Social inclusiveness in urban design : enhancing the urban experience through the indigenization of built environment

(1)

Social Inclusiveness in Urban Design:

Enhancing the Urban Experience Through

the Indigenization of Built Environment

Anissia Klimova

(2)

MSc International Development Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences

August 18th, 2019

Social Inclusiveness in Urban Design:

Enhancing the Urban Experience Through the

Indigenization of Built Environment

Anissia Klimova 12207055

Supervisor: Prof. Ioana Vrăbiescu Second reader: Dr. Courtney Vegelin

(3)

anissia.klimova@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Canadian history has been marked by systematic attempts at marginalizing the country’s native inhabitants and their cultures (Neylan, 2018). Only recently has this past started being officially recognized and addressed. Despite the efforts, Indigenous presence in Montreal’s landscape remains virtually null. The overall result of these dynamics is a society divided, disconnected from the history of its land, and ignoring a rich part of its own culture. Existing literature on the indigenization of Montreal is

rare, so is information about the public opinion on this matter. As such, the purpose of this work is to understand the underlying reasons behind the lack of Indigenous

representation in the city’s landscape, and dive into the parameters and impacts of a successful process of indigenization. This study relies primarily on data gathered in the field, through interactions with Indigenous and non - Indigenous Montrealers from native civil society organizations, local government representatives, and experts from the world of architecture and design. They are supplemented by an anonymous

survey, field observations, and content analysis of a variety of secondary sources - including news articles, design manuals, policy documents, and academic literature. The resear ch findings reveal that through commitment to approaches rooted in context - sensitivity, participatory governance, and capacity building, the

indigenization of urban space can play a role in mending the consequences of deep -rooted historical wrongs which co ntinue to loom over the city.

(4)

Key Words: indigenization, urban indigenization, urban planning, urban design, Montreal, indigeneity, social inclusiveness, inclusive development, decolonization.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to begin by acknowledging that much of this research was conducted on unceded traditional land of the Kanien’kehá:ka. Montreal, traditionally known as Tiohtiá:ke, has also been a crossroads for different nations, and is today, home to a divers ity of communities. We extend for the city, the vision of a future reconciled and connected to its past.

(5)

SPECIAL THANKS

I would like to thank Ioana Vrabiesu, under whose direction this study was conducted. Thank you for your guidance and your patience throughout the process.

Thank you to Philippe Meilleur, for graciously opening the doors of Native Montreal to me and prov iding backing - up in the field.

To all the participants for contributing valuable time and knowledge to this project.

(6)

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CDC - Native Montreal Co- design Committee IDC - International Design Charter

IND - Indigenous (in reference to participants who self - identify as Indigenous)

NI - Non- Indigenous (used in reference to participants who self - identify as non - Indigenous) NM - Native Montreal (local Indigenous NGO)

QNW - Quebec Native Women (regional Indigenous organization)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Island of Montreal subdivision map - p.15

Figure 2: Indigenous distribution in the Quebec province - p.17

Figure 3: Ternary relationship: dimensions of successful indigenization - p.22 Figure 4: Visual rendering of the conceptual scheme - p.30

Figure 5: Alfred Pellan, Canada West and Canada East - p.45

Figure 6: Pictou Landing Health Centre, Nova Scotia, Canada - p.62

Figure 7: Example of a pan- Indigenous design feature: View of a white pine tree from the ‘Pine Lobby’ of the NM imagined by TP1 - p.64

Figure 8: La Piaule emergency shelter. Project renovation - p.66

(9)

Figure 9: Canadian High Arctic Research Station (CHARS), Nunavut. LEED gold project by EVOQ Architecture. P.69

Figure 1o: Speech Silencing Arms, Evoq Architecture, 2017 p.72

Figure 11: Project inspired by the qamatik, a traditional Inuit sled. Puvirnituq airport terminal, by Evoq Architecture, Nunavik, Quebec p.73

Figure 12: Project inspired by the qilalugaq (beluga whale in Inuktitut). Quaqtaq airport terminal, by Evoq Architecture, Nunavik, Quebec. P.73

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

The colonial geopolitical order implied the establishment of a European dominion over all other competing interests. Colonial legacies, reproduced over - time, are considered to be the main matrix of Indigenous social exclusion in modern Canadian society. The first French and British expe ditions arrived in North - Eastern America in the late 15th century (Bigon and Njoh, 2018). In 1534 Jacques Cartier claimed the first province on New France under King Francis I, and as a result of the French expansion and settlements, Montreal was officiall y founded in 1642. By then, these territories had been occupied for millennia by aboriginal peoples with pre - established trade networks, distinct systems of social organization, a diversity of languages and spiritual beliefs.

Indigenous settlements did no t leave behind many sizable and lasting traces of their cultural presence on what would become the modern urban landscape of

Montreal, and the growth of Montreal excluded Indigenous people from its early days as a small French settlement - on. Tensions between the French and the British, which came to a head during the seven years war (1756 - 1763), persisted in post confederation days (1867 - 1914), framing the stakes against aboriginal interests. Dynamics of

(10)

exclusion soon took on a federal character, institutionalized under the British North America Acts (1867- 1975) and the Indian Act (1876 - present), the main instruments of Indigenous subjugation. The Act progressively introduced mea sures such as the Indian reserves and the ‘Indian status’ - requiring First Nations individuals to register with the federal government or a band recognized by the crown through treaty ratification. The status could be easily lost by Indigenous people who chose to marry out, enroll in university, or join the army. Later additions to the Act rendered schooling mandatory for all, without offering satisfactory alternatives to residential schools, forcing many families to unknowingly condemn their children to v arious forms of physical and psychological abuse. Much like the schools, the 1960s Scoop was an instrument of forced conversion, leading thousands of children to be taken away from their Indigenous households and relocated to Christian families.

Canadian history has been marked by systematic attempts at marginalizing the country’s native inhabitants and their cultures (Neylan, 2018). Only recently has this past started being officially recognized and addressed. In 1998, prompted by a Royal Commission on Ab original Peoples (RCAP) report written in 1996, the Canadian

government began acknowledging the tragedy of the residential schools for the first time. This policy has led to the death of thousands of children, as well as physical, psychological, and sexual abuse for many more, effectively scaring entire generations of survivors (Milloy, 2017). Unfortunately, subsequent reconciliation efforts on the part of the federal government fell short of the expectations of the native communities.

