Weaving Indigenous knowledge systems and Western sciences in terrestrial research, monitoring and management in Canada: A protocol for a systematic map

6. The systematic map will aim to capture all available and relevant studies found in the published academic and grey literature. The search will use standardized search terms across four publication databases, four specialized websites and one web-based search engine. Bibliographies of relevant review articles captured by our search strategy will be cross-checked to identify additional studies. Calls for evidence among professional networks will also complement the search strategy. All searches will be conducted in English. Search results will be reviewed in two stages: (1) title and abstract and (2) full text. All screening decisions at the full-text stage will be included into the map database. 7. The systematic map will use a narrative synthesis approach employing descriptive tables, statistics and figures (including a map with geospatially referenced studies) to summarize findings. 8. Results from this mapping exercise can serve to support environmental research and management efforts working across IKS and Western sciences by highlighting best practices, as well as evidence gaps.


5.
Here, we present a protocol for a systematic map that will examine the extent, range and nature of the published literature that weaves IKS and Western sciences in terrestrial ecosystems research, monitoring and management in Canada.
6. The systematic map will aim to capture all available and relevant studies found in the published academic and grey literature. The search will use standardized search terms across four publication databases, four specialized websites and one webbased search engine. Bibliographies of relevant review articles captured by our search strategy will be cross-checked to identify additional studies. Calls for evidence among professional networks will also complement the search strategy. All searches will be conducted in English. Search results will be reviewed in two stages: (1) title and abstract and (2) full text. All screening decisions at the full-text stage will be included into the map database.
7. The systematic map will use a narrative synthesis approach employing descriptive tables, statistics and figures (including a map with geospatially referenced studies) to summarize findings. 8. Results from this mapping exercise can serve to support environmental research and management efforts working across IKS and Western sciences by highlighting best practices, as well as evidence gaps.

K E Y W O R D S
Canada, ecological research, environmental management, Indigenous knowledge systems, literature review, terrestrial ecosystems, traditional and local ecological knowledge, Western science INTRODUCTION Human activities, development and resource extraction are dominant forces on Earth (Vitousek et al., 1997), responsible for creating numerous threats that contribute to declines in biodiversity across the globe (Cardinale et al., 2012;SCBD, 2020). Many of these threats, such as climate change, deforestation and plastic pollution, are incredibly complex issues that require the mobilization of diverse knowledge in order to be understood and addressed (IPBES, 2019). While calls for interdisciplinary science practices in environmental research date back decades (Hicks et al., 2010;IPCC, 2007), there has been a more recent push for these practices to include the weaving of different knowledge systems, specifically Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) and Western sciences (Henri et al., 2018(Henri et al., , 2020Johnson et al., 2016;McGregor, 2004;Popp et al., 2019;Tengö et al., 2014Tengö et al., , 2017; see Table 1 for definitions). For example the International Panel on Climate Change and the International Platform on Biodiversity Services have specifically called for greater inclusion of IKS in their assessments (Ford et al., 2016;Tengö et al., 2017).
'Weaving knowledge systems' refers to a process through which multiple types of knowledge are equitably brought together to enable the reciprocal exchange of understanding for mutual learning and application (Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019;Johnson et al., 2016;Tengö et al., 2017). This notion implies a dynamic and co-evolving process of knowledge co-production (Castleden et al., 2017) through which the integrity of each knowledge system is respected and maintained (Rathwell et al., 2015;Reid et al., 2021). As such, it is a process similar to what other authors have termed 'braiding' or 'bridging' knowledge systems (Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019;Johnson et al., 2016;Kimmerer, 2013;McGregor, 2008;Rathwell et al., 2015;Reid et al., 2021). The expression 'weaving' moves beyond the narrative of 'integrating' , 'combining' or 'incorporating' knowledge systems which has been critiqued for connoting or suggesting the assimilation of IKS into a dominant and overarching Western scientific paradigm (Johnson et al., 2016;Reid et al., 2021). The process of weaving knowledge systems places IKS on equal par with Western sciences (Johnson et al., 2016), recognizes the inherent value of IKS and may be understood as coming from a place of respect for Indigenous peoples and their intellectual traditions (Kimmerer, 2002).
Bridging multiple knowledge systems in environmental research and management improves our understanding of socio-ecological connections and mechanisms (Kimmerer, 1998;Kutz & Tomaselli, 2019;Pierotti & Wildcat, 2000), and builds trust in decision-making and research findings . The weaving of knowledge systems can also facilitate uptake of findings by different decisionmaking bodies that can help implement actions towards conservation of ecosystems (Ban et al., 2018;Eckert et al., 2020). Ultimately, it can serve to address ongoing issues related to the power and agency of TA B L E 1 Definitions of key concepts

