Feeding Indigenous people in Canada

Abstract

Historically, hunger was used as a tool of coercion and manipulation, and as a weapon to eradicate Indigenous populations. Through policy decisions, the support for and removal of Indigenous children, and other assimilative practices, social work has contributed to the perpetuation of ‘helping practices’ which damaged Indigenous cultures and well-being. Today, experiences of hunger are still tied to colonialism. There is a need to examine the complex history of feeding Indigenous peoples in Canada and to work to reclaim and heal Indigenous food systems. For social work, this requires an emphasis on Indigenous ways of helping led by Indigenous peoples.

Keywords

Canada colonialism indigenous food sovereignty indigenous peoples social work

Introduction

Despite being a survival necessity, the role of food for Indigenous individuals, families and communities has yet to be adequately addressed within social work practice and scholarship. Prior to colonization, Indigenous peoples’ relationships to food were strong, a necessary function of self-determining nations dependent on the land for survival. Since contact with Europeans, the history of food for Indigenous peoples in Canada has been deeply layered and traumatic. Without diminishing the impact of the destruction of Indigenous food and land systems, we focus on conditions of hunger experienced by Indigenous peoples in the prairie provinces from the 1780s to the present (Daschuk, 2013). First, we provide a brief history on the role of social work in the realm of Indigenous peoples’ lives through assimilative policies that have deeply impacted their food systems. Then, we focus on hunger and food security interventions that have arisen through three major time periods: the loss of the bison in the late 1700s and early 1800s; the malnutrition crisis and starvation experiments in the 1940s and 1950s; and finally, the contemporary food security crisis in Indigenous communities. Today, a resurgence of healing practices around food are occurring on the land through a process known as Indigenous food sovereignty (IFS). IFS is presented here as a call to action for social work.

Positioning ourselves

Positioning is critical in Indigenous scholarship. All the present authors are Indigenous: Cree, Athabaskan and Cree, respectively, and are deeply engaged in anti-colonial social work practices and policies. Hart (2009) defines anti-colonialism as including ‘resistance to the operations of colonialism in political, economic and cultural institutions as well in social systems’ (p. 30). In order to resist, there is a need to reveal a process of uncovering truths of the past that have often been hidden from societal views. Indeed, the history of feeding Indigenous peoples in Canada, and throughout the world, offers insight into mechanisms of colonial power and dominance. Indigenous theory has been referred to as felt or affective theory (Million, 2013). An emphasis on the way Indigenous peoples have been affected by hunger and social work provides the platform for this article.

Colonization and social work

Social work and indigenous peoples

As a profession, social work in Canada developed in urban settings due to the rapid population growth through immigration in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Further growth is attributed to industrialization, capitalism, urbanization and an economic downturn post-World War I (WWI) (Hart and Bracken, 2016; Jennissen and Lundy, 2014). With the waged labour system, people sought work in the city but conditions were dangerous for low pay (Jennissen and Lundy, 2014). Facing unemployment, poor housing conditions, poverty and the associated poor health experiences, early attempts to help those in need were based on ‘the goodwill of the community or local church’ (Jennissen and Lundy, 2014: 1). Charity-based models of the Charity Organization Society and the Settlement House Movement implemented to help the ‘needy’ were common practice, with social work being thrust into the spotlight in the Depression era (Jennissen and Lundy, 2014). The Depression and the expansion of the welfare state prior to World War II (WWII) caused the rapid expansion of the social work profession, which grew continuously through to the 1990s (Hart and Bracken, 2016; Jennissen and Lundy, 2014).

Indigenous peoples did not receive the attention of social work, which focused on the urban poor and immigrant populations, until the development of the post-WWII welfare state and an increase in urban Indigenous populations (Hart and Bracken, 2016). Through the Indian Act, the reserve system served to keep First Nations people in rural locations and out of general society; those First Nations peoples that chose to move off-reserve lost their legal status, thereby becoming non-status, removing eligibility to a range of benefits, rights and services provided by the government. Métis and non-status Indigenous groups were invisible and not seen as a separate cultural or linguistic group (Hart and Bracken, 2016). First Nations were recognized as citizens in 1956 and gained the right to vote in 1960, thereby entitled to the same social welfare programmes as all other Canadian citizens. There was and continues to be some confusion around the jurisdiction of social welfare services for Indigenous peoples, resulting in yet another series of obstacles. Within the push–pull dichotomy between federal, provincial and municipal governments, access to services is challenging for Indigenous peoples.

