Inclusion, Coexistence, and Resilience: The New Frontiers of Environmental Law Encoded in the Genes of Indigenous Law

Indigenous knowledge, observations, cosmologies, and traditions (that, in one expression, we define as “Indigenous law”) have drawn criticism for adopting ‘nonscientific’ and ‘non-objective’ methods. The way to respond to these challenges is through nrejecting accounts of objectivity that rely on the universalization of models (State-oriented perspectives, colonialist approaches, and asymmetric relations of powers) and endorsing alternative proposals that make room for Indigenous worldviews (by means of the “Indigenous methodology”). The Indigenous methodology, therefore, takes due account of Indigenous and local perspectives and integrates them with further relevant existing data on key issues such as human rights protection, procedural and substantive environmental rights, food safety, and security, right to free movement of peoples, immigration, and gender. At the heart of the Indigenous methodological approach is deep and abiding commitment to identifying, articulating, and applying the intellectual resources from Indigenous legal orders to the work of rebuilding Indigenous citizenries and governance. In other words, the Indigenous methodology brings back the treasure of Indigenous law together with its teachings. In this vein, the article identifies three key lessons learned through adopting an Indigenous methodology that takes into account Indigenous perspectives, traditions, and worldviews. These key lessons connect to the values of coexistence, inclusion, and resilience and culminate in a body of knowledge that investigates, scrutinizes, and demonstrates the epistemic reliability, objectivity, and inner values of Indigenous perspectives. The paper is divided into five sections. After this brief introduction (section 1), section 2 (Parola and Poto) examines the constituent elements drawn from the training on Indigenous law and methodology: inclusion, coexistence, and resilience. Section 3 (Porrone) refers to the need of inclusion and interaction between different legal orders (State law and Indigenous and traditional peoples’ legal orders), focusing on the case study of the Belo Monte Hydroelectric Power Plant in the Xingu Basin, Brazil. This section raises the pressing question of equality, in its definition of handling identical situations in the same manner and of handling different situations in different manners. From the methodological viewpoint, this section combines grounded theory and fieldwork and offers concrete suggestions on the equal treatment of tribal communities and Indigenous groups. Thus, demonstrating the possibilities towards a more inclusive society. Section 4 (Tsiouvalas) examines the coexistence of diverse legal orders using the case of Coastal Sámi Marine Tenure. This section develops the theme on the Indigenous legal traditions of the Northern Coastal peoples in the county of Troms (Sea Sámi and traditional fishers) still kept alive and co-existing with the Norwegian system of coastal governance. Moreover, the section encourages the reflection on past wounds and injustices and on the possibilities to revitalize ancient traditions and knowledge around the Indigenous marine tenure system, with the aim to protect nature and its peoples. Section 5 (De Gregorio) focuses on resilience with a case study on the Arctic and the local and Indigenous peoples’ response to the challenges posed by climate change. This contribution reflects on the integration of Indigenous knowledge systems and modern science related to food traditions, the ability of its integration on developing a co-evolution of knowledge, and its influence in shaping resilient societies. Section 6 (Parola and Poto) reports concluding remarks on the findings.