Search results

Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid venture creation represents a significant opportunity for Indigenous peoples to build vibrant Indigenous-led economies that support sustainable economic development and well-being. It is a means by which they can assert their rights to design, develop and maintain Indigenous-centric political, economic and social systems and institutions. In order to develop an integrated and comprehensive understanding of the intersection between Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures, this chapter adopts a case study approach to examining Indigenous entrepreneurship and the underlying global trends that have influenced the design, structure and mission of Indigenous hybrid ventures. The cases present how Indigenous entrepreneurial ventures are, first and foremost, hybrid ventures that are responsive to community needs, values, cultures and traditions. They demonstrate that Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures are more successful when the rights of Indigenous peoples are addressed and when these initiatives are led by or engage Indigenous communities. The chapter concludes with a conceptual model that can be applied to generate insights into the complex interrelationships and interdependencies that influence the formation of Indigenous hybrid ventures and value creation strategies according to three dimensions: (i) the overarching dimension of indigeneity and Indigenous rights; (ii) indigenous community orientations and (iii) indigenous hybrid venture creation considerations.

This chapter discusses the legal and political process whereby indigenous peoples in Chile have demanded, and failed to be granted, constitutional recognition. By identifying indigenous peoples as groups that suffer from both misrecognition and maldistribution, I demonstrate political authorities' and legal scholars' lack of understanding toward indigenous peoples' demands since the resumption of democracy, in the late 1980s. I discuss the way in which indigenous peoples ultimately resort to the law from outside, i.e., international human rights law, to challenge the local understandings and the contours of a Constitution that fails to include the most disadvantaged group in Chilean society.

To examine whether indigenous critiques of globalization and critical theories of modernity are compatible, and how they can complement each other so as to engender more realistic theories of modern society as inherently constructive and destructive, along with practical strategies to strengthen modernity as a culturally transformative project, as opposed to the formal modernization processes that rely on and reinforce modern societies as structures of social inequality.

Comparison and assessment of the foundations, orientations, and implications of indigenous critiques of globalization and the Frankfurt School’s critical theory of modern society, for furthering our understanding of challenges facing human civilization in the twenty-first century, and for opportunities to promote social justice.

Modern societies maintain order by compelling individuals to subscribe to propositions about their own and their society’s purportedly “superior” nature, especially when compared to indigenous cultures, to override observations about the de facto logic of modern societies that are in conflict with their purported logic.

Social theorists need to make consistent efforts to critically reflect on how their own society, in terms of socio-historical circumstances as well as various types of implied biases, translates into research agendas and propositions that are highly problematic when applied to those who belong to or come from different socio-historical contexts.

An effort to engender a process of reciprocal engagement between one of the early traditions of critiquing modern societies and a more recent development originating in populations and parts of the world that historically have been the subject of both constructive and destructive modernization processes.

Criminology and criminal justice research in Australia that involves Indigenous peoples or has an Indigenous focus currently needs to follow guidelines of the National Health and Medical Research Council National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (Updated 2018) and the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies (2012). However, neither of these documents specifically focus on research or evaluations in the criminology and criminal justice space, resulting in discipline-specific gaps. Drawing from both the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous and post-colonial literature on research ethics, our chapter focuses on three core questions: (a) What does ‘free, prior and informed consent’ to participate in research mean and how should it be obtained and operationalised in criminology and criminal justice research involving Indigenous peoples and communities? (b) What does the requirement that research be ‘for the benefit of Indigenous peoples’ mean in the context of criminal justice research? and (c) How can ethical guidelines ensure that Indigenous-focussed criminological and criminal justice research and evaluation enhance and support Indigenous peoples’ empowerment and self-determination?

Indigenous peoples are often alienated from their lands and culture. This has arguably resulted in Indigenous peoples figuring disproportionately in the social and economic statistics. The right of self-determination is often touted as a panacea to these statistics. The focus of this paper is to rethink the notion of self-determination and examine whether the process afforded by the United Nations Decolonization Committee can assist or whether the sway of State politics and State power impedes this right for Indigenous peoples.

