Indigenous Research Methodologies in Sámi and Global Contexts

Front matter

N E W Re Ee Sak ASR CAH ON EW, V O I C E S

Indigenous Research Methodologies in Sámi and Global Contexts

Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen, Pigga Keskitalo and Torjer Olsen (Eds.)

Contents

List of Figures and Tables vii Notes on Contributors VIII

Introduction 1 Pigga Keskitalo, Pirjo Kristina Virtanen and Torjer Olsen

1 Contemporary Indigenous Research within Sámi and Global Indigenous Studies Contexts 7 Pirjo Kristüna Virtanen, Torjer Olsen and Pigga Keskitalo

Introduction

Pigga Keskitalo, Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen and Torjer Olsen

This volume contributes to the discussion on Indigenous research methodologies and doing Indigenous research, drawing from perspectives on Sámi and global Indigenous studies. Sámi studies focus on Sámi society, while Indigenous studies have a more global approach, albeit drawing from local contexts. The rationale behind this book is the fact that in addition to the progression of Indigenous and Sámi rights and important previous contributions in the field of Indigenous research from a pan-Sámi perspective, there is an ongoing need to discuss (1) the starting point and meaning of Sámi research and research methodologies, (2) how Indigenous and Sámi studies academic discussions on the regional and local level are connected to the practical level of doing Indigenous research today in different contexts, as well as (3) how ideas from practitioners connect to global debates in Indigenous studies. The chapters offer a broad view of the articulation, conceptualization, and practice of Indigenous research methodologies locally, and in our case, especially in Sámi academic contexts.

By 'Sámi context' we refer to a pan-Sámi view, as the Sámi live in a wide area of mid Sweden and Norway up until the Kola Peninsula with nine different Sámi languages and diverse cultural and area features. There are between 75,000-100,000 Sámi people estimated to live in the four countries, about 45,000 in Norway, around 25,000 in Sweden, about 10,000 in Finland, and 2,000 in Russia. North Sámi is the largest of the Sámi languages, followed by Lule, Skolt, Inari, Southern, Skolt, Kildin, Ume, and Pite Sámi languages. They are all differently threatened languages. Some Sámi languages are no longer spoken (Salminen 2007). The Sámi people are the only Indigenous peoples in the European Union. The authors of this book come from the universities that conduct Sámi or Indigenous studies programmes in Norway, Finland, and Sweden, but not all the universities with these studies are included in this volume.

Who are the Sámi as Indigenous peoples is related to ethnic and political questions concerning the origin and background of this particular Indigenous group. The concept is related to political rights and to individual identity and is intertwined with questions about one's belonging and identity in the context of human rights and Indigenous self-determination (see e.g. Valkonen 2019). Overall, the understanding of this issue has been complex and is still open to debate. Obviously, due to the history of assimilation and the trajectory of the

© PIGGA KESKITALO, PIRJO KRISTIINA VIRTANEN AND TORJER OLSEN, 2021 DOI: 10.1163/9789004463097 001 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the cc By 4.0 License.

cultural colonial impact, the call for an inclusive way of understanding Indigeneity is a way to nurture the wellbeing and future of Indigenous peoples.

Likewise, a clear-cut definition of those who count as Indigenous is problematic, as it stretches from tribal peoples living in the rainforests of Borneo, to reindeer herders living in Siberia, to the Sámi living in both traditional and urban areas, or to Pacific Indigenous peoples who have migrated to other islands, not to mention the peoples of North and South America or Africa. The official categories of Indigenous peoples vary greatly. In Russia, a population of 50,000 is the limit for official recognition as Indigenous people. Africa and Asia also have their own state recognitions for Indigenous peoples. What unites different Indigenous peoples are their experiences of colonialism, as well as coloniality and modernity projects (Battiste 2000; Virtanen et al. 2013). In this context Indigenous peoples' aspirations to tell their own stories and use and advance their knowledges in academia can be understood.

There are about 370 million Indigenous peoples worldwide in over 9o countries. Despite the fact that they represent up to 5 percent of the global population, they account for about 15 percent of the extreme poor (World Bank Group 2018). Needless to say, it takes a broad approach to be able to study issues related to such a huge diversity of people within one field. Moreover, indigeneity is constantly reconceptualized by Indigenous people themselves (see e.g. de la Cadena & Starn 2007).