In 2006, the signing of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (IRSSA) and its mandated establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) were perceived as a positive new chapter, the first step towards the mending of relations between the Canadian st ate and its Indigenous Peoples. The first public apology on behalf of the Canadian government was pronounced on June 11, 2008, by

(11)

then Prime Minister Harper, denouncing the residential school system (1870s - 1990s) and its part in a wider strategy of forced assimilation. This gesture was soon echoed by other prominent political actors in various jurisdictions. In 2016, nearing its 10th

anniversary, under the Trudeau administration, Canada finally endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indige nous People2, and in November 2018, in a public speech, Prime Minister Trudeau extended Harper’s apology to residential schools’ victims previously left out3. In spite of these encouraging events, there remains a lack of concrete and appropriate mechanism for the resolution of the many deep seated issues faced by the Indigenous members of Canadian society, forged by decades of harmful policies.

This momentum of Canadian reconciliation took arguably longer to reach the city of Montreal. Advocacy groups and various organizations had long been pushing forth Indigenous rights in Montreal and in the rest of Quebec. The first political demonstration of a strong will for reconciliation took place in 2017, on the occasion of Montreal’s and Canada’s 375th and 150th anniversaries, respectively. While the celebrations represented an opportunity to showcase the city’s history, many deplored the events’ selective amnesia with regards to Indigenous past, as municipal organizers mostly chose not to highlight 750 years of the city's Indigenous history (Neylan, 2018; Woods, 2018). Nevertheless, one particular program stood out. The Indigenize Montreal exhibition, proposed by Native Montreal, a local Indigenous organization, in the context of the World Design Summit, presented the vision of a city honoring its Indigenous heritage through architecture and urban design (Native Montreal, 2017). The Book of Works, a report produced in the context of the exhibition, will serve here as a blueprint, proposing a set of values and principles which should guide urban

2_{The UNDRIP is an international framework of individual and collective rights} addressing the dignity, wellbeing, and survival of Indigenous people.

3_{Harper's apology was extended to victims of residential schools in the Newfoundland} and Labrador provinces.

(12)

indigenization projects in Montreal, with a focus on educational and cultural spaces, the transpor tation network, and parks (Native Montreal, 2017). Moreover, for the occasion, the decision to finally include First Nations on the flag and the coat of arms of Montreal was made, giving a new meaning to the city’s motto: «Salvation through harmony». This new addition, a white pine tree standing strong, in the center of the flag and coat of arms, was decided upon by a committee composed of members of the city’s Indigenous communities («Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples», 2017).

However, while these ef forts can be seen as a token of good faith, Indigenous presence in Montreal’s landscape remains virtually null (Gyorog, 2017; Woods, 2017). Several factors should be taken into consideration when trying to understand the

current situation. Chief among them , is the province’s complicated history with the rest of the country. Tensions between the French Catholic minority and the English Protestant elite dating back to colonial times, have informed a long tradition of

protectionist policies and persistent tens ions between the French community and English speakers in contemporary Montreal (Maguire, 2010). Even today, the Montreal landscape displays a great pride in the French Conquest, and by extension, pride in the oppression of Indigenous Peoples. In negotiat ing its independence and claiming the right to protect its difference, the province of Quebec has continuously neglected, if not silenced Indigenous culture s and rights, and many policy makers are content to continue this tradition, sometimes in spite of their vocal support of Indigenous causes (Gyorog, 2017). .

Nevertheless, in parallel, Canadian society is often described as diverse and multicultural. The country was in fact, the very first to adapt multiculturalism into policy in 1971, and officially promulgate it into law in 1988 with the Canadian Multicultura lism Act (Qadeer, 1997). This publicly associated diversity with the

(13)

all Canadian citizens (Quadeer, 1997; Kymlicka 2003). As Qadeer (1997) worded it: « Multiculturalism is a n expression of the social diversity in contemporary cities. The traditional source of multiculturalism, namely immigration, is now complemented by the forces of globalization that scramble national (cultural) boundaries and promote rapid circulation of in formation and people. » This inevitably influences the evolution of urban landscapes and modern approaches to urban planning.

Despite this, Canada's Indigenous peoples see multiculturalism as falling to tackle their own revendications (Srikanth, 2012; St. Denis, 2011). Furthermore, in the words of Ghislain Picard (chief of the Assembly of First Nations Regional Chief for Quebec and Labrador), «Quebec has isolated itself from a notion (i.e. the value of traditional Indigenous knowledge) that has been widely recognized, nationally, and even internationally» (Hamilton, 2018). The overall result of the aforementioned

dynamics is a society divided, disconnected from the history of its land, and ignoring a rich part of its own culture. In the context of this study , improving Indigenous representation in Montreal means reconnecting its urban landscape to the city's

Indigenous heritage, in a visible way. Primarily building on the empirical data

gathered in the field as well as secondary data analysis, this work probl ematizes indigenization as a necessary paradigm for upholding the fundamental recognition, inclusion, and accomodation of Indigenous peoples. Namely, focusing on the

dimension of urban design, this study looks at indigenization as a multi - dimensional and m ulti - scalar process challenging exclusionary and assimilationist dynamics on the city scale, by virtue of a collective right to shape the urban experience (Harvey, 2003). In doing so, it seeks to build a comprehensive understanding of what a successful ur ban indigenization process entails within the Montreal context, it's obstacles and imperatives, it's characteristics, and it's benefits.

With this aim, Chapter 2 will present the theoretical and conceptual framework underpinning this study. Chapter 3 will introduce the methods used in pursuing this

(14)

research project. Chapter 4 will look deeper into our case study to identify perceptions surrounding indigenization, what has already been put in place, and the root causes of scarce Indigenous representation w ithin the city. Informed by the local context, Chapters 5 and 6 will present the core conditions of a satisfactory indigenization process, and discuss the related factors which must be respected by public, private, and civil society interests engaging in u rban indigenization. Chapter 5, will emphasise the significance of practices rooted in the knowledge of the local context, and Chapter 6 will discuss the importance of Indigenous participation and capacity building, for well executed, publicly supported, a nd impactful instances of indigenization. Our final conclusions will bring together these findings in articulating a comprehensive vision of the indigenization of Montreal and provide key policy recommendations.

Drawing from local initiatives and other par ts of the world, this study will draw conclusions which will have, to some extent, relevance outside of the Quebec context, in various instances involving minority claims to self - determination and cultural struggles for urban representation.

1.1 Research Location, Context and Unit of Analysis

1.1.1 Unit of Analysis

Taking Native Montreal and their external partners, representatives of the

municipality, and members of the population as unit of observation, this study will use indigeneity in the urban landscape as unit of analysis - i.e. features in the urban landscape reflecting Indigenous culture, or absence thereof. While they do not

necessarily serve a public function, we will look at those features that can be experienced from the public sphere. More specifically, urban indigeneity will be

(15)

examined from the perspec tive introduced by Native Montreal, with a focus on Indigenous cultural features in architecture and design. These features should be promoted in various areas of urban life (parks, neighborhoods, stores etc.), with the goal of enhancing living environment s and quality of life.

