The Possibilities for Legally Pluralistic Planning: An Exploration of Haudenosaunee Planning Law

References

• Agyeman, J., & Erickson, J. S. (2012). Culture, recognition, and the negotiation of difference: Some thoughts on cultural competency in planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(3), 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X12441213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, E. R. (2002). The public interest in planning: From legitimation to substantive plan evaluation. Planning Theory, 1(3), 226–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100303
   Google Scholar
• American Institute of Certified Planners. (2021). AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/document/add38c5d-71d4-4915-92d6-650140adf7fbAICP-Code-of-Ethics-and-Professional-Conduct-2021.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Arquette, M., & Cole, M. (2004). Restoring our relationships for the future. In M. Blaser, H. A. Feit, & G. McRae (Eds.), In the way of development: Indigenous peoples, life projects, and globalization (pp. 322–350). Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bhandar, B. (2007). Re-covering the limits of recognition: The politics of difference and decolonisation in John Borrows’ Recovering Canada: The resurgence of Indigenous law. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 27(1), 125–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2007.10854388
   Google Scholar
• Bhandar, B. (2015). Title by registration: Instituting modern property law and creating racial value in the settler colony. Journal of Law and Society, 42(2), 253–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2015.00707.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomley, N. (2015). The ties that blind: Making fee simple in the British Columbia treaty process. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 40(2), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booth, P. (2016). Planning and the rule of law. Planning Theory & Practice, 17(3), 344–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1183810
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrows, J. (1997). Living between water and rocks: First Nations, environmental planning and democracy. The University of Toronto Law Journal, 47(4), 417–468. https://doi.org/10.2307/825948
   Google Scholar
• Burnham, S., Bastedo, J., & Longboat, S. (2018). Our people are the planners. Plan Canada, 33(6), 11–12.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (2002). Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory, 1(2), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100205
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Institute of Planners. (2016). CIP Code of Professional Conduct and Statement of Values. https://www.cip-icu.ca/Files/Provincial-Codes-of-Conduct/CIP-CODE-OF-PROFESSIONAL-CONDUCT.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Coulthard, G. S. (2014). Red skin, White masks: Rejecting the colonial politics of recognition. University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Craft, A. A. (2013). Breathing life into the Stone Fort Treaty: An Anishinabe understanding of Treaty One. Purich Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366508978187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorries, H. (2012). Rejecting the “false choice”: Foregrounding Indigenous sovereignty in planning theory and practice. University of Toronto. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/65468
   Google Scholar
• Dorries, H. (2022). What is planning without property? Relational practices of being and belonging. Environment and Planning D, 40(2), 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758211068505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorries, H., & Ruddick, S. (2018). Between concept and context: Reading Gilles Deleuze and Leanne Simpson in their in/commensurabilities. Cultural Geographies, 25(4), 619–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474018778576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fawaz, M. (2016). Planning and the making of a propertied landscape. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1180423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, B. M. (2015). The spirit of Haudenosaunee youth: The transformation of Identity and well-being through culture-based activism. Wilfred Laurier University. https://scholars.wlu.ca/etdThroughCulture-basedActivism%22
   Google Scholar
• Friedmann, J. (1973). Retracking America: A theory of transactive planning. Anchor Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, N. (2011). Lawscape: Property, environment, law. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, J. (2005). Rethinking the public interest as a planning concept. Plan Canada, 45(2), 48–50. https://www.cip-icu.ca/Files/Awards/Plan-Canada/Rethinking-the-Public-Interest-as-a-Planning-Conce.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths, J. (1986). What is legal pluralism? The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 18(24), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387
   Google Scholar
• Hill, S. M. (2017). The clay we are made of. University of Manitoba Press.
   Google Scholar
• Houston, D., Hillier, J., MacCallum, D., Steele, W., & Byrne, J. (2018). Make kin, not cities! Multispecies entanglements and ‘becoming-world’ in planning theory. Planning Theory, 17(2), 190–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095216688042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howitt, R. (1991). Aborigines and restructuring in the mining sector: Vested and representative interests. Australian Geographer, 22(2), 117–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049189108703035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howitt, R., & Lunkapis, G. J. (2010). Coexistence: Planning and the challenge of Indigenous rights. In J. Hillier & P. Healey (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to planning theory: Conceptual challenges for spatial planning (pp. 109–134). Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, S. (2014). Ontologies of Indigeneity: The politics of embodying a concept. Cultural Geographies, 21(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474013500226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indigenous Law Research Unit. (n.d.-a). ILRU Analytical Framework: Environmental Issues. Retrieved January 26, 2023, from https://www.uvic.ca/law/assets/docs/ilru/narrative-environmental-issues-framework-2019-07-15.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Indigenous Law Research Unit. (n.d.-b). ILRU Analytical Framework: Human and Social Issues. Retrieved January 26, 2023, from https://www.uvic.ca/law/assets/docs/ilru/Narrative Human Issues Framework 10.24.16.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Innes, R. A. (2013). Elder brother and the law of the people: Contemporary kinship and Cowessess First Nation. University of Manitoba Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johansen, B. E. (1995). Dating the Iroquois Confederacy. Akwesasne Notes New Series, 1(3–4), 62–63.