The diversity of Indigenous people (also referred to as First peoples, Aboriginal peoples, Native peoples, or autochthonous peoples), points to an enormous variety of Indigenous localities and historicities (Sanders 1999). There is no single definition or explanation of Indigenous peoples. There is, however, a set of characteristics concerning "Indigenous people" found in international conventions and declarations (such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) (UNDRIP), 1LO-Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 1989 (No. 169) and Martínez Cobo's study (1981), which have in part grown out of the success of the international Indigenist political struggle of the last four decades (Dahl 2012).

According to Paulette Steeves (2018), the term ‘Indigenous’ was not used to identify human groups until recently. According to Martínez Cobo (1981), Indigenous people form communities or nations as groups that have a "historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies" within the territories they developed, and as communities that “consider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies" now in their territories. Cobo further stresses that Indigenous people and communities are normally minorities within contemporary populations that work to preserve their ethnic identities and ancestral territories for future generations. Yet, it should be noted that Indigenous peoples are not always minorities, and in Bolivia and Guatemala Indigenous peoples form a majority. According to Steeves, the category should include so-called displaced people who prior to colonization identified themselves with specific lands and regions, as well as Indigenous communities that have for decades sought safer places and moved away from their original homeland areas. Furthermore, many descendants of Indigenous people were forced to hide their identities for their own safety due to colonization and genocidal policies that focused on physical and cultural erasure. This does not make them non-Indigenous, rather it makes them survivors of genocide, erasure and forced acculturation. The term First People came into use in the 1990s and as a concept refers to Indigeneity as an identity. Indigenous people are usually identified as the First People of a specific regional area (Steeves 2018).

Even if the concept ‘Indigenous’ can be contested, there is a shared understanding of what Indigenous studies covers and how it emerged. Likewise, in neighbouring disciplines like anthropology, religious studies, art history, sociology and gender studies, it is difficult to find a univocal definition of ‘religion’, or ‘art’, for instance, but the centre of attention is commonly understood.

The authors of this volume represent four countries where Sámi live. Most of them are involved with Sámi research and education and some with global Indigenous research. The authors represent mostly the humanities, and address the processes and research conducted in the participant tertiary institutions involved with Sámi and Indigenous studies and research. Sámi studies have for a long time been linked to global Indigenous research contexts. The authors are interested in discussing theoretical and practical implications when conducting research in the Sámi context and global Indigenous contexts, involving North European academic spaces. They engage with their experiences of doing research and reflect on the use of Indigenous research methodologies.

The chapters view Sámi and Indigenous studies through the lens of theoretical and practical research-based case solutions in the Sámi academic context. They arise from today's situation in Sámi and Indigenous research and studies in participative higher education institutions, where both researchers coming from different backgrounds are involved in research and teaching. The first three chapters provide theoretical insights about the research field, and from the fourth chapter onwards more case-based research examples are discussed. They all problematize and discuss methodological solutions in engaging in Indigenous knowledge in academia.

In Chapter 1, the editors of this book present the genealogy of Indigenous studies in Sámi and Nordic contexts, and the theoretical and practical implications in elevating Indigenous knowledge and perspectives in academia. The chapter also shows how as a consequence Sámi and Indigenous research emerged in Northern Europe. It also draws from central concepts, decolonization and Indigenization, in Indigenous studies as a discipline, and revisits them in its current research and teaching. Chapter 1 then reflects on the importance of Indigenous research methodologies, and what kind of challenges they may pose, taking into account both local and global contexts.

Chapter 2, by Jelena Porsanger and Irja Seurujárvi-Kari, focuses on early influential thinkers and their methodological choices, offering a deep history of Sámi research. It shows how holistic approaches concerning Indigenous epistemologies, ontologies, and axiologies have been present in Sámi intellectuals' thinking for centuries, and how it is practically present in the so-called lávvu method.