Knowledge systems
Knowledge systems are 'made up of agents, practices, routines and institutions that organize the production, validation, transfer, and use of knowledge' (Cornell et al., 2013).

Indigenous knowledge systems
We define 'Indigenous knowledge systems' (IKS) according to Berkes as 'a cumulative body of knowledge, practice, and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by cultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (including humans) with one another and with their environment' (Berkes, 2012, p. 7), and also McGregor as 'more than a body of knowledge [. . . ] [encompassing] such aspects as spiritual experience and relationships with the land' (McGregor, 2004, p. 79;McGregor, 2018). Indigenous knowledge systems are a 'way of life, rather than being just the knowledge of how to live, it is the actual living of that life' (Ibid, p. 79). We understand the expression 'Indigenous knowledge systems' to be broader in scope and more holistic than the term 'Indigenous knowledge' conveys. We find it important to further highlight that 'Indigenous sciences' are embedded in Indigenous knowledge systems (Cajete, 2000;Johnson et al., 2016;Turnbull, 2000aTurnbull, , 2000b. Johnson et al. define Indigenous science as 'a "multi-contextual" system of thought, action and orientation applied by an Indigenous people through which they interpret how Nature works in "their place" [. . . ] Indigenous science knowledge is derived using the same methods as modern Western science including: classifying, inferring, questioning, observing, interpreting, predicting, monitoring, problem solving, and adapting' (Johnson et al., 2016, p. 5).
Their cumulative body of knowledge, practice and belief gives rise to multifaceted IKS that vary within and between communities (Reo, 2011;Houde, 2007; (Smith, 2012;Tang & Gavin, 2016;TRCC, 2015). Accordingly, applying multiple ways of knowing to prioritize, conserve and restore relationships between Indigenous peoples and the environment they live in -and are a part of -is critical and can help advance reconciliation with Indigenous peoples (Wong et al., 2020).
In recent decades, the importance of IKS has been increasingly reflected in policy and legislation. At the international level, there has been greater recognition of the value of IKS for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in international policy (Berkes, 2012;UN, 1987UN, , 1992  Articles that concern all terrestrial ecosystems (e.g. grasslands, prairies, forests, woods, mountains, taiga, tundra, terrestrial components of watersheds, marshlands), habitat or species (including birds, mammals, herpetofauna, insects, plants and fungi). Articles involving resource management (i.e. silviculture, soil, agriculture) will only be included if outcomes are directly related to biodiversity or ecosystem health. Studies reporting process optimization (e.g. timber production, harvest techniques) will be excluded.

Study design
Articles that report empirical results (either qualitatively or quantitatively) where knowledge combining or weaving practices and/or methods are discussed or inferred. Empirical studies included will fall into one of three broad categories: (1) studies focused on environmental/ecological research and monitoring (i.e. those reporting on direct or indirect observation or experience from IKS and Western sciences); (2) studies focused on the processes and practices of bridging knowledge systems in the context of environmental decision-making; and (3) (Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019) and freshwater ecosystems in Canada (S. M. Alexander et al., unpubl. ms.). These reviews have covered studies that bridge IKS and Western sciences in aquatic ecosystems and regions across Canada (e.g. lakes, rivers, wetlands, marine and coastal regions). However, with the exception of a review that has examined the use of traditional ecological knowledge in forest management (Cheveau et al., 2008), we are unaware of any systematic review and/or map conducted to date covering terrestrial landscapes such as grasslands, forests, taiga and tundra that span the territories of Indigenous peoples in the land now known as Canada.