1.1.2 Location and Context

Fieldwork for this project was carried out in the Greater Montreal area (or Montreal census metropolitan area, CMA), located in the Quebec province, Eastern Canada. The Native Montreal headquarters, where most of the initial research and outreach was conducted, is located in the Southwest district («Le Sud - Ouest» on Figure 1). The inner circle of Montreal and most of its population is situated on the island of Montreal - composed of 19 boroughs, and 15 additional independent municipalities (c.f. Figure 1). Greater Montreal includes the North Shore territories of the Mille - Îles River, the South Shore territories (excluding Longueuil), and the Vaudreuil - Soulanges Peninsula. Steadily growing over the years, t he Montreal CMA population reached 4.098 million individuals in 2016 (Statistics Canada, 2016), making it next to Greater Toronto, the most populated metropolitan area in the country.

Currently, there is no single entity representing all Indigenous people of Montreal (Pilon, 20184). There are eight main organizations concerned with the urban life of Indigenous people, and more initiatives focus exclusively on homelessness5. Native Montreal, a local non- profit organization, is arguably the organization providing most services to Indigenous Montrealers (Pilon, 2018). It is also the main non- governmental actor pushing for Indigenization of urban space in Montreal.

4_{This thesis was provided by the author and should be available at the UVA library.} 5_See_{http://www.211qc.ca}

(16)

Figure 1: Island of Montreal subdivision map. Source: Ville de Montreal

Historically, Mohaw ks, or the Kanien’kehà:ka (People of the Flint), have occupied the land. They are thus considered to be the 'traditional custodians' of the territory. The Mohawk belong to the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, composed of six autonomous nations, united among othe r things by the Iroquian language 6). Today, many live on nearby mohawk settlements and reserves7, the closest one being Kahnawà:ke (c.f. Figure 2), but also chose to live in the city.

In addition, to the Mohawk nation, the area where the metropolis stands today has long been a meeting place for many other nations as well. Today it is home to at least 11 distinct ethnic groups, all with distinct languages, traditions, and customs. This

6_{The Haudenosaunee are also referred to by the French as the Iroquois, and Six} Nations by the English.

7_{In Canada. the federal government allows First Nations a degree of autonomous} governance within the limits of reserve territories. Polycentric government

arrangements extend to other Indigenous peoples as well, on the basis of separate agreements between them and federal, provincial, and territorial governments, with various degrees of powers granted to them.

(17)

includes First Nation, Inuit, and Métis peoples, collectively referred t o as 'Indigenous', 'Aboriginal', and 'Native'.

In Quebec, the majority of Indigenous people resides on reserves (63,8%), some on remote, difficult to access territories, where living conditions can be arduous

(Aboriginal Children in Care, 2015). In additio n to geographical spread, in all of Quebec, Indigenous people represent merely a 2.3% share of the total population, or 182,890 individuals (versus 19,7% in Saskatchewan for example). Among them, 34,745 people live in Montreal (roughly 16 thousand First Nation individuals, 15 thousand Métis, and 1 thousands Inuit).

(18)

Figure 2: Indigenous distribution in the Quebec province. Source: Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada.

(19)

1.2 Research Questions

There exist available literature on Indigenous architecture and urban planning (Grant, 2018; Porter, 2017; Weinberger, 2017). Some writers have explored the topic of urban space and Indigenous cultures in Montreal (Poultier, 2004; Breitkreutz, 2o14). The fact remains that there is not an abundance of existing literature making holistic attempts at understanding urban indigenization o n the scale of Montreal. There is also no known literature on the public perceptions surrounding this specific topic.

Furthermore, w e could not find much academic literature explicitly stating the absence of Indigenous heritage in the Montreal landscape, the apparent consensus fr om news articles is that Indigenous visibility and representation are indeed minimal in Montreal ( Gyorog, 2017; Woods, 2017).

Thus, prior to engaging in this research, there was a need to confirm, deny, or nuance the scarcity of Indigenous representation and understand why such little progress has been made to date. In addition, among other things, it is interesting to look at Montreal because it is a large, metropolitan area, which is also positioned within a province with more t raditional and disconnected localities and a very distinct identity and history compared to the rest of the country. This identity has informed the formation of attitudes and policies which can have distincts impacts on the Indigenous experience.

Furtherm ore, there are sources providing guidance on urban indigenization (Auckland Design Manual; International Indigenous Design Charter (IDC)). These principles are derived from and highlight similar patterns across a diversity of

Indigenous cultures worldwide, but they also fail to address the specific context of our case study. Cues as to best indigenization practices are presented in the Indigenize

(20)

Montreal Book of Works, however these offer limited explanation of the principles they outline, and exclude poin ts present in similar guides produced outside of Montreal. In addition, this work does not result from academic inquiry.

Main Research Question:

What does the inclusion of Indigenous heritage within the urban landscape represent in the Montreal context?

Sub- questions:

1. Does the Montreal landscape reflect inequality in its portrayal of Indigenous people? What are the reasons behind this and what are the consequences? 2. What are the parameters of a successful indigenization process? What

challenges and conditions must be taken into account?

3. What are the externalities of a successful indigenization process? Can

indigenization of urban space offer substantial benefits to indigenous people, society as a whole, and future generations?

The following chapter will lay out the theoretical and conceptual framework which guided our research on Indigenous representation in the Montreal landscape, and present the research design.

(21)

CHARTER 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

This chapter aims to build an understanding of the main determinants of urban indigenization which aggregate into a broad framework for analyzing this complex process, within the context of the deliberate transformation of urban landscapes

aimed at increa sing the representation of Indigenous citizens. The chapter consists of three sections. The first section looks at key concepts underpinning the meaning of urban indigenization, including the key factors which must be considered in

indigenization practice. This study focuses on the combined significance of these notions, for the successful execution of indigenization projects. The second section presents the conceptual scheme articulating the main dynamics at play. Finally, the third section shows how the m ain concepts introduced in this chapter were operationalized.

2.1 Key Determinants of Landscape Indigenization

2.1.1 Indigenization of Urban Space

First and foremost, this study cannot be detached from the concept of ‘Indigeneity’, understood here as fl uid, evolving, and contextually contingent (similarly to tradition). Native people are «Indigenous to the lands they inhabit, in contrast to and in

contention with the colonial societies and states that have spread out from Europe and other centres of empi re.» (Alfred and Corntassel, 2005). Indigenization of urban space

(22)

is thus understood here as the incorporation of Indigenous knowledge, worldviews, designs, and practices into urban landscapes, landscapes being « the combination of environmental and human phenomena that coexist together in a particular place » (Tschakert et al.) - including but is not limited to, built environment. Under this

concept, this study takes into account static landscape adaptations - e.g. statues, buildings, and parks), and dynam ic or temporary displays of culture within the

landscape - e.g. ephemeral public art exhibitions, festivals, or awareness campaigns (Gordon, 2001).