Social work and assimilation of indigenous people

The motivations and undercurrents of goodwill, however, have been a significant challenge for the experiences of Indigenous peoples with the profession of social work. This is perhaps best exemplified through the forced removal of Indigenous children from their families, communities and cultures into residential schools, foster care and the 1960s scoop, which was the large-scale apprehension of Indigenous children between 1960 and the mid-1980s, often without the knowledge of their families or communities (Blackstock, 2009; Hart and Bracken, 2016; Sinclair, 2004). The social work profession was complicit with government colonial actions towards Indigenous people (Sinclair, 2004). Social workers accompanied police onto the reserves to remove children and place them in residential schools (Sinclair, 2004). Despite knowledge of the abuse occurring in residential schools and the development of children’s aid societies, there was little evidence that anyone, including social workers and human rights groups, ‘did anything significant to disrupt residential schools or the colonial policies of government overall’ (Blackstock, 2009: 29).

In 1947, the Canadian Association of Social Workers (CASW) and the Canadian Welfare Council (CWC) submitted a joint brief to the Special Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons revealing social workers’ awareness of residential school abuses and outlining their end goal of full assimilation of Indigenous people (Blackstock, 2009; Hart and Bracken, 2016; Jennissen and Lundy, 2014). While the CASW later recommended and advocated for the extension of social and education services to Indigenous peoples on reserves to further promote assimilation into Canadian life, it was viewed by Indigenous people as an attack on their culture and ways of life (Hart and Bracken, 2016). These activities coincided with the development of the welfare state programme and social workers charged with notions of wrongdoings and helpfulness (Sinclair, 2004).

Although changes have been made in the arena of social work practice through the recognition of cultural competency in working with Indigenous people, the legacy of social work’s involvement in a process referred to as ‘cultural genocide as languages were lost, cultural practices were denigrated, and traditional socialization practices were replaced by institutionalization’ is deeply traumatic (Sinclair, 2004: 51).

Food and colonization

Shewell (2004) has argued that social welfare services such as social assistance are a continuation of oppression through the levels of structure that Indigenous peoples work through to access social services. The jurisdiction of Indigenous peoples’ lands and bodies varies greatly from nation to nation (tribal) and province to province. The differences in the interruptions Indigenous peoples have faced in their access to health, food and land are a significant part of an oppressive Indigenous history. Responsibilities and responses to food, health and Indigenous affairs are split between federal, provincial, municipal and First Nations governance authorities, resulting in a complex system often made of informal relationships.

Prior to European contact, Indigenous relationships with food were land-based, wholistic and self-determined (Morrison, 2011). While fluctuations in food availability occurred with changes in weather, climate, and animal and plant populations, for most Indigenous communities hunger was not a persistent challenge (Council of Canadian Academies, 2014). Today, Indigenous peoples face higher than average rates of food insecurity ranging from one in three households off-reserve (Health Canada, 2007) to reported levels at 100 percent for South Indian Lake, a community in northern Manitoba (Thompson et al., 2011). The journey to contemporary food insecurity began hundreds of years ago when Europeans came to Canada for trade purposes. This later intensified as land, food sources and cultural wellbeing were systematically eradicated, leaving Indigenous peoples in states of starvation and death. Ample examples of the use of food as a weapon to assimilate and eliminate Indigenous peoples in Canada exist in the literature (see Burnett, 2010; Daschuk, 2013; Kelm, 1999; Lux, 2001; McCallum, 2017; Morrison, 2011; Mosby, 2013, 2014; Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada [TRC], 2015).

