In January 2023, our team convened for a writing retreat to finalize our report. Discussion flowed from reflections on the Contested Authorities workshop and a close review of all case studies.  

The following questions informed the discussion of our report:

• How should we approach the conceptualization, or defining of, Indigenous-led IA? What does it mean for a process to be Indigenous-led? To what degree can settler law determine the process and content of an ‘Indigenous-led’ IA? 

• Can an IA still be considered ‘Indigenous-led’ if there are varying levels of Indigenous participation and/or authority throughout the IA process? Can settler IA law be a tool to advance Indigenous interests? 

• Does the credibility of an Indigenous-led IA depend on the ability of Indigenous nations to use their own processes to develop and apply their own laws and legal principles to the issues of importance determined by the community? 

• What is the value to the community in developing an Indigenous-led IA? What role can IA play in the revitalization of Indigenous law at the community level? 

• What concerns arise in the integration or harmonization of Crown and Indigenous IA legal principles and frameworks? Can Crown and Indigenous jurisdiction operate in a parallel fashion within the IA arena? How should we conceptualize IA as a space of inter-legality? 

• What are the dangers and possibilities in the integration of Indigenous IA with Crown IA?

• Can we create a useful/informative visual representation of types of Indigenous-led IAs? Would this be best characterized as a spectrum? Or a scatterplot? Are there specific criteria that must be met for an IA to be considered Indigenous-led?