In Chapter 3, Pigga Keskitalo, Torkel Rasmussen, Rauna Rahko-Ravantti, and Rauni Aarela-Vihriala discuss the state of Sámi research and the authors’ ideas on, and actions towards, the research paradigm shift based on the previous literature and their experiences when teaching and researching in the field. They present their ideas based on the gáfestallan talking circles and the research process inspired by making a traditional weaving band (ruvdet in North Sámi language).

In Chapter 4, Hanna Outakoski looks at the development of literacy research in Sápmi (Sámi land) through the implementation of Indigenous methodologies. She sees an awareness of Indigenous research principles as an example of what kinds of issues she has faced during her research and how she has solved them.

In Chapter 5, Hanna Guttorm, Lea Kantonen, Britt Kramvig, and Aili Pyhala engage with the decolonial writing process in the context of Sámi and global Indigenous societies. They take the land, Eana, as an actor in the co-writing, and give the reader novel ideas about creating different ways of research writing.

In Chapter 6, Jelena Porsanger, Irja Seurujárvi-Kari, and Ragnhild Nystad present a conversational method, muittasit ovttas, literally translated “shared remembering" in the Sámi context. They also show how they have used the Sámi solju, breastpin, both as a methodological and a theoretical tool.

In Chapter 7, Marja-Liisa Olthuis, Trond Trosterud, Erika Katjaana Sarivaara, Petter Morottaja, and Eljas Niskanen present project-based writing strategies and methodologies in the Aanaar Saami (Inari Sámi) language community. They describe the measures taken to recreate and activate the missing writers' generations in their personal and communal writing processes. The authors preferred to use the spelling ‘Aanaar Saami’, because 'Sámi' actually comes from north Sámi writing, even if it is already commonly used in English. The language community itself uses ‘anaraskiela’ for Aanaar Saami (Inari Sami).

Chapter 8, by Attila Paksi and Ilona Kivinen, reflect on practical experiences of doing research with Indigenous communities in two different contexts, in

Southern Africa and Sápmi. They provide personal stories and reflections on their research practices, especially reciprocal relationships.

Along similar lines, Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen in Chapter 9 reflects on cultural protocols and research agendas in Amazonian research, and how different localities accommodate the values often pointed out in Indigenous research methodologies literature. Lastly, this edited volume includes a concluding epilogue.

This edited volume is a result of the scientific workshops of the network Indigenous Research Methodologies in Academia. In 2017-2019, the network gathered together scholars from interdisciplinary scientific fields from the Sámi allaskuvla/Sámi University of Applied Sciences, the University of Helsinki, UiT-the Arctic University of Norway, the University of Oulu, the University of Lapland, Umea University, and the University of the Arts Helsinki. The network was based on the practical need to create connections between institutions and scholars working with Indigenous and Sámi studies and research. The participants contributed with their thoughts and writing, drawing from their own efforts and practical work related to Indigenous and Sámi research as well as with the Indigenous societies from where this volume emerges. Their contributions reflect a broad approach in human, social, and environmental sciences, as well as cross-disciplinary and applied perspectives.

Assuch, the network became an important place for interdisciplinary collaboration connecting researchers. The network's scientific workshops addressed diverse topics, identifying the different Indigenous research, research methodologies, and theoretical approaches involved when working with jointly identified topics. The topics included: ‘Indigenous epistemologies in dialogue with Euro-American academia; 'Evaluations of Indigenous research methods used in teaching, ‘How to write about methodology’ and fourthly, the final workshop in the Sajos Sámi cultural centre in Anár/Aanaar (Inari), Finland, 'Re-searching Indigenous methodologies and engaging communities’. Based on these topics, network members with similar interests examined the topics in their work. This volume presents the results of different working groups based on the writings of those groups which were created based on their agreement to cooperate. They also had similar interests in developing Indigenous research methods in the Sámi context. The workshops also hosted invited guests who gave their opening ideas and presentations. During the workshops, a common feature of the contributions was scholars working on decolonial projects, sharing methodological discussions through network building, and creating new relationships and reflections by researchers working in Sámi and Indigenous research contexts. Although the meetings were primarily directed at doctoral and senior researchers, they were open and gained wide attention. The workshops took place in Guovdageaidnu (Kautokeino), Romsa (Tromsø), and Karasjohka (Karasjok), Ubmi (Umea), and Helsset (Helsinki) and Inari (Anár) in Finland.