Starvation on the plains

The story of the development of the Canadian Plains through the 1700s and 1800s is deeply complex, and yet quite simple. In preparing the lands of the Prairie provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta) for settlement and the construction of railways, Indigenous peoples were forced away from their traditional hunting, trapping, fishing, growing and harvesting grounds (Daschuk, 2013). Importantly, they were separated from the lands that birthed them, their nations, stories and languages and songs. The significance of this loss cannot be understated: Indigenous relationships to food are spiritual, ceremonial and medicinal (LaDuke, 2005; Lux, 2001; Morrison, 2011). Herd animals such as the bison, a sacred and plentiful food source, were overhunted in a deliberate attempt to clear the lands; the bison hides were also profitable for European hunters (Grey and Patel, 2015). The beaver, a key fur trade species, was also nearly eradicated, resulting in rapid changes to fresh water systems, a strategic move to prepare the land for agriculture (Daschuk, 2013). The combination of overhunting and bovine tuberculosis resulted in rampant conditions of hunger and disease (Daschuk, 2013).

Food rations, largely in the form of flour and pork, were part of the treaty promises made to Indigenous communities during the late 1800s. Indigenous leaders fought for these provisions to deal with the malnutrition and starvation occurring in communities. The cruelty of these rations came in a number of forms. Governments knowingly held back on these rations until the transition onto reserves, small parcels of marginal land where Indigenous nations were placed, was complete. Not only did starvation lead to death, but it also ‘contributed to high mortality rates from diseases like tuberculosis’ (McCallum, 2017: 101). Rations were also provided in much smaller quantities than was understood through the agreements, and was often rancid (Daschuk, 2013).

Malnutrition and experimentation

Conditions of malnourishment and starvation for Indigenous peoples extended into the 1900s. Especially disheartening is the knowledge the government had of these issues. Upon learning of the conditions in Northern Manitoba, Dr. Moore, Indian Affairs Branch Superintendent, stated,

While most of the people were going about trying to make a living, they were really sick enough to be in bed under treatment and that if they were white people, they would be in bed demanding care and medical attention. (Cited in Mosby, 2014: 199)

However, rather than provide food, researchers saw this as an opportunity to study nutrition and hunger through observation and medical records, and conduct further research during World War II. In northern Canada, a research hub during the war, Indigenous subjects were experimented on with a series of vitamin tests (Mosby, 2014). The word ‘subjects’ is used here to indicate the frame of thinking of this time period. Mosby (2014) shares that Indigenous communities were used as ‘laboratories’ and Indigenous peoples as ‘experimental materials’ (p. 201).

Starvation and experiments were also experienced by Indigenous children attending residential schools. Conditions of hunger were widespread and severe (Kelm, 1996; Milloy, 1999; TRC, 2015). The constant state of hunger emerged along with children’s strategies to alleviate their hunger. These ranged from killing small rodents to cook and eat, running away to family members’ homes for food (often to be caught and punished upon return), foraging at the dump, and even eating the food found in the slop pail for the pigs (TRC, 2015). Much of the food provided was of poor quality; again, rancid rations were knowingly provided to Indigenous children. The state of hunger in residential schools was so well documented that the TRC (2015) has concluded,

The federal government knowingly chose not to provide schools with enough money to ensure that kitchens and dining rooms were properly equipped, that cooks were properly trained, and, most significantly, that food was purchased in sufficient quantity and quality for growing children. It was a decision that left thousands of Aboriginal children vulnerable to disease. (p. 92)

Lesser known, however, are the occurrences and details of the experimental phase of residential schools. Conducted without informed consent, experiments were undertaken in six residential schools in Canada. As Mosby (2013) argues, ‘the systematic neglect and mistreatment of students in these schools also made them into ideal scientific laboratories’ (p. 162). Once again, these experiments did little to address hunger and instead introduced vitamins to examine their impacts on nutrition. Strict efforts controlled other influencing factors, thus dental care was not provided for the experimental periods (Mosby, 2013). Experiments were also conducted as a further attempt to assimilate the Indigenous peoples through education about their poor, land-based diets. At the time, many scientists and government officials felt that the malnutrition and starvation problems were the result of the wrong diets (traditional foods) that Indigenous peoples were consuming. For some, malnutrition was seen as a problem that Indigenous peoples brought on themselves. In response to the conditions of hunger, the Canada Food Guide was presented as a gift to Indigenous people for them to learn how to eat (Mosby, 2014). Welfare provisions precluded any land-based food and instead introduced the kinds of foods that are now linked to the high prevalence of diabetes (Kuhnlein and Receveur, 1996). Family allowances for Indigenous peoples were not given in cash as they had been for the rest of society, but instead as in-kind food purchases dictated by the government (Mosby, 2013). Yet despite these concerns, social work was in support of The Family Allowance Act (Jennissen and Lundy, 2014).

