How we view Co-Stewardship

The overall SEARCH group uses a recent definition of co-production of knowledge inspired by Jagannathan et al 2020: “bringing together diverse groups to iteratively create new knowledge and practices” [3]. To us however, knowledge is learned from our Elders and experts who have passed it down to us. Knowledge can be adapted, synthesized, molded in new forms, but the core of the knowledge is not ‘created’. Moreover, to be taught the knowledge is an honor and a gift from the knowledge holders and therefore ought to be treated as such. Hence why we use the term ‘co-stewardship’ here. And as such, co-stewarding knowledge is an ever-evolving process akin to developing and maintaining any relationship. To succeed, we all must show up with our whole authentic selves, be humble and respectful of others, be open to listening before speaking and to learning that our understanding of all that is and our relationship to it aren’t the only worldviews, and to recognizing and grappling with our own (and often unconscious) biases. It takes time. Making mistakes and being uncomfortable is usually part of the relationship building process. We held space in our group for all these aspects.

At the beginning of the first day of our first in-person meeting, Jackie reminded us that we all wear many ‘hats’ – an analogy which often refers to the different capacities in which individuals act, more often professionally, but also personally. She encouraged us to remove our hats. The SEARCH teams are a place to show up as our full selves: mother, daughter, provider, scientist, lawyer, descendant, improv actor, violinist, award receiver. Jackie asked this of the entire group–all three SEARCH teams, just as we readied to start a round of introductions. For those of us from academic backgrounds, Jackie’s invitation to move away from the tradition of listing off accolades and institutional memberships and instead share the aspects of our lives we care most about and we are proud of, may have felt awkward, uncomfortable or even vulnerable. Yet this approach allows us to celebrate our collaborators more fully, and aids in stepping back, thoughtfulness, seeing more holistic approaches, and bringing humility to our work. This approach also facilitates finding common ground and shared values even if our backgrounds are wildly and widely different. When we stop thinking from the perspective of our silo denoted by the ‘hat’ we are wearing at any one time, it’s easier to draw on and value knowledge gained from other experiences. To do this as a group asks us to value different knowledges as well as what we bring to the table, and to build rapport with others as people, rather than via our job titles.

Successes

We view success as so much more than products or deliverables. For us, success encompasses uplifting concepts of planetary health–how everything is connected and those reciprocal interconnections of all beings with each other. Foundational are ‘right’ relationships, which includes respect, reciprocity, equity, inclusion, and humility.

Our HWB team has fostered depth in our relationships with each other. Members say that our monthly online meetings is one meeting that they actually look forward to joining (that says A LOT). We spent over a year getting to know each other, asking ‘intro’ questions, allowing the conversation to flow freely without the anxiety of having to produce a ‘deliverable’ rapidly. This is a very different approach than many groups who feel the pressure to ‘jump right in,’ often with their professional hats as armor that does not allow for true relationships to form. Another way to think about this is that we feel comfortable inviting each other into our own homes, a sign of trust and caring. How many collaborators have you invited into your home to share a meal?

Our bridging of the (false) divide between professional and personal realms showed up in other ways as well. We openly discussed challenges and set backs in honest, raw conversations, and we infused humor into all of our work. Humor is central in Indigenous cultures as a support in the face of adversity. It connects us together, aids in teaching the next generations, and strengthens our relationships as we are vulnerable with each other. Of course, laughter heals as well, and has therapeutic benefits that promote our mental health. Humor also connects us with another Indigenous value–humility. Humor is also recognized, when used appropriately, in scientific knowledge systems as promoting learning, problem solving and relationship building [4]. We value humility to remind ourselves that we are not “one” singular unit, rather we are communities who look after each other. Using humor promotes humility and allows us to maintain the perspective of our connections.

The time spent building relationships enabled us to brainstorm and create unique “deliverables” with the purpose of reaching more than the usual audiences. In July 2022, the SEARCH teams discussed the upcoming annual Arctic report card and consistent feedback that Indigenous voices and experiences were missing from the report card. Within two months, our HWB team had brainstormed ideas on how to meaningfully include Indigenous voices, and proposed a submission of the first oral contribution to the report. HWB team co-lead Jackie Schaeffer recorded a powerful conversation with Ahtna Dine’ Elder Wilson Justin [5]. Inclusion of Justin’s oral report was the first of its kind for the Arctic report card, providing an example of how to share Indigenous experiences both in content and in form. Media interest in Justin’s narrative gained much broader attention than usually occurs for report card products. Meltwater, a tool to analyze media distribution, found that news articles, broadcasts and radio programs in the Arctic Report Card appeared in approximately 870 media outlets from December 2022 until early January 2023. The potential reach to audiences for these news items was approximately 3.7 billion people and the estimated value of what it would have cost to purchase this publicity is $35.8 million. Articles on the NOAA Arctic Report Card appeared around the world with the majority published in the United States and Canada, and other nations in this order: India, U.K., Japan, Australia, Norway, Spain, Brazil and Switzerland.

