What Is Wellbeing, and What Is Important for Wellbeing? Indigenous Voices from across Canada.

Indigenous peoples' perceptions of wellbeing differ from non-Indigenous constructs. Thus, it is imperative to recognize that Indigenous peoples will conceptualize wellbeing from their perspectives and set their own wellbeing priorities. In keeping with this viewpoint, the aims of the present study were to conceptualize wellbeing and determine what was (and is) important for wellbeing from Canadian Indigenous peoples' perspectives. In this paper, we take a partnership approach based on the elements of respect, equity, and empowerment. One primary data source and two existing data sources were examined and analyzed thematically utilizing a combination approach of deductive and inductive coding. Indigenous leadership and organizations viewed wellbeing holistically and conceptualized wellbeing multidimensionally. From across Canada, wellbeing was communicated as physical, economic, political, social, and cultural. The scaling of wellbeing represented a collectivist perspective, and land was the connecting thread between all types of wellbeing, being a place to practice cultural traditions, reassert one's Indigenous identity, find solace, and pass on Indigenous knowledge and languages. Although wellbeing was discussed in the context of the individual, family, community, and nation, wellbeing was most often discussed at the cultural level by regional and national Indigenous leadership and organizations. Even in acknowledging the great cultural diversity among Canadian Indigenous nations, four concordant themes were identified regionally and nationally, with respect to what was important for cultural wellbeing: land and water, sustainability, and inherent obligations; being on the land, and indigenous languages and knowledge systems; sustainable development; and meaningful involvement in decision-making, and free, prior, and informed consent. Taking into account these themes is foundational for any interaction with Indigenous peoples, especially in the context of land, culture, and development. There needs to be a new beginning on the journey to reconciliation with land and cultural wellbeing at the forefront.

Fiduciary Responsibility and the Green Energy Act, 2009 (Ontario, Canada).

Analyses of the Green Energy Act (2009) have stated that the act had numerous shortcomings concerning the environmental impacts of the energy projects initiated within its purview. This account addresses the core points of divergence in the policy's creation that are responsible for the problematic effects. The crux of these problems comes from the ambiguity of the concept of green energy within the act due to its lack of a formal definition. The reasons for this anomaly originate from the Legislative Assembly of Ontario's address on the topic and their decision to let it remain ambiguous. This stance raises questions of whether they are fulfilling their fiduciary duties to an acceptable level. Although these questions of duty and obligation are both delicate and necessary when talking about projects that involve Canada's indigenous peoples, it is not limited to them due to the scope of the effects. Ultimately, although the policy was repealed in January 2019, there are many lessons that can be learned from the missteps of the Act.

Harvest Programs in First Nations of Subarctic Canada: The Benefits Go Beyond Addressing Food Security and Environmental Sustainability Issues.

By breaking down barriers that impacted the ability of subarctic First Nations people to harvest waterfowl, the Sharing-the-Harvest program provided a safe, nutritious, and culturally appropriate food (i.e., geese) to James Bay Cree communities while also helping to protect the environment by harvesting overabundant geese. However, the impacts extend beyond those described above. Thus, the objectives of the present paper are twofold: to document the food sharing networks of the Sharing-the-Harvest program; and to examine the benefits associated with the harvest program beyond food security and environmental sustainability issues, as revealed through semi-directed interviews. In the regional initiative, harvested geese were shared with all James Bay communities; sharing is an important part of Cree culture. Where detailed information was collected, the goose-sharing network reached 76% of the homes in one of the communities. Likewise, in the local initiative, the goose-sharing network had a 76% coverage rate of the homes in the community. Although decreasing food insecurity was an important focus of the harvest-sharing programs, there were other benefits, from an Indigenous perspective, of being on the land, as identified by the Cree harvesters through semi-directed interviews (e.g., the transmission of Indigenous knowledge, the strengthening of social networks, and the feeling of wellness while out on-the-land). Thus, by participating in the on-the-land harvest programs, the Cree gained benefits beyond those solely related to strengthening food security and contributing in part to environmental sustainability. The Sharing-the-Harvest protocol has the potential to be adapted and employed by other Indigenous (or marginalized) groups worldwide, to help improve health and wellness, while, also protecting the environment from overabundant and/or invasive species.