Indigenous Methodologies: Suggestions for Junior Researchers

Indigenous methodologies in geography have recently been developed to decolonise Western dominated paradigms. It has been argued that research which does not benefit Indigenous communities should not be conducted. However, Indigenous methodologies are not taught in many post-secondary institutions. Therefore, when they pursue Indigenous topics, many junior researchers are self-taught in these methodologies. However, these methodologies cannot be defined simply and they are too diverse to be learnt in a short period. In Japan, Indigenous peoples are not widely recognised and research on contemporary Indigenous issues is limited. The concept of Indigenous methodologies is rarely discussed. Because of this, Japanese researchers rarely identify their research as adopting an Indigenous methodology. Indigenous researchers are thereby discouraged from pursuing Indigenous methodologies. Furthermore, a methodology or a thesis statement used by researchers to reflect Indigenous perspectives often gets little support from Indigenous peoples. My master's research on the Ainu mirrored this situation. While Indigenous methodologies remain difficult to learn, junior researchers should not be discouraged from this form of engagement. Practical suggestions are therefore necessary to encourage their use and application. Based on my experience, I suggest that researchers approach Indigenous communities from a learning perspective. This would encourage open-mindedness and sensitivity. Researchers should also be prepared and willing to refine their research questions and to continue their literature searches after their fieldwork is completed. These strategies could limit misinterpretation and exploitation of Indigenous knowledges and peoples.     

Towards a Culturally Sustainable Environmental Impact Assessment: The Protection of Ainu Cultural Heritage in the Saru River Cultural Impact Assessment,Japan

Culturally sustainable environmental impact assessment (EIA) requires consideration of the impact of development on local people's cultural activities, including holding ceremonies, collecting resources, and learning skills, which are fundamental essences of Indigenous rights. While culturally sustainable EIA has become a common practice when a development project involves an Indigenous community, it is still argued that Indigenous cultural heritage is not adequately protected. This is due to the fact that Indigenous people do not always keep power in the post‐approval stage of EIA, or the lack of practical measures to minimise the impact of development projects on Indigenous cultural heritage and to enhance the possibility of reaching a consensus among stakeholders. The Cultural Impact Assessment of the Saru River Region in Japan was the first investigation of a site to preserve an ethnic minority culture, with regard to a dam construction. In the second phase of the assessment project, research staff members, some of whom are of Ainu ethnicity, suggested alternative ceremony sites and conducted experimental transplants to protect the local cultural activities. The long‐term investigation by research staff, in fact, influenced the direction of the dam construction. The developer agreed not to proceed with the construction until measures were taken to minimise the impact on cultural activities that would satisfy residents in the construction area. While still early to conclude that Indigenous participation in this assessment project has been successful, Indigenous participation has clearly enhanced the possibility of reaching a consensus. The project should be considered with other published EIA reports, in demonstrating a return from investing in EIA with Indigenous participation, with a practical means for realising Indigenous rights.     

北海道文学述略

北海道不仅以风光旖旎名重扶桑,其作家的数量和创作成就亦位居前茅。从明治初年登上北海道土地的国木田独步至30年代名扬世界的日本左翼代表作家小林多喜二,乃至今日誉满全球的渡边淳一等,均在这片丰饶的土地上留下了无数精美的篇章。     

Mundane mobilities,banal travels

Participatory approaches have become a critical and somewhat normalised methodology in geography for working in a positive and constructive way with Indigenous communities. Nevertheless, recent literature has seldom examined the sustainability of participatory projects or looked critically at their ongoing impacts. Since the early 2000s, Nibutani, an Ainu community in Hokkaido, Japan, has developed several participatory projects led by a non-Indigenous professional. The projects have involved community members working to revitalise and promote local Ainu culture. Over the last decade, some positive outcomes from the projects have been observed; for example, the younger generation has had opportunities to engage intensively in learning local Indigenous knowledge and skills. The projects have also helped some participants to develop a stronger sense of ethnic identity and gain empowerment. Still, the power transfer from the talented non-Indigenous leader to community members has been limited and Nibutani has yet to realise a sustainable project structure. Also, community members have multiple perspectives in regard to the direction of participatory projects and their impact. I discuss these issues in Nibutani's participatory projects based on my observations and interviews and suggest that Indigenous geographies need to undertake follow-up evaluations of participatory projects.     

Japan's Policies Towards the Ainu Language and Culture with Special Reference to North Fennoscandian Sami Policies

Under Japan's colonization of Ainu Lands (Hokkaido, the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin), the Ainu were disconnected from their lands by relocations and deprived of their language and culture by regulations. In 1899, the Hokkaido Former Aborigines Protection Act came into force to finalize the assimilation of the Ainu into Japanese society. In 1997, as a result of Ainu efforts to scrap the assimilation policies, the Ainu Culture Promotion Act (CPA) replaced the Act of 1899. The CPA was expected to emancipate the Ainu from the sufferings caused by the assimilation policies, and yet it stipulated neither Ainu indigeneity nor their linguistic and cultural rights. It is still in effect even after the 2008 official recognition of the Ainu as an indigenous people in the northern part of Japan by the Government of Japan. This article attempts to examine Japan's past and present policies towards the Ainu language and culture in the international context for the revitalization of the Ainu language and culture as the Ainu desire. In order to do this, it first outlines the assimilation policies, and then traces the Ainu struggle for survival as a people. It also discusses the CPA and the Final Report written by the Advisory Committee for Future Ainu Policy, which both form the basis of Japan's present Ainu policies. Finally, in order to explore the revitalization of the Ainu language and culture, how the North Fennoscandian Sami policies have advanced is surveyed.     

The Tenpō-Era (1830–1844) Map of Matsumae-no-shima and the Institutionalization of Tokugawa Cartography

Japan’s early modern Tokugawa government (1603?1868) sponsored a series of projects of national mapping. The Matsumae family, ruling what is now Hokkaido, were loosely incorporated into these projects. It was only during the last of these, in the Tenpō era (1830?1848), that their lands were represented in the same manner as the rest of Japan because the central government made the final Matsumae-no-shima map. This article examines the production of this final official map of Japan’s north to argue that the Tokugawa’s institutional mapping made this region part of the nation through its own mapping framework, distinct from the cartographic forms with which national or imperial states are usually associated.