Conservation

A reading list of scholarly articles about colonial conservation and topics related to Indigenous-led conservation. The reading list is evergreen and is an extremely helpful resource. It is compiled and managed by Megan Youdelis, Kim Tran, and Elizabeth Lunstrum.
This article by Robert Jago (Kwantlen First Nation and Nooksack Indian Tribe) explains how places like Vancouver’s Stanley Park are tied to colonial concepts like ‘wilderness’, and how these parks and protected areas have displaced Indigenous Peoples, like the Squamish, in the name of settler settlement and conservation.
This article reminds me of how the wilderness myth contributes to the national myth of Canada. It is a reminder of the stories the settler-state tells to legitimize violence against Indigenous Peoples.
This podcast, published by Jesse Brown (Canadaland) and featuring Brandi Morin (Cree/Iroquois/French), tells the story of the Dene, the Cree, and the land they were expelled from to make way for Wood Buffalo National Park .
This powerful resource centers the place-based stories and voices of Dene and Cree peoples, highlighting the ways in which the imposition of Wood Buffalo has impacted families across generations.
Colonial conservation does not only happen in Turtle Island/Canada. This video, published by Survival International, features Odette, a member of the Baka tribe in what is colonially known as the Congo Basin. Odette describes the human rights abuses she and other community members have experienced through the creation of the Messok Dja National Park.
The video shows the violence (physical and emotional) that park boarders can impose on Indigenous bodies. Odette’s pain and anger are palpable.
This article by Arno Kopecky explores the white supremacist roots of some of the West’s foundational environmentalists, and how this past complicates partnerships with Indigenous governments, communities, and organizations.
This article, by Megan Youdelis, Roberta Nakoochee, Colin O'Neil, Elizabeth Lunstrum, and Robin Roth, interrogates the ways in which the concept of wilderness is being employed, resisted, and transformed by a multitude of actors in three parks and conservation areas across Canada.

It is no secret that environmentalism, and by extension conservation, is a white, settler movement (Curnow & Helferty, 2018; Scott, 2023). Conservation discourse stems from dualistic and human-centered logics of separation, which seek to save the last of nature from an inherently destructive humanity (Braidotti, 2020; Hutton et al., 2005). These logics are tied to a ‘wilderness ethic’, closely associated with Terra Nullius, which constructs an imaginary of pristine landscapes untouched by people (Jago, 2020; Youdelis et al., 2022). Mainstream conservation practices have a history of reinforcing settler-colonialism by dispossessing and marginalizing Indigenous peoples from their territories; disrupting Indigenous governance, legal orders, and complex relational systems; and privileging positivist scientific knowledge (Carroll, 2014; Moola & Roth, 2019).

Not only has mainstream conservation contributed to negative social outcomes, including human rights abuses (see the example to the left called “We’ve had enough of this talk of boundaries in the forest”), these approaches are also proving to be ineffective. It is now indisputable that we are living through the dual mass extinction and climate crises (Braidotti, 2020). Clearly, mainstream conservation’s attempts to protect nature are not working. At the same time, there is increased recognition among scholars and conservation practitioners of the efficacy of Indigenous approaches to caring for lands and waters. An often-quoted statistic shows that while Indigenous peoples comprise about 6% of the world’s population, Indigenous territories account for 80% of the world’s biodiversity (Garnett, et al., 2019). We are in a moment of shift with the potential for transforming the conservation sector. Within this context, my work is interested in how settler conservationists are navigating this shift and is framed within the broader decolonial project.

Changing tides: ICE and ‘we rise together’

This video summarizes the work of the Indigenous Circle of Experts. It was produced by River Voices Productions. In the video, Danika Littlechild (Cree), co-chair of ICE, emphasizes the transformational intent of the ICE members. This is a call for radical change.

In March, 2019, the Indigenous Circle of Experts (ICE), a national advisory body and part of the Pathway to Canada Target 1 federal policy initiative, released the We Rise Together (2018) report. The report articulated how Indigenous-led conservation can help achieve national conservation goals while advancing reconciliation in Canada. ICE advocated for the advancement of Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs), which are “lands and waters where Indigenous governments have the primary role in protecting and conserving ecosystems through Indigenous laws, governance and knowledge systems” (ICE, 2018, pg. 35). IPCAs, therefore, are both a conservation mechanism and a tool to advance self-determination and sovereignty for Indigenous Nations.

The Nature Conservancy of Canada’s (NCC) website says “ [NCC] envisions building meaningful relationships that are grounded in mutual respect and the desire to achieve significant and lasting conservation outcomes. NCC will use our capacity, expertise and influence to act as an ally in support of Indigenous-led conservation projects and as a partner in joint initiatives….”
This website provides insights into how NCC understands its role and relationship to supporting Indigenous-led conservation.
Nature United’s website says the organization believes that “the increased authority and capacity of Indigenous Peoples to steward their lands and waters is critical for the future of healthy ecosystems and communities”.
Nature United emphasizes the importance of Indigenous governance and authority explicitly on its website.
WWF Canada’s website acknowledges the organization has been working towards more inclusive and collaborative engagement with Indigenous Peoples. It says “our work has become more inclusive over time, and we commit to collaborating with Indigenous partners, where and when requested, as we pursue the goals of Regenerate Canada, our 10-year plan to fight the biodiversity and climate crises”.
Each of these three websites provide important information about how the large-scale conservation organizations are orienting themselves to Indigenous-led conservation and the role the organizations see themselves playing: as allies, political advocates, and/or collaborators.

ICE called upon environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) to partner with Indigenous governments in the design, implementation, and management of IPCAs (ICE, 2018, pg.61). Since then, many ENGOs have expressed support for Indigenous-led conservation as a central part of their mandates (Nature Conservancy of Canada, 2022; Nature United, 2022; WWF Canada, 2022).

This video provides an overview of IPCAs and their critical role in achieving biodiversity targets and fighting climate change. It was produced by River Voices Productions.

In 2019, the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership (CRP) was launched to continue the momentum of the Indigenous Circle of Experts. An Indigenous-led network, the CRP seeks to investigate, inform, and transform conservation strategy and practice by centering Indigenous leadership, rights, responsibilities, and knowledge. Several large ENGOs, including the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), the David Suzuki Foundation, Ducks Unlimited Canada, the Nature Conservancy of Canada, Nature United, the Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada, and World Wildlife Fund Canada are active partners in the CRP (Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, 2023b). There are also a number of smaller conservation organizations that engage with CRP resources and attend CRP learning events, such as our popular virtual campfire webinar series. As the manager of the CRP, one question I receive consistently from non-Indigenous conservation organizations is “how can we help support Indigenous-led conservation?”. I’ve been sitting with this question and all of its complexity. In many ways, this question is a motivator for my doctoral work.

“How can we help?” Towards transforming the conservation sector

The question of how conservation organizations can support Indigenous-led conservation efforts has many different entry points. CRP Leadership Circle member Steven Nitah (Łutsel K'e Dene First Nation) recently shared during a webinar that one way the conservation sector can support Indigenous-led conservation is by lending their skills, knowledge, and capacity to support Indigenous goals (Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, 2022). However, collaborations between conservation organizations and Indigenous governments, communities and organizations comes with risks, including (but not limited to):

State and elite capture of Indigenous movements (Roth & Bishop, 2021);
The instrumentalization of Indigenous peoples by conservation organizations to achieve their goals; and
Inclusion-based models of collaboration that prioritize mainstream conservation logics and practices.

In my time with the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, I have noticed an unevenness within the sector. Some ENGOs have individuals who are very active partners in the network who are deeply committed to transformative change within the sector. And, at the same time, the same organization is using language in campaigns e.g. (‘wilderness’, ‘pristine’, etc.), is announcing programs, or is engaged in financial practices, that may undermine Indigenous approaches to conservation and foreclose possibilities of meaningful transformation.

The images above are from a webinar hosted by the Sustainability Network and the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. The images were created by Elena McCullough.