Contemporary food insecurity

Today, Indigenous peoples across Canada face higher than average levels of food insecurity with over 33 percent of Indigenous households reporting food insecurity (Health Canada, 2007), a condition that intensifies as poverty levels grow (Power, 2008). Indeed, it has been noted that Indigenous heritage is a ‘household characteristic associated with a higher likelihood of food insecurity’ (Tarasuk et al., 2013: 3). Foods presented in the Canada Food Guide as being indicators of good health (fruits, vegetables) are often unavailable on-reserve, and when they are, poor quality and high prices are the norm (Thompson et al., 2011).

Reserves were placed on economically marginalized, isolated areas, often with poor growing conditions (Grey and Patel, 2015) and the startup and maintenance of greenhouses are often neither feasible nor appropriate. Similar and growing costs exist for harvesting food from the land; fishing, trapping and hunting, for example, require machinery, gas, tools and other resources. Without access to these tools, the ability to provide food is lost. In the face of climate change, these resources are critical for communities to adapt (Furgal and Seguin, 2006). Of particular concern for Indigenous communities today are issues around the safety of food from the land. Contamination, the destruction of lands, the introduction of non-native species, and rapid changes to the landscape due to large-scale industries such as hydro (Thompson et al., 2011) and the tar sands (McLachlan, 2014) are major contributing factors to food insecurity for Indigenous peoples. With the intensification of weather patterns, climatic conditions and resource development, the future of Indigenous lands and the food provided from the land is still unknown.

Indigenous food sovereignty: A call to action

Food insecurity and social work

Food has been a tool used to control Indigenous peoples ‘through which the Canadian state secures and reproduces settler colonial relationships with Indigenous peoples’ (Burnett et al., 2016: n.p.). It is one of many tools that have been used over time, but the impacts of the politics of starvation have been enormous (Daschuk, 2013). The question remains, ‘Why are Indigenous peoples in Canada still going hungry?’.

Historically, there have been few interventions by social work into food security. And yet social workers are confronted by food insecurity daily, in working with food-insecure populations (Himmelheber, 2014). Early attempts to address hunger and malnutrition included the work of private charitable organizations, in which food was gifted in-kind, and through the provision of garden plots and food banks (Jennissen and Lundy, 2014). These are also the predominant interventions available today. Food banks and other in-kind food programmes provide food directly to clients; they have also been criticized as being dumping grounds for often less healthy, leftover food (Saul, 2013). These avenues work only to alleviate hunger and are a one-dimensional approach to feeding people. Particularly problematic is their failure to teach people to feed themselves. It is important to note, however, that food assistance organizations, health organizations, breakfast programmes and other programmes are working to expand their services to include cooking and gardening classes as a result of the discourse around food and empowerment (Himmelheber, 2014). These new innovations are still problematic in that they fail to acknowledge services for culturally-diverse groups because they offer limited attention to the social dimensions of food. They are, however, attempts at creating more opportunities for people to feed themselves (Rideout et al., 2007). For the most part, charitable food programmes are seen as problematic ‘because the proliferation of charitable “solutions” has shifted the policy debate from one of rights to one of benevolence’ (p. 570).

Despite charity, Indigenous peoples in Canada still experience high levels of food insecurity, poverty, health problems and housing issues, among others; these are not mutually exclusive. In examining these challenges, remnants of settler colonial ideologies are still present, and in some cases newly active today. Indeed, the history of feeding Indigenous peoples in Canada has included inappropriate, inadequate and entirely harmful interventions. The history of benevolence and of helping Indigenous peoples is wrought with tensions around if, when and how Indigenous peoples need to and should be helped. Assimilation has been a tool of manipulation for much too long to ignore. That said, on a pragmatic level, food security interventions are undeniably important. Malnutrition resulting from food insecurity has been connected to decreased academic performance and increased troubles in learning environments, from comprehension to increased behavioural problems (Cook et al., 2004). These are issues that have been found to affect the future of children: ‘risky behaviour, school dropout, and delinquency among youths have been linked to poor academic performance and food insecurity and are thought to be cumulative, persisting into adolescence and adulthood’ (Martinez and Kawam, 2014: 371).

