Beyond ‘Good Intentions’: Fostering Meaningful Indigenous–Settler Relationships to Support Indigenous Food Sovereignty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An invitation into ethical space We invite the reader to enter with us into ethical space. Originally coined by literary theorist Roger Poole (1972) and further developed by Cree Elder and legal scholar Willie Ermine (2000, 2007), ethical space aims to bring together Indigenous and settler knowledge systems to co- create relational space where different ways of knowing can interact. According to Ermine (2007: 193), ‘ethical space is formed when two societies, with disparate worldviews, are poised to engage each other. It is the thought about diverse societies and the space in between them that contributes to the development of a framework for dialogue between human communities’. He uses a metaphor of two people sitting on a bench and reflects on ‘the electrifying nature of that area between entities that we thought was empty’ (Ermine, 2007: 195). The space between people is where ideas and assumptions form the foundation for relationships. Acknowledging unjust power relations that undergird historical and current realities in (so- called) Canada, encounters between Indigenous and settler Peoples, require explicit rules for engagement to enable ethical relationships to be negotiated. Ethical space acts as an intermediary between knowledge systems where participants commit to processes that nurture relationships on all levels. Ethical space is a process for open communication and collaboration, wherein participants commit to respecting different ways of knowing. Larry McDermott, an Algonquin Elder and co- author of this chapter, explains that those engaging in ethical space are responsible for holding up the integrity of the circle and ensuring that everyone feels safe and heard. In writing this chapter collectively, the authors, both Indigenous and settler, hold each other in ethical space. We invite the reader to journey with us as we struggle collectively towards an understanding of how we can support, enable, and in some cases, get out of the way of those who are actualizing Indigenous food sovereignty (IFS). Indigenous– settler partnerships Throughout the ongoing colonization of Turtle Island, Indigenous Peoples have faced extensive oppression and injustices. After centuries of land expropriation, imposed starvation, forced sterilization, and forced cultural assimilation under the Indian Act, including the removal of children from their families through residential schools (Manuel and Derrickson, 2021), in 2019, the Federal Government of Canada acknowledged their role in an ongoing genocide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".