This resource, created by the Indigenous Leadership Initiative, shares some key principles for non-Indigenous supporters of Indigenous-led conservation.
This resource, created by Indigenous Climate Action, illustrates the ways in which allyship is performed by non-Indigenous peoples in ways that can reinforce power dynamics while doing little to change the structures of settler-colonialism.
This article, by Kyle Powis Whyte (citizen of the Potawatomi Nation), problematizes two common approaches to solidarity with Indigenous peoples taken up by settlers within the environmental movement: romanticism and the ‘same boat’ approach. Whyte explains how both of these approaches foreclose decolonial futures.
This resource, produced by the Indigenous Knowledge Circle of the National Boreal Caribou Knowledge Consortium, provides non-Indigenous practitioners and organizations with advice for engaging respectfully and equitably across difference.

I have tried to find publicly available resources that can support conservation organizations in transforming their practice. In doing so, I’ve noticed that these resources are limited. Those that are available typically provide a list of principles to guide engagement with Indigenous peoples and provide high-level advice about the kinds of behaviours are helpful or helpful. It is also common to find lists of additional sources for learning about settler-colonialism more broadly. Increasingly (and encouragingly), it is becoming easier to find content that showcases Indigenous voices and their visions for lands and waters in their territories.

As a settler who has been doing this work, I found myself unsatisfied with many of the resources I was able to find. Having navigated many contradictions, tensions and challenges in my own praxis, I was looking for something more nuanced. I wanted a resource that would take the reader/user on a journey of what it feels like as a settler to commit to cultivating a decolonial conservation practice, weaving in critical theory and perspectives. Settler feelings of discomfort, fear, anger, shame, love, and hope all have a tremendous influence on the potential to achieve transformational change. I know this because I have felt my own body respond to uncomfortable and painful truths about settler-colonialism and my own complicity. I’ve felt my cheeks burn and my heart race with shame when my practices were challenged. I have felt myself shrink away from the pain of having been shown that the central narratives and beliefs I held true about my identity and community were false. But my body also remembers what it feels like to be connected and grounded in ethics of love and mutual respect, and move towards positive change.

How are settlers navigating complex entanglements of power, racism, and settler-colonial structures?

What are they learning from these encounters?

How are settlers feeling their way through social change?

Where do settler emotions help with social change and where are they getting stuck?

These are some of the questions I am interested in as part of the broader decolonial project.

Works Cited

*Braidotti, R. (2020) “We” are in this together, but we are not one and the same. Bioethical Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10017-8

Brown, J. (Executive Producer). (2022, December 12). Canadaland #840 The Taking of Wood Buffalo. [Audio Podcast]. Canadaland. https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/840-the-taking-of-wood-buffalo/

Carroll, C. (2014). Native enclosures: Tribal national parks and the progressive politics of environmental stewardship in Indian Country. Geoforum, 53, 31-40. http://doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.02.003

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2021, June 21). What are Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas? [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR1EeEB2t2I

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2022, November 8). Building Ethical Partnerships for Indigenous-led Conservation [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwi6qX5UKFw&t=620s

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2023, January 24). Organizational Change and Reconciliation within ENGOs [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/GsI6Ie4NdFg

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2023, 03, 25a). About Us. Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. https://conservation-reconciliation.ca/about-us-1

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2023, 03, 25a). Our Partners. Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. https://conservation-reconciliation.ca/our-partners

Curnow, J., & Helferty, A. (2018). Contradictions of Solidarity: Whiteness, settler coloniality, and the mainstream environmental movement. Environment and Society, 9(1), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.3167/ares.2018.090110

Garnett, S.T., Burgess, N.D., Fa, J.E., Fernández-Llamazares, Á., Molnár, Z., Robinson, C.J., Watson, J.E.M., Zander, K.K., Austin, B., Brondizio, E.S., Collier, N.F., Duncan, T., Ellis, E., Geyle, H., Jackson, M.V., Jonas, H., Malmer, P., McGowan, B., Sivongxay, A. & Leiper, I. (2018). A spatial overview of the global importance of Indigenous lands for conservation. Nature Sustainability, 1, 369–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6

Hill, S. (2017). The clay we are made of: Haudenosaunee land tenure on the Grand River. University of Manitoba Press.

Hutton, J., Adams, W. M., & Murombedzi, J. (2005). Back to the barriers? Changing narratives in biodiversity conservation. Forum for Development Studies, 32(2), 341-370. http://doi:10.1080/08039410.2005.9666319

Indigenous Circle of Experts. (2018). We rise together: Achieving Pathway to Canada Target 1 through the creation of indigenous protected areas in the spirit and practice of reconciliation. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57e007452e69cf9a7af0a033/t/5ab94aca6d2a7338ecb1d05e/1522092766605/PA234-ICE_Report_2018_Mar_22_web.pdf.

Indigenous Climate Action. (2014, May 4). Accomplices not allies: Abolishing the ally industrial complex, an Indigenous perspective. https://www.indigenousaction.org/accomplices-not-allies-abolishing-the-ally-industrial-complex/accomplices-not-allies-print/

Indigenous Leadership Initiative. (n.d.). How to be an ally of Indigenous-led conservation. https://www.ilinationhood.ca/publications/how-to-be-an-ally-of-indigenous-led-conservation

Jago, R. (2020, June). Canada’s national parks are a colonial crime scene. The Walrus, https://thewalrus.ca/canadas-national-parks-are-colonial-crime-scenes/.

Kopecky, A. (2021, October). How environmentalism’s white supremacist roots branch into today’s struggles. The Tyee, https://thetyee.ca/Culture/2021/10/13/How-White-Supremacist-Roots-Environmentalism-Branch-Today/

Moola, F., & Roth, R. (2019). Moving beyond colonial conservation models: Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas offer hope for biodiversity and advancing reconciliation in the Canadian boreal forest, Environmental Reviews, 27(2), 200-201. http://doi:10.1139/er-2018-0091

Nature Conservancy of Canada. (2023, March 5). Indigenous conservation. Nature Conservancy of Canada. https://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/what-we-do/indigenous-conservation/

Nature United. (2023, March 5). Our priorities: Indigenous-led conservation. Nature United. https://www.natureunited.ca/what-we-do/our-priorities/indigenous-led-conservation/

River Voices. (2018, March 28). ICE summary and recommendations [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THFAJS-XgVM

Roth, R. & Bishop, A. (2021). Conservation through Reconciliation in Canada: Cultivating a decolonial conservation practice. [Through an interrogation of the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, this paper outlines what a decolonial conservation practice might look like and their potential for transformation]. American Association of Geographers. Seattle (virtual) April 10.

Scott, J.L. (2023, January 6). A demand for diversity in the environmental sector. Black Outdoors. https://blackoutdoors.wordpress.com/2023/01/06/a-demand-for-diversity-in-the-environmental-sector/.

Survival International. (249, January 4). “We’ve had enough of this talk of ‘boundaries in the forest [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qD3Hpf2nv4U

Tuck, E. & Yang, W. (2018). Born under the rising sun of social justice. In E. Tuck & W. Yang (Eds.), Toward what justice? Describing diverse dreams of justice in education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351240932.

Whyte, K.P. (2018, April 3). White allies, let’s be honest about decolonization. Yes! Magazine, https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/decolonize/2018/04/03/white-allies-lets-be-honest-about-decolonization

World Wildlife Fund Canada. (2023, March 5). Indigenous-led conservation. World Wildlife Fund Canada. https://wwf.ca/about-us/indigenous-led-conservation/

Youdelis, M., Nakoochee, R., O'Neil, C., Lunstrum, E., & Roth, R. (2020). "Wilderness" revisited: Is Canadian park management moving beyond the "wilderness" ethic? Canadian Geographer-Geographe Canadien, 64(2), 232-249. http://doi:10.1111/cag.12600

Youdelis, M., Tran, K., and Lunstrum, E. (2021). Indigenous-Led Conservation Reading List. Conservation Through Reconciliation Publication.

Note: Sources with an asterisk * were listed as mandatory or recommended from the Transformational Methodologies Lab course taught by Dr. Carla Rice (SOPR PhD program, University of Guelph).

Allison Bishop 2023-03-22 Allison Bishop 2023-03-22

Feeling our way: Towards a decolonial conservation practice

This blog explores some of the theory I will explore in my research project, including theoretical approaches to affect, emotion, and decolonization.

This is the second blog in a three-part series I created as my culminating assignment for a first-year class called “Transformational Change Methodologies” (a required course for the Social Practice and Transformational Change PhD program at the University of Guelph taught by Dr. Carla Rice). I have chosen to share my project publicly in the spirit of co-learning and reciprocity. While it feels vulnerable to do so, I believe we are all always in a state of becoming. With humility, I offer this messy, partial, and in-process piece.

