
Nicholas Reo
@wnishin
I am an interdisciplinary scholar focused on the human-environment interactions of Indigenous peoples. My research concerns Indigenous environmental stewardship, Indigenous knowledge systems and Indigenous experiences with environmental change, which all fit within the burgeoning field of Indigenous environmental studies. I link the natural and social sciences, utilize qualitative and quantitative approaches and engage concepts from cultural anthropology, human geography, Indigenous studies and ecology to address environmental and socio-political issues facing Indigenous nations.
Address: 6182 Steele Hall
Hanover, NH 03755
I am an interdisciplinary scholar focused on the human-environment interactions of Indigenous peoples. My research concerns Indigenous environmental stewardship, Indigenous knowledge systems and Indigenous experiences with environmental change, which all fit within the burgeoning field of Indigenous environmental studies. I link the natural and social sciences, utilize qualitative and quantitative approaches and engage concepts from cultural anthropology, human geography, Indigenous studies and ecology to address environmental and socio-political issues facing Indigenous nations.
Address: 6182 Steele Hall
Hanover, NH 03755
less
InterestsView All (16)
Uploads
Papers by Nicholas Reo
2. We argue that one solution to IAS management is to align models of alien species management with Indigenous management frameworks that are rela-tional and biocultural. We make the theoretical case that centring Indigenous management frameworks promises to strengthen overall management re-sponses and outcomes because they attend directly to human and environ-mental justice concerns.
3. We unpack the origins of the ‘introduced species paradigm’ to understand how binary framing of so-called ‘aliens’ and ‘natives’ recalls harmful histories and al-ienates Indigenous stewardship. Such a paradigm thereby may limit application of Indigenous frameworks and management, and impede long-term biodiversity protection solutions.
4. We highlight how biocultural practices applied by Indigenous Peoples to IAS cen-tre protecting relationships, fulfilling responsibilities and realising justice.5. Finally, we argue for a pluralistic vision that acknowledges multiple alternative Indigenous relationships and responses to introduced and IAS which can contrib-ute to vibrant futures where all elements of society, including kin in the natural world, are able to flourish
relationships between Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their environments, thereby challenging the continuity and dynamism of Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK). In this article, we contribute to the “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity,” issued by the Alliance of World
Scientists, by exploring opportunities for sustaining ILK systems on behalf of the future stewardship of our planet. Our warning raises the alarm about the pervasive and ubiquitous erosion of knowledge and practice and the social and ecological consequences of this erosion. While ILK systems can be
adaptable and resilient, the foundations of these knowledge systems are compromised by ongoing suppression, misrepresentation, appropriation, assimilation, disconnection, and destruction of biocultural heritage. Three case studies illustrate these processes and how protecting ILK is central to
biocultural conservation. We conclude with 15 recommendations that call for the recognition and support of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their knowledge systems. Enacting these recommendations will entail a transformative and sustained shift in how ILK systems, their knowledge
holders, and their multiple expressions in lands and waters are recognized, affirmed, and valued. We appeal for urgent action to support the efforts of Indigenous Peoples and local communities around the world to maintain their knowledge systems, languages, stewardship rights, ties to lands
and waters, and the biocultural integrity of their territories—on which we all depend.
conducting research with Indigenous nation partners, references the kincentric beliefs among many Indigenous Peoples. It implies that researchers are responsible for nurturing honorable relationships
with community collaborators and are accountable to the entirety of the community in which they work, potentially including collaborators’ more-than-human network of relations. This research examines relational accountability in ethnobiology and other research contexts, with a focus on
work within Anishnaabe territories. Anishnaabe inawendiwin, a teaching about kinship, provides a path for centering research ethics and praxis in Anishnaabe ways of knowing and being. Anishnaabe inawendiwin urges us to remain committed to Indigenous nation partners regardless of budgets and beyond research grant timelines; to attend to accountabilities towards more-than-human communities; to foster loving, personal relationships with research partners; and to involve youth genuinely in the
partnerships.
forested ecosystems. Nonetheless, many forests and corresponding management plans lack quantitative
information on fire interval, frequency, and seasonality. This project examined the fire history at Price
Mountain, Virginia, using fire scar samples and tree-ring analyses from live tree chronologies. Additionally,
this project investigated the fire scarring potential of two little-studied species, black gum (Nyssa
sylvatica) and sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), as well as described the age-structure of the current
stand. We hypothesized that fire frequency would be high prior to the fire suppression era, given the
proximity to an historical railroad track at the base of the mountain and susceptibility to lightning due
to elevation. Six major fire years occurred between 1861 and 1925 at an average interval of 14 years,
followed by a period of no fires. Two-thirds of the fires burned early in the season. There was an initial
establishment of sourwood and chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) from 1930-1940 as well as another establishment
peak between 1950 and 1960 after a major logging event. Pine (Pinus pungens and Pinus
rigida) species established between 1870 and 1930. Reconstructed fire history and age structure informs
land managers that repeated fires occurred in this Appalachian ridge top forest and that modern forest
structure is in part the legacy of historic fires and fire suppression.