Sweden can learn from Norway and Canada to give the Sámi people greater influence over their cultural heritage
Sámi people are rarely involved in the management of their own cultural heritage – but increasing their participation is entirely possible. So says archaeologist Charina Knutson. Her research shows that Sweden can learn from Norway and Canada, where Indigenous peoples are more actively engaged in heritage matters. This would lead to a richer understanding of Sámi culture and help Sweden align with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
In Sweden, Sámi people are seldom contacted or involved in archaeological projects concerning their own cultural heritage, despite having the right to be, according to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Sweden voted to adopt in 2007. Charina Knutson pointed this out already in her licentiate thesis a few years ago.
Charina wanted to explore this further and investigate how other countries are working with these issues. In her doctoral thesis, she compares the situation in Sweden with two countries that have progressed further in implementing the UN Declaration: Norway and the province of British Columbia in Canada. The results show that increased Sámi involvement in managing their own heritage is entirely feasible, and that Sweden could draw inspiration from Norway and Canada.
Charina earned her PhD in archaeology from the GRASCA graduate school at Linnaeus University. She works at the Nordic Centre for Heritage Learning and Creativity in Östersund and has a background at the Jamtli museum.
Norway: The Sámi Parliament is responsible for Sámi heritage sites
In Norway, the state has delegated responsibility for Sámi heritage sites to the Sámi Parliament. This means that the Sámi Parliament oversees management and inventory, and decides whether archaeological remains can be removed. The Sámi Parliament's archaeologists work closely with the archaeologists of the county municipalities and discuss what is considered Sámi. If an excavation is to take place, it is usually carried out by one of the university museums. Charina notes that one difference between Sweden and Norway is that in Sweden, determining whether an archaeological site is Sámi is often seen as problematic.
“In Sweden, there is scepticism about applying ‘ethnic labels’ on archaeological sites. In Norway, this has been resolved. They have agreed that if a site is of a certain type and age, the Sámi Parliament takes responsibility. It’s a respectful dialogue, not a point of conflict”, Charina explains.
British Columbia, Canada: Indigenous peoples must be consulted by law
In the province of British Columbia in Canada, there are more than 200 different groups of Indigenous peoples (First Nations). The archaeology sector is deregulated, just like in Sweden, meaning that companies compete for contracts. However, there is a law stating that relevant First Nations must be consulted prior to archaeological investigations. They can provide input on how and when the archaeological work should take place. Several Indigenous communities also have their own consultants and archaeological firms.
“Through legislation, they’ve ensured that archaeologists and Indigenous peoples communicate with one another. It works there and should be possible in Sweden too. Several people I spoke with in British Columbia found it strange that archaeologists in Sweden are not required to consult the Sámi people”, says Charina.
Sweden does not value intangible cultural heritage
Charina’s research also shows that Sweden is the only one of the three countries that does not include intangible cultural heritage – such as oral knowledge – in contract archaeology, even though this can provide valuable information about a site.
“Oral stories and traditions are valued in both British Columbia and Norway, but not in Sweden. These stories can contribute to our understanding of ancient remains, especially in a living cultural landscape like the Sámi one”, says Charina.
Ask the Sámi people what feels right from a Sámi perspective.
Greater Sámi participation is entirely possible
Charina believes that the experiences of Norway and Canada demonstrate that greater Sámi involvement in managing their cultural heritage is fully achievable – and that the Sámi should be asked what type of solution they prefer.
“Ask the Sámi people what feels right from a Sámi perspective. Allowing Indigenous peoples to articulate how they want their heritage to be managed can become a tool for real change”, says Charina.
“There is everything to gain by involving the Sámi in the management of Sámi heritage. It would allow the state to show that it takes the UN Declaration seriously. And we would also gain a richer understanding of Sámi history”, says Charina.
More information
- Charina Knutson’s doctoral thesis: "Indigenous Archaeology in Sweden: Aligning Contract Archaeology with National and International Policies on Indigenous Heritage"
- GRASCA is Linnaeus University’s industrial graduate school for Swedish contract archaeology