Ronald L Trosper

Interests

Teaching

Indigenous Economic Theory; Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Indigenous Nation-Building: Community-Based Research

Research

Indigenous Economic Theory

Courses

Scholarly Contributions

Books

• Trosper, R. l., & Parrotta, J. (2012). Traditional Forest Knowledge: Sustaining Communities, Ecosystems and Biocultural Diversity. Springer.
• Trosper, R. l., Tindall, D. B., & Perriault, P. (2013). Aboriginal Peoples and Forest Lands in Canada. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
• Trosper, R. l. (2009). Resilience, Reciprocity and Ecological Economics: Northwest Coast Sustainability. London and New York: Routledge.

Chapters

• Trosper, R. L. (2019). Place of the Falling Waters: How the Salish and Kootenai Tribes Dealt with Settler Colonialism to Acquire and Name Se̓liš Ksanka Qĺispe̓ Dam. In Reclaiming Indigenous Governance: Reflections and Insights from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States(pp 193-227). Chapter 9: University of Arizona Press.
• Trosper, R. L., & Tindall, D. B. (2013). Consultation and Accommodation: Making Losses Visible. In Aboriginal Peoples and Forest Lands in Canada(pp 313-325). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
• Trosper, R. L., & Tindall, D. B. (2013). The Social Context of Aboriginal Peoples and Forest Land Issues. In Aboriginal Peoples and Forest Lands in Canada(pp 3-11). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
• Clark, F., Gerez-Fernandez, P., Lake, F., McGregor, D., Peters, C. M., Purata, S. E., Ryan, T., Thomson, A., Trosper, R. L., Watson, A. E., & Wyatt, S. (2012). North America [Chapter 5]. In Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge: Sustaining Communities, Ecosystems and Biocultural Diversity(pp 157-202). Springer.
  More info

  The colonial history of North America presents a contrast between Mexico and the two predominantly English-speaking countries, the United States and Canada. In Mexico, indigenous and other local communities own considerable forested lands, a consequence of the Mexican Revolution of the early twentieth century. In the United States, forest land is now primarily in private or federal hands, while in Canada forest land is primarily managed by the provinces. In all three countries, traditional knowledge had little effect upon forestry until the end of the twentieth century. In Mexico and the United States, the central government retained control over forested lands ostensibly held by communities. Policy changes in those two countries have decentralized control to indigenous peoples, and their ideas have started to affect forestry. In Canada, although traditional management of lands in remote regions persisted until the middle of the twentieth century, provincial policies have generally been displacing indigenous control; First Nations knowledge, which has survived well in some areas, is only recently being applied to forest management, and in only a few examples.

Journals/Publications

• Trosper, R. L. (2024). Relationality in the Economics of Indigenous Peoples. The Minority Report, 16, 13-15.
• Beaudoin, J., Bouthillier, L., Bulkan, J., Nelson, H., Trosper, R., & Wyatt, S. (2016). What does "First Nation deep roots in the forests" mean? Identification of principles and objectives for promoting forest-based developoment. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 46(4), 508-519. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2015-0170
  More info

  We often hear about the resistance of First Nation (FN) communities to the industrial model of forestry, but we hear less about what they wish to achieve. Translating FN perspectives into concepts that are understood by the mainstream society can help inform current and future forest policies. Such translation can support initiatives that seek ways to increase FNparticipation in the forest sector. This paper documents one process of translation. It identifies the principles and objectives for forest-based development of the Essipit Innu First Nation in Quebec, Canada, reflective of the deep roots that anchor the Essipit to their territory. Based on participatory research carried out between January and July 2013, we identify 34 objectives folded into three core FN principles: Nutshimiu–Aitun (identity–territoriality), Mishkutunam (sharing–exchange), and Pakassitishun(responsibility–autonomy). Our analysis shows that the economic aims of the dominant forestry model are too narrow for FN communities. This paper contributes to expanding FN engagement in forestry through management and economic approaches that are better adapted to their culture and values.
• Kim, I., Trosper, R. L., & Mohs, G. (2012). Cultural uses of non-timber forest products among the Sts' ailes, British Columbia, Canada. Forest Policy and Economics, 22, 40--46.
• Trosper, R. L. (2012). Menominee implementation of the Chichilnisky criterion for sustainable forest management. Forest Policy and Economics, 25, 56-61. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.08.002
• Tikina, A. V., Innes, J. L., Trosper, R. L., & Larson, B. C. (2010). Aboriginal peoples and forest certification: a review of the Canadian situation. Ecology and Society, 15(3), 33.
• Trosper, R., Nelson, H., Hoberg, G., Smith, P., & Nikolakis, W. (2008). Institutional determinants of profitable commercial forestry enterprises among First Nations in Canada. Canadian Journal of Forest Economics, 38(2). doi:10.1139/X07-167
  More info

  This paper uses survey information to examine several common assertions about the institutional prerequisites for successful profitability when a First Nation enters an economic enterprise either independently or in joint effort with an outside firm. In the winter of 2004-2005, we interviewed managers on both the First Nations and private sides of joint ventures and other business alliances in Canada, to determine what affected their recent profitability experience. We gathered information on the ages, sizes, and activities of the firms. We also gathered information about the firms' management structures and relationship with the First Nation, and the characteristics of the government of the First Nation. With a sample size of 40 firms that responded, we found that several institutional characteristics affected profit positively: strong separation of management from band governance, participation in management planning, and the use of staggered terms in band council elections. We found that the likelihood of profitability decreased if the band had been in third party management as well as if there was formal participation of elders or hereditary chiefs in decision making. We offer interpretations of these results. © 2008 NRC.
• Trosper, R. L. (2007). Indigenous influence on forest management on the Menominee Indian Reservation. Forest ecology and management, 249(1), 134--139.
• Trosper, R. L. (2005). Emergence unites ecology and society. Ecology and Society, 10(1), 14.
• Trosper, R. L. (2003). Resilience in pre-contact Pacific Northwest social ecological systems. Conservation Ecology, 7(3), 6.
• Trosper, R. L. (2002). Northwest coast indigenous institutions that supported resilience and sustainability. Ecological Economics, 41(2), 329--344.
• Trosper, R. L. (1998). Incentive systems that support sustainability: a First Nations example. Conservation Ecology, 2(2), 11.
• Trosper, R. L. (1995). Traditional American Indian Economic Policy. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 19(1), 65--95.
• Trosper, R. L. (1988). MULTICRITERION DECISION-MAKING IN A TRIBAL CONTEXT. Policy Studies Journal, 16(4), 826--842.
• Trosper, R. L. (1981). American Indian nationalism and frontier expansion. CF Keyes (1981). Ethnic change, 247--270.
• Trosper, R. L. (1978). American Indian relative ranching efficiency. The American Economic Review, 503--516.
• Trosper, R. L. (1976). Native American Boundary Maintenance: The Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana--1860-1970.. Ethnicity, 3(4), 256--274.
• Barsh, R. L., & Trosper, R. L. (1975). Title I of the Indian self-determination and education assistance act of 1975. American Indian Law Review, 361--395.

Others

• Trosper, R. L. (1974). The economic impact of the allotment policy on the Flathead Indian Reservation.