The book is aimed at those interested in research methodologies, Indigenous studies and Sámi research in particular as well as all those interested in research concerned with Indigenous societies and how to implement decolonial approaches into research.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Finnish Cultural Foundation for funding our workshops and allowing the creation of novel research collaborations; our project coordinators, Anni Latva-Pukkila and Mariia Rauramo, as well as Sofie Henriksen, who assisted in the editing process; the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, and lastly all our research collaborators.

Battiste, M. (2000). Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision. UBC Press.

Cobo, M. (1981). Martínez Cobo Study. United Nations. https://www.un.org/development/ desa/indigenouspeoples/publications/2014/09/martinez-cobo-study/

Dahl, J. (2012). The Indigenous space and marginalized peoples in the United Nations. Palgrave Macmillan.

De la Cadena, M., & Starn, O. (Eds.). (2007). Indigenous experience today. Bloomsbury.

Salminen, T. (2007). Europe and North Asia. In C. Moseley (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the world's endangered languages (pp. 211-280). Routledge.

Sanders, D. (1999). Indigenous peoples: Issues of definition. International Journal of Cultural Property, 8, 4-13.

Steeves, P. F. (2018). Indigeneity. Oxford University Press.

Valkonen, S. (2019). Conceptual governance on defining Indigeneity: The Sámi debate in Finland. In T. H. Eriksen, S. Valkonen, & J. Valkonen (Eds.), Knowing from the Indigenous North. Sami approaches to history, politics and belonging (pp. 142-162). Routledge.

Virtanen, P. K., Seurujárvi-Kari, I., & Kantonen, L. (2013). Modernit ja muuttuvat alkuperäiskansat [Modern and changing Indigenous peoples]. In P. K. Virtanen, L. Kantonen, & I. Seurujärvi-Kari (Eds.), Alkuperäiskansat tämän päivän maailmassa [Indigenous peoples in today’s world] (pp. 9-28). Finnish Literature Society.

World Bank Group. (2018). Indigenous peoples. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/ indigenouspeoples

Chapter 1

Contemporary Indigenous Research within Sámi and Global Indigenous Studies Contexts

Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen, Torjer Olsen and Pigga Keskitalo

This chapter addresses the genealogy of Indigenous studies, and how it is conceptualized and practised in the Sámi context. It discusses the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and Indigenous ways of doing research in academia, as well as the role of Indigenous research methodologies in this effort. We link our chapter to larger academic Indigenous discussions on the concepts of ‘knowledge’, ‘decolonization, ‘research’ and 'indigenization’ At the theoretical and practical levels these processes and initiatives have enabled researchers to shed light on Indigenous views on the past, the present, and the future, first of all in Indigenous societies, but also in academia. This chapter also addresses the challenges of moving between local and global levels. Indigenous research contexts are diverse and dynamic, and the key to creating dialogues, bridges, and collaboration, lies in this very diversity, complexity, and multivocality of Indigenous societies.

Keywords

Sami studies — Indigenous studies — Indigenization — decolonization — Indigenous research methodologies — Indigenous paradigm

Even though many scholars would argue that Indigenous studies belongs within different kinds of cultural or ethnic studies, today it is a field of its own. It has its own scientific journals, academic events, as well as specially targeted funding mechanisms and strategic plans within education institutions. This chapter aims to discuss the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and Indigenous ways of doing research in academia, as well as the role of Indigenous research methodologies in this effort. It sheds light first on the genealogy of Indigenous studies, the Sámi context in particular.

© PIRJO KRISTIINA VIRTANEN, TORJER OLSEN AND PIGGA KESKITALO, 2021 DOI: 10.1163/9789004463097_002 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the cc By 4.0 License.

