Acknowledging that Land Acknowledgements are kind of useless? Lachlan McNamee, Kyle Peyton, ‘Effects of land acknowledgements on non-Indigenous audiences in Australia and the USA’, Nature Human Behaviour’, 2026

15Oct26

Abstract: Land acknowledgements—formal statements recognizing Indigenous custodianship of land—are widespread in Australia, where they originated, and have been gaining traction in the USA. Proponents argue they raise awareness of Indigenous histories and build support for reparations, but causal evidence is limited. Here randomized experiments on non-Indigenous populations in Australia (N = 1,724) and the USA (N = 1,773) find that exposure to land acknowledgements increases awareness of local Indigenous groups but can reduce interest in Indigenous culture and heritage. We find no significant effects on a range of political attitudes, including collective guilt and support for reparations. Additional experiments (N = 3,638) suggest that the adoption of land acknowledgements provides small reputational benefits to institutions facing public scrutiny. Costlier practices—such as financial compensation and Indigenous participation in decision-making—have significantly larger effects. These findings suggest that land acknowledgements primarily improve organizational reputation rather than generate sociopolitical change.

Response: Settler states increasingly offer Indigenous peoples symbolic recognition, such as land acknowledgements, instead of political power or resources, yet the effects of these gestures are untested. Peyton and McNamee’s experiments in the USA and Australia find that land acknowledgements raise awareness of Indigenous peoples but reduce interest in learning more.

Note: all this is published in Nature (the journal, not the actual thing)!