You have encountered a “Great White Beast”- a fleeting, shapeshifting figure that performs the world as indeterminate. The possibilities of encountering a Great White Beast, is a reminder that there are no right decisions to be made, but that we are nevertheless to hold ourselves accountable to our own choices. When the world is ‘remade’ in each meeting, it means that there is an imperative to take responsibility for the intra-active relations we build and the future relations our actions make possible or foreclose (Barad, 2007 p.x; see also Rosiek & Adkins-Cartee, 2023 p.160). It’s a constant reminder to ‘stay with the trouble’ (Haraway, 2016).
The Gjoa Haven HTA seeks recognition of the impacts suffered from quota reductions by the community. Academic publication were desired to be part of such recognition. Nevertheless, describing the personal experiences around such a sensitive topic as polar bear quota reductions from my (then still) disconnected positionality –struck me as unethical, let alone impossible. It proved impossible for me to separate the research-practices of a project like BearWatch- which are directly focussed on the methodologies of polar bear monitoring- from the subject of harvest quota. Quotas are set, at least partially, based on the insights derived from such monitoring efforts.
[[File:Great White Beast.png|thumb]]
Coulthard argues that the (settler-)nation state’s ability to grant or withhold recognition is legitimized through the employment of “integrative” strategies. The expressed desire of the Gjoa Haven HTA to have their knowledge better “integrated” into research, from this perspective, presents a tension that actively undermines Indigenous self-determination efforts. Coulthard, referring to such tensions, thus critiques integrative forms of ‘recognition’ as a promise ‘to reproduce the very configurations of colonial power that Indigenous demands for recognition have historically sought to transcend’ (Coulthard, 2007, p. 437). Although aware of these possible tensions connected to the expressed desires of Gjao Haven’s HTA for recognition, we have not tried to seek and resolve them. Interpreting rather the multiple forms of desired recognition as requiring different actions from different actors, each of the co-created knowledge outputs addresses the appeal of Gjoa Haven’s HTA for recognition in different ways. Our [[Voices of Thunder#Voices of Thunder Animated Graphic Documentary|audio-visual]] and other [[Voices of Thunder#Winds of Change Webpage|non-academic knowledge outputs]] centre Gjoa Haven’s voices and address the quota reduction impacts suffered by the community over the past two decades. These align themselves with Gjoa Haven’s desire for recognition by, and more effective participation within, the institutional landscape, without challenging its legitimacy. In our academic writing, on the other hand, the Bearwatch project researchers have engaged with the appeal of Gjoa Haven’s HTA, by taking a more critical and self-reflective role towards the systematic, epistemic dominance of euro-centric science and institutions in polar bear research and management. What does it mean for scientists that are embedded within western institutions and co-management mandates to engage with the issue and challenges of “recognition”, when they are part of the hegemonic structures that are enabled to bestow, or withhold, epistemic recognition of Inuit Knowledge in its own right? We, institutionally embedded researchers, ask ourselves what it means to hold ourselves accountable as implicated within the agential dynamics that have contributed to Gjoa Haven experiences. Our main approach to do so has been to conduct a [[Voices of Thunder#Voices of Thunder testimonial reading|testimonial reading]] of Gjoa Haven’s experiences and explore the power relationships at play within and beyond our own collaborative partnership.
You have encountered a “Great White Beast”, a fleeting, shapeshifting figure that performs the world as indeterminate. The possibilities of encountering a Great White Beast is a reminder that there are no right decisions to be made, but that we are nevertheless to hold ourselves accountable to our own choices.
The Gjoa Haven HTA seeks recognition for the impacts that their community has suffered from the impacts of polar bear harvest quota reductions, and one of the ways in which they expect to gain such recognition is through the publication of an academic article.
But what does it mean for scientists to generate “recognition” through academic publishing, if they are themselves part of the hegemonic institutes that are enabled to bestow, or withhold, such recognition? Some of the expressed frustrations by Gjoa Haven community members directly involve researchers and western science. Glen Coulthard, referring to such contradictions, critiques ‘recognition’ as a promise ‘to reproduce the very configurations of colonial power that Indigenous demands for recognition have historically sought to transcend’ (Coulthard, 2007, p. 437).
<span class="Pop-up link" data-page-title="Science_based_conservation" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="Wrecksite">[[Science based conservation|Pop up: You seem to have located a Wrecksite nearby: Read about the apparatus of Science based conservation]]</span>
<div class="next_choice">You seek to be responsive towards Gjoa Haven’s needs, while you also want to acknowledge the tensions that are connected to Gjoa Haven’s HTA desire for recognition.
<span class="return link" data-page-title="Voices_of_Thunder" data-section-id="2" data-encounter-type="return">[[Voices of Thunder#2. From purveying voices towards accepting testimony.|Return to Cut 1 Voices of Thunder: "From purveying voices to accepting testimony"]]</span>
So, what can you do?
<span class="return link" data-page-title="Wayfaring_the_BW_project_Point_of_Beginning" data-section-id="5" data-encounter-type="return">[[Wayfaring the BW project Point of Beginning#2. Workshops Summer 2019|Return to Cut 3 Wayfaring the BW project: "Workshops 2019"]]</span>
Do nothing. You do not want to be complicit.
Or,
Instead, lean into such tensions, (re)negotiate your position as an implicated subject and find responsive approaches to “share” Gjoa Haven’s experiences.
Go check out a nearby "Wrecksite" to find out more about the larger science-based conservation apparatus that the BearWatch project, and by extent, our actions are entangled with.</div>
<span class="detour link" data-page-title="Do Nothing" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[Do Nothing|Detour: Do Nothing]]</span>
<span class="Pop-up wrecksite link" data-page-title="Science based Conservation" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="wrecksite">[[Science based Conservation|Wrecksite: Science-based Conservation]]</span>
Latest revision as of 17:34, 23 January 2025
You have encountered a “Great White Beast”, a fleeting, shapeshifting figure that performs the world as indeterminate. The possibilities of encountering a Great White Beast is a reminder that there are no right decisions to be made, but that we are nevertheless to hold ourselves accountable to our own choices.
The Gjoa Haven HTA seeks recognition for the impacts that their community has suffered from the impacts of polar bear harvest quota reductions, and one of the ways in which they expect to gain such recognition is through the publication of an academic article.
But what does it mean for scientists to generate “recognition” through academic publishing, if they are themselves part of the hegemonic institutes that are enabled to bestow, or withhold, such recognition? Some of the expressed frustrations by Gjoa Haven community members directly involve researchers and western science. Glen Coulthard, referring to such contradictions, critiques ‘recognition’ as a promise ‘to reproduce the very configurations of colonial power that Indigenous demands for recognition have historically sought to transcend’ (Coulthard, 2007, p. 437).
You seek to be responsive towards Gjoa Haven’s needs, while you also want to acknowledge the tensions that are connected to Gjoa Haven’s HTA desire for recognition.
So, what can you do?
Do nothing. You do not want to be complicit.
Or,
Instead, lean into such tensions, (re)negotiate your position as an implicated subject and find responsive approaches to “share” Gjoa Haven’s experiences.
Go check out a nearby "Wrecksite" to find out more about the larger science-based conservation apparatus that the BearWatch project, and by extent, our actions are entangled with.