We link our chapter to larger academic Indigenous discussions on the concepts of ‘knowledge’, ‘decolonization’, ‘research’ and 'indigenization: These concepts offer common points in Indigenous studies, and have been studied in diverse Indigenous locations. In addition to the research work carried out previously in the field, the authors' experiences of teaching and researching in Sámi Research and global Indigenous Studies and related programmes provide an important mirroring point. We present the programmes addressed in crossborder contexts, as well as the ideas of students in our study programmes. These views were collected in the course evaluations, which revealed the hopes and ideas of students' roles concerning their studies. The evaluations showed that students aimed to bring forth transformations in communities and societies, and indicated that researchers had a strong sense of individual responsibility in these projects. Pirjo Kristiina Virtanen works as an Associate Professor in Indigenous Studies at the University of Helsinki. Torjer Olsen works as a Professor in the Indigenous Studies Centre for Sámi Studies and is the Head of Department. Pigga Keskitalo works as a part time Associate Professor at the Sámi University of Applied Sciences in a Sámi teacher education programme and at the University of Lapland as a researcher.

Indigenous perspectives are diverse and dynamic, as they draw from the various aspects of Indigenous societies' practices, languages, histories, landscapes, and ways of living. The same applies to Sámi studies and Sámi society. Therefore, we aim here to go beyond clear-cut distinctions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous perspectives and avoid homogeneous and universal categorizations. We highlight the fact that Indigenous research methodologies do not only allow raising attention to diverse onto-epistemologies, but also more horizontal, relational, and accountable encounters in research (see Porsanger 2004; Weber-Pillwax 1999; Wilson 2008). Yet, such methodological efforts require critical reflections concerning the meaning of knowledge building and its methods in each local Indigenous context.

In what follows, the history of global Indigenous and Sámi studies is presented, and their approaches, overarching topics, concepts, and places in academia are discussed. As will be seen, the conceptualization of Indigenous studies as a discipline, its objectives, and thus how it is practised, is also related to Indigenous views on the past, the present, and the future.

2 The Sámi in the World of Research

Sámi research as a field of study is understood as research with Sámi contents from a Sámi standpoint and with the aim of producing knowledge about Sámi people using their own premises and Sámi language terminology. It can cover among other things, Sámi history, society, language, material and non-material culture, as well as environmental issues (Lehtola & Länsman 2012; Sergejeva 2002; Seurujárvi-Kari 2014a; Seurujárvi-Kari et al. 2011).

Sámi research itself has a long history (see Chapter 2 in this volume). Sámi intellectuals, since the 17th century, gave a deep account of the genealogy of Sámi research up until the 1970s. For centuries, missionaries and explorers actively travelled and explored the wide Sdpmi (Sámi areas) (see e.g. Pulkkinen 2005). For religious purposes, missionary activities created the first Sámi writings as early as 1619 (Capdeville 2014). From the 17th century on, church schools were organized that gathered in Sámi children (Hirvonen 2004). The occasional use of the Sámi language was one means to introduce Christianity for the Sámi people (Minde 2003). This is a period of different unifying ideologies, such as the Enlightenment, highlighting the ideas of human rationality, and excluding many people who were considered culturally different. From the 1850s onwards, early institutionalized education was provided in different forms of assimilation processes in the different nation states where Sámi people lived. Gradually, the Sámi adapted to the customs, language, and attitudes of the mainstream culture (see Pauls 2019), and their children began to attend residential schools (Rasmus 2014).

The Sámi have been among the most researched Indigenous peoples in the world, and like many other Indigenous peoples around the globe they have long been the object of “Western” scholarship (Lehtola & Lansman 2012). One of the early research traditions related to the Sámi was Lappological research conducted by outside researchers from the 18th and 19th centuries onwards. These researchers represented different fields of science, from linguistics to philanthropy, and their research was conducted in Finnish, Norwegian, Swedish, German, Italian, and French, among other languages. Lappological traditions have been largely tainted by racist and stereotype ideologies until the middle of the twentieth century (e.g. Isaksson 2001; Seurujárvi-Kari 20142). Racist attitudes were not the only ones, however, as Lappologist researchers were diverse and represented a variety of different approaches (Lehtola 2017).

