Abstract: OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand the role that traditional Indigenous health care practices can play in increasing individual-level self-determination over health care and improving health outcomes for urban Indigenous peoples in Canada.

METHODS: This project took place in Vancouver, British Columbia and included the creation and delivery of holistic workshops to engage community members (n = 35) in learning about aspects of traditional health care practices. Short-term and intermediate outcomes were discussed through two gatherings involving focus groups and surveys. Data were transcribed, reviewed, thematically analyzed, and presented to the working group for validation.

RESULTS: When participants compared their experiences with traditional health care to western health care, they described barriers to care that they had experienced in accessing medical doctors (e.g., racism, mistrust), as well as the benefits of traditional healing (e.g., based on relationships, holistic approach). All participants also noted that they had increased ownership over their choices around, and access to, health care, inclusive of both western and traditional options. They stressed that increased access to traditional health care is crucial within urban settings.

CONCLUSIONS: Self-determination within Indigenous urban communities, and on a smaller scale, ownership for individuals, is a key determinant of health for Indigenous individuals and communities; this was made clear through the analysis of the research findings and is also supported within the literature. This research also demonstrates that access to traditional healing can enhance ownership for community members. These findings emphasize that there is a continued and growing need for support to aid urban Indigenous peoples in accessing traditional health care supports.



Abstract: This doctoral project examines reconciliation and how Canada’s Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (2005) was designed to provide reparations to former students who were harmed in residential schools. In the past three decades, many Indigenous leaders and organizations identified a need for public investment to address historical injustice. In response, settler governments reframe these demands as opportunities for economic investment that are guaranteed to produce self-esteem and social inclusion for Indigenous peoples. This dissertation documents and problematizes an ideological shift whereby demands for redress and restitution give way to an investment rationale that is used to bypass demands for self-determination (Green 2015). Therefore, in this study I ask: how do investment discourses structure Indigenous-settler relationships? What is specific about the application of investment rationale when deployed during redress and reconciliation processes? In order to answer these questions I use a multi-site methodology to examine material and symbolic reparations, such as the Independent Assessment Process, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and therapeutic health supports. I draw on governmentality literatures to argue that an investment rationale disciplines individual compensation claimants through categories of harm and legal accounting processes to construct Indigenous subjects as dysfunctional and wage employment as emancipatory. I then examine how Indigenous health supports are subject to disinvestment, which effectively marginalizes Indigenous conceptualizations of health that privilege self-determination. Finally, I explore how the Truth and Reconciliation Commission routinely valorizes “mutually beneficial partnerships” as a template for contemporary Indigenous-settler relationships. My analysis thus contributes to the field of settler colonial studies and reveals how investment rationale is deployed to contain the cost of reparations and to create a politics of exchange where a return can be recovered from monies allotted to reparative strategies. The expected return that is desired by the settler state is, ultimately, the assimilation of Indigenous peoples’ into neoliberal citizenship.





Abstract: My dissertation, “Appalachian Anthropocene: Conflict and Subject Formation in a Sacrifice Zone” diagrams the dominant forces of historical subject formation to see how they shape contemporary responses to extraction-based development and environmental crises. My first chapter examines the new challenges posed by the Anthropocene and neoliberalism in Appalachia, and outlines the general analytical framework of material, conceptual, and affective systems used throughout the dissertation. In Chapter Two I show the violent rearrangement of these three systems as integral to dominant forms of subjectivity and resistance. I then present an overview of these forms of subjectivity before assembling a theory of oppositional subjectivity drawing from Marxism, decolonial, continental, and black philosophy, and queer theory.

Chapter Three traces the boundary-making practices of settler colonialism as they shaped the settler-subject in Appalachia. I examine how dominant forces of subjectification emerged under colonialism, the harmful effects that persist, and their impact on contemporary responses to the land-use conflicts surrounding resource extraction and to environmental disasters like the 2014 Charleston Water Crisis. I conclude this chapter by arguing for a renewed attention to residues of settler colonialism in collective political responses to the context of the neoliberal Anthropocene.

Chapter Four examines the unifying forces of white supremacy, nationalism, and capitalism as they shaped the citizen-subject over the two centuries following the War of Independence. In this chapter I examine the geopolitical production of the national territory of the United States and socio-political production of the national subject of the American Citizen. I then present oppositional responses to dominant American subjectivity in the writing of the militant Appalachian preacher and poet Don West. I show how he helps us to understand these discourses and more importantly, helps us to become subjects differently.

In my conclusion I reflect on the era of Anthropocene neoliberalism and the new problems and opportunities it poses. Since the end of World War II, more than sixty years of rapid political, technological, social, and ecological changes have dramatically reshaped the context facing environmental scholars and Appalachian activists. Among other trends, the region faces the decline of the region’s primary industrial sectors, population loss to coastal and urban regions, new resource extraction opportunities, accelerating inequality and absentee landownership, and changing racial and ethnic demographics. I show how these unique economic, environmental, and socio-political challenges provide rich opportunities for further scholarship on regional development, environmental justice, and related social movements.