Search

Over the past 3 decades, indigenous guardian programs (also known as indigenous rangers or watchmen) have emerged as an institution for indigenous governments to engage in collaborative environmental governance. Using a systematic review of peer‐reviewed literature for research conducted in Australia, Canada, Aotearoa‐New Zealand, and the United States, we sought to characterize the emergence of indigenous guardians in the literature and explore whether guardian approaches are representative of Indigenous approaches to environmental governance. Using a multistep relevance‐screening method, we reviewed 83 articles published since 1995, that report on, critique, or comment on Indigenous guardians. Our findings indicated that most articles on the topic were published in the last decade (88%), focused on Australia (65%), and were in a social science discipline (53%). The lead author of the majority of articles was an academic, although only half of the articles included an indigenous scholar or member of an indigenous group or organization as a coauthor. Finally, 11 articles were on research of guardian programs that were locally led and only 5 exemplified indigenous governance, based on 2 well‐known community‐based monitoring typologies. Our findings indicate that more research is required to understand the implications of current guardian programs for indigenous self‐determination, particularly when such programs are embedded in a broader western environmental governance structure. Article impact statement: Since 2010, the number of peer‐reviewed articles on indigenous guardians has risen substantially, signaling their vital role in conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legal scholars and political theorists dominate academic writing on the issue of indigenous peoples' rights. This article, however, adopts a sociological approach, analysing indigenous rights in Australia as a socially constructed phenomenon, the product of ideals, entrenched colonial structures and the balance of power between political interests. It shows how, during rights institutionalization processes, ably aided by a receptive government and media, commercial lobby groups constructed propaganda campaigns to further their interests to the detriment of indigenous interests. The resultant legislation was an exercise in rights limitation behind a veneer of agrarian reform. The article concludes by highlighting the tension between national rights regimes of this nature and international human rights norms and suggests an approach that could overcome this problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]