Volume 54, Issue 1 p. 89-120
COMMITTING SOCIOLOGY

Canadian University Acknowledgment of Indigenous Lands, Treaties, and Peoples

Rima Wilkes

Corresponding Author

Rima Wilkes

University of British Columbia

Rima Wilkes, Department of Sociology, The University of British Columbia (Vancouver Campus), 6303 NW Marine Drive, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z1. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
Aaron Duong

Aaron Duong

University of Alberta

Search for more papers by this author
Linc Kesler

Linc Kesler

University of British Columbia

Search for more papers by this author
Howard Ramos

Howard Ramos

Dalhousie University

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 21 February 2017
Citations: 18

We thank François Dépelteau, Tracey Adams, as well as several reviewers for their very helpful feedback. We also thank Avril Bell, Carole Blackburn, Alex Cywink, Kim Lawson, Diana Lewis, Lisa Nathan, and Susan Rowley for helpful comments and advice.

Abstract

At many Canadian universities it is now common to publicly acknowledge Indigenous lands, treaties, and peoples. Yet, this practice has yet to be considered as a subject of scholarly inquiry. How does this practice vary and why? In this paper we describe the content and practice of acknowledgment, linking this content to treaty relationships (or lack thereof). We show that acknowledgment tends to be one of five general types: of land and title (British Columbia), of specific treaties and political relationships (Prairies), of multiculturalism and heterogeneity (Ontario), of no practice (most of Quebec), and of people, territory, and openness to doing more (Atlantic). Based on these results, we conclude that the fluidity of acknowledgment as a practice, including changing meanings depending on the positionality of the acknowledger, need to be taken into account.

Plusieurs universités Canadien pratique une reconnaissance des territoires, des traités, et des peoples autochtone en publique. Cette pratique, cependant, n'a jamais été considérée comme une enquête savante. Dans ce projet nous regardons comment les reconnaissances varie par institution et pourquoi. Nous trouvons qu'il y a un lien entre le contenu des reconnaissances et les relations traité. On démontre cinq forme des reconnaissances: territoire et titre (Colombie britannique); traité spécifique and les relations politiques (Prairies); multiculturalisme et hétérogénéité (Ontario); l'absence (la majorité du Québec); et des peoples, territoire et volonté a plus faire (Atlantique). Nous concluons que la fluidité de la reconnaissance, comme pratique, est fluide et doit prendre en considération la position de la personne qui le fait.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.