Unfortunately, a new study by Alejandro Frid shows that fisheries management policies in Canada are failing to incorporate Indigenous knowledge. This study underscores the profound necessity for improved incorporation of such important perspectives. The study was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Fish and Fisheries. It analyzed 78 public documents produced or jointly produced by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). The findings highlight a persistent gap in the meaningful inclusion of Indigenous perspectives, despite legislative efforts to modernize fisheries policies.
In 2019, Canada’s Fisheries Act was amended to more effectively protect Indigenous peoples’ rights. The study’s results show a surprising conclusion. A shocking 87% of the documents we analyzed failed to meaningfully engage with Indigenous peoples and their knowledges. Remarkably, only one document out of nearly 80 fully integrated Indigenous approaches: Haida Gwaii ‘íináang | iinang Pacific Herring: An Ecosystem Overview and Ecosystem-based Rebuilding Plan. This Agreement thus serves as a robust example to guide future, collaborative processes that deepen our understanding of regional herring ecology.
The Haida Gwaii ‘íináang | iinang Pacific Herring Management Plan promotes dialogue between all stakeholders. This collaborative approach allows for a regional study of various fisheries and gear types, improving co-governance and decision-making processes. This new approach did more than create stronger ecological understanding, it cultivated a broader collaborative structure for a resource with diverse stakeholders to manage lucrative fisheries resources.
Frid stated, “We found the vast majority—just under 90 per cent—were not inclusive of Indigenous people and their knowledge systems in any way.” This stark DFO statistic highlights the need for systemic changes within DFO in order to truly incorporate Indigenous knowledge in fisheries management.
Our search turned up 78 relevant documents. Only three percent integrated Indigenous knowledge systems, while the vast majority preferred Western scientific approaches. Nine per cent of participants mentioned Indigenous peoples having a role in the research but failing to integrate their traditional knowledge frameworks. Only eight of the 48 participants in this peer review advisory meeting were recognized as Indigenous. Doing so shows clear, large imbalances in who is being represented.
Though these obstacles were disheartening, Frid felt a newfound cautious optimism about DFO’s willingness to do the right thing. He remarked, “I sense that at very high levels of DFO there is a legitimate desire to do better and learn from their mistakes.” He’s optimistic that this spirit will continue, as the agency endeavors to right past wrongs.
The research calls for a fundamental rethinking of governance frameworks and decision-making agendas. This latest report focuses on the importance of elevating Indigenous knowledge to the forefront of fisheries management. “We’re hoping that they keep that same attitude,” Frid emphasized, advocating for ongoing collaboration between government bodies and Indigenous communities.
Frid pointed out the potential benefits of this collaborative approach: “I think it’s a bright spot that DFO and other fisheries management agencies around the world can learn from.” By acknowledging the potential of Indigenous knowledge systems, Canadian fisheries management can become a more effective and equitable process.