In this blog I share a bit of the theory that is guiding my inquiry. See the first blog for background on myself and the context for my work, and the third blog for my early thinking about my methodology and methods.

“I can’t tell you how many times Chad or a Knowledge holder or Ktunaxa tell me something and I think I hear them and understand. And then one day I’ll be talking to them and they say the same thing (sometimes after numerous times) and I tilt my head to the side and give an ahhhh….

And they can see me do that. And they’ll see it goes from my head to my ʔa·kiǂwi·. And I actually understand it from a completely different perspective. ”

— Kerri Garner (settler-Canadian working in support of the Ktunaxa Nation)

The quote above was shared by Kerri Garner (settler-Canadian) during a recent webinar hosted by the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership (2023). Kerri is working on the Qat’muk Indigenous Protected and Conserved Area on behalf of the Ktunaxa Nation. During the webinar she was reflecting on what is required of settlers and settler organizations who are seeking to create ethical relationships with Indigenous governments, communities, and organizations. Kerri describes a moment in her own learning journey when her comprehension moved from her head to her heart. This move from cognitive understanding to embodied and felt knowledge is a pivotal moment for Kerri, her relationship with the Ktunaxa, and her work. Rice et al. (2022) contend that knowledge (and ignorance) are intimately connected to emotion, arguing that “it is is impossible to commit to a thought alone as the very act of attaching to an idea indicates that emotion is somehow operating” (pg. 4). For Kerri, this moment of shift opened new possibilities, not only for greater cross-cultural understanding and connection, but for collective political action. As a white settler-practitioner, this feeling is familiar to me. I’ve felt these moments of shift in my own learning and professional experience. When my understanding moves from my mind into my body, I can sense that new worlds are possible. Not just in the future, but they are possible here and now. Kerri’s story and my own personal experience has inspired me to think more deeply about the role of settler emotion in transforming conservation practices.

This webinar, from the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, explored stories and examples of relationships between Indigenous governments and conservation sector organizations. The stories highlight tensions as well as pathways to build, strengthen, or renew relationships.
In this video, American poet Mary Oliver (white settler), reads her poem Wild Geese. This poem is typical of Mary Oliver’s work - she brings us back to our bodies, and reminds us of our kinship relationships with more-than-human beings. I like the line “You only have to let the soft animal of your body love what it loves”.
This song is a cover of Willie Dunn’s song “I Pity the Country” by Leanne Betasamosake Simpson. It’s a critique of the colonial state and anti-Indigenous racism. The song shows how hate moves in ways that impact not only the singer, but the land, water, individual settlers and settler society itself.

What is affect theory?

Despite its popularity in the social sciences, affect theory is difficult to describe. While I am at the beginnings of my thinking about affect, I am coming to understand that affect theory can be interested in the physical, psychological, material, social, cultural, philosophical, and political dimensions of emotional experiences and their effects. Affect can be described as an ‘intensity’ that comes from an encounter that causes a feeling or moment of shift (Let’s Talk about Art and Culture, 2021). Ephemeral and sometimes beyond the realm of the conscience thought, this feeling is embedded in a set of ongoing processes and within a broader social context (Wetherell, 2012). Critical affect studies in the humanities and social sciences explores “the complex interrelations of discursive practices, the human body, social and cultural forces, and individually experienced but historically situated affects and emotions” (Zembylas, 2014, pg. 397). Rice et al. (2022) explain that “feminist theorists have long argued for the political importance of embodied knowledges to help understand “the fleshy, the sensory, the felt, the yet-to-be languaged” (pg. 13-14). For the purposes of my project, I am interested in critical orientations to affect and emotion. More specifically, I am interested in how affect and emotion can both foreclose and open moves towards a decolonial conservation practice in Turtle Island/Canada.

Affect, emotion, and possibilities for social change

Thinking with Haraway (2016), this digital story “stays with the trouble” of settler responsibilities for decolonization. I share a personal experience of intervening in settler-colonial narratives. The questions that ground this story are similar to the questions that drive my research interests. Once we (settlers) can recognize epistemic erasure, how do we take steps to address it? How can we help? What are our responsibilities? What ethical frameworks guide us? What does accountability look like?

The ending of this story is unsatisfactory and viewers are left with a feeling of unresolved discomfort. How might settlers avoid taking action to avoid such feelings? How might this foreclose possibilities for transforming Indigenous-settler relations? These are all necessary questions to explore if, as Harraway suggests, we are to “live and die well with each other in a thick present” (2016, pg. 1).

My project will bring into conversation the work of three scholars, each of whom offer a different perspective on affect and its role in social change movements, including decolonial movements. First, I will be thinking closely with Sara Ahmed, a critical scholar whose work is at the intersection of feminist, queer, and race theory. Ahmed asks the question “what do emotions do?” in her influential book, The Cultural Politics of Emotion (2004). Drawing on the work of David Hume (1964) to explain how emotions leave “impressions” or marks on bodily surfaces, Ahmed explains how these impressions help define the boundaries of bodies in relation to other bodies and surfaces (2004, pg. 4). When we bump up against a table and feel pain, we’re reminded of where our bodies end and others begin (Ahmed, 2004, pg. 24). Emotions mediate our relations between the personal and the social by shaping our sense of self and our perception of others (pg. 24). Not only are emotions relational, for Ahmed (2004), emotions are active. They are not situated in objects or subjects, but rather move between them (pg. 8). Emotions can also cause us to move by either bringing us closer to others or causing us to turn away and become closed off. When certain emotions circulate, they gain intensity and ‘stick’ to ideas, things, and bodies (both individual or collective). Ahmed (2004) calls this process the “affective economy”, drawing a comparison to the way capital accumulates value through it’s circulation (pg. 46).

This webpage, published by the The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, provides a description of Sorry Books. Sorry Books were a response to the Australian Bringing them home report, which details the findings of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children.
Sarah Ahmed (2004) argues that Sorry Books have exposed the failure of the Australian nation-state to live up to its ideals. Saying sorry for what has happened in the past allows the nation to be absolved and celebrated in the present (pg. 112-113).
This document is a personal reflection I created for a class on feminist, gender, sexuality, and other critical perspectives for rethinking the human. I was promted to reflect on what my gender feels like and whether it has changed over time. The process helped me better understand Sara Ahmed’s articulation of affect theory and the “impressions” that are left on us.
This book, by Vanessa Machado de Oliveira, provides a series of exercises that help readers divest from “modern-colonial desires that cause harm”. The metaphor of hospicing invokes the necessary death (and, for some, grieving) process we must collectively undertake if we are to truly divest from harmful structures and transform our relations. I’m curious about what role grief might play in transforming conservation practices.

Ahmed’s thinking about what emotions do brings important insights into how affect can contribute to the formation of collective identities, how we become invested in social norms, and how those relations are imbued with power. For example, Ahmed (2007) describes how whiteness orients bodies in specific ways, creating habitual patterns that become the background for social action. Rice et al. (2022) draw on Ahmed’s analysis to explain how “knowledge and ignorance bind white settler social bodies together through emotion and how, given their embodiment, these affects are difficult to disrupt” (Rice et al., 2022, pg. 5). Crucially, Ahmed shows the relevance of affect in our social change and justice movements by demonstrating how “the sedimentation and movement of affect in and through individual and social bodies that block and/or open possibilities for change” (Rice et al., 2022, pg. 28). Ahmed (2004) explains that analysis of emotions allows us to address how we “become invested in particular structures such that their demise is felt as a kind of living death” (pg. 12). Even when we challenge our emotional investments we can become stuck and must be vigilant to the ways in which this can happen (Ahmed, 2004, pg. 19).

