3.8 Article

Our Shared Relationship with Land and Water: Perspectives from the Mayangna and the Anishinaabe

期刊

ECOPSYCHOLOGY
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 191-198

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/eco.2019.0001

关键词

Water security; Bosawas; Mayangna; Anishinaabe; First Nations; Mother Earth

资金

  1. Social Science and Humanities Research Council
  2. University of Guelph

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The health and well-being of Indigenous communities are deeply connected to respect for the rights of nature. This relationship is informed by their unique knowledge systems which view the world as an interdependent unity of beings with their environment. Drawing on concepts from ecopsychology, interviews with Indigenous peoples and Elders in the Bosawas Reserve (Nicaragua) and the Kettle and Stony Point First Nation (Canada), and qualitative research conducted by the authors, this paper presents a comparative case study analysis of the experience of Mayangna communities around issues of forest protection and Anishinaabe perspectives on water. For the Mayangna peoples, the health of their communities is intrinsically connected to respect for Mother Earth. They struggle for enforcement of existing laws to prevent the deforestation of the Bosawas Reserve, home to their communities and to diverse ecosystems. Similarly, for First Nations peoples in Canada, water, the lifeblood of Mother Earth, is essential for the preservation of a traditional and contemporary way of life. For many of these communities, a lack of water security is a persistent problem which influences all aspects of life. Codified in Indigenous knowledge systems and taught by First Nations Elders are teachings for balanced relationships with creation-behavior necessary for survival and to ensure sustainability for future generations. These cases point to the need for a decolonizing framework to resource management, calling for holistic and participatory perspectives to governance, and recognition of spiritual and cultural relationships with nature.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据