Indigenization projects can emerge from public and private contractors,

Indigenous or not, and civil society organizations. They can also result from public and commercial design, creating a multitude of potential permutations of urban design 8. Indigenization can be controlled or guided through urban planning, but initiatives external to planning can also emerge and feed into the wider process. These two areas may even overlap (c.f. Figure 3). The involvement of the local government in urban planning implies oversight of public landscape adaptations, as well as public projects, to a lesser extent. Thus, the planning dimension of indigenization is a multi-jurisdictional issue, which involves the local municipal government and indigneous governments, and to some extent the provincial and federal decision levels. However, indigenization itself reaches beyond governmental control and involves contributions on all levels.

Furthermore, indigenization is concerned with the rendering of indigneous cultures in urban design, this raises the issue of design subjectivity, as culture can be difficult to define and cultural depictions can be subject to interpretation and debate (Spencer- Oatey and Franklin, 2012). As data from this study will reveal, informed

8_{The IDC defines 'design' refers to « a profession of associated disciplines » and} « encompasses communication design, digital design, environmental design, architecture and the built environment, landscape design, fashion design, visual language, advertising and design strategy » (Ico- D, 2018).

(23)

execution (i.e. attention to the needs and demands surrounding indigenization), public approval, and impact (the benefits s temming from indigenization) are the three key factors for what can be considered a successful indigenization project (c.f. Figure 3).

Figure 3: Ternary relationship: dimensions of successful indigenization

2.1.2 Reclaiming Identity Representation

Public Memory, Visuality and Visibility

In order to speak on the importance of urban indigenization, it is necessary to understand the impact of urban space in popular consciousness. This will be based in Hayden's (1997) and Rubavičius' (2013) contention o f the existence of a correlation between urban landscapes and public memory systems and thus collective identities. Building on similar premises, Nejad and Walker (2018) discuss the potential of built environment in terms of symbolic capital, arguing that urban design holds the potential of enhancing acceptance and positive perceptions of Indigenous identities and values, combating Indigenous sense of placelessness, and oppressive social dynamics. By using examples found throughout the city of Montreal (e.g. the

(24)

Maisonneuve statue, street names etc.), this study will explore the way certain spaces are empowering to some, yet isolating to others. This work rationalises urban

indigenization based on the notion of a collective right to determine urban space, contextualised by Harvey through similar revendication in the renegotiation of metropolitan landscapes (2003).

A city’s aesthetics, materiality, and functionality, play an important role in

creating meaning and driving social dynamics. Through visual content or physical constraints, people can be empowered, or equally, made to feel invisible. As such, while materiality and the function of spaces will be emphasized in this work, we must also address the role played by visuality (i.e. information which is commu nicated visually, or perceived by the human eye), in (re)producing or minimizing urban

inequalities. More specifically, we will look at the relation between visibility of

Indigenous culture within urban landscapes and social inclusiveness. In doing so, we will explore Mirzoeff’s concept of visual commons (2016), which makes visual

inclusiveness both the right and the responsibility of all citizens. Problematizing Colonial Landscape Influences

To fully understand indigeneity in the Canadian context, we must define it in relation to settler colonialism, which rather than a finite historical event, is viewed here as a system, or institutional framework, with ongoing ramifications, particularly for native people (Wolfe, 2006). Additionally, it is also important for us to recognize the widespread and influence of colonial or Western tradition in all spheres of life in

Canada, including in urban planning and design. As Walker et al. (2013) point out, landscape changes continue to emerge within the parameters of th e Western planning tradition. « The reason for the absence of indigeneity in planning scholarship is

structural: Urban planning as a field is largely vested in Western modes of analysis. As a significant portion of the world falls under the Western structu re, Indigenous

(25)

peoples inevitably are evaluated and regulated using these same Western values. » (Tamayose, 2013, p. 348).

Urban planning discourse on indigenization tends to lean towards the incompatibility of western and aboriginal value systems in plan ning processes (Porter, 2013). The imperatives of indigenization may be difficult to uphold within the planning status

quo, among other things, because they are not compatible with the dominant Western approach to land use and ownership. This can represent a challenge in partnerships with governments and private interests, but most of all, it challenges the very core of mainstream planning practice (Porter, 2013). Beyond urban planning, this principle also applies to smaller, independent projects. Thus, in attempting to draw an objective assessment of external conditions for successful indigenization opportunities, and because indigenization is in and of itself a city - wide process, the decolonization of practices and processes represents a key dimension for consideration. Porter (2016) presents the decolonization of planning «as a complex renegotiation of values,

knowledge, meaning, agency and power between planning and Indigenous peoples, and within planning itself» (p. 153). This study will look at the pivo tal role played by the integration of Indigenous values in processes and design, as well as the direct

involvement of Indigenous people.

In addition, the indigenization of urban space can be paralleled with, but does not necessarily presuppose or lead to another dimension of decolonization: the decolonization of urban space, the value of which deserves to be given separate consideration in academic research. The decolonization of physical space, implies in broad terms, the physical removal of landscape fea tures reflecting settler culture. The removal of landscape features can be highly contested, particularly in the context of features which have been a part of urban spaces for long periods of time. This, to some

(26)

extent because people build attachments to f amiliar aspects of their surrounds and because they reflect or appeal to their identities (Rubavičius, 2013). Thus, instances of physical decolonization are often examples involving particularly problematic portrayals of colonial legacies.

Some aspects of the Montreal landscape, are indeed more problematic than others in their portrayal of oppression, subjugation, and killing of Indigenous people through the commemoration of colonial victories and figures. The most common example of this has been the Maisonneuve Monument, which displays a battle-depicting bas- relief and an inscription - perceived by many interviewees as a glorified promotion of ethnic genocide - which reads: «It is an honor to accomplish my mission; all the trees of the island of Montreal should change into as many Iroquois.» Another infamous figure mentioned in several interviews is Sir. John A. Macdonald, whose monument is also frequently vandalised with blood- red paint («Montreal’s John A. Macdonald Statue Vandalized», 2019). The first Prime Minister of Canada was responsible for enacting number of draconian policies depriving Indigenous people of cultural tradition and autonomy, and was an important catalyst for the residential school system (Hopper, National Post, 2018). The eponymous avenue and the McGill University campus have also been the source of numerous grievances by anti- colonial advocates. Other direct references to colonisation include the Wolfe street, Maisonneuve Boulevard, Saint Catherine street, Colonial street, Victoria square, Jeanne Mance park, avenue Girouard and much more.