In an analysis of anti-hunger programmes and their connection to social work practice, Himmelheber (2014) articulated the need to adopt empowerment theory. In a social work context, empowerment theory is a tool that focuses on ‘a change in the actual power of the client or community so that action can be taken to change or prevent the problems clients are facing’ rather than on management or adaptation to a social problem (Gutierrez et al., 1995: 250). Food security interventions can have the potential to empower; however, in the realm of social work there is a need to unpack the colonial underpinnings behind food insecurity with Indigenous peoples. Food security, as a study and a discourse, has been criticized for its lack of cultural consideration for Indigenous peoples by non-Indigenous and Indigenous food scholars (Martens, 2018; Power, 2008). These criticisms range from the lack of traditional or original foods in surveys to the role of outside researchers conducting food security surveys in Indigenous communities in English (Power, 2008). Perhaps the most important criticism of the food security movement is its failure to adequately address the power inherent in food systems. This power has neglected the social and political dimensions of food for Indigenous peoples. Given the troubled and constrictive history of feeding Indigenous peoples in this country, the need to support self-determination of Indigenous peoples and their communities is great. There has been a failure to give Indigenous peoples a voice, and agency in determining their own diets based on their own cultural needs.

Indigenous social work

Social work scholarship now includes Indigenous voices and needs to incorporate more fully the use of an anti-colonial framework, ‘a social, cultural, and political stance’ that ‘sees colonialism as a persistent process’ in the areas of anti-oppressive and critical race theory and practice (Hart, 2009: 29). The development of Indigenous social work practices takes a further step in the anti-colonial direction, one that aligns with and supports Indigenous food- and land-based knowledges. Indigenous social work is based upon Indigenous knowledges and epistemologies that encompass the land as a place of wellbeing and connection, and the notion that Indigenous peoples can care for our own people in our own ways (Hart, 2009). Examples of Indigenous ways of caring for social work practitioners include emphasizing body, mind and spirit through use of ceremony, incorporating traditional healing practices such as talking circles and the use of Elders as teachers and healers (Morrisette et al., 1993).

Morrisette et al. (1993) explain four characteristics of an Indigenous model of social work practice: recognition of an Indigenous worldview, advancement of Indigenous consciousness of colonial impacts, maintenance of Indigenous identity through cultural knowledges, and the practice of empowerment in order to move beyond the dominant, non-Indigenous paradigm. The presence of cycles and circles (Absolon, 2010) has also been described as central to Indigenous social work knowledges, along with notions of community over individualism (Weaver, 1999) to achieve balance or harmony as is presented through models such as the medicine wheel. Importantly, Indigenous social work works to ‘address oppression, inequities, the influence of social structures and policies on individuals, and social justice’ (Hart, 2015: 807). While the breadth of scholarship around Indigenous social work is much greater than what is presented here, these elements have been chosen for their call to action for social work: Indigenous food sovereignty.

