MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7161840575 · doi:10.82308/51556

Colonial moves in Canada’s (non-) recognition of Indigenous spiritual connection to land: the Innu’s Nitassinan

2024· dissertation· en· W7161840575 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeanne Pérès

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIndigenousPoliticsColonialismNegotiationSubject (documents)RealpolitikLand rights

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Innu people have been present on nitassinan, their ancestral territory, since time immemorial, in the provinces of Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. Their unceded territory has been the subject of numerous land claims over the past several decades, with little success to date. A cursory review of land claim negotiations and litigation between Indigenous peoples and provincial and federal governments over the past several decades reveals that the focus is often narrowed to the economic and political aspects of land sharing, rooted in the realpolitik of the Canadian state. In my view, the advancement of the Canadian state’s agenda of Indigenous land dispossession has been facilitated by the relegation of the spiritual aspect of the relationship of Indigenous peoples to the land to the background, which has allowed the state, among other things, to secure and assert its control over ancestral territories and their resources. Particularly interested in the strategies pursued by the Innu of the province of Quebec in the protection of their ancestral territory, I maintain that for a true nation-to-nation relationship to exist between them and the provincial and federal governments, it is necessary to make room for their spiritual link with nitassinan. To do so, we must first acknowledge that “land” and “nitassinan” come from two different “worldings”, that is, the combined material and semiotic phenomena, co-created by humans and non-humans, that go to make up a lived world. Thus, to confuse them amounts to ignoring and silencing the laws and philosophies that contribute to the worlding of the Innu nation. In this regard, I have identified three avenues available to the Innu people in their land claims today and the room they have made to Innu’s spiritual tie to nitassinan: the ‘conventional avenue’ under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, the ‘parallel avenue’ that has developed in ecological law with the rights of nature and Indigenous Protected and Conserved areas, and the ‘alternative avenue’ under religious freedom in section 2(a) of the Constitution Act, 1982. For each of these avenues, I argue that the Canadian legal system has tended to perform colonial moves, that is, proprietary, anthropocentric, and Christian biases that presume the existence of only one lifeworld within Canadian territory – essentially a liberal and Western (European) one –, thereby silencing Indigenous lifeworlds. In so doing, the Canadian state has prioritized its economic and political objectives over Innu land claims, ignoring the spiritual dimension of the Innu connection to the land and reinforcing its sovereignty over so-called "Crown lands." Thus, the legal mechanisms offered to the Innu in the recognition of their land claims, while providing spaces for convergence and exchange likely to be conducive to the expression of Indigenous peoples’ understanding of their lifeworlds and their relationship with other lifeworlds they have encountered, have tended to obliterate the normative significance of Innu’s spiritual relationship to nitassinan, which underpins their economic, social, political, identity and cultural interests in their ancestral territory. Finally, I contend that it is impossible for the Canadian state to engage in a meaningful conversation about Innu land claims, or in a genuine process of reconciliation, unless it makes room for the Innu’s worlding and the spiritual aspect of their land claims, a powerful lever against the predominant Canadian discourse on the land that focuses on economic and political concerns, and recognizes that land is a lived space, shaped by the people who inhabit it

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,153
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,983

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0440,022
Communication savante0,0100,002
Science ouverte0,0020,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,294
Écart entre enseignants0,281 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→Travaux en français237 207→