Furthermore, as argued above, urban indigenization is not only limited to the build environment, and reminder of colonialism under many other forms. For instance, Montrealers also celebrate many holidays or attend festivals and parades, which can be interpreted as a reflection of the western colonial tradition - the most obvious example being the celebrations for the anniversaries of Montreal and Canada, or the St Patrick Parade, Canada Day, Thanksgiving, and more. Gordon argues, these

(27)

public events have an event stronger influence on the collective consciousness than statues, plaques, or churches, which provide a « static representation of the past » and therefore « a fairly narrow vision of public me mory » (2001, p. 145).

Local frame of reference

Having acknowledged the power of visuality, in particular in the case of colonial narratives permeating urban space (Rubavičius, 2013), the next step is to examine emerging counter narratives, in the form of visual urban content which reflects Indigenous culture. While we also look to various initiatives in Canada and worldwide in order to shed light on the principles that are recurrent to Indigenous urban design, our understanding of this dimension of the fieldwork research is mostly informed by Native Montreal’s vision, as expressed in the Indigenize Montreal Book of Works (2017).

In 2016, then - Mayor Dennis Coderes’ declared Montreal’s commitment to becoming the « metropolis of reconciliation ». The rather ambitious mission statement behind Indigenize Montreal, is to realise through indigenization projects aiming to « ensure better cultural representation of Indigenous people for the benefit of all and future generations», through architecture and design (Native Montreal, 2017). Indigenization of urban space should thus promote a collaborative relationship

between Indigenous and non - indignrous people, and encourage social inclusiveness and Indigenous self- determination.

2.1.3 Exclusion and Social Inclusiveness

Social exclusion and lack of representation in mainstream culture, and specifically in its representation through urban landscapes, combine to further alienate Indigenous members of society and negatively affect overall social cohesion. We theorize that th e

(28)

indigenization of urban space is an important step in order to remedy this issue. But for this to be possible, it must be done right. Good practices must be derived from the intrinsic imperatives of indigenization (which are linked to the factors describ ed in this chapter). With this in mind, the social inclusiveness framework positions itself as an appropriate tool to guide the process of Indigenization.

'Social inclusiveness' is derived from the inclusive development framework (Gupta and Vegelin 2016). This framework developed by Gupta and Vegelon builds on three key notions: social inclusiveness, environmental inclusiveness, and relational inclusiveness. Social inclusiveness is one of the core concepts informing the research process. It is rooted in int ernational human rights and capabilities approaches to development, and requires for us to address the dichotomy between integration and assimilation, particularity with regard to social and cultural identity. The core idea underpinning social inclusivenes s is to leave no one behind, to take into account and empower the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, or those at risk of being

marginalized. In this sense, within our context, social inclusiveness calls for a certain restoration of distributive justice in the approach to landscape adaptations.

The focus of our study is on social inclusiveness at the local level, where it « implies accounting for specific individuals and groups », in order to improve their living conditions (Gupta and Vegelin, 2016, p. 436). Our focus on the Indigenous minority is justified by virtue of ingenious people’s attachment to their traditional land on which Montreal stands today, and because of the damages inflicted upon them throughout history (Poultier, 2014; Milloy, 2017; Neylan, 2018).

Importantly, social inclusiveness aligns with the multi - scalar nature of urban indigenization in that it demands commitment at all levels of governance and in all

social spheres of influence, in all aspects of life. This requires identifying vulne rable groups and individuals, understanding their needs and the challenges they face, as well as investments in human capital and enhancing opportunities for participation.

(29)

Subsection 2.1.1 will argue that decision - making surrounding indigenization inevit ably carries a degree of subjectivity. To separate the signal from the noise and arrive at a satisfactory design solution, subjective design - related ideas, and the wider process of indigenization ought to be guided by a set of good practices or objective principles, reflecting the values and imperatives of indigenization - as per the « powerful ends - means connection » described by Gupta and Vegelin (2016, p. 445). Such efforts have been attempted in Montreal with the Indigenize Montreal Book of Works, and elsewhere (e.g. the Auckland Design Manual, on a bigger scale in the IDC, and on the policy level in the Saskatchewan 2013 - 2023 Strategic Plan for the indigenization of city planning 9 (Fawcett et al., 2015)).

Gupta and Vegelin (2016) outline five principles related to social inclusiveness which, by virtue of the apparent consistencies between urban indigenization and this framework, should bear relevance on our specific case study: « (a) adopting equity principles to share in development opportunities and benefits; (b) including the knowledge of the marginalized in defining development processes and goals; (c) ensuring a social minimum through higher level of protection for the most marginalized; (d) targeted capacity building to help the poor benefit from opportunities since they may not be able to otherwise use such opportunities; and (e) engaging the marginalized in the politics of development governance» (2016, p. 436). As section 4.3 will show, these principles can be combined into three entry points: context- sensitivity, participatory governance, and capacity building (2016, p. 436).

Lastly, speaking of social inclusiveness in the context of urban Indigenous experience also requires for us to understand the dynamics of social exclusion through the lens of social role valorization (Wolfensberger, 1983). In other words, how is social value constructed and what makes certain people vulnerable to social

9_{Montreal has shown a lesser commitment to the issue. The city's reconciliation and Indigenous relations} agendas are further discussed in section 4.3.

(30)

exclusion (e.g. the impact of family, dignity, respect, education etc.). In order to identify the key so cial challenges associated with the indigenization of Montreal, this study will also approach social exclusion from the perspective of contemporary

placemaking, looking at the connection between the sense of belonging and identity, and the meanings, memori es, and activities or functions attached to physical settings (Nejad and Walker, 2018).

2.2 Research Design

2.2.1 Conceptual Scheme

The first two key concepts used in the creation of the conceptual scheme are 'indigeneity' in urban design and social inclusiveness (introduced above). The latter falls within the sustainable development paradigm. Figure 4 shows how the

incorporation of th e imperatives of urban indigenization - namely the inclusion of indgenous cultures and people, visual and functional representation, and decolonial practices - into the social inclusiveness framework, enables the pursuit of a successful indigenization of u rban space. This process directly increases Indigenous

representation within the urban landscape and indirectly contributes towards the creation of more inclusive urban landscapes by allowing the representation of other cultures present within the city. As a multi - scalar construct, indigenization involves both government contributions and actors who are not affiliated with governments (various organizations, private interests, etc.). While local actors are the main drivers of indigenization, international a ctors can also play a part. The small arrows in Figure 4 shows how these international actors also collaborate and contribute to the social inclusiveness and sustainable development discourses and the promotion of the principles they advocate.