My project will also engage the work of Michalinos Zembylas, a critical scholar whose work is situated at the intersections of decolonial theory, affect theory, and education studies. Zembylas (2018) theorizes white discomfort as a social and political affect that produces colonial structures and practices (pg. 88). Using the Deleuzian concept of an assemblage to consider “the complex ways in which flows of affect, material elements and discourses coalesce to form social phenomena that are beyond the individual subjective responses, feelings, and sensibilities”, Zembylas (2018) brings our attention to what race, racism and whiteness do, rather than what they are (pg. 89-90). This approach sees the affective, material and discursive assemblage of race, racism and whiteness taking shape as specific events that are situated within larger structures and requires specific and nuanced analysis of how white discomfort and other affective responses emerge from particular relations at the micro (individual) and macro (white colonial structures and practices) levels (Zembylas, 2018, pg. 90). Zembylas (2018) advocates for pedagogies of discomfort, which encourage learners to engage in critical inquiry to interrogate cherished values and beliefs. Through this interrogation, discomforting feelings can be engaged to challenge assumptions and practices that perpetuate systemic inequities (pg. 93). The following three strategies are proposed by Zembylas (2018) to ensure pedagogies of discomfort are well aligned the decolonial project:

White discomfort must be situated within the broader history and context of settler-colonialism and white discomfort should be considered as the product of specific affective, cultural and political processes.
Humanist approaches that uphold colonial binary logics should be challenged while elevating Indigenous and other subjected knowledge systems.
An ethics of critical affect should be adopted. This approach recognizes the link between colonialism and affects and advocates for ‘small practices of every day activism’ (pg. 97-98). These strategies should be used to help address the risk of sentimentalizing white discomfort.

A black and white portrait of Lee Maracle smiling. She is surrounded by blue, pink, purple and white flowering plants and ferns. — A photo of a mural of Lee Maracle located on Simcoe Street in Tkaronto/Toronto. Credit: Artist Tannis Nielson

Finally, my project is also informed by the work of Athabascan scholar Dian Million who brings forward a theory of ‘felt knowledge’. Million (2009) argues that feelings are theory because they offer important insights into lived experiences (pg. 61). Moreover, feelings are never only an individual experience because they are “culturally mediated forms of knowledge” (Million, 2009, pg. 61). This embodied or felt knowledge is disruptive: it breaks down divisions between “the private and public, the micro and the macro . . . illustrating how social structures are an outcome of [e]motionally [e]mbodied [p]ractices” (Million, 2009, pg. 71). Million draws on stories created by Indigenous feminists like Lee Maracle (Sto:lo) to illustrate how felt knowledge of settler colonialism is often communicated through stories as a practice which either “reifies settler colonial structures or offer an ‘otherwise’ as a powerful tool for social change” (Million, 2014, pg. 72). Like Ahmed, Million (2009) argues that emotions exist outside of objects. From Million, emotions are embodied responses to situations that they come “from” a body rather than being “about” a body (pg. 72). As explained by Rice et al. (2022) Million’s work shows how the felt and embodied testimonies of Indigenous women, who embody the intersections of heteropatriarchy and settler colonialism, “carry the potential to move settlers’ psyches and worldviews” (pg. 5).

I have just started learning about affect theory and emotion, and admittedly, I am still unclear about the distinction between the two (scholars use the terms in different ways). Regardless, I am excited about the possibilities critical engagement with emotion can reveal. Together, Ahmed, Zembylas and Million provide important insights into how emotions are both cultural and historical, coming together with race and racism. They also provide nuanced analysis of the ways emotions move (or get stuck) that can either reify both settler identity and the structures of settler-colonialism, or open possibilities for transformation. For the purposes of this assignment, I have not written deeply about decolonial theory but decolonial thinkers and practitioners deeply inform my project’s orientation. I have attempted to weave decolonial perspectives throughout.

“Mother nature corrects us with a firm but loving hand, and then we don’t have to fight her, or fight climate. We have to learn to respect her again. And so, for me this is the gift of sacred urgency. ‘Urgency’ is a word that inspires, for some people, anxiety. And there is an urgent need to act, still. But sacred urgency takes away that anxiety. It provides us with a moral and philosophical approach that will encourage all of us to be our best selves in the years to come, for what we’re going to leave behind for our grandchildren and our great grandchildren.hatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.”

— Eli Enns (Nuu-chuh-nulth, CRP Leadership Circle)

The above quote from Eli Enns was shared during a recent Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership (CRP) meeting. I’m curious about the distinction Eli makes between ‘urgency’ and ‘sacred urgency’. He suggests that bringing the sacred into our work will remove anxiety (and perhaps, by extension, fear), ensuring that we act with care for the benefit of future generations.

(Enns, E. personal communication. February, 2023).

Affect, Emotion and Decolonial Conservation Practice

The World Wildlife Foundation’s (WWF) symbolic wildlife adoption program enables supporters to ‘adopt’ a charismatic animal, like a polar bear. In return for their donation, supporters receive a plush animal and information about the animal’s habitat and behaviour.
The fundraising campaign relies on the positive emotions supporters will associate with charismatic animals like polar bears and red pandas. However, the WWF program is also designed in a way that draws comparisons to symbolic adoption programs for children in the Global South. I am curious about the implications of this design choice. Is the target audience presumed to be white donors, because environmentalism is predominantly white (see Curnow & Helferty, 2018)? I also wonder about the role of emotion in this choice, and whether the program is designed to invoke feelings of pity and guilt. Zembylas (2018) argues that pity is the “socially acceptable emotional display white people can display towards people of colour, rather than displaying anger or resentment out of concern that they might be called racists” (pg. 92). How does this campaign draw on the emotions of white donors and to what effect?
This campaign, by Nature Canada, positions human development as the cause for environmental degradation and suggests that creating more ‘protected areas’, which separate humans from non-humans, is the path forward. The campaign invokes feelings of fear and love to motivate supporters to act: “…prevent environmental catastrophe, we must take urgent action to protect the nature we know and love before it’s too late”.
Similarly, this video by the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, stresses the importance of urgent action to prevent biodiversity loss. The video uses fear and hope as motivators to encourage supporters to urge Crown governments to protect more land and waters.
This video, by the Indigenous Leadership Initiative, “recognizes generations of Indigenous women’s leadership on the land” and shows how Indigenous women are leading the way in protecting lands and waters across the country. The video emphasizes caring relationships, kinship with land and water, and reinvigorating Indigenous knowledge systems, legal orders and governance. The message is one of healing and hope.

Environmental conservation is an emotionally charged sector. The campaigns and videos I have collected on the right show that while the sector is galvanized by a deep love for land, water, plants, and animals, in the face of biodiversity decline and climate change, fear is a strong emotional current underlying conservation practices. Sara Ahmed (2004) argues that discourses of fear are interested in with the preservation of “me”, “what is” and, sometimes, with “life itself” (pg. 64). The video from the Indigenous Leadership Initiative offers a juxtaposition to the first three campaigns, emphasizing multi-generational and multi-species love, care, and connection based in what Nishnaabeg scholar, Leanne Betasamosake Simpson, calls “grounded normativities” (Simpson, 2017). As a settler scholar who is embedded in an Indigenous-led partnership seeking to support transformational change within the conservation sector, I am left wondering what role fear and love might play in opening or foreclosing moves towards a decolonial conservation practice amongst settler conservationists.

While my literature review has not been exhaustive, it seems as though cultural and political analyses of affect, emotion, and embodiment are limited in the field of political ecology. Pratt (2022) has examined the role of practice and emotion in collective environmental work, and Pereen (2019) has applied Ahmed’s (2004) concept of affective economy to understand how attachments to ‘wilderness’ enable political mobilizations. With the movement to advance Indigenous-led conservation and transform the conservation sector I am wondering about the role of emotion in cultivating a decolonial conservation practice. In their influential 2012 article, Eve Tuck and Wane Yang emphasize that within settler colonialism, “land is what is most valuable, contested, required” (pg. 5). A decolonial conservation practice, therefore, must have the rematriation of Indigenous land and life as its primary goal and objective (Tuck and Yang, 2018, pg. 9). To this end, a decolonial conservation practice requires moves away from:

hierarchical and dualistic colonial logics;
human-centered ontologies; and
centralized sources of power.

Instead, a decolonial conservation practice must:

center logics of connection, relationality and reciprocity;
cultivate a sense of responsibility for an extended web of relations;
power must be distributed amongst many-to-many connections; and
land rematriation should be actively pursued. In the absence of rematriation, Indigenous governance should be elevated. (Roth & Bishop, 2021).

I need to conduct a more fulsome literature review, but it seems that much of the current scholarship in political ecology tends to focus on challenging and changing colonial logics and practices in conservation (Carroll, 2014; Moola & Roth, 2019; Whyte, 2018; Willems-Braun, 2004; Youdelis et al., 2020). While this is important, I hope that my project will make a contribution by drawing on critical Indigenous, queer, and feminist theory and methodologies to “bring the body back in” by exploring the importance of affect and emotion as part of cultivating a decolonial conservation practice (Rice et al., 2022, pg. 27).