Contrary to this tradition, Sami scholar Alf Isak Keskitalo, among other forerunners, criticized the ways that Sámi were situated and represented in research. He argued in 1974 that the Sámi were only considered research objects and ‘others’, and called for a change in this hierarchical research design (Keskitalo 1974/1976, see also Chapter 2 in this volume). A. I. Keskitalo's views have been recognized as an inevitable turning point in the rise of new Sámi research and have justified Sámi's own research institutions. His views also marked a shift from the former Lappological approach to a new mode of Sámi research in which the voice and research needs of the Sámi themselves were central (Stordahl 2008; Thuen 1995). This occurred as a continuum to the

Sámi movement, active since the early 1900s. The movement established a Sámi cultural and political awakening and later, other transformations, such as the establishment of the Davviriikkaid Sámi Instituhtta, Nordic Sámi Institute (NS1), in Guovdageaidnu (Kautokeino), Norway, in 1973. In addition, in the late 19708, the Sami movement was active because of the Alta dam conflict, which united Sámi people and gave a voice to Sámi rights.

The notion at the time that the Sámi themselves should decide how research was conducted, was part of the rise of the Indigenous decolonialism that emerged in the 1960s, which has been getting stronger ever since. In all the countries where the Sámi people live, Sámi studies from Sámi standpoints have been conducted in a variety of forms during their history. Sámi language studies began in Tromse in the 1970s, at the Universities of Helsinki, Oulu, and Lapland in Finland since the 1980s (Lehtola 2014; Rantala 2014; Seurujárvi-Kari 2014b), in Guovdageaidnu Sámi allaskuvla (Sámi University of Applied Sciences) since 1989, and in Sweden since 2000 (Centre for Sámi Research 2020).

3 International Connections in the Emergence of Indigenous Studies as a Discipline

Local and global politics have contributed to many transformations in science. Developments in the Indigenous field were connected to worldwide processes after WW2 inputting efforts on human rights perspectives. This was also a time when many former colonial countries became independent, and coincided with an increased political awareness of the struggles that Indigenous peoples had experienced for centuries (see e.g. Hill 2010). Among others, since the 1960s, Native American scholar, Vine Deloria Jr. (19702, 1970b), wrote about the invisible history of the Indigenous peoples research in the U.S. Furthermore, in 1975, the first Indigenous Peoples World Council (wciP) was held in Port Alberni in Canada, where common Indigenous issues were addressed. Indigenous academic discussions were also strongly related to postcolonial thinking, which emerged in the 1960s. Or to put it in another way, postcolonial thinkers have acted in parallel with several Indigenous scholars worldwide since the end of the 1960s. Among them are Frantz Fanon (1965, 1965/1967) and Edward Said (1979), who founded and illuminated the field of postcolonial studies, representing alternative perspectives on gaps in cultural and political understanding. The roots of postcolonial critique go far back. Among others, in the 19th century, works like Joseph-Ernest Renan's La Réforme intellectuelle et morale (1871) presented colonialism as “the extension of civilisation", which ideologically justified the self-ascribed racial and cultural superiority of the

“Western” world over the “non-Western” world (see Said 2000). "Western" is a contested term, like “Euro-American”, but here we use it to refer to the influences of certain political, cultural, and economic features and influences that largely originate among European thinkers, and later also to the colonial powers established in the United States and Australasia. "Western" and “the West" are not concise analytical concepts. They are often used to describe and articulate a particular perspective. In the context of Indigenous research, the concepts are most often used as an opposition to what is Indigenous. Later, the work of Amar Acheraiou (2008), Homi K. Bhabha (1994), Gayatri Spivak (1990), Raman Siva Kumar (1999), and Dipesh Chakrabarty (2000/2007), among others, had a crucial impact on the development of postcolonial theory and studies.

Local Indigenous intellectual discussions also elaborated in relation to, and as part of, shared global dialogues, and Sámi research also contributed to the foundation of Indigenous studies globally. Furthermore, Indigenous scholars were also active in student movements and this also gave a voice to Indigenous students. As one of the results of these diverse global changes, Maori scholar Linda Tuhiwai Smith (1999/2012) wrote Decolonizing Methodologies, which became a monument in global discourse on Indigenous research with the recognition that "research is not an innocent or distant academic exercise but an activity that has something at stake and that occurs in a set of political and social conditions" (Smith L. T. 1999/2012, 5; also Lóf & Stinnerbom 2016, 140). It has paved the way for Indigenous scholars who have felt the need to present their communities’ points of view and histories from the inside, and to carry out research differently from the dominant "Western" mode. In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Kaupapa Maori movement by Maori scholars has become a foundation and a framework both for research, education and other related practices. In research it means research done in the Maori way. In practice, this research is done by Maori, for Maori, with Maori, and from a Maori perspective (Smith L. T. 1999/2012).