(31)

This points to the third and last key concept: ‘well - being’ (Gupta and Vegelin, 2016). Driven by an inclusive approach to urban design, the indigenization of urban space participates to the increase of material, social - relational, and cognitive well being for Indigen ous people and the broader society, even if these processes are differently experienced by each group. Improved well - being feeds back into the social inclusiveness and sustainable development paradigms. White (2009) discusses a

similar conceptualisation of well - being in more detail, although using the terms material, relational, and subjective. Vegelin and Gupta (2016) apply their model to the SDGs, which although concerned with developing countries, are intended for

implementation across the world, and lar gely based on the premise that inequality can arise anywhere and in a multitude of forms. Thus, the concept of well - being is relevant to the study of urban indigenization in Montreal. The goal here is to examine whether indigenization has the potential to yield the anticipated results of social inclusiveness practices.

(32)

Figure 4: Visual rendering of the conceptual scheme

2.2.2 Operationalization of Major Concepts

The operationalization table in Appendix 1 shows how the main concepts in this study have been operationalized. Indigeneity in urban design was operationalised using four variables: its visibility or presence within the Montreal landscape, the good practices successful indigenization entails, and the challenges to successful indigenization (including people’s perceptions on the matter). Social inclusiveness was mainly

operationalized based on Gupta and Vegelin’s factors of successful social inclusiveness policies: enhanced participation in governance, capacity building, and sensitivity to the local context (2016). Such measures are expected to improve the living conditions -

(33)

or wellbeing of - the Indigenous population (Gupta and Vegelin, 2016, p.436). In addition to this, we included three variables: practices and perceptions regarding social inclusiveness, and the social exclusion experienced by Indigenous people. By grouping these variables under the «cultural and material inclusiveness» dimension, we solidify our research focus on projects that visually reflect Indigenous culture, as well as those projects that in addition to this, enhance material well - being (c.f. cultural and material dimensions of social inclusiveness). Lastly, well - being was operationalised using the material, social - relational, and cognitive dimensions, as presented by White (2009) and mentioned by Gupta and Vegelin (2016).

This chapter has provided the conceptual parameters of this study, painting a broad picture of indigenization of urban space as an inherently multilayered and decolonial approach to minority represent ation, resting on the principles of re - equilibration of the balance of power and restorative justice in society. Having put forth a theoretical and analytical lens to examine the process of indigenization, and having discussed their operationalization, thr ough which the aforementioned considerations have guided the development of a research design which allowed us to navigate data collection and analysis through these concepts, but also in an exploratory manner, so as to better understand our topic of inqui ry. It will then present the methods used in the gathering of our data.

(34)

CHARTER 3. Methodology

This research aims to reveal and explain the role indigenization of urban space can play in inclusive development. To do so, this study followed an exploratory design, as there is limited pre - existing research contributing to the emerging area of study we are focusing on. For the same reason, while a theoretical frame and expected

outcomes have been identified prior to the beginning of the fieldwork, this research relied to some extent on inductive reasoning.

3.1 Mixed Methods Research Design

Considering the relatively unexplored nature of the research topic within the specific context of this study and because of limited resources and time, this study followed a mixed methods design was selected in order to analyse the parameters of the

indigenization of urban space in Montreal. Quantitative methods, in the form of a short survey, were used to compliment our findings, by allowing us to sample public opinions on the issue of indigenization. This study however, mostly relied on

qualitative research methods. Indeed, considering the type of phenomena this study is concerned with the use of strictly quantitative methods risk limiting the scope of the findings. The angle this study takes on indigenization and urban design involves a great deal of personal experie nces, perceptions, and value judgements that can be difficult to quantify and are best expressed with non - numeric information (Bryman,

(35)

2012). Exploratory and well suited for a natural setting, this more flexible research strategy allowed the discovery of v ariables which had not been considered beforehand, provided illustrative findings by encouraging the full expression of the participants’ opinions, and added a layer of complexity to the information captured (Bryman, 2012). Thus, data was collected through semi- structured interviews, participatory observation, and secondary data analysis including any relevant documents obtained during the fieldwork period. Most interviews were conducted in English. Only one interview in French required to be translated in full. In a handful of interviews small parts or a few words were translated, where participants feel more comfortable

expressing their thoughts in French. Semi Structured Interviews :

Semi- structured interviews have been the principal method of data colle ction. Three standard questionnaires with slight variations and response categories based on

predetermined codes, were used for each of the target groups. Slight changes were made based on whether the interviewee identified as Indigenous or not (this was determined at the beginning of each interview). When necessary, some adaptations were also made on a case by case basis. The use of a semi- structured format allowed for more flexible discussions with the participants. A few follow - up interviews were conduct ed towards the end of the fieldwork research with respondents who wanted to share information which arose in hindsight.

The first target group consisted of members of the Indigenize Montreal co-design committee. This included artists, co-designers, and archit ects, as well as representatives of various Indigenous organizations (including Natvie Montreal

employees). The second target group assembled individuals working for various Indigenous initiatives (including NM programs, QNW, and Indigenous initiatives at McGill University). This group also included one participant who worked on designing

(36)

the new building for Native Montreal as part of a masters’ of architecture. The third target group comprised people representing the municipal office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Affairs, they offered valuable insight from the perspective of the

municipality.

In addition to notes, audio recordings were used on the basis of free, prior, and informed consent (c.f. section 4.7). As the first participants declined from be ing filmed, no video recordings were made of the interviews for the sake of consistent data

analysis. Participants’ behavior was therefore observed in person to the extent of my abilities, and nonverbal cues (from facial expression to body language) were w ritten on my field notes and were taken into account in the data analysis stage, ensuring a better grasp on the information communicated. This design has allowed for in - depth yet flexible discussions, encouraging the respondents to engage in reflection and

introspection, and consequently, fostering the expression of deeper insights, while enabling us to probe for additional, potentially unexpected information (Bryman, 2016).

We determined that a sample of 16 interview participants was sufficient. This resulted in over 30 hours of audio recordings collected. The interviews were particularly rich because participants could have taken a number of directions when responding to a number of interview questions (c.f. Annexe 3). This is why numbers are perhaps not the best indicator of the veracity of the statements, instead every input was considered as valuable. What these numbers can show is for how many people certain topics were important to. Lower numbers, can also show topics that are less thought about, but not necessarily less important.

Participatory Observation :

To enhance the results of the interviews, participatory observations were carried out in two phases. First, by ob serving the work of Native Montreal programme

(37)

coordinators, members of the Indigenize Montreal co- design committee, as well as other employees and visitors, in between interviews. Some observations were also made at the locations of other interviews (archi tecture firms, indigneous organisations, and the City Hall). Second, other field observations were conducted in the natural environment, by visiting relevant sites cars the city and observing the way the public interacts with our unit of analysis. Notes an d pictures have been taken (c.f. section 4.7), and the arcGIS app has been used to mark relevant locations and inform later data analysis by allowing a better understanding of the urban space.