Works Cited

Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion, second edition. Edinburgh University Press.

Ahmed, A. (2007). A phenomenology of whiteness. Feminist Theory, 8(2), 149-168. http://10.1177/1464700107078139

Australian Institute of Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2021, November 4). The Sorry Books. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Studies. https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/sorry-books

Bishop, A. (2022, November 26). White Washing [Video]. https://www.allisonbishop.ca/mywork/research-and-making.

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society. (2022, October 18). Take action to protect 30% of land and ocean in Canada! [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp-WNwSU5Yg

Chircop, P. (2019, January 18). Mary Oliver reading ‘Wild Geese” [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfayiBoaXE8

Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership. (2023, January 24). Organizational change and reconciliation within ENGOs [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsI6Ie4NdFg

de Oliveira, V.M. (2021). Hospicing modernity: Facing humanities wrongs and the implications for social activism. North Atlantic Books.

*Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the Trouble. Duke University Press.

Indigenous Leadership Initiative. (2021, March 8). Indigenous women: Leading on the land [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt-MtNb93KQ

Let’s Talk About Art and Culture. (2021, June 8). What is affect theory? [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuKIqF72Bwo

Million, D. (2009). Felt theory: An Indigenous feminist approach to affect and history. Wicazo Sa Review, 24(2), 52-76. http://doi.org/10.1353./wic.0.0043

Million, D. (2014). There is a river in me: Theory from life. In A. Simpson & A. Smith. (Eds.), Theorizing Native studies. Duke University Press.

Moola, F., & Roth, R. (2019). Moving beyond colonial conservation models: Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas offer hope for biodiversity and advancing reconciliation in the Canadian boreal forest. Environmental Reviews, 27(2), 200-201. http://doi:10.1139/er-2018-0091

Nature Canada. (n.d.). Defend nature: End the extinction. Nature Canada: All campaigns. https://naturecanada.ca/defend-nature/how-you-help-us-take-action/protect-wildlife-habitat/

Pereen, E. (2019). The affective economies and political force of rural wilderness. Landscape Research, 44(7), 834-845. https://doi.org/10.1080.01426397.2018.1427706

Pratt, K. (2012). Rethinking community: Conservation, practice, and emotion. Emotion, Space, and Society, 5, 177-185. http://10.1016/J,EMOSPA.2011.08.003

*Rice, C., Dion, S.D., Fowlie, H. & Breen, A. (2022). Identifying and working through settler ignorance. Critical Studies in Education, 63:1, 15-30, http://10.1080/17508487.2020.1830818

Roth, R. & Bishop, A. (2021). Conservation through Reconciliation in Canada: cultivating a decolonial conservation practice. [Through an interrogation of the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership, this paper outlines what a decolonial conservation practice might look like and their potential for transformation. American Association of Geographers. Seattle (virtual) April 10.

*Simpson, L.B. (2017). As we have always done: Indigenous freedom through radical resistance. University of Minnesota Press.

Simpson, L.B. (2021). I pity the country [Song]. On Theory of ice [album]. Gizhiiwe Music.

*Tuck, E. & Yang, W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society 1, (1), 1-40

Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Whyte, K. (2018). Settler Colonialism, Ecology, and Environmental Injustice. Environment and Society, 9(1), 125-144. http://doi:10.3167/ares.2018.090109

Willems-Braun, B. (2004). Buried epistemologies: The politics of nature in (Post)colonial British Columbia. Annuals of the Association of American Geographers, 87(1), 3-31. http://doi.org/10.1111.0004-5608.00039

World Wildlife Fund. (2023). Adopt a Polar Bear. World Wildlife Fund Gifts. https://gifts.worldwildlife.org/gift-center/gifts/Species-Adoptions/Polar-Bear

Zembylas, M. (2014). Theorizing “difficult knowledge” in the aftermath of the “affective turn”: Implications for curriculum and pedagogy in handling traumatic representations. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(3), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12051

*Zembylas, M. (2018) Affect, race, and white discomfort in schooling: Decolonial strategies for ‘pedagogies of discomfort’. Ethics and Education, 13(1), 86-104. http://10.1080/17449642.2018.14287

Note: Sources with an asterisk * were listed as mandatory or recommended from the Transformational Methodologies Lab course taught by Dr. Carla Rice (SOPR PhD program, University of Guelph).

Allison Bishop 2023-03-21 Allison Bishop 2023-03-21

Tentative Beginnings: Storytelling, knowledge creation, and social change

This blog explores my early thinking about my methodological orientations for my research project. It is interested in stories, art and research as creation.

This is the final blog in a three-part series I created as my culminating assignment for a required first-year class on “transformational change methodologies” (a required course for the Social Practice and Transformational Change PhD program at the University of Guelph taught by Dr. Carla Rice). I have chosen to share my project publicly in the spirit of co-learning and reciprocity. While it feels vulnerable to do so, I believe we are all always in a state of becoming. With humility, I offer this messy, partial, and in-process piece.

In this blog I am beginning to explore methodologies and methods that I may use in my research project. See the first blog for background and context, and the second blog for some of the theory that is guiding my inquiry.

My Research Aims and Questions

The first two blogs in this series explain that I am a white settler-Canadian and I am a first-year PhD student in the Social Practice and Transformational Change program at the University of Guelph. I also manage the Conservation through Reconciliation Partnership (CRP), a seven-year SSHRC Partnership Grant aimed at supporting Indigenous-led conservation. In response to questions I have received from conservation organizations in my time with the CRP, I am hoping to support the decolonization of the conservation sector.

This video, by KAIROS Canada, describes the Blanket Exercise. The Blanket exercise is a popular education tool used to help settler-Canadians learn the history of colonialism in Canada in a participatory way. The exercise often brings forth a lot of emotion from settlers as they encounter difficult truths about their identities and beliefs.
A recent paper by Sheldon (2020) critiques the Blanket Exercise for extracting decolonization away from the material (rematriation of land). I am curious about the role of settler emotion in this exercise and if/how a decolonial approach to pedagogies of discomfort may be helpful.
expect it to be, at times, incoherent, messy, uncomfortable, difficult, deceptive, contradictory, paradoxical, repetitive, frustrating, incomprehensible, infuriating, dull and painful – and prepare for your heart to break and be stretched do you still want to do it?

This is an excerpt of a poem by Elwood Jimmy and Vanessa Andreotti (2019) in their book, Towards Braiding. The poem emphasizes feelings of discomfort, frustration and pain which are necessarily part of transforming Indigenous-settler relations. The poem names these emotions directly and calls upon settlers to engage with them bravely.
In June 2021, a storytelling circle was convened with former ICE members and federal civil servants who provided organizational and operational support to ICE and the Pathway to Canada Target 1 initiative. The circle members reflected on their personal experiences of ethical space within the Pathway to Canada Target 1 process, including the organizational and personal commitments required to achieve ethical space.

This resource, which weaves together the audio and visuals from the storytelling circle, emphasizes the importance of emotion in ethical space processes and their lasting impact - transforming personal relations and professional practices.

For my project, I am interested in what emotions and stories can do to support transformational change. More specifically, the aim of my project is to explore how settler emotions can get stuck or move in ways that support the cultivation of a decolonial conservation practice in Turtle Island/Canada. While I am in the process of refining my research questions, my initial questions ask:

What can settler-conservationists' stories teach about the work emotions do to inhibit or help cultivate a decolonial conservation practice in Turtle Island/Canada?
How can these stories support the learning of other settler-conservationists?
How can this learning contribute to the transformation of the conservation sector in Canada?

