Co-management, also known as community-based management, community-based resource management, cooperative management, joint management, and collaborative management, in the broadest terms refers to the administration of a particular place or resource being shared between multiple local and state management systems.[1] Although co-management encompasses a spectrum of power-sharing arrangements,[2] in the Canadian context it typically refers to agreements between government agencies and representatives of Indigenous peoples in Canada to jointly make land use and resource management decisions about a tract of government-controlled land (e.g. protected areas) or resource (e.g.fishery.).[3]
Co-management has come to mean institutional arrangements whereby governments and Aboriginal entities (and sometimes other parties) enter into formal agreements specifying their respective rights, powers and obligations with reference to the management and allocation of resources in a particular area of crown lands and waters.
Co-management arrangements in Canada between Crown governments and Indigenous groups have historically arisen out of comprehensive land claims settlements (modern treaties),[4] crisis resolution processes (i.e. over resource disputes), and more recently out of growing legal recognition of Indigenous right through supreme court jurisprudence, such as the 1999 Sparrow ruling.[1] Where Crown governments enter into co-management agreements to minimize management costs or uphold human rights commitments, such Canada's endorsement of the United Nation's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous groups leverage co-management strategically as a tool to advance their self-determination as distinct cultures and to reclaim political agency.[1][5][6] Historically, co-management has been a subject of debate. From one stance, co-management is viewed as a paternalistic administrative arrangement levied by the state that reifies colonial relationships by co-opting Indigenous peoples, excludes Indigenous forms of law and governance, and/or displaces Indigenous assertions of sovereignty.[7][8][9] In nearly all co-management agreements, the Minister maintains unfettered veto rights, which is a source of contention among critics of co-management.[7][10] Proponents of co-management highlight its utility as an adaptive platform by which Indigenous peoples can assert their sovereignty and jurisdiction, and engage in power-sharing arrangements with the state.[11][12] Indigenous perspectives on co-management have been under represented in studies on co-management and critiques against co-management erroneously reduce Indigenous peoples to subjects without agency or the capacity to politically organize.[6]
- ^ a b c Notzke, Claudia (May 1995). "A new perspective in aboriginal natural resource management: Co-management". Geoforum. 26 (2): 187–209. doi:10.1016/0016-7185(95)00019-h. ISSN 0016-7185.
- ^ Berkes, F., George, P., & Preston, R. (1991). Co-Management: The Evolution of the Theory and Practice of the Joint Administration of Living Resources (No. 1; TASO Research Report, Second Series. Program for Technology Assessment in Subarctic Ontario). McMaster University.
- ^ "ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS Co-Management Definitions Guide" (PDF). Assembly of First Nations. Retrieved August 1, 2014.
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada; Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs (2023-02-22). "Modern treaties". www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca. Retrieved 2023-09-09.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Reed, G., Brunet, N. D., Longboat, S., & Natcher, D. C. (2021). Indigenous guardians as an emerging approach to indigenous environmental governance. Conservation Biology, 35(1), 179–189. doi:10.1111/cobi.13532
- ^ a b Martin, T. (2016). Beyond the Protection of the Land, National Parks in the Canadian Arctic: A Way to Actualized and Institutionalized Aboriginal Cultures in the Global. In T. M. Herrmann & T. Martin (Eds.), Indigenous Peoples' Governance of Land and Protected Territories in the Arctic. Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25035-9
- ^ a b Youdelis, M., Nakoochee, R., O'Neil, C., Lunstrum, E., & Roth, R. (2020). "Wilderness" revisited: Is Canadian park management moving beyond the "wilderness" ethic? The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe Canadien, 64(2), 232–249. doi:10.1111/cag.12600
- ^ Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Lassen, B., Broome, N. P., Phillips, A., & Sandwith, T. (2013). Governance of Protected Areas: From Understanding to Action (No. 20; Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series, p. 124). International Union for Conservation of Nature.
- ^ Finegan, C. (2018). Reflection, Acknowledgement, and Justice: A Framework for Indigenous-Protected Area Reconciliation. International Indigenous Policy Journal, 9(3). doi:10.18584/iipj.2018.9.3.3
- ^ Parks Canada. (2018). We rise together: Achieving pathway to Canada target 1 through the creation of Indigenous protected and conserved areas in the spirit and practice of reconciliation : the Indigenous Circle of Experts' report and recommendations. Parks Canada. https://www.deslibris.ca/ID/10096675
- ^ Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5), 1692–1702. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001
- ^ Clark, D., & Joe-Strack, J. (2017). Keeping the "co" in the co-management of Northern resources. Northern Public Affairs, 71–74.