Anonymous Survey:

Towards the end of the fieldwork, observati ons in the natural environment were also used as an opportunity to conduct the surveys. Survey participants were approached at random in various public spaces, with the intention of better understanding public opinion on indigenization, particularly on the part of non - Indigenous members of society who detached from Indigenous issues, as this section of the population was not represented within the interview sample. Should anyone approached in this way have demonstrated more than subpar knowledge on the matt er, they would have been considered as potential interview participants. However, although six out of the

twenty participants declared having Indigenous roots, none of them demonstrated

sufficient understanding of the issue in order to answer the interview in- depth questions.

Before they began answering the survey, participants were briefed on the meaning of indigenization and were shown pictures exemplifying indigenization

projects. They were then handed printed copies of the survey to fill out. Contrary to interview respondents, survey participants were not professionally involved in any

(38)

survey format was chosen, while also giving participants the ability to provide longer answers when they could.

3.2 Sampling

The goal of the fieldwork research has been to interact with people from Indigenous communities and other individuals concerned - including architects and designers, government employees, and non - Indigenous Montrealers - in order to understand indigeneity and colonial remnants within the urban landscape, sample the public

attitudes on indigeneity, and build a better understanding of indigenization projects. Because this study does not require an extensive a mount of participants and considering the available time and resources, a total sample of sixteen respondents was deemed sufficient to adequately answer the research question. Nine out of the sixteen people self - identified as Indigenous (most First Nation, one Inuit, and two Métis or mixed). Most participants were selected using purposive and snowball

sampling methods.

This selection was made based on willingness to participate and ability to provide adequate and rich information (most productive sample to answer the question). The respondents we came in contact with were people involved in the

Indigenize Montreal project and employed at Native Montreal. From then, we were able to come in contact with representatives from the office of the Commissioner of

Indigenous Affairs, including Commissioner Bordeleau herself (in charge of overseeing relations between Indigenous peo ple and the municipality), in order to better grasp the policy side of the issue at hand. Lastly, the first two target groups as well as separate outreach allowed us to build a sample of members of Indigenous

(39)

order to engage them on their experience of Montreal and the relevance of including indigeneity in urban planning.

For survey participants, the selection of this sample was not predetermined. The survey was used in th is study with the aim of complementing the interviews with information from a sample over which the researcher had very limited influence, thus avoiding the potential bias which can arise from snowballing and purposive sampling methods. In addition, this method prevented any cross contamination with the interview participants, allowing the survey sample to stand independently.

A sample size of twenty people was deemed sufficient as a considerable amount of data was gathered. Each survey took roughly thirt y minutes to be completed and was conducted under difficult environmental conditions, in the middle of winter (c.f. Appendix 6 for survey locations and more information). The fieldwork period was limited to eight weeks, which also impacted the sample size. While a majority of interview participants had Indigenous background, most survey respondents did not (fourteen out of twenty people), thus complementing interview data.

3.3 Data analysis

In order to study indigeneity in urban landscape from the perspec tive of various stakeholders, the data was processed using Atlas.ti as well as critical discourse

analysis. Atlas.ti was used to compile and analyse interview and survey transcripts, notes, pre- authorised audio recordings, and pictures taken on the field. Open coding was used in order to draw patterns from emerging concepts and insights. Primary and secondary data comparisons were carried out, examining fieldwork findings in

relation to the previously identified codes, concepts, and theory. This was made ea sier because the interviews were conducted following predetermined categories based on the operationalisation of major concepts, and in accordance with the different

(40)

categories of respondents (three groups of interview participants, plus survey

participant s). Finally, the findings were interpreted in order to derive the final theory and conclusions.

3.4 Ethical Considerations

In illustrating how ethical challenges have been addressed in the field, this section borrows from ethical principles outlined by Bryman (2016) and the Social Research Association Guidelines (2003).

Informed Consent, Voluntary Participation, and Freedom t o Withdraw:

Several steps were taken in order to rule out deceptive practices and build trust with the respondents. Prior to conducting the interviews, participants were thoroughly

informed on their rights, the purpose of the study and the types of questio ns to be asked. Consent forms were provided and required to be signed - free of pressure, in a fully informed manner - in order for the interviews to begin.

Participation was strictly voluntary. Participants were made aware ahead of time of the fact that w hile the study was being conducted, they retained the ability to refuse to participate in parts of the study, decline to answer any question, and

withdraw from the study at any time, for any reason. Upon the conclusion of the study, withdrawal was no longe r be possible. Participation could be rendered anonymous upon request by the participant or if it was deemed necessary for the purpose of the study. Two participants requested to remain anonymous. Whether their participation was anonymous or not, in the ev ent that the participant decided to withdraw from the study, their information would have been destroyed, unless they gave explicit

(41)

event that it no longer appeared relevant to the purpose of the study, or if the information gathered was found to be erroneous. No such situation arose.

Anonymity and Confidentiality :

Unless specified otherwise by the participant, personal identifying information has been collected for some par ticipants. If the participant did not wish to disclose such information, we insured that the participant remained truly anonymous. Potential information to be collected included: name, age, email address, residence,

professional information (including pres ent and past employment), information about the respondents’ family or social networks, and participants’ habits. The information collected has been stored in digital format on a password protected hard - drive. Research supervisors and MIDS programme repres entatives may also have had access to the information collected, in whole or in part, during the preparation of the final

thesis. Any information that is not publicly available and which the respondents do not wish to disclose publicly has been kept strict ly confidential. Confidentiality was limited by the researcher’s duty to disclose reasonable suspicion of imminent serious harm to the participant or others, in which case the researcher retained the right to contact the competent authorities. Lastly, part icipants were made aware that the products of this research may be published online.

Potential Risks:

The anticipated legal, economic, or political risks associated with participating in this study were minor. The environment, design, and the interview questions do not a priori represent any danger for anyone involved in this study. The safety of the

participants as well as that of researcher was nevertheless a priority at all times, and necessary steps were taken in order to minimise the risk of harm wa s any to arise.

(42)

Participants were however to consider the fact that emotional or psychological distress may have been caused by the potentially personal nature of some of the

interview questions (e.g. questions pertaining to past traumas, or the social st igma experienced by the participant). All questions were be formulated and asked in the most respectful and careful way possible. Participants’ concern with other possible social repercussions – including but not limited to damage to relationships, or loss of privacy - although highly unlikely, may have been offset by the possibility of

anonymous participation and withdrawal of participation before the conclusion of the study.

Researcher Positionality :

The fieldwork interaction was easy as I speak fluent English and French. Besides this, three important considerations were taken into account while carrying out the

fieldwork research.

