Research

Abstract:  Profound inequalities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals persist to this day in settler colonial societies across the world. Reconciliation requires collective acknowledgment of past harm and reparative measures to redress it. However, this process can prove challenging among the mass public due to widespread misapprehensions about, and animus toward, Indigenous populations. But what happens when citizens are confronted with information about the prevalence and extent of structural inequalities today? Leveraging the case of Canada, we argue raising awareness about these issues should reduce misinformation and prejudice, which should ultimately help pave the path for reconciliation. We field a national survey of 3,000 non-Indigenous Canadians to test two distinct informational interventions commonly used in the misinformation and prejudice reduction literatures: fact-checking and perspective-getting narratives. Each results in increased recognition of ongoing inequality, higher support for policy reforms, and reduced anti-Indigenous resentment. Additionally, each intervention may foster advocative behavior in the form of an anonymous note addressed to the House of Commons of Canada. Overall, fact-checking appears most effective at shifting awareness and behavior, whereas narratives more successfully increase support for actual policy change. Surprisingly, combining both interventions produces an unanticipated backlash effect, with fact-checking diminishing the influence of narratives. Our findings contribute to the study of reconciliation and pave the way forward for advocates of reparations by identifying promising strategies to rally support among the mass public.

In the context of collective victimization, such as colonization in Canada, recognizing past and ongoing victimization is essential to healing relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. Reconciliation cannot occur without recognition of ongoing victimization. While most Canadians recognize historical victimization, fewer acknowledge ongoing victimization and support measures promoting the self-determination of Indigenous communities. The recognition of ongoing inequality can evoke feelings of guilt and pose a threat to the privileges of the advantaged groups, which may lead to minimizing and disregarding the experiences of victimization. While recognition of ongoing victimization can be uncomfortable, it is not impossible. Members of the advantaged group may be more willing to consider relinquishing their privileges if they receive social acceptance from members of the disadvantaged group. Using data (n = 313) collected from an original survey, this paper will examine the impact of social acceptance of non-Indigenous Canadians by Indigenous Peoples on the willingness of non-Indigenous Canadians to a) acknowledge the ongoing victimization of Indigenous Peoples, b) support justice measures and c) recognize their autonomy. The findings suggest that there is a positive relationship between social acceptance and both recognition of victimization and support for justice measures. However, no significant association was found between social acceptance and support for autonomy. These findings partially support the needs-based model, suggesting that social acceptance plays a role in promoting reconciliation, but not autonomy.

Reconciliation in Canada requires a deep societal transformation in which the majority population (non-Indigenous Canadians) not only recognizes the historic victimization of Indigenous peoples in Canada but also recognizes their ongoing structural victimization. However, members of the advantaged group may be reluctant to embrace change and give up their privileged position. According to System Justification Theory, people are motivated to justify the existing system (status quo) even when it produces socioeconomic inequities. In this paper, we examine the willingness of non-Indigenous Canadians (n=58) in the province of Quebec to recognize Indigenous victimization. We then explore their attitudes towards recognizing economic autonomy and ceding control over resources to Indigenous peoples. While most respondents claim to support the economic autonomy of Indigenous peoples, a qualitative analysis of their views on what should be done to improve the economic situation paints a more nuanced picture. Some participants support the self-determination of Indigenous peoples, and others support the maintenance of the colonial status quo, whether in the form of collaboration or total control from the state.

Since the 1970s, victimologists have identified victims as the ‘forgotten party’ in criminal law, emphasising its failure to recognise them as more than a witness to a crime. While victimology and our understanding of the effects of crime on victims have advanced considerably in recent years, victims largely remain the forgotten party in legal education. Law schools in Canada continue to approach victims as witnesses and fail to offer tomorrow’s legal professionals comprehensive training in victimology. Based on the premise that change starts with education, we created an interdisciplinary legal clinic for victims of crime in which law students work together with criminology students, providing legal information to victims. This article presents findings from an evaluation of the programme, which is based on a qualitative study of law students who participated in our legal clinic for victims. After a brief presentation of the programme and the training provided to students, we explore the experiences of the law students and examine how they feel their experience impacted the way they view law and prepared them to work with victims of crime.

This paper examines the evolution of victimology in Canada, tracing its development from early theoretical frameworks to contemporary practices and emerging research trends. It explores the impact of the 1985 UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power on Canadian victimology and highlights the unique legal framework within which victim services have developed. Key historical milestones, including the establishment of victimology as a recognized academic discipline and the influence of foundational European and American theories, are discussed. The shift from theoretical victimology to a focus on supporting crime victims is analyzed, along with the professionalization of victim services and the challenges faced in providing comprehensive support. The paper also addresses current issues such as disparities in compensation, barriers to access, and the specific needs of marginalized groups, including Indigenous Peoples. Future directions in Canadian victimology are considered, emphasizing the importance of restorative justice mechanisms, alternative justice models, and a sustained commitment to victim-centered research and policy development.