   Google Scholar
• Jojola, T. (2008). Indigenous planning – An emerging context. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 17(1), 37–47.
   Google Scholar
• King, J. T. (2007). The value of water and the meaning of water law for the Native Americans known as the Haudenosaunee. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 16(3), 450–472. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1114&context=cjlpp
   Google Scholar
• Lane, M. B., & Hibbard, M. (2005). Doing it for themselves – Transformative planning by indigenous peoples. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(2), 172–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livesey, B. T. A. M. (2017). Returning resources alone is not enough’: Imagining urban planning after Treaty settlements in Aotearoa New Zealand. Settler Colonial Studies, 9(2), 266–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2017.1409404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matunga, H. (2013). Theorizing Indigenous planning. In R. Walker, T. Jojola, & D. Natcher (Eds.), Reclaiming Indigenous planning (pp. 2–32). McGill-Queen’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metzger, J. (2020). A more-than-human approach to environmental planning. In S. Davoudi, R. Cowell, I. White, & H. Blanco (Eds.), The Routledge companion to environmental planning (pp. 190–199). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pinel, S. L. (2009). Collaborating to compete: The governance implications of stakeholder agendas at Mount Pulag National Park, the Philippines. Planning Theory & Practice, 10(1), 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350802664950
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L. (2010). Unlearning the colonial cultures of planning. Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L. (2013). Coexistence in cities: The challenge of Indigenous urban planning in the twenty-first century. In D. Natcher, R. Walker, & T. Jojola (Eds.), Reclaiming Indigenous planning (pp. 183–310). McGill-Queen’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L. (2014). Possessory politics and the conceit of procedure: Exposing the cost of rights under conditions of dispossession. Planning Theory, 13(4), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095214524569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, L., & Barry, J. (2016). Planning for coexistence? Recognizing Indigenous rights through land-use planning. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L., Matunga, H., Viswanathan, L., Patrick, L., Walker, R., Sandercock, L., Moraes, D., Frantz, J., Thompson-Fawcett, M., Riddle, C., & Jojola, T. (2017). Indigenous planning: From principles to practice/a revolutionary pedagogy of/for indigenous planning/settler-indigenous relationships as liminal spaces in planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(4), 639–666. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2017.1380961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purcell, M. (2016). For democracy: Planning and publics without the state. Planning Theory, 15(4), 386–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095215620827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W. J., & Weber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandercock, L. (1998). Towards cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, K. (2018). Beyond human ownership: Property, power and legal personality for nature in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Environmental Law, 30. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jenv30&id=211&div=18&collection=journals
   Google Scholar
• Six Nations Development Corporation. (2019). Six Nations Community Plan. https://www.sixnations.ca/app/uploads/2021/08/SN_Community_Plan.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tait, M. (2016). Planning and the public interest: Still a relevant concept for planners? Planning Theory, 15(4), 335–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095216660780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, Z. (2016a). An Indigenous feminist’s take on the ontological turn: ‘Ontology’ Is just another word for colonialism. Journal of Historical Sociology, 29(1), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/johs.12124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, Z. (2016b). From a fishy place: Examining Canadian state law applied in the Daniels decision from the perspective of Métis legal orders. Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies, 36, 43–57. https://doi.org/10.3138/topia.36.43
   Google Scholar
• Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Turriff, K. (2020). Planning for Skén:nen: Conceptualizing a Haudenosaunee culture of planning. University of Waterloo. https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/handle/10012/15748
   Google Scholar
• Ugarte Urzua, M. (2019). Normative worlds clashing: State planning, Indigenous self-determination, and the possibilities of legal pluralism in Chile. University of British Columbia. https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0377642
   Google Scholar
• Ugarte, M., Fontana, M., & Caulkins, M. (2017). Urbanisation and Indigenous dispossession: Rethinking the spatio-legal imaginary in Chile vis-à-vis the Mapuche nation. Settler Colonial Studies, 9(2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2017.1409397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umemoto, K. (2001). Walking in another’s shoes: Epistemological challenges in participatory planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21, 17–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T., & Beunen, R. (2014). Laws, people and land use: A sociological perspective on the relation between laws and land use. European Planning Studies, 44(6), 654–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310903322314
   Google Scholar
• Watson, V. (2006). Deep difference: Diversity, planning and ethics. Planning Theory, 5(1), 31–50.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, V. (2013). Indigenous place-thought and agency amongst humans and non-humans (First Woman and Sky Woman go on a European world tour!. Decolonization, 2(1), 20–34.
   Google Scholar
• Webber, J. (2006). Legal pluralism and human agency. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 44(1), 167–198.
   Google Scholar
• Webber, J., Napoleon, V., Fournier, M., & Borrows, J. (2020). Sally Engle Merry, Legal pluralism, and the radicalization of comparative law. Law & Society Review, 54(4), 846–857. https://doi.org/10.1111/LASR.12518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, K. P. (2018). Kayanerenkó:wa: The Great Law of Peace. University of Manitoba Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yiftachel, O. (2009). Critical theory and ‘gray space’: Mobilization of the colonized. City, 13(2–3), 246–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604810902982227
   Google Scholar