First, the leading positionality issue concerning my study was one of personal subjectivity. My desire to study urban indige nization was initially motivated by personal interest born during the years I spent studying in Montreal. To be specific, the catalytic moment happened in 2016, while attending a conference on the Truth and Reconciliation Challenges Facing the University, at McGill University. I was moved by personal accounts of the residential schools and became fascinated with the resilience of the survivors, but one comment in particular imprinted on my mind: when the

professor Michael Loft remarked on the scarcity of in digneous representation in the city. From then on, every stroll through the city was spent paying attention to the

flags, the statues, the street names, which never seemed to honor the people who walked on this land first. Until this research project, how ever, my knowledge of Indigenous realities remained limited.

(43)

With this in mind, and while maintaining a strong interest in the topic, I made a conscious effort to remain weary, in my role as a researcher, of my predisposition to side with Indigenous cause s and sympathise with the work of Indigenous NGOS and civil society organizations, also setting aside my critical outlook on government

operations. To this end, I focused on keeping my interactions with all participants (including prospective ones) neutral , avoiding displays of personal inclinations, wording questions in ways which influence responses as little as possible, and analyzing data without seeking to confirm preconceived ideas.

Another pertinent problematic was my ethnic background. I have spent the better part of my childhood in Kyrgyzstan before immigrating to France, and while my name betrays my Russian roots, as a caucasian woman, I blend rather well in Western crowds. The challenge with regard to this, is the fact that the complex social dynamics between Indigenous and non - indigneous Montrealers play into a social climate which is difficult to explain without falling into mischaracterizations. As I came to experience first - hand, some Indigenous people can be very skeptical, if not dismissive of

researchers, perceiving them as outsiders attempting to probe into their culture. During my fieldwork, I have at times felt out of place, for instance, when traveling into Mohawk territ ory to conduct my interviews. More memorably, at the beginning of the fieldwork, I have received a particularly negative response to one of my outreach emails from an Indigenous affairs representative working at a local university. Of course she knew very little about my personal background, the years I have spent living in and learning to love Montreal, but what certainly jumped out to her was my mention of the University of Amsterdam, located in a remote West European country, and perhaps the picture att ached to my email address. This may be what prompted her to post on social media about the unwanted attention of non - Indigenous researchers, using my email as an illustration. While I understand the criticism, I

(44)

made sure from this point forward, to commun icate to all outreach candidates the fact that reflexivity was far from being an afterthought during the initial stages of my study program.

As a matter of fact, the second key motivation behind my decision to pursue this line of research was to work in a n environment, the city of Montreal, whereby my perceived identity would not be as disputable as perhaps in a more «exotic» location, where the privileges I personally enjoy, do not stand out in sharp contrast against the realities of the people I would in terview.

The third motivation behind my choice was to explore a topic which allows me to discuss some of the most alarming issues faced by Indigenous people today, without them being at the core of my inquiries. This, because of a prior understanding tha t as an outsider looking in, I may encounter pushback in inquiring about particularly

sensitive topics. It can be especially challenging to acquire trust with the participants within a short fieldwork period. In parallel, while I did not have the opportu nity to immerse myself in the research context for longer than a few months, my project

received the approval and the support of Native Montreal, considered locally as a respected indigneous organization, (c.f. Appendix 6). My ability to connect with NM was due to the organization's desire to sustain their contribution to the indigenization of Montreal. Once I began disclosing this affiliation more clearly, I no longer

(45)

CHAPTER 4. Explaining the Absen

ce of Indigeneity in Montreal's

Landscape

One common exasperation among Indigenous participants was the feeling that Indigenous cultures have been amalgamated and reduced to a convenient set of identifiers for too long. French urbanism in fact, was one of the tools used to this effect (Njoh, 2016) . This study looks at the indigenization of Montreal seeking to understand the social, cultural, and political context behind it. This is important

because what indigenization means and requires in Montreal, cannot be transposed to other territories with different histories and cultures. In navigating the relationship between the city of Montreal and Indigenous landscape representation, this chapter will first draw an overview of the current status quo as well as public perceptions on the matter. Next, it will dive into some of the main factors behind the limited physical representation of Indigenous cultures in the city. Finally, it will also explore some encouraging progress and the recent initiatives which appear to be picking up stream, and briefly disc uss what this could mean for the future of Montreal.

4.1 Landscape Visibility and Exclusion

In support of the observations guiding the fieldwork research for this project, what

first stood out from the interviews as well as the survey is an overwhelmin g consensus on the lack of visibility of Indigenous heritage in the Montreal landscape, which was shared by Indigenous and non - Indigenous respondents alike. All interview respondents had a fairly good understanding of Indigenous realities due to their

(46)

prof essional and personal involvement with local Indigenous communities. Thus, they had less of a struggle thinking of appropriate examples of references to Indigenous cultures, nevertheless agreeing that these «can appear to be drowned or insignificant» as one respondent said10. The scarcity also transpired through the survey responses, which provided an interesting insight into the perceptions of Montrealers who are rarely made aware of Indigenous realities in their day to day lives (all six out of twenty respondents with an Indigenous or mixed background, declared feeling disconnected from this aspect of their identities). Notably, out of twenty survey participants, twelve could think off the top of their head of only one landscape feature reflecting Indigenous cultures. For nine of them, this was exclusively limited to Charles Joseph’s totem pole in downtown Montreal11. Totem poles are however endemic to native communities established along the Pacific Northwest, and as such are not reflective of the local Indigenous heritage. This is a fact that survey respondents who mentioned the totem pole declared being unaware of, demonstrating the impact such misleading representations can have on public memory systems (Rubavičius 2013; Hayden, 1997).

The seven interview respondents who mentioned this installation described it as odd and out of place. A few others even drew parallels between the installation and «the tokenism that often permeates efforts to 'indigenize' settler spaces» (Porter et al., 2017). The same individuals however, had no previous knowledge of the intentions behind the eye- catching art piece - i.e. the fact that it was imagined as a remembrance of the tragedy of residential schools, that the homage to Eastern Canadian cultures was intentional, and that the totem pole was inaugurated in the presence of leaders from local Mohawk communities (Cram, 2017). Nevertheless, some interviews

10_{Annexe 5: Interview 14: KC, Mcgill University Special Advisor on Indigenous initiatives. IND.}

11_{The totem poles is erected in front of the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, on Sherbrooke Street West,} one of the busiest locations in downtown Montreal.

Social inclusiveness in urban design : enhancing the urban experience through the indigenization of built environment

Social Inclusiveness in Urban Design:

Enhancing the Urban Experience Through

the Indigenization of Built Environment

Social Inclusiveness in Urban Design:

Enhancing the Urban Experience Through the

Indigenization of Built Environment

ABSTRACT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

SPECIAL THANKS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

CHARTER 2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

CHARTER 3. Methodology

CHAPTER 4. Explaining the Absen

ce of Indigeneity in Montreal's

Landscape