Deterritorialisation of Indigenous Peoples in Canada: Transformation of the Ethnocultural Landscape and Identity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V534Keywords:
indigenous peoples of Canada, deterritorialisation, colonial policy, traditional territories, ethnocultural identity, ethnocultural landscapeAbstract
The article represents a socio-philosophical analysis of the process of deterritorialisation of indigenous peoples in Canada, in both geographical and socio-cultural terms. It examines the process of forced resettlement and assimilation of aboriginal peoples implemented by the Canadian state throughout the colonial period. Analyzing Canada’s state policy within the framework of constructivist theories, the researcher demonstrates that the colonial policy was based on the ideological opposition of “civilized” European society to “savage” indigenous peoples. The study shows how the categories of “uncivilized”, “backward peoples”, and “non-status Indians” were used by the authorities to represent the indigenous peoples in order to justify the denial of their rights to traditional territories. The analysis reveals that the deterritorialisation of the indigenous peoples of Canada was a comprehensive process implemented through a system of interconnected instruments. The key instrument was the Indian Act of 1876, which legally established the categorisation of the indigenous population into “status” and “non-status”, limited their spatial boundaries through the reservation system, and deprived the aboriginal peoples of the right to their ancestral lands. In socio-cultural terms, this act was aimed at erasing the ethnocultural landscape and identity. Another crucial means of deterritorialisation was the residential school system, which severed the children's spiritual connection to their native places and traditional way of life and disrupted intergenerational continuity. Re-mapping based on the doctrine of “terra nullius” presented the ancestral lands of aboriginal peoples as “no one's lands”, thereby erasing indigeneity from the country's landscape. The industrial development of territories led to the degradation of the environment, the forced relocation of aboriginal communities, and the rupture of the procedural bond between the indigenous peoples and their lands. The article substantiates that the underlying goal of deterritorialis ation was not merely the physical displacement of the indigenous peoples and the deprivation of their rights to traditional territories, but also the transformation of the aboriginal cultural landscape and the recodification of their ethnocultural identity.
For citation: Kaznina I.A. Deterritorialisation ation of Indigenous Peoples in Canada: Transformation of the Ethnocultural Landscape and Identity. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2026, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 95–105. https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V534
Downloads
References
Донецкая А.С. Правовые и институциональные основы самоуправления коренных народов Канады // Американистика на Дальнем Востоке. 2025. № 4(11). С. 83–90. https://doi.org/10.48344/27824152_2025_4_83
Пименова О.И. Природоресурсные права коренных народов и судебная практика их соблюдения в Канаде // Сравнит. конституц. обозрение. 2022. № 4(149). С. 89–109.
Барабанская Л.А., Слепцов А.Н. К вопросу защиты прав коренных народов при промышленном развитии арктических территорий России и Канады // Арктика XXI век. Гуманит. науки. 2021. № 4(26). С. 4–24.
Топунов Н.А. Политика примирения и сохранение исторической памяти коренных народов Канады // Россия и Америка в XXI веке. 2025. № 10. URL: https://rusus.jes.su/s207054760036903-0-1/ (дата обращения: 25.02.2026).
Максимова Д.Д., Соколов В.И. Коренные народы Канады: эволюция отношений с государством // США и Канада: экономика, политика, культура. 2010. № 12(492). С. 55–71.
Юдин В.И. Государственная политика стран Северной Европы, Соединенных Штатов Америки и Канады в отношении коренных малочисленных народов. М., 2012. 223 с.
Ваневская П.Н. Культурные аспекты глобализации: детерриторизация и символическая мобильность // Солидарность и конфликты в современном обществе: материалы науч. конф. СПб., 2018. С. 526–528.
Волченко В.В. Риски деятельности социальных субъектов в условиях детерриторизации глобального социального пространства // Контекст и рефлексия: философия о мире и человеке. 2017. Т. 6, № 6A. С. 76–81.
Куропятник М.С. Идентичность в контексте мобильности // Вестн. С.-Петерб. ун-та. Сер. 12. Психология. Социология. Педагогика. 2014. № 1. С. 143–148.
Соловьева А.Н. Детерриторизация социальных практик в контексте этнокультурных ландшафтов // Вестн. Помор. ун-та. Сер.: Гуманит. и соц. науки. 2009. № 5. С. 126–130.
Беркович Н.А. Этнотерриториальность и детерриторизация // Природное и культурное наследие: междисциплинарные исследования, сохранение и развитие: коллектив. моногр. по материалам IX Всерос. науч.-практ. конфер. с междунар. участием. СПб., 2020. С. 295–297.
Делез Ж., Гваттари Ф. Тысяча плато. Капитализм и шизофрения. Екатеринбург, 2010. 895 с.
Sibley D. Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Difference in the West. London, N. Y., 1995. 224 p.
Niemi E. National Minorities and Minority Policy in Norway: International Obligations and National Debates: Minorities around the Baltic Sea. Åland, 2006. P. 397–451.
Nietschmann B. The Fourth World: Nations Versus States // Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century / ed. by G.J. Demco, W.B. Wood. Boulder, 1994. P. 225–242.
Blomley N. The Boundaries of Property: Lessons from Beatrix Potter // Canad. Geographer. 2004. № 48(2). P. 91–100.
de Leeuw S. Intimate Colonialisms: the Material and Experienced Places of British Columbia’s Residential Schools // Canad. Geographer. 2007. № 51(3). P. 339–359.
Harris C. How Did Colonialism Dispossess? Comments from an Edge of Empire // Ann. Assoc. Am. Geographers. 2004. Vol. 94, № 1. P. 165–182.
Brown D. Carrier Sekani Self-Government in Context: Land and Resources // Western Geography. 2002. № 12. P. 21–67.
Андерсон Б. Воображаемые сообщества. Размышления об истоках и распространении национализма. М., 2016. 416 с.
Тишков В.А. О примирении конструктивизма и примордиализма (оммаж народоведу Андрею Владимировичу Головневу) // Этнография. 2023. № 1(19). С. 6–25.
Gaski L. Sami Identity as a Discursive Formation: Essentialism and Ambivalence // Indigenous Peoples. Self-determination, Knowledge, Identity. Delft, 2008. P. 219–236.
Теребихин Н.М. Этноэкологическая парадигма и традиционная аксиология геокультурного пространства российского Севера // Вестн. Помор. ун-та. Сер.: Гуманит. и соц. науки. 2011. № 9. С. 122–127.
Forbes B.C., Stammler F. Arctic Climate Change Discourse: the Contrasting Politics of Research Agendas in the West and Russia // Polar. Res. 2009. № 28. P. 28–42.
Delaney D., Ford R., Blomley N. The Legal Geographies Reader. Law, Power and Space. Oxford, 2001. 328 p.
Swentzell R. Conflicting Landscape Values: The Santa Clara Pueblo and Day School (Vision, Culture and Landscape) // Places J. 1990. Vol. 7, № 1. P. 19–27.
Eades G. Maps and Memes. Redrawing Culture, Place, and Identity in Indigenous Communities. Montreal, 2015. 264 p.
Windsor J.E., Mcvey J.A. Annihilation of Both Place and Sense of Place: The Experience of the Cheslatta T’En Canadian First Nation within the Context of Large-Scale Environmental Projects // Geograph. J. 2005. Vol. 171, № 2. P. 146–165.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Kaznina I.A.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.