Bridging Knowledge Systems in Regulatory Research – Creating the Conditions for Change

The current state of the conversation within the federal public service tends to ask how to integrate Indigenous knowledge into western science. Within regulatory contexts, this question generally considers how to incorporate Indigenous scientific perspectives into decision-making. While common, this positioning assumes that it would be ethical, possible, and effective to extract bits and pieces, or projections – snapshots in space and time with reduced dimensionality – of living, dynamic, relational Indigenous knowledge systems and incorporate them into a singular “objective” and “true” scientific framework. However, when we more accurately talk about the bridging of knowledge systems – and the subsequent braiding, eventually leading to weaving, over longer periods and across multiple relationships – we are describing parallel knowledge systems (more than just two, at that) that are equitably resourced and engage within an ethical space to exchange knowledge, approaches, and even practitioners to co-create new knowledge that will form the strongest evidence base for decision-making.

Within Canada, regulatory science, discovery science, and innovation play complementary roles in advancing scientific knowledge and enhancing the implementation of science or evidence-based decision-making processes across disciplines and economic sectors. True bridging of knowledge systems calls for parallel representation, leadership, and participation at all stages of the knowledge creation and decision-making process – from research question inception and study design to interpretation and dissemination of findings. Evaluating knowledge mobilization through the lens of regulatory frameworks provides an opportunity to evaluate the current capacity of the Canadian science ecosystem to weave knowledge systems. 

The ultimate goal of regulatory research is to generate the best evidence base for decision-making that protects public health, the environment, and society, while also fostering innovation. It aims to safeguard the well-being of future generations, similar to Indigenous approaches such as the Seven Generations principle: that decisions made today must account for their impact seven generations from now. The scientific community must acknowledge that western regulatory frameworks have failed in certain respects, particularly when it comes to long-term sustainability. A common misconception is that western scientific frameworks are objective and value-neutral, but history shows that this is far from the case. The priorities of regulatory research have often been driven by short-term economic interests and political agendas. By contrast, Indigenous knowledge systems inherently value and seek to understand the intricately interconnected relationships between water, lands, animals, and humans – western science is only catching up to this now with the concept of One Health.    

Indigenous knowledge systems, of which Indigenous sciences are a subset, are not merely a supplement to enhance or enrich our current regulatory practices and outcomes; they offer equally sophisticated and robust approaches to both knowledge creation and decision-making and can offer new perspectives and solutions to some of our most pressing challenges. When regulatory research fails to incorporate these perspectives, it not only perpetuates colonial attitudes but also endangers the very systems, both human and ecological, it seeks to protect. Indigenous sciences provide alternative frameworks  to address systemic-level societal challenges, such as climate adaptation, which require intense collaboration, coordination, and transdisciplinary approaches. By rethinking current science to policy action processes, identifying and overcoming systemic barriers, and co-creating spaces within our regulatory systems to include Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge systems, we can introduce greater flexibility, responsiveness, inclusivity, understanding, and ethical conduct into the regulatory science system. However, this process is not without its challenges. Legal considerations, political influences, and regulatory review cycles characterize the structural barriers in the regulatory science systems and must be navigated carefully to ensure that this inclusion is both meaningful and effective. 

Mobilizing Indigenous science systems into federal regulatory perspectives in Canada will require concerted effort from all partners. To achieve a future where both Indigenous and Western sciences are equitably included in regulatory decision-making processes, we must consider the necessary steps to prepare for such a collaborative environment, as demonstrated in various federal Indigenous-STEM (I-STEM) Cluster-led or coordinated learning sessions, which lead to better decision-making and outcomes for all Canadians. This means developing strategies to address the systemic barriers that may hinder the process, focusing on training public servants and scientists in the competencies needed to build effective relationships with Indigenous Peoples and provide them with the skills and tools needed to recognize, protect and include Indigenous knowledge in regulatory processes and deliverables, as well as creating spaces for open and constructive dialogue. Exemplar case studies involving regulatory processes and community collaboration can serve as a powerful example of what is possible when we embrace and create space for Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge and science systems. 

Policymakers, researchers, and regulatory bodies must work collaboratively with Indigenous Peoples to co-create inclusive and equitable systems and processes. These voices are not just important; they are vital. Ensuring that Indigenous Peoples’ are meaningfully included can lead to more robust, resilient and evidence-based regulatory processes and outcomes. Regulatory processes that reflect a wider range of perspectives and values are more capable of bridging the gaps between different knowledge systems and developing the innovative solutions we need to move forward. By embracing these steps, we can move towards a regulatory environment that not only acknowledges the contributions of Indigenous knowledge but also reshapes processes in a way that uplifts and aligns with Indigenous sovereignty and ways of knowing. This will create an environment where Indigenous Peoples and their science systems are key partners in a strengthened Canadian regulatory science system that enhances the well-being and resilience of all communities and citizens across Canada. 

As we move forward, we must continue to ask the important questions: Are we ready to facilitate this kind of environment? What steps are necessary to prepare us for this step forward? And how can we ensure that the dialogue remains open, constructive, and forward-looking? The answers to these questions will shape the future of regulatory science in Canada, and with it, the potential for a more inclusive and innovative approach to governance.