Heidi Sinevaara-Niskanen – författare

Through analyses of cases in Australia, Finland, Greenland and elsewhere, the book illuminates how states appropriate hope as a means to stall and circumscribe political processes of recognising the rights of indigenous peoples.The book examines hope in indigenous–state relations today. Engaging with hope both empirically and conceptually, the work analyses the dynamic between hope, politics and processes of rights and recognition. In particular, the book introduces the notion of the politics of hope and how it plays out in three salient cases: planned constitutional changes that would finally recognise the indigenous peoples of Australia, the lengthy debate on the ratification of ILO Convention 169 Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries in Finland and the prospect of Greenland’s independence after its gaining self-government in 2009. Juxtaposing these contexts, the book illustrates the ways in which hope has become a useful political tool in enabling states to sidestep the peoples’ claims for justice and redress. The book puts forward insights on the power of hope – by definition future oriented – in diminishing the urgency of present concerns. This is hope’s most potent colonial force. This book brings together studies on indigenous–state relations, social scientific discussions on hope, and critical postcolonial, feminist and governmentality analyses.

Through analyses of cases in Australia, Finland, Greenland and elsewhere, the book illuminates how states appropriate hope as a means to stall and circumscribe political processes of recognising the rights of indigenous peoples.The book examines hope in indigenous–state relations today. Engaging with hope both empirically and conceptually, the work analyses the dynamic between hope, politics and processes of rights and recognition. In particular, the book introduces the notion of the politics of hope and how it plays out in three salient cases: planned constitutional changes that would finally recognise the indigenous peoples of Australia, the lengthy debate on the ratification of ILO Convention 169 Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries in Finland and the prospect of Greenland’s independence after its gaining self-government in 2009. Juxtaposing these contexts, the book illustrates the ways in which hope has become a useful political tool in enabling states to sidestep the peoples’ claims for justice and redress. The book puts forward insights on the power of hope – by definition future oriented – in diminishing the urgency of present concerns. This is hope’s most potent colonial force. This book brings together studies on indigenous–state relations, social scientific discussions on hope, and critical postcolonial, feminist and governmentality analyses.

This book is a pioneering effort in critical Arctic studies. The chapters probe topics such as representations of the Arctic in contemporary art, the role of affects in postcolonial Greenland, Canada’s Arctic policies and China’s engagement with the Arctic.

This book is a pioneering effort in critical Arctic studies. The contributions identify and investigate some of the blind spots in human development in the Arctic that research in the social sciences had yet to broach. To this end, the authors tap a variety of critical approaches in fields spanning aesthetics, affect theory, biopolitics, critical geopolitics, Indigenous archaeology, intersectionality, legal anthropology, moral economy, narrative studies, neoliberal governmentality, queer studies and socio-legal studies. The chapters probe topics such as representations of the Arctic in contemporary art, the role of affects in postcolonial Greenland, Canada’s Arctic policies and China’s engagement with the Arctic. The book provides a rich knowledge base for researchers in Arctic social sciences and offers an absorbing textbook for students interested in Arctic issues.

This book challenges the common perception that global politics is making progress on indigenous issues and argues that the current global care for indigeneity is, in effect, violent in nature.