Our HWB team also worked with scientist Francis Wiese from another SEARCH team to create a ‘salmon illustration.’ The purpose of the one-page infographic is to clearly depict how different groups of people think about salmon, and how it is important to include these multiple views in research and decision-making. Alaska Native artist Danielle Larsen created the image, which is freely available on the SEARCH website [6]. Feedback from other SEARCH members who have included the illustration in their presentations to scientific audiences have said that the use of this image boosts audience understanding of the importance of equitably including Indigenous worldviews.

Another example of the work is NIUGTAQ: Fractured Edge, an art piece and podcast by team members Schaeffer and Donatuto that exhibited in the Museum of Northwest Art in 2023 (Fig 1) and associated podcast [7].

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 1. Niugtaq: Fractured Edge.

Adaptation, mitigation and resilience are big words. Complicated words. They have multiple meanings in English. Try translating the meaning into Yugtun (Yup’ik). Try translating them to me. I am nine. The closest term is pektayiinata. We are resilient. I want to play outside. Play for me is learning, aquilleq elitnarquq. Learning about the ways of my ancestors and how they moved in harmony with this land. Seasonal living. Hearing stories from my aunties. Squatting and bending to pick berries as a toddler. The gift of the fish, the birds, the seals. Our promise to be good stewards of this place, our home, their home. This is what I learn from my community. But others, far away, don’t have these understandings, these relationships, this community. They are not connected. They don’t dance in harmony with nature, like I do. And they tell us our oceans are warming, our land is melting, our more-than-human relatives are dying. They want more details, more studies. But I can see that things are changing, I carry that understanding, and that burden. Artist and Scientist: Jackie Qataliña Schaeffer. Support: Dr. Jamie Donatuto.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000692.g001

In our last in-person team meeting in October 2023, our HWB team decided to focus on the central importance of Indigenous education to HWB in the Arctic. Indigenous education is passing on the teachings since time immemorial to the next generations–both a foundation for a knowledge system and for how to navigate changes, such as climate change. Yet Indigenous education is not widely supported by the Alaska State education system, and thus not widely taught in schools where it is needed most. Darlene Tocktoo Turner, a long-time educator and HWB team member, discussed the importance of bringing Indigenous Knowledge into kindergarten through 12th grade education in Shishmaref, Alaska [8].

Challenges

Currently, within the federal system, many of the environmental policies affecting Tribes are rooted in colonial thinking. For example, the Marine Mammal Protection Act was promulgated at the same time as President Nixon formally ended “Termination” policies for Indigenous Peoples. At that time, Indigenous Peoples were not seen as a vibrant part of society or of the environment in which they had lived for millennia. By the 1990s co-management was being brought into policy via amendments, but still at the discretion of the federal agencies. Even now, policies largely lag behind the recognized needs and benefits of co-stewarded solutions to contemporary social and environmental challenges in the north. Examples of the repercussions of this lag include federal funding models that require constant grant writing by Tribes rather than committed funding through agency commitments to co-steward solutions. Without policy changes that commit funds to on-the-ground partners in a sustainable manner, maintaining relationships and trust that can only be built over longer time periods than traditional grants themselves (which are usually one to three years), local co-stewardship efforts will struggle to sustain themselves, and tribal/agency relationships will continue to be challenged by power inequities. Moreover, foundations that support research science (e.g., NSF) fund research science projects focused on ‘concrete’ western science results within these limited time frames, and lack the policies and guidance to support and evaluate co-stewardship successes from different perspectives.

In addition, there are inadequate feedback loops for providing constructive criticism to funding agencies (with notable exceptions), nor transparency when funding agencies change course mid-project. One pertinent example was the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recent creation and then abrupt dissolution of an ad-hoc committee on “Co-Production of Environmental Knowledge, Methods, and Approaches.” NASEM shut down the work amidst accusations from multiple committee members and staff that NASEM itself was not equitably engaging in the co-production that the group set out to do. Two NASEM staff were fired [9].