Methodological orientations: Knowledge creation, art, and social change

As described by Natasha Myers (in Manning et al., 2020), the aim of this project “experiments with movement, gesture drawing, sonic mapping, and kinesthetic imaging to detune the colonial sensorium, and explore other modes of attention and rendering that can do justice to the sentience of more-than-human beings”. (pg. 238).
The “Becoming Sensor in a Sentient World” project is an interesting example of research-creation, drawing on art, science, and felt knowledges, not only of humans, but of the more-than-human to disrupt colonial hierarchical logics.
Wave Sound and Ayum-ee-aawach Oomama-mowan:
Speaking to Their Mother are two art projects by Rebecca Belmore (Lac Seul First Nation).
For the Wave Sound project, Belmore created sculptures that were placed in four Canadian National Parks to encourage visitors to listen to the land and water.
For the Ayum-ee-aawach Oomama-mowan saw project, Belmore created a large (2 meter) wooden megaphone which was carried into Banff National Park so invited Indigenous leaders, activists and artists could “speak to and about the land”.
These works by an Indigenous artist, take place in state-controlled National Parks, which have violently displaced Indigenous peoples. The artworks serve to reimagine and reconnect relations between humans, land, water and other more-than-human entities.
This video, created by Michelle Wilson (white settler-Canadian), explores her embodied and emotional responses to a witnessing a taxidermied bison on display at the Manitoba Museum. Through this encounter, Michelle explores the entangled myths and violence of colonial conservation, Canadian nation-building, and settler identity. responsibilities for challenges these myths.
The video demonstrates the potential of critical-arts based methodologies to open up new conversations, stories and narratives.
This exhibit by Michelle Wilson weaves together textiles and technology to tell stories of bison. As a settler scholar/artist, Michelle focuses her stories on what settlers have done to bison and their kin.
This exhibit refuses to participate in the ‘colonial archive’, instead centering specific embodied perspectives by ‘taking the stories out of the academy’.
Michelle’s work has inspired my thinking about how to engage colonial conservation, settler identity/responsibilities, the associated affects of conservation.

Research as Creation

At this point in my studies, developing a methodology plan (however tentative) seems like an overwhelming task. There is so much I don’t know and every time I encounter an idea or concept, I find myself journeying on a new (to me) path with excitement, curiosity, and a desire to engage across epistemic difference with integrity. Recently, I have found myself drown to questions about how knowledge creation can happen through critical engagement with the arts within the broader context of decolonization as a specific justice project (Tuck & Yang, 2018).

Research-creation is a term that is emerging through the social sciences in Canada to describe methodologies that situate art and creation at the heart research inquiry and methods (Chapman & Sawchuck, 2012; Loveless, 2019; Manning et al., 2020). Research-creation does not assume an objective, knowable truth. Rather, research-creation methodologies “challenge the colonial, hetero-normative, white supremacist, and ablest logics of the settler-colonial Canadian university by centering intersectional queer, feminist, Black, Indigenous and critical disability scholarship/critical art practices” (Manning et al., pg. 226). Manning describes research-creation as active. It is “a way of getting involved in the world that takes seriously embodied knowledge, craft, creativity, aesthetics, and practices of […] making knowledge and telling stories about both what is known and what remains unknown” (pg. 227). Similarly, Stephanie Springgay describes her approach to research-creation as a “way of doing theory that is bodily, experimental, and considers research (knowledge making) as a (speculative) event emerging from a practice…” (in Manning et al., 2020, pg. 226). I am drawn to research-creation due to its ability to disrupt hegemonic systems by placing art at the heart of inquiry and its ability to expand one’s engagement with different ways and modes of being in the world, surfacing new entanglements and questions.

I have more learning to do to better understand current conversations regarding methodologies that weave together research and the arts, with attention to the nuances between approaches. For example, Chapman and Sawchuck (2012) describe four different categories to articulate different approaches to research and creation:

Research-for-creation: Experimental and processual activities from which a research event may emerge. This can include literature reviews; gathering artifacts; developing prototypes; collaborating with community partners. The results may be a final creative product, or a prototype (pg. 16).
Research-from-creation: Is a participatory, iterative processes that uses artistic works to generate research questions, which feed back into artistic creation. (pg. 17).
Creative presentations of research: Describes the creative presentation of traditional academic works (pg. 18).
Research-as-creation: Integrates theory and practice. It is takes place when “knowledge is produced as creative work, and not simply through their analysis and interpretation” (pg. 21).

Drawing on the distinctions made by Chapman and Sawchuck, Loveless (in Manning et al., 2022) argues that research-creation inextricably links the form and content of research while inviting scholars to “pay rigorous attention to “non-writerly” forms as challenges to conventional knowledge production as inherited within the settler colonial spaces of the Canadian university” (pg. 230). While I have more to learn about the distinctions between research-creation and critical arts-based research, I am coming to understand that the most important consideration is that research-creation does not create art as a secondary outcome of research. Rather, theory, art, and practice come together to answer questions that exceed a particular discipline, while disrupting hegemonic systems and approaches to knowledge production.

Personally, I’m drawn to this approach because when I think of moments where I have generated new insights for myself, they have often emerged when I was making something (whether that be a painting, a textile art piece, a poem, or a piece of music). While the prospect of integrating art so intrinsically throughout my research process is exciting, I also find myself quite nervous. I look at this blog I created for my assignment and - clearly - creating art is not my first instinct when it comes to producing something within the confines of the academy. My mind immediately begins to recite a list of why I shouldn’t attempt research-creation and should stick to creative presentations of research (I am not an artist, I don’t have training to be an artist, I don’t have time to learn artistic skills or knowledge). Speaking with my friend and fellow SOPR student, Janna, I wonder how much of this internal dialogue is a product of my training. I too have been shaped by the systems I am trying to change. I too have been taught to suppress emotive and creative forms of knowing. This acknowledgement brings some comfort, but I am treading tentatively towards research-creation methodologies.

Story-Making and the Re•Vision Centre for Art and Social Justice

For my project, I hope to engage with the Re•Vision: The Center for Art and Social Justice’s (Re•Vision) multimedia storytelling methodological approach, which is described by Rice & Mündel (2018) as situated both within the tradition of critical arts-based research and the rich tradition of activist art (pg. 214). Re•Vision describes critical arts-based research is an “umbrella of methods that seek to generate original works through art-making and is characterized by political and process-oriented approaches” (Evans et al., 2022). Their approach brings together participants, often from justice-seeking groups, to create short personal stories using digital multimedia (photographs, video, music, art) through facilitated, multi-day workshops. Re•Vision’s approach aligns with research-creation methodologies in its commitment to destabilizing positivism and its recognition that “every day people make knowledge” (Rice & Mündel, 2018, pg. 215). Moreover, knowledge can be co-created through the artistic practice of making stories (Rice & Mündel, 2018, pg. 215). Oriented towards social change, Re•Vision’s methodology aims to shift “taken-for-granted-understandings” (Evans et al., 2022). I do find myself wondering whether there is a distinction to be made between research-creation and critical-arts based research as they are described and practiced by Re•Vision (Evans et al., 2022; Rice & Mündel, 2018) and Manning et al. (2020). Reflecting on the power of stories, Rice and Mündel (2018) content that stories have a unique ability to “make us vulnerable to ourselves and others, make us ask questions about who we are and who we should be, make us take risks, go to uncharted places, and rethink ourselves in relation to others and the world” (pg. 224). While I am in the very early stages of learning about this methodology, I am excited by the opportunities storytelling makes possible for revealing what we do not yet know about ourselves and for deepening our understanding of how our identities are shaped through encounters with the world (Rice & Mündel, 2018, pg. 216).

Possible Methods

My research questions are interested in both emotion and stories, and their potential to inform and catalyze social change. To address my first question, which is concerned with what settler stories can teach about how emotions enable and inhibit the cultivation of a decolonial conservation practice, I am hoping to recruit 10-12 settler-conservationists to engage in a multimedia storytelling workshop series. With support from myself and Re•Vision’s team of facilitators and methodological experts, the participants will create short personal stories about their attempts to enact or cultivate a decolonial conservation practice. The storytellers will be guided through a series of creative, open-ended prompts designed to encourage reflections on their own identities, subjectivities, and relations with land, water, and more-than-human entities in the context of conservation. I imagine asking participants to reflect on:

Moments of shift in their practices and learning with attention to what those moments felt like in an embodied way;
Moments when they felt resistance or discomfort; and
Moments when they felt new understandings, connections and generative possibilities and how those new understandings felt.

