TY - JOUR
T1 - “Wisdom Seeking Together”
T2 - Circling around Research Ethics
AU - Auger, Josie C.
AU - Nath, Nisha
AU - Greene, Carolyn
N1 - Funding Information:
Third, research ethics processes pertaining to research with First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in Canada vary across provincial contexts, and also across institutional contexts given the composition of institutional REBs, and the processes adopted by institutional REBs, which can also include professional development and training, or the lack thereof. For example, in the province of Ontario, the Jane Finch Community Research Partnership was created in 2016, bringing together York University faculty and librarians and members of the Jane Finch community in the Greater Toronto Area. The group has a threefold focus on: 1) creating a community procedure for reviewing and approving research; 2) establishing a process and open-access database to make research easily accessible to members of the community; and 3) developing resources for researchers looking to conduct research in the Jane Finch community, including principles for conducting research within the community (Jane Finch Community Research Partnership, n.d). More recently, York University developed an Indigenous Research Ethics Board, “the first for a post-secondary institution in Canada,” (York University, 2023). Or, within the province of Manitoba, Kishaadigeh (the Manitoba Network Environment for Indigenous Health Research) is funded by the CIHR and promotes “Indigenous self-determination in research through the development of community-based research lodges in partnership with five Manitoba Indigenous organizations” (Manitoba Network Environment for Indigenous Health Research, n.d.)4 Reflecting these accountabilities, the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Manitoba has adopted a comprehensive “Framework for Research Engagement with First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Peoples” (First Nations, Metis, and Inuit Health Research Strategic Planning Committee, n.d.). Specific parallels do not exist at our institution, nor in our home province of Alberta which is covered by Treaties 6, 7, and 8.
Funding Information:
While the specificities of Auger’s original research have been elaborated elsewhere (see Auger et al., 2020),2 in this context we note that bringing Auger and Greene into conversation was distinctive given Auger’s use of Indigenous Research Methodology (IRM) to explore self-determination and sovereignty with nehiyaw iskwewak as Knowledge Holders. Conducted within Treaty 8, the Canadian part of Turtle Island that also includes the United States and Mexico, Auger’s project needed to be assessed by a Canadian university REB because her research involved Indigenous people. In the Canadian context, the Tri-Council refers to the three major Canadian government research funding agencies: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). All researchers at Canadian postsecondary institutions are bound to the Tri-Council Policy Statement on “Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans,” also known as the TCPS2. Notably, Chapter 9 of the TCPS2 pertains specifically to “Research Involving the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada” [hereafter Chapter 9].
Publisher Copyright:
© This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Before Indigenous scholars engage in decolonial research with human participants, Canadian universities must grant them ethics approval. Grounded by the experiences of the nehiyaw researcher and the Chair of the research ethics board who reviewed the research, we explore the experience of REB review with research exploring self-determination and sovereignty with nehiyaw iskwewak (Cree females) as Knowledge Holders. In accordance with iyiniwak (Indigenous Peoples) beliefs, the co-creators and authors positioned themselves in the centre of a circle with Natural Law teachings of kindness, honesty, caring, strength, and determination. In this shared space, we brought together dialogues connected to thematics grounded in ceremony, Natural Law (iyiniwak teachings), and cyclical process. Through four directions, we examine colonial processes and identify REB accountabilities.
AB - Before Indigenous scholars engage in decolonial research with human participants, Canadian universities must grant them ethics approval. Grounded by the experiences of the nehiyaw researcher and the Chair of the research ethics board who reviewed the research, we explore the experience of REB review with research exploring self-determination and sovereignty with nehiyaw iskwewak (Cree females) as Knowledge Holders. In accordance with iyiniwak (Indigenous Peoples) beliefs, the co-creators and authors positioned themselves in the centre of a circle with Natural Law teachings of kindness, honesty, caring, strength, and determination. In this shared space, we brought together dialogues connected to thematics grounded in ceremony, Natural Law (iyiniwak teachings), and cyclical process. Through four directions, we examine colonial processes and identify REB accountabilities.
KW - Indigenous research methodology
KW - Research Ethics Boards
KW - Wisdom Seeking
KW - international research policy
KW - invasion of sexual boundaries
KW - self-determination
KW - sovereignty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85161135151&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.18584/iipj.2023.14.1.13606
DO - 10.18584/iipj.2023.14.1.13606
M3 - Journal Article
AN - SCOPUS:85161135151
VL - 14
JO - International Indigenous Policy Journal
JF - International Indigenous Policy Journal
IS - 1
ER -