Territories, including Maxhlaa Didaat pictured here. Government and western scientific
provisions and regulations that purport to manage her territories preclude fundamental Gitxsan
tenets like reciprocity—the acts and responsibilities that foreground her community’s and
family’s stewardship ethos.
Photo: Chelsey Geralda Armstrong
By Chelsey Geralda Armstrong, Jennifer Grenz, Jennifer Zyp-Loring, Jade LaFontaine, Leslie Main Johnson, and Nancy J. Turner.
Indigenous scholars and ethnoecologists have been braiding and blending Indigenous and western science for the better of a century. Yet, we continue to be stumped by how to effectively blend reciprocity—the fundamental philosophy that foregrounds successful Indigenous environmental stewardship practices across North America.
The meaning of reciprocity within stewardship ethos is not widely understood by environmental scientists and regulators. Yet, it foregrounds successful Indigenous stewardship practices globally—often evoked in peoples’ social institutions, governance structures, and behaviours towards non-human beings. These act to limit overharvesting and resource exploitation and incentivizes people to maintain or even enhance food plants, fish, and game.
We present data and personal experiences within and from Gitxsan and nłeʔkepmx Territories to evaluate and demonstrate the ways in which reciprocity acts as a prime mover in good stewardship practices. We show that it may not be possible to maintain the integrity of reciprocity and reciprocal acts under conventional scientific and regulatory frameworks and thus argue that an alternative to blending/braiding knowledge should be to recognize the exclusive rights of Indigenous Peoples to govern and protect their lands autonomously. From this recognition, space is afforded to reciprocal relationships with biota and landscapes, which in turn will result in better environmental stewardship outcomes.
Relational Thinking 