This project sought to understand how to create school communities that support positive Indigenous student achievement. The innovative story-making methods used with settler-teachers is of interest to me and my project.
This digital resource is a guide through Re•Vision’s story-making process and demonstrates the potential of stories for supporting transformative social change. It will be an important resource for me if I choose to pursue multimedia story-making methods.
This podcast by WalkingLab is an introduction to critical walking methodologies as research-creation. The podcast explains where the term research-creation comes from, and the ways critical walking methodologies draw on queer, crip, and critical Indigenous studies to interrogate relationships with land, place and movement.
Drawing on Tuck and McKenzie, who argue that methods have a place and need to be relationally appropriate/accountable, this podcast explores the possibilities of critical walking methodologies for responding to place in research.
This website explores the stories of people from different communities who are impacted by eugenics.
The website is an interesting example of how stories can be presented digitally in a way that prepares the listener to engage with respect and care.

As explained in my second blog, a decolonial conservation practice must have the rematriation of Indigenous land and life as its primary goal and objective (Tuck and Yang, 2018). The importance of land in decolonizing conservation practice is something that I am curious about attending to in my methodology and methods. From my limited knowledge of Re•Vision’s methodology, participants could be encouraged to think about place and their relationships to place through different prompts which might inspire a story. Given the centrality of land, water, and power in the context of my project, I began wondering if there is a way to bring land and place into my methodology more directly.

I recently discovered critical walking methodologies and the work of WalkingLab. Critical walking methodologies engage land-based artistic, walking, and research practices in ways that “unsettle the distinction between living and non-living matter” and they create opportunities to “shift the ways in which we understand place as something fixed and static, to place as a set of relations between humans, non-humans, and the environment” (WalkingLab, n.d.). I am interested in exploring the possibility of bringing participants together in place, hosted by a community with an Indigenous Protected and Conserved Area or other Indigenous-led conservation initiative, to engage in critical walking methodologies as part of the story-making workshop. Participants could engage with guest lectures or with artistic works while walking. They could also record sounds of the land, water plants and animals while on the walk, take video footage, photographs and narration. They could also create prose or fiction while out on the land. These gathered media could then be incorporated into their digital stories. Another approach would be to invite the participants to travel to a place that has affected them and their attempts to cultivate a decolonial conservation practice, where they could carry out similar activities before creating their multimedia stories. If these two options are cost prohibitive, a more economical option would be to adapt the methodology by encouraging participants to walk in a place where they live that is meaningful for them and provide tools to guide their independent processes before creating their stories.

This video by TwoRow Info provides a short overview of an annual 10 day canoe paddle down the Grand River in what is now known as Ontario. The canoe trip brings together Indigenous peoples and settlers in a journey from Cambridge Ontario to the shores of Lake Eerie. It is meant to represent an embodied commitment to the principles of the Guswentah or Two-Row Wampum Belt Covenant. Participants camp along the canoe route and participate in teachings together. I’m interested in the Two Row on the Grand as an example of bringing people together on the land and water to transform relationships and subjectivities.

I am imagining the stories created through the workshop will be reviewed by an interdisciplinary team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars and practitioners who are interested in pedagogical approaches to transforming the conservation sector. Together, we will discuss our affective responses to the videos and connect them to theory. At this time, I find myself struggling to identify an appropriate approach to answering my the second and third research questions, which are interested in the potential for the stories to support the learning of settler conservationists. I am not trying to measure the impact the stories will have on settler-conservationists learning, so I don’t believe I need to engage in methods to test the stories as a pedagogical intervention. That said, I do wonder if I need to engage more with educational theory and methods to sufficiently answer my second and third research questions.

Discussion: Benefits, limitations and questions

Potential Benefits

As a settler-scholar working with other settlers, I am working from within my own knowledge system, though I hold a commitment to collaborating across epistemic difference with integrity. This commitment guides my interest in adopting methodologies that align epistemologically with Indigenous methodologies and methods. The emphasis of research-creation methodologies on generating knowledge through practice is appealing because this approach has congruence with Indigenous methodologies. Leanne Betasamosake Simpson (2017) explains that within Nishnaabeg thought, theory is continually created through “embodied practice within families, communities, and generations of people” (pg. 151). Continuing, Simpson argues that theory is for everyone - not just academics. She explains that to learn about something, from a Nishnaabeg perspective, it is essential to “‘get a practice […] get out, get involved, and get invested” (pg. 165). Athabascan scholar Dian Million (2014) describes the relationship between theory and practice slightly differently. She contents that theory is a “link between sets of practices”, connecting ways of “intuiting/feeling/thinking” (pg. 36). Emphasizing the importance of practice, Million (2009) also argues that “ the social structure itself is both “medium and out-come” of “[e]motionally [e]mbodied [p]ractices.” (pg. 72). Despite the slightly different views on the relationship between theory and practice offered by Simpson and Million, the ability of research-creation methodologies to embed practices in the knowledge creation process will be beneficial for my project.

Similarly, arts-based storytelling methodologies can have strong alignment with Indigenous methodologies. Margaret Kovach (Pasqua First Nation) describes story as an Indigenous methodology, explaining that stories “remind us of who we are and of our belonging” (pg. 94). They are deeply relational and are born out of connections with the world. In Indigenous storytelling methodologies, stories and knowing are inseparable (Kovach, 2009, pg. 94). Stó:lo researcher Jo-Anne Archibald (2008) uses the term ‘storywork’ to describe both the importance of storytelling as Indigenous methodology and to describe how stories “invite listeners to reflect deeply on their actions and reactions” (Rice et al., 2022, pg. 21; Kovach, 2009, pg. 94; Archibald, 2001, pg. 94). Rice et al (2022) explain how they draw on Indigenous thinkers like Lee Maracle, Daniel Heath Justice (Cherokee) and Thomas King (Cherokee) to orient themselves to the transformative potential of stories as “carriers of people’s knowledge, values, and relationships – as speech acts that have the power to make and change the world” (pg. 20). It is this transformative potential that draws me to story-making as methodology.

Another benefit to using storytelling methodologies is the relevance of stories and narrative for both Ahmed’s theory of affective economies and Dian Million’s theory of felt knowledge (see my second blog for more detail). Ahmed (2004) explains that she uses narrative analysis to explore what work emotions to because emotion is performed through speech acts, which are reflected in texts (pg. 13). While my project is more focused on audio/visual stories, I believe Ahmed’s close analysis of metaphor and narrative is applicable. In her work on ‘felt theory’, Million (2009) describes how stories convey embodied knowledges, which can “fuel discursive shifts” and mobilize political change (pg. 64). These stories have the potential for remaking social relations and shifting subjectivities at the micro and macro scales.

Potential Limitations and Risks

My main concern about my proposed methodology is the risk of centering and reifying whiteness, and the potential for inadvertently creating opportunities for moves to settler ignorance (Tuck and Yang, 2012) in the process of engaging settler stories. This is a challenging undertaking for a white settler and an emerging scholar. However, I am inspired by and will seek guidance from the Re•Vision team, who worked on the Nishnabek de’bwe win//Telling Our Stories: Aboriginal People and Allies Using Technology, Telling Stories, and Making Change project. One output of this project was the paper entitled “Identifying and working through settler ignorance”, which explains how the Re•Vision team decolonized their methodological approach. This included:

Disrupting conventional binaries between researcher and researched by ensuring researchers are active participants in the research creation process (including by making their own stories);

Offering robust training to prepare workshop participants to engage respectfully across epistemic difference, and to challenge/disrupt the colonial gaze in their storytelling process;
Engaging a knowledge keeper to provide support with cultural protocols and teachings; and
Operating under Indigenous leadership and hiring a team of Indigenous and settler facilitators (Rice et al. 2022, pg. 21)

Importantly, Rice et al. (2022) describe how they “enacted a pedagogy of accountability”. This was accomplished by “emphasizing how Indigenous storytelling methods center the necessity of listening” and by “remaining attuned to the problematics of settler stories that look for recognition from Indigenous peoples rather than take responsibility for transformational change through decolonizing thought and action” (Flowers, 2015 in Rice et al., 2022, pg. 21). I take my role and responsibility for destabilizing settler narratives through story-making very seriously and will work closely with my supervisor to ensure that I am well prepared and well supported before engaging in this work.