The developments in different Indigenous contexts, including the Sámi, draw from quite independent ideas, even if the processes of calling for a new type of research and inclusion of Indigenous peoples were occurring at the same time. In addition to the Kaupapa Maori movement (Smith G. H. 1997, 2003; Bishop 1996) in Aotearoa, Indigenous studies also relates to the many peoples of the Americas (Deloria 1970a, 1970b, 1998; Kovach 2009; Wilson 2001, 2008), to Sápmi, Sámi homeland (Gaski 2004; Hirvonen 2008; Kuokkanen 2000, 20078; Lehtola & Länsman 2012; Porsanger 2004; Seurujárvi-Kari 2000), to Australia (e.g. Nakata 2007), to Asia (Mao et al. 2012), Asia Pacific (Dirlik 2006), and to Africa (e.g. Chilisa 2012). The terms vary, but the ideas have a similar resonance across local contexts within a wide geographical area.

This coming up with similar ideas also empowered Indigenous scholars, and led to the inauguration of Indigenous Studies programmes in a number of universities around the world. In several parts of the Indigenous world, from Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia, Sápmi, and the Americas, Indigenous research, Indigenous theories and research methodologies have been developed and come into being as an important part of creating and strengthening Indigenous knowledge both globally in academia. For a long time, Indigenous knowledge-making practices in diverse Indigenous contexts have inspired and guided educators.

4 Indigenizing and Decolonizing Academia — A Global Project

BringingIndigenous knowledge into academia as valid knowledge has been one of the uniting aims in Indigenizing and decolonizing academia (Battiste 2000, 2013; Mihesuah & Wilson 2004; Wilson 2013). In several Indigenous contexts, despite the local differences in the content, knowledge is considered to be relational and place-based, built in relations that include other-than-humans and the land (e.g. Wilson 2001; Guttorm 2011; Helander 2016; Valkonen & Valkonen 2019). These relations are all connected with protecting the land and to many other social and economic issues. Indigenous knowledge draws from observations and experiences of generations, transmitted through chants, art, and intergenerational oracity (Chilisa 2012). Through the presence of Indigenous studies, Indigenous knowledge is finding a more legitimate space in academia and elsewhere, such as in policy making.

Indigenization and decolonization have become defining parts of Indigenous studies. Decolonization deals with different forms of knowing that originate from sources other than Eurocentric academic traditions. According to Walter Mignolo (201), a decolonial view of the world looks critically at the geopolitics of knowledge and aims to go beyond Eurocentrism and Euro-American emphases. It allows different views of the present, the colonial past, and the pre-colonial past to emerge or become visible (Hutchings & Lee- Morgan 2016, 3-5; Smith L. T. 1999/2012, 23-24). Space is made for these connections and sources of knowledge and light are shone on them.

Decoloniality differs from postcolonialism. The latter presupposes something that has ended, whereas from the perspective of decolonization, colonization and imperialism are seen as processes that are still ongoing. Decolonial studies started from the "inside", with one's own language, concepts, theories, and methods. For Indigenous peoples, a key issue in decolonization is to move beyond the suppression and denial of Indigenous languages, histories, and knowledge bases, and instead to work with Indigenous concepts, methods and/or institutions, depending on the context. Decolonization is about taking different epistemologies and knowledge-production seriously.

In the context of Indigenous studies, decolonization allows a critical exploration of how existing research has been conducted through the impact of more or less colonizing methods and concepts. It also means carrying out research which does not replicate the damaging impact of colonization (Pihama 2016, 103). As research has shown, minds like territories can be colonized. However, decolonization debates have been criticized for creating new dualisms, and for essentializing and simplifying cultures.