UDC

[325.3:911.3:323.2:39](71)(045)

DOI

https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V534

Authors

Irina A. Kaznina – Cand. Sci. (Philos.), Assoc. Prof. at the Department of Philosophy and Sociology
Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Arkhangelsk, Russia,
i.kaznina@narfu.ru, https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8659-9537

Abstract

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

Keywords

indigenous peoples of Canada, deterritorialisation, colonial policy, traditional territories, ethnocultural identity, ethnocultural landscape

References

1. Donetskaya A.S. Legal and Institutional Foundations of Indigenous Peoples’ Self-government. Amerikanistika na Dal’nem Vostoke, 2025, no. 4, pp. 83–90 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.48344/27824152_2025_4_83

2. Pimenova O.I. Natural Resource Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Judicial Practice of Their Enforcement in Canada. Sravnitel’noye constitutsionnoye obozreniye, 2022, no. 4, pp. 89–109 (in Russ.).

3. Barabanskaya L.A., Sleptsov A.N. On the Protection of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights during the Industrial Development of the Arctic Regions of Russia and Canada. Arktika XXI vek. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2021, no. 4, pp. 4–24 (in Russ.).

4. Topunov N.A. Reconciliation Policy and Preservation of Historical Memory of Indigenous Peoples in Canada. Rossiya i Amerika v XXI veke, 2025, no. 10. URL: https://rusus.jes.su/s207054760036903-0-1/ (accessed: 25.02.2026) (in Russ.).

5. Maksimova D.D., Sokolov V.I. Indigenous Peoples of Canada: the Evolution of Relations with the State. SSHA i Kanada: ekonomika, politika, kul’tura, 2010, no. 12, pp. 55–71 (in Russ.).

6. Yudin V.I. State Policies Towards Indigenous Peoples in Nordic countries, the USA, and Canada. Moscow, 2012. 223 p. (in Russ.).

7. Vanevskaya P.N. Cultural Aspects of Globalisation: Deterritorialisation and Symbolic Mobility. Solidarnost’ i konflikty v sovremennom obshchestve, 2018, pp. 526–528 (in Russ.).

8. Volchenko V.V. Social Actors’ Risks in a Deterritorialised Global Social Space. Kontekst i refleksiya: philosophiya o mire i cheloveke, 2017, vol. 6, no. 6A, pp. 76–81 (in Russ.).

9. Kuropyatnik M.S. Identity in the Сontext of Mobility. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 12. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya. Pedagogika, 2014, no. 1, pp. 143–148 (in Russ.).

10. Solov’yova A.N. Deterritorialisation of Social Practices in the Context of Ethnocultural Landscapes. Vestnik Pomorskogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2009, no. 5, pp. 126–130 (in Russ.).

11. Berkovich N.A. Ethnoterritoriality and Deterritorialisation. Natural and Cultural Heritage: Interdisciplinary Research, Conservation, and Development. St. Petersburg, 2020, pp. 295–297 (in Russ.).

12. Deleuze G. Guattari F. A Thousand Plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Ekaterinburg, 2010. 895 p. (in Russ.).

13. Sibley D. Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Difference in the West. London, N. Y., 1995. 224 p.

14. Niemi E. National Minorities and Minority Policy in Norway. International Obligations and National debates: Minorities Around the Baltic Sea. Åland, 2006, pp. 397–451.

15. Nietschmann B. The Fourth World: Nations Versus States. Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century. Boulder, 1994, pp. 225–242.

16. Blomley N. The Boundaries of Property: Lessons from Beatrix Potter. Canad. Geographer, 2004, no. 48, pp. 91–100.

17. De Leeuw S. Intimate Colonialisms: the Material and Experienced Places of British Columbia’s Residential Schools. Canad. Geographer, 2007, no. 51, pp. 339–359.

18. Harris C. How Did Colonialism Dispossess? Comments from an Edge of Empire. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geographers, 2004, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 165–182.

19. Brown D. Carrier Sekani Self-Government in Context: Land and Resources. Western Geography, 2002, no. 12, pp. 21–67.

20. Anderson B. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Moscow, 2016. 416 p. (in Russ.).

21. Tishkov V.A. On the Reconciliation of Constructivism and Primordialism (A Homage to Andrey Vladimirovich Golovnev). Etnografiya, 2023, no. 1, pp. 6–25 (in Russ.).

22. Gaski L. Sami Identity as a Discursive Formation: Essentialism and Ambivalence. Indigenous Peoples. Self-determination, Knowledge, Identity. Delft, 2008, pp. 219–236.

23. Terebikhin N.M. The Ethno-ecological Paradigm and Traditional Axiology of the Geocultural Space of the Russian North. Vestnik Pomorskogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye i sotsialnye nauki, 2011, no. 9, pp. 122–127 (in Russ.).

24. Forbes B.C., Stammler F. Arctic Climate Change Discourse: the Contrasting Politics of Research Agendas in the West and Russia. Polar. Res., 2009, no. 28, pp. 28–42.

25. Delaney D., Ford R., Blomley N. The Legal Geographies Reader. Law, Power and Space. Oxford, 2001. 328 p.

26. Swentzell R. Conflicting Landscape Values: The Santa Clara Pueblo and Day School (Vision, Culture and Landscape). Places J., 1990, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 19–27.

27. Eades G. Maps and Memes. Redrawing Culture, Place, and Identity in Indigenous Communities. Montreal, 2015. 264 p.

28. 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, no. 2, pp. 146–165.