OBJECTIVES
The primary question that this work seeks to address is, 'What methods, models and approaches have been used in studies that seek to weave IKS and Western sciences in terrestrial ecosystems research, monitoring or management in Canada'? The purpose of this protocol is to set out a methodology for the conduct of a systematic map that will collate and catalogue relevant articles relating to the above research question in order to address a series of questions in future phases of the project.
Articles identified and explored through this protocol and its associated systematic map will have the following characteristics (see Table 2 for more details): • Population: Articles that report findings on research, monitoring or management related to terrestrial ecosystems, habitat or species. • Study design: Articles that report empirical results, either qualitatively or quantitatively, and where knowledge combining or bridging practices and/or methods are discussed or inferred that seek to weave IKS and Western sciences.
• Geographical scope: Articles including case studies conducted within Canada's jurisdictional boundaries, as well as cases where Indigenous territories overlap contemporary nation-state boundaries (i.e. the Canada-United States border; e.g. Ktunaxa territory in western North America and Haudenosaunee territory in eastern North America).

Searching for articles
This systematic map protocol will use standardized search terms across four publication databases, specialized websites and one webbased search engine, as described in more detail below. This protocol will consider the bibliographies of relevant reviews to identify any articles that may not be found using the search strategy noted above.
Calls for evidence among professional networks will also complement the search strategy. Google Scholar will also be performed using two simplified search strings to search for additional published academic and grey literature. The top 250 search results for each search string (sorted by relevance) will be exported for screening in Excel. In a deviation from the previously published protocol ), Google will not be used as a search engine for this review due to its lack of consistency and limited ability to return relevant results in past reviews (Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019). In order to ensure inclusion of a wide range of sources and materials, four specialist websites (i.e. Library and Archives Canada, In addition, calls for evidence will be used to complement the search strategy described above. This will be done via an email circulated among the authors' professional networks and on social media platforms (i.e. Twitter, Facebook) asking groups and people to identify studies, papers, theses and reports that fit the scope of the systematic map. Calls for evidence will be distributed via personalized emails to co-management boards (n = 28) and Aboriginal Aquatic Resource and Oceans Management (AAROM) organizations (n = 25) in Canada with a mandate related to terrestrial ecosystems (Supporting Information 5).

Screening process
The results from the four bibliographic databases will be exported into EPPI Reviewer Web (Thomas et al., 2020), where duplicates will be removed prior to screening. Results from Google Scholar screened at both the title and abstract stage and full-text stage will be exported directly into Excel.
All articles identified through the search process outlined above will be screened for inclusion in the map at two distinct stages: (1) title and abstract and (2) full-text using the criteria outlined in the original protocol , with some modifications as described below (see Section 3.2.2). Prior to screening articles at title and abstract, a consistency check will be performed by all reviewers on an initial subset of approximately 5% of articles.
Inter-reviewer Kappa statistics will be calculated (requiring a 'moderate' level of agreement between reviewers [Landis & Koch, 1977] before moving forward), and discrepancies between reviewers will be discussed and the inclusion criteria clarified before reviewers proceed independently. If reviewer agreement is lower than moderate, a second round of inter-reviewer comparisons will be done to reconcile any differences before screening is allowed to proceed.
Attempts will be made to find the full-text of any article included at title and abstract using Carleton University subscriptions or Environment and Climate Change inter-library loan services when needed.
Prior to full-text screening, a consistency check will again be performed between the reviewers with a random subset of approximately 5% of articles included at title and abstract. Kappa statistics will be used to examine variation in agreement between the reviewers. Again, discrepancies will be discussed and inclusion criteria will be further clarified with the help of review team members. If agreement between reviewers is lower than moderate, another subset of articles will be screened by reviewers and Kappa statistics will be examined until at least a 'moderate' to 'substantial' agreement is achieved before full-text screening is allowed to proceed. Any discrepancies will be reconciled prior to screening and the inclusion criteria will be reviewed and clarified for final use. During screening, reviewers will have the ability to request a second opinion from another member of the review team for any articles with unclear eligibility.
At no point during title and abstract or full-text screening will a reviewer be allowed to influence the inclusion decision for any article that they were an author of. A list of articles excluded at the full text assessment will be provided as a Supporting Information file in the systematic map with details regarding reasons for exclusion.