As mentioned earlier, another significant limitation of engaging in research-creation as a methodology is my own ignorance of the arts. Natalie Loveless and Stephanie Springgay explain that transdisciplinary research is hard work - it requires an ethical commitment to “many different disciplines, practices, and ways of being” (In Manning et al., 2020, pg. 242). It also requires an understanding of art. While graduate students do not necessarily need to already have an art practice before engaging in research-creation methodologies, Loveless and Springgay (In Manning et al., 2020) emphasize that graduate students should have an openness to creating a practice that engages deeply with art and/as theory (pg. 242). While I am interested in engaging deeply with the arts in my scholarly work and developing my own artistic practice, I am concerned about imposter syndrome and my own time/capacity constraints as this would add another layer of complexity to my work.

New questions and concluding thoughts

This blog series represents my tentative first step towards thinking about the methodological orientation for my research project and potential methods I might use. While I have learned that I am interested in settler emotions, stories, and conservation practice in the context of the broader decolonial project, I still have many questions to consider before developing my research proposal. Some of these questions include:

How can I recruit participants to engage in this project if the topic may be a deterrent for some? I recognize that exploring emotion is a vulnerable thing to do.
As a settler-scholar, I am focused on settler responsibilities for decolonizing conservation practice. However, I have some concerns about how to do this work ethically. I am wondering how I can host workshops with settler-conservationists in a way that avoids asking Indigenous collaborators to take on unnecessary emotional labour (acknowledging there will, likely unavoidably, be some)?
I am also concerned that, while the question of settler emotion in decolonizing conservation practice is relevant, I expect this may not be a priority for many Indigenous collaborators in the CRP. I have been considering how I can ensure there is reciprocity throughout the process, even if the questions I’m exploring do not have immediate tangible benefits for Indigenous communities engaged in Indigenous-led conservation.
I am wondering what kind of additional training and preparation might I need before I can engage in these methods. I wonder whether I could shadow the Re•Vision facilitation team. I’m also exploring taking a creative writing or storytelling class.
I’m curious about what steps I can take to begin to cultivating my own artistic practice in relation to this project. I recently participated in a 1:1 consultation with a librarian for support with my project. They suggested I create a research journal to track my ideas, thoughts, and questions, as well as my process. I am wondering if I could create (and more, importantly, maintain) a journal that integrates my own artistic practice.
I am wondering if I need to engage with educational theories and methods to answer my second and third research questions. I hope not to because I want to focus on settler emotion and decolonizing conservation. I will work with my committee to perhaps refine my research questions and for support with my methods to ensure the scope is manageable and relevant to my interests.
I wonder if it would be helpful to adopt a mixed-methods approach to my work. I could pair the critical walking methodologies/multimedia story-making methodologies with a narrative analysis of public communications materials produced by environmental not-for-profit organizations. It could be helpful to analyze individual practitioners stories with narratives produced by organizations as a collective with it’s own identity and investments.

I have much more to learn about each of the topics I am interested in. I am really looking forward to exploring them more deeply through my qualifying exam and ongoing course work.

Works Cited

Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion, second edition. Edinburgh University Press.

*Archibald, J. (2008). Indigenous storywork: Educating the heart, mind, body and spirit. University of British Columbia Press

Chapman, S. & Sawchuck, K. (2012). Research-Creation: Intervention, analysis and “family resemblances”. Canadian Journal of Communication, 37(1), 5-26. http://doi.org/10.22230.cjc.2012v37n1a2489

Evans, C., Fowlie, H., Jones, C. Lee, L., Mündel, I., & Rice, C. (2022). Re•Vision Online Story-Making. E-Campus Ontario [Digital Publication]. https://revisionstorymaking.ca.

* Jimmy, E., Andreotti, V., & Stein, S. (2019). Towards braiding. Musagetes.

*Kovach, M. (2010). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. UT Press

*Loveless, N. (2019). How to Make Art at the End of the World. Duke University Press

Manning, E., Loveless, N., Myers, N. & Springgay, S. (2020). The intimacies of doing research-creation: Sarah E. Truman in conservation with Natalie Loveless, Erin Manning, Natasha Myers, and Stephanie Springgay. N. Loveless (Ed.) In Knowings and knots: Methodologies and ecologies in research-creation. University of Alberta.

Million, D. (2009). Felt theory: An Indigenous feminist approach to affect and history. Wicazo Sa Review, 24(2), 52-76. http://doi.org/10.1353./wic.0.0043

Million, D. (2014). There is a river in me: Theory from life. In A. Simpson & A. Smith. (Eds.), Theorizing Native studies. Duke University Press.

Re•Vision: The Center for Art and Social Justice. (2023, March 5). nishnabek de’bwe win//telling our truths: Aboriginal People and Allies Using Technology, Telling Stories, and Making Change. Re-Vision: The Center for Art and Social Justice. https://revisioncentre.ca/projects/nishnabek-debwe-win

*Rice, C. & Mündel, I. (2018). Storymaking as methodology: Disrupting dominant stories through multimedia storytelling. Canadian Review of Sociology. 55(2), 211-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.12190

*Rice, C., Dion, S.D., Fowlie, H. & Breen, A. (2022). Identifying and working through settler ignorance. Critical Studies in Education, 63:1, 15-30, http://10.1080/17508487.2020.1830818

Sheldon, J. (2020). Colonial under the covers: A critical examination of the KAIROS Blanket Exercise and its limitations as a decolonial education tool. Transformations, 30(2), 111-126

*Simpson, L.B. (2017). As we have always done: Indigenous freedom through radical resistance. University of Minnesota Press.

Stonefish, M., Stonefish, S., Parker, P., Slark, M. & Charlebois, A. (n.d.). Into the light: Living histories of oppression and education in Ontario. https://intothelight.ca/index.html

TwoRow Info. (2022, November 14). Two Row 3Minute [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDzsOXJoZx8

*Tuck, E., & McKenzie, M. (2014). Place in research: Theory, methodology, and methods. Routledge

WalkingLab. (n.d.). Podcast episode 1: Introduction to critical walking methodologies [Podcast]. WalkingLab. https://walkinglab.org/podcast/walkinglab-introduction-to-critical-walking-methodologies/

WalkingLab. (n.d.). Podcast episode 6: Walking-with place [Podcast]. WalkingLab. https://walkinglab.org/podcast/walkinglab-introduction-to-critical-walking-methodologies/

Note: Sources with an asterisk * were listed as mandatory or recommended from the Transformational Methodologies Lab course taught by Dr. Carla Rice (SOPR PhD program, University of Guelph).

My starting place

Where I come from

Context

Colonial Conservation

Indigenous-led conservation reading list

Canada's National Parks are a colonial crime scene

The taking of wood buffalo

"We've had enough of this talk of boundaries in the forest"

How environmentalism's white supremacist roots branch into today's struggles

“Wilderness” revisited: Is Canadian park management moving beyond the “wilderness” ethic?

Changing tides: ICE and ‘we rise together’

Example: Nature Conservancy of Canada

Example: Nature United

Example: WWF Canada

“How can we help?” Towards transforming the conservation sector

How to be an ally of Indigenous-led conservation

Accomplices not allies: Abolishing the ally industrial complex

White allies: Let's be honest about decolonization

Beyond Conservation: A Toolkit for Respectful Collaboration with Indigenous Peoples

Works Cited

Feeling our way: Towards a decolonial conservation practice

Building Ethical Partnerships for Indigenous-led Conservation

Mary Oliver Reading Wild Geese

I Pity the Country

What is affect theory?

Affect, emotion, and possibilities for social change

Sorry books

Gender is a memory my body holds

Hospicing modernity: Facing humanity’s wrongs and the Implications for Social Activism

Affect, Emotion and Decolonial Conservation Practice

Adopt a Polar Bear

Defend Nature: End the exctinction

Take action to protect 30% of land and ocean in Canada!

Indigenous Women: Leading on the land

Works Cited

Tentative Beginnings: Storytelling, knowledge creation, and social change

My Research Aims and Questions

The Blanket Exercise

Wanna be an ally?

Stories of Ethical Space in Pathway to Canada Target 1

Methodological orientations: Knowledge creation, art, and social change

Becoming Sensor in Sentient Worlds

Art in Parks

Outlaw #5

Forced Migration

Research as Creation

Story-Making and the Re•Vision Centre for Art and Social Justice

Possible Methods

Nishnabek de b'we win//Telling our truths

Re-Vision Story Making

Introduction to critical walking methodologies

Walking-with place

Into the Light

Discussion: Benefits, limitations and questions

Potential Benefits

Potential Limitations and Risks

New questions and concluding thoughts

Works Cited