Indigenous food sovereignty

Although often considered a response to food insecurity, Indigenous food sovereignty (IFS) is grounded in principles that go beyond access to and availability of food. In fact, IFS is less about the mechanics of a food system and more about the power and forces surrounding Indigenous people’s food systems. It is a pathway towards self-determination. Indigenous food sovereignty represents a movement, a convergence of activism that takes place on the land and waters, in the fields, at the table, in the classroom and the political arena across the world (Morrison, 2011). It is spiritual, ceremonial, and grounded in a way of life that Indigenous peoples have been living since time immemorial (Martens, 2018). In practice, IFS takes different roles across the globe (see Desmarais, 2007; Desmarais et al., 2017). For some areas in Canada, this includes fishing, hunting, trapping, gathering and growing (Grey and Patel, 2015). In other areas, IFS looks like activism: a bio-monitoring programme developed by the First Nations surrounding the tar sands in Alberta has been documented as a political act towards protecting the land and land-based food systems (McLachlan, 2014). Most importantly, Indigenous food sovereignty advocates for the self-determination of food systems through strengthening cultural ties and connections to land and spirituality. The importance of self-determination as part of Indigenous ways of life, including Indigenous food systems, has been stated by a number of authors (Bell-Sheeter, 2004; First Nations Health Council, 2009; Morrison, 2011). The healing potential for these activities is enormous. For example, traditional food activities, which help provide a diet rich in cultural food, also work as social networks bringing people and place together, creating contacts within communities and between people and the land (Lambert, 2014). Although newly emerged in the literature, the potential of Indigenous food sovereignty to re-build connections to land, culture and community is growing every day. However, it needs to break free from being seen as separate from social development. Food is land; it is life and it is love. Social workers can support this by incorporating land- and food-based knowledge into programmes, supporting community-led initiatives and making connections to food sovereignty such as housing, environmental justice, water rights, hunting and fishing rights, family preservation and even clinical healing programmes.

Conclusion

Today, a deep land-based trauma has settled into many Indigenous communities. This trauma presents itself as dis-ease, marginalization, and hunger (LaDuke, 2005; McCallum, 2017). Food security interventions are short term and do not work to address the systemic issues of racism and colonization that Indigenous peoples face. The contributing factors to food security are social work issues. There is a need for social work to examine the intricate history behind the hunger faced by Indigenous peoples. While we have focused on the experiences in Canada, similar experiences have occurred in Indigenous populations throughout the world. Stories of colonialism often overlook Indigenous peoples in countries and continents outside of North America, Africa, New Zealand and Australia. Their experiences should be brought to light. Future research must work to raise up Indigenous peoples globally to better understand their experiences, as lived and felt (Million, 2013). Today, Indigenous peoples throughout the world are responding to issues of food insecurity and lack of control over food through novel and innovative approaches, ranging from urban initiatives in Australia (Davila and Dyball, 2015) to those embedded in regional populations such as Task Force Food Sovereignty in the Philippines (Wittman et al., 2010). Indeed, the origins of food sovereignty are traced to the Global South; and including a diversity of Indigenous experiences is key to expanding IFS (Desmarais, 2007).

According to the CASW Code of Ethics, there is space for Indigenous issues:

The social work profession is dedicated to the welfare and self-realization of all people; the development and disciplined use of scientific and professional knowledge; the development of resources and skills to meet individual, group, national and international changing needs and aspirations; and the achievement of social justice for all. The profession has a particular interest in the needs and empowerment of people who are vulnerable, oppressed, and/or living in poverty. (CASW, 2005: 3, emphasis added)

Social work would benefit from understanding the connections between the history of food for Indigenous peoples and the policy and practice interventions that face Indigenous peoples today. Our call to action includes social workers practising in all countries around the globe, to self-examine and address how food affects Indigenous peoples and social work. Standing behind and working alongside the Indigenous food sovereignty movement is a good place to start.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Tabitha Robin (Martens)

Author biographies

Tabitha Robin (Martens) is a PhD Candidate in the Faculty of Social Work at the University of Manitoba studying Indigenous food sovereignty.

Mary Kate Dennis, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Master of Social Work based in Indigenous Knowledges (MSW-IK) programme at the University of Manitoba.

Michael Anthony Hart, PhD, is a citizen of Fisher River Cree Nation and the inaugural Vice Provost of Indigenous Engagement at the University of Calgary.

References

Absolon

K.E.

(2010) ‘Indigenous Wholistic Theory: A Knowledge Set for Practice’, First Peoples Child & Family Review 5(2): 74–87.

Bell-Sheeter

(2004) Food Sovereignty Assessment Tool. Fredricksburg, VA: First Nations Development Institute.

Blackstock

(2009) ‘The Occasional Evil of Angels: Learning from the Experiences of Aboriginal Peoples and Social Work’, First Peoples Child & Family Review 4(1): 28–37.

Burnett

(2010) Taking Medicine: Women’s Healing and Colonial Contact in Southern Alberta. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Burnett

Hay

Chambers

(2016) ‘Settler Colonialism, Indigenous Peoples and Food: Federal Indian Policies and Nutrition Programs in the Canadian North since 1945’, Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History 17(2). DOI: 10.1353/cch.2016.0030.