Opportunities

While the long-term goal is equitable co-production of knowledge for all parties, interim actions could be taken to ease the workload of low-capacity Tribes and non-governmental agencies (NGOs) assisting Indigenous Knowledge holders to be in that space. Providing monetary or in-kind support for Tribes and IK holders who wish to have a seat at the table but get burdened by government jargon and authorities is a start. The current system in place does not benefit IK holders, rather it is a system put in place by a patriarchal system that has historically given power and privilege to the former colonizers, which results in a power imbalance if we all don’t have an equal seat at the table. For example, Tribes are considered “dependent” sovereign nations instead of independent sovereign nations. No matter the relationship they have with the US government, they will still always be dependent, which creates that power imbalance between the two.

Throughout the paper, you will recognize the system we have put in place to create a safe space for all involved to speak equally, which mirrors the Indigenous way of allowing all who are affected to have a say in their future. There are no requirements for degrees, or language, or socioeconomic status, rather an equal seat at the table to provide key messages that are rooted in each of our respective experiences.

By educating ourselves and our Tribes, and pooling all of the experience the team has, we understand that there are several ways to be creative in this space. Long-term funding streams are a goal for many Tribes and tribal communities. Because of the uncertainty of government administrations and policy changes, and the use of continuing resolutions without passing a federal budget, getting 5–10-year funding pots is extremely important for the continuity of projects. For example, any federal agency can utilize an Interagency Agreement (IA) as long as it fits within the purview of their work. In Alaska, the Denali Commission can accept an IA and associated funds from a federal agency, then work directly with Tribes to fund their projects over a period of years without the short time limits imposed by federal government agencies and programs.

Another method for uplifting co-stewardship is to focus on the policies in the federal system that direct federal employees to improve relationships with Tribes: co-steward the land (JSO-3403) and include Indigenous Knowledge in policy and decision making (PM 111521). Unfortunately, there is no enforcement of those orders, nor uniformity across agencies or departments, and no clear guidelines regarding co-stewardship and equitable inclusion by Indigenous Knowledge holders. However, the policies can be used as tools for Tribes and NGOs to use. One such avenue is to ask for official tribal consultation and be on record, next focus on the reporting that occurred and gather the reports from the respective agencies, then request explanations as to why projects or policies have been implemented without Indigenous input even with the above-mentioned policies in place.

Another opportunity to promote co-stewardship is to push for projects to include funding to be ‘out on the land’ together. In order to nurture relationships, an understanding of others’ worldviews is key; to be in-person and in-place together allows team members to experience firsthand the issues being faced in order to better understand them. Scientific research proposals include - and are expected to include - funds for attending scientific workshops and meetings for communication of results and collaboration. These meetings offer important opportunities for sharing scientific research results with scientists. We believe it equally important for co-stewardship practices to have funding available in order to meet on the land and promote relationship building and knowledge exchange from diverse knowledge systems. Akin to other authors [e.g., 10] we urge agencies and other funding groups to better invest in this relationship building.

In addition, we recommend increasing the participation of Indigenous scientists and Indigenous knowledge holders on review and decision-making panels, particularly on the panels that judge co-stewardship projects. Move beyond the ‘one Indigenous representative’ model, which puts one individual in an impossible position because they cannot represent all Indigenous worldviews. Ensure truer representation with multiple Indigenous people participating, which increases the diversity of knowledge systems. Inviting early career Indigenous scientists also provides the opportunity for them to learn about federal programs’ systems.

Hire more Indigenous scientists as Program Officers, either through IPA (temporary loans from other institutions, primarily but not always Universities) or better, into full-time positions. The position need not be in the Tribal Colleges and University Program (TCUPS) or in a position that is specifically about collaborations with Indigenous communities. Hiring Indigenous scientists, of which there are increasing numbers, into the Directorate of Biology, the Directorate of Geosciences, and the Directorate of Engineering and Office of Polar Programs will help to foster greater collaborations with diverse communities. It is important to keep in mind, however, that just because someone is an Alaska Native Scientist does not mean that they only want to work on projects focused on Alaska or Indigenous peoples. This is akin to the erroneous assumption that female lawyers only want to practice family law.

Finally–many of these opportunities require FUNDING. Yet, the funds spent on this would be miniscule compared to astrophysics or astronomy telescopes. Senator Ted Stevens was not completely wrong when he pointed out the Antarctic base was being funded at an exorbitant cost and there were no people there. Of course, climate change has changed all this because the Antarctic ice sheet melting will certainly affect a lot of people. Yet climate change in the Arctic is also severely impacting people–not only in the Arctic, but worldwide.

As we pass through many of the planetary boundaries [11], we must consider new and progressive practices; what we have outlined here can be a part of new ways of thinking and implementing solutions to the challenges we collectively face in the Arctic.