This chapter critically examines the dialectical relationship between colonial capitalism, racism, state terrorism, and racial/ethnonational domination from the sixteenth to the twenty-first century. It demonstrates the deficiencies of theories of global studies. In reformulating and improving critical international studies, this study advances the idea that excluding indigenous wisdom and knowledge from this area has allowed the hegemonic Euro-American-centric scholarship and ideology to limit our understanding of the racist sickness and its continuous evolution in the modern world system. Since this sickness has been hidden under the rhetoric of democracy, human rights, and social justice, even progressive intellectuals have failed to thoroughly comprehend the devastating consequences of racism and terrorism in global studies.

First, the chapter critically establishes the dialectical relationship between colonial capitalism, racial terrorism, and the continuous destruction of indigenous peoples in the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Australia. It explains how the dominant racial/ethnonational groups have continued to maintain their privileges at the cost of marginalized societies. Second, using indigenous wisdom and knowledge, the piece exposes the intellectual deficiencies of Euro-American scholarship and ideology from the right and left in global studies. Third, the chapter demonstrates that the claims of democracy, human rights, and social justice do not adequately apply to the conditions of the indigenous peoples in the world. Fourth, it proposes ways of developing a comprehensive critical global studies by critically including the wisdom and knowledge of indigenous peoples.

This chapter offers an overview of Indigenous Entrepreneurship (IE) in the national Canadian context and aims to analyze how the diversity among the Aboriginal peoples of Canada in society is managed with regard to entrepreneurship.

Taking into account the scope of diversity, three major dimensions were identified for analysis – (1) the sociocultural dimension, in reference to the worldviews and values of indigenous peoples, (2) the institutional dimension, in reference to the political management of reservations and the Band Council system, and (3) the financial dimension, in reference to the financial opportunities available to indigenous entrepreneurs.

This chapter’s original contribution rests in its critical analysis of IE in Canada, taking into account the history, the process of colonization and the diversities within the diversity.

The historian Patrick Wolfe reminds us that the settler colonial logic of eliminating native societies to gain unrestricted access to their territory is not a phenomenon confined to the distant past. As Wolfe (2006, p. 388) writes, “settler colonizers come to stay: invasion is a structure not an event.” In the Gulf of Carpentaria region in Australia’s Northern Territory this settler colonial “logic of elimination” continues through mining projects that extract capital for transnational corporations while contaminating Indigenous land, overriding Indigenous law and custom and undermining Indigenous livelihoods. However, some Garawa, Gudanji, Marra, and Yanyuwa peoples are using creative ways to fight back, exhibiting “story paintings” to show how their people experience the destructive impacts of mining. We cannot know yet the full impact of this creative activism. But their body of work suggests it has the potential to challenge colonial institutions from below, inspiring growing networks of resistance and a collective meaning-making through storytelling that is led by Indigenous peoples on behalf of the living world.

Indigenous Australians are often referred to as ‘the First Peoples’ of Australia, and the inclusion of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags in being recognised as official national flags in 1995 by the Keating Federal Government, alongside the Australian flag, embues First Peoples with national recognition. The national discussion and consultation to reform Australia's Constitution has failed to progress a proposal to enshrine Australia's First Peoples recognition in the preamble of the constitution. The Australian Federal Government also dismissed the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which calls for a national Indigenous voice to parliament and the concept of a Makarrata, to facilitate the truth-telling about Australia's violent history. This great southern continent experiences long periods of drought, intense fires and periodic intense flooding across Australia. However, Australian society has barely engaged with First Peoples and their unique knowledge of this land, whether traditional or revitalised, including their exemplary sustainable management through ‘Caring for Country’. This chapter examines the benefits of Indigenous people's knowledge exercised through their laws, customs, practices and polity, and analyses the significant impact resulting from generations of settler Australians ignoring Indigenous ontology and knowledge.