❖ token or cursory inclusion of local expertise in research – There is profound dissatisfaction with research proposals that offer to incorporate or consider
local expertise but do not provide a valid plan and/or commit resources necessary to do so.Token references to traditional knowledge are viewed as insincere
attempts by researchers to leverage funding or fulfill requirements.
❖ lack of recognition or compensation – Inuit participants in research
projects have not always received appropriate credit in research publications,
reports, etc. and/or have not been compensated fairly for their important contributions (i.e. paid adequately and equitably for their time).
❖ generalization/decontextualization of local knowledge – Local knowledge from different locations or groups are often inappropriately combined or
generalized to present a generic picture of local Inuit knowledge which is, in fact,
distinct or unique. In an attempt to make very complex knowledge understandable, local knowledge is often separated from the context in which it is situated.
❖ appropriation of expertise and knowledge – Local Inuit expertise and
knowledge shared with researchers has sometimes been presented as the
researcher’s own knowledge or expertise.
❖ inappropriate research methodologies – Data collection methods (e.g.
tranquilizing, collaring, banding, and/or low level flying for wildlife populations
studies) are sometimes perceived as biased, or worse, as destructive to the study
population.
❖ short, typically summer, field seasons – Field season length, timing, and
duration (i.e. one to two months in the summer) are not considered representative, or sufficient, to adequately understand the phenomenon under study.
❖ lack of locally relevant or beneficial research – While much scientific
research is beneficial to science, communities often complain that there are no
tangible benefits for communities who are nearby, or even involved in, the project.
❖ lack of funding for locally initiated projects – Funding agencies have
mainly targeted academic or government institutions, making it difficult for
community-initiated projects to get sufficient (or any) funding.
❖ lack of local data ownership – Information is placed in a database in a
southern institution and communities find themselves unable to gain access, or
having to pay for data that they provided.
❖ inadequate reporting by researchers – One of the longstanding and
frequent criticisms of research by Inuit is that scientists do not do enough to
return results from their studies to Inuit in a timely manner and/or an appropriate format. In the case of physical or natural science research, Inuit have frequently been surprised to find out about a project that was completed without
their knowledge.
4
❖
N EGOTIATING R ESEARCH R ELATIONSHIPS W ITH I NUIT C OMMUNITIES