Canadian Association of Social Workers (CASW) (2005) ‘Code of Ethics’. Available online at: https://www.casw-acts.ca/sites/default/files/attachements/casw_code_of_ethics.pdf (accessed 4 November 2019).

Cook

J.T.

Frank

D.A.

Berkowitz

Black

M.M.

Casey

P.H.

Cutts

D.B.

Meyers

A.F.

Zaldivar

Skalicky

Levenson

Heeren

Nord

(2004) ‘Food Insecurity Is Associated with Adverse Health Outcomes among Human Infants and Toddlers’, The Journal of Nutrition 134(6): 1432–8.

Council of Canadian Academies (2014) Aboriginal Food Security in Northern Canada: An Assessment of the State of Knowledge. Ottawa: The Expert Panel on the State of Knowledge of Food Security in Northern Canada, Council of Canadian Academies.

Daschuk

(2013) Clearing the Plains. Regina: University of Regina Press.

10.

Davila

Dyball

(2015) ‘Transforming Food Systems through Food Sovereignty: An Australian Urban Context’, Australian Journal of Environmental Education 31(1): 34–45.

11.

Desmarais

A.A.

(2007) La Vía Campesina: Globalization and the Power of Peasants. Black Point: Fernwood Publishing.

12.

Desmarais

A.A.

Claeys

Trauger

(2017) Public Policies for Food Sovereignty: Social Movements and the State. Abingdon: Routledge.

13.

First Nations Health Council (2009) ‘Healthy Food Guidelines for First Nations Communities’. Available online at: https://www.fnha.ca/Documents/Healthy_Food_Guidelines_for_First_Nations_Communities.pdf (accessed 4 November 2019).

14.

Furgal

Seguin

(2006) ‘Climate Change, Health, and Vulnerability in Canadian Northern Aboriginal Communities’, Environmental Health Perspectives 114(12): 1964–70

15.

Grey

Patel

(2015) ‘Food Sovereignty as Decolonization: Some Contributions from Indigenous Movements to Food System and Development Politics’, Agriculture Human Values 32(3): 431–44.

16.

Gutierrez

GlenMaye

DeLois

(1995) ‘The Organizational Context of Empowerment Practice: Implications for Social Work Administration’, Social Work 40(2): 249–58.

17.

Hart

M.A.

(2015) ‘Indigenous Social Work’, in Wright

J.D.

(ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

18.

Hart

M.A.

(2009) ‘Anti-Colonial Social Work: Reflections on an Aboriginal Approach’, in Sinclair

Hart

M.A.

Bruyere

(eds) Wicihitowin: Aboriginal Social Work in Canada, pp. 25–41. Winnipeg: Fernwood Press.

19.

Hart

M.A.

Bracken

(2016) ‘Canadian Social Work and First Nations Peoples’, in Palattiyil

Sidhva

Chakrabarti

(eds) Social Work in a Global Context: Issues and Challenges, pp. 59–73. Abingdon: Routledge.

20.

Health Canada (2007) Income-Related Household Food Security in Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2.2, Nutrition 2004. Ottawa: Health Canada.

21.

Himmelheber

(2014) ‘Examining the Underlying Values of Food Security Programming: Implications for the Social Work Profession’, Journal of Progressive Human Services 25(2): 116–32.

22.

Jennissen

Lundy

(2014) One Hundred Years of Social Work: A History of the Profession in English Canada, 1900–2000. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

23.

Kelm

M.E.

(1996) ‘A Scandalous Procession: Residential Schooling and the Shaping of Aboriginal Bodies’, Native Studies Review 11: 51–81.

24.

Kelm

M.E.

(1999) Colonizing Bodies: Aboriginal Health and Healing in British Columbia, 1900–50. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

25.

Kuhnlein

H.V.

Receveur

(1996) ‘Dietary Change and Traditional Food Systems of Indigenous Peoples’, Annual Review of Nutrition 16: 417–42.

26.

LaDuke

(2005) Recovering the Sacred. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

27.

Lambert

(2014) Research for Indigenous Survival: Indigenous Research Methodologies in the Behavioral Sciences. Pablo, MT: Salish Kootenai Press.

28.

Lux

M.K.

(2001) Medicine That Walks: Disease, Medicine, and Canadian Plains Native People, 1880–1940. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

29.

McCallum

M.J.L.

(2017) ‘Starvation, Experimentation, Segregation, and Trauma: Words for Reading Indigenous Health History’, The Canadian Historical Review 98(1): 96–113.

30.

McLachlan

S.M.

(2014) ‘“Water Is a Living Thing”: Environmental and Human Health Implications of the Athabasca Oil Sands for the Mikisew Cree First Nation and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation in Northern Alberta’. Report, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

31.

Martens

T.R.

(2018) ‘Responsibilities and Reflections: Indigenous Food, Culture, and Relationships’, Canadian Food Studies 5(2): 9–12.

32.

Martinez

M.J.

Kawam

(2014) ‘A Call to Action for Social Workers: Food Insecurity and Child Health’, Social Work 59(4): 370–2.

33.

Million

(2013) Therapeutic Nations: Healing in an Age of Indigenous Human Rights. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.

34.

Milloy

(1999) A National Crime: The Canadian Government and the Residential School System, 1879–1986. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

35.

Morrisette

McKenzie

Morrisette

(1993) ‘Towards an Aboriginal Model of Social Work Practice: Cultural Knowledge and Traditional Practices’, Canadian Social Work Review 10(1): 91–108.

36.

Morrison

(2011) ‘Indigenous Food Sovereignty: A Model for Social Learning’, in Wittman

Desmarais

Wiebe

(eds) Food Sovereignty in Canada: Creating Just and Sustainable Food Systems, pp. 97–113. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.

37.

Mosby

(2013) ‘Administering Colonial Science: Nutrition Research and Biomedical Experimentation in Aboriginal Communities and Residential Schools, 1942–1952’, Social History 46(91): 145–72.

38.

Mosby

(2014) Food Will Win the War: The Politics, Culture, and Science of Food on Canada’s Home Front. Vancouver: UBC Press.

39.

Power

E.M.

(2008) ‘Conceptualizing Food Security for Aboriginal People in Canada’, Canadian Journal of Public Health 99(2): 95–97.

40.

Rideout

Riches

Ostry

Buckingham

MacRae

(2007) ‘Bringing Home the Right to Food in Canada: Challenges and Possibilities for Achieving Food Security’, Public Health Nutrition 10(6): 566–73.

41.

Saul

(2013) ‘Food Banks Need to Fuel People’s Hope and Purpose, Not Just Hunger’. Available online at: https://cfccanada.ca/en/News-Events/Latest-News/In-the-media-1/News-18-06-19-2013 (accessed 4 November 2019).

42.

Shewell

H.E.Q.

(2004) ‘Enough to Keep Them Alive’: Indian Social Welfare in Canada, 1873–1965. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

43.

Sinclair

(2004) ‘Aboriginal Social Work Education in Canada: Decolonizing Pedagogy for the Seventh Generation’, First Peoples Child & Family Review 1(1): 49–61.

44.

Tarasuk

Mitchell

Dachner

(2013) Household Food Insecurity in Canada 2011. Toronto: Research to Identify Policy Options to Reduce Food Insecurity (PROOF). Available online at: https://proof.utoronto.ca/resources/proof-annual-reports/annual-report/ (accessed 4 November 2019).

45.

Thompson

Gulrukh

Ballard

Beardy

Islam

Lozeznik

Wong

(2011) ‘Is Community Economic Development Putting Healthy Food on the Table? Food Sovereignty in Northern Manitoba’s Aboriginal Communities’, Journal of Aboriginal Economic Development 7(2): 33–45.

46.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) (2015) Canada’s Residential Schools: The Legacy. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

47.

Weaver

(1999) ‘Indigenous People and the Social Work Profession: Defining Culturally Competent Services’, Social Work 44(3): 217–25.

48.

Wittman

Desmarais

Wiebe

(2010) ‘The Origins and Potential of Food Sovereignty’, in Wittman

Desmarais

Wiebe

(eds) Food Sovereignty: Reconnecting Food, Nature, and Community, pp. 1–12. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.