Eligibility criteria
A pre-established set of eligibility criteria (Table 2) will guide article screening. All four inclusion criteria will need to be met in order for an article to be included in the final dataset of articles and case studies.

Study validity assessment
Given the broad objective and scope of this systematic map, the validity of individual articles or case studies will not be appraised.

Data coding strategy
Coding and data extraction will be conducted at the case study level rather than at the article level since, in some instances, a single arti-cle could contribute two or more case studies when the purpose of the article is comparing and contrasting multiple cases -assuming here that empirical-based research is always a case study. A standardized coding questionnaire (Supporting Information 5) will be deployed through an Excel spreadsheet to collate responses and ensure consistency across coders. The questionnaire was modelled on Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, and Cooke (2019)  Included studies will be coded by team members. Prior to meta-data extraction, a consistency check will be conducted with the questionnaire among the reviewers. The review team's extracted data from a random subset of articles (approximately 5%-10% of articles included at full-text) will be included in a consistency check before full metadata extraction proceeds. All coding decisions will be reviewed by the review team and any discrepancies will be reconciled and clarified before allowing data extraction to continue. In addition, the lead author will review all coding decisions for consistency upon the conclusion of meta-data coding. Resulting data will be exported from Excel and recorded in a comma separated file. Formatting of the data will be standardized in R and analyzed using a customized script. The R code and data files used for formatting and analysis will be made available with the results of these methods.

Study mapping and presentation
The systematic map will include two main outputs: (1) a written narrative synthesis and a coded database and (2) composite maps. Case studies will be examined to describe the overall amount of available evidence, and to provide readers with an overview understanding of cases that contribute to the body of literature that weaves IKS and Western sciences together in terrestrial research, monitoring and management in Canada.
Specifically, we will employ a narrative synthesis approach (Popay et al., 2006) that will include the use of descriptive statistics, figures and tables to summarize findings and insights. Case study variables that will be examined and described will include the follow- ing: year of publication; publication type (i.e. published academic and grey literature, theses); Indigenous authorship; Elder participation; age group of knowledge holders; focal terrestrial ecosystem (i.e. forest, woodland, prairie, taiga, tundra); focal species; and focal region within Canada. Descriptive statistics, figures and tables will be combined with a framework-based synthesis to help identify trends and gaps in the evidence. Framework-based synthesis (e.g. Dixon-Woods, 2011) will be used to guide the development of three structured matrices (similar to Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019). Bar graphs will be made using base R, and structured matrices will be developed using ggplot2 (Wickham, 2016). Sankey data visualizations to understand how themes are connected across studies (e.g. see Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019) will be produced in R using the publicly available package networkD3 (Allaire et al., 2017).
Composite maps covering the study region of the systematic map (i.e. Canada) will be developed depicting where all of the included cases took place across geographic regions (similar to Alexander, Provencher, Henri, Taylor, Lloren, et al., 2019). These maps will report the locations of case studies, thus articles that present information from more than one region will be referenced in each of those regions on the maps.
Maps depicting the approximate geospatial locations of case studies will be constructed in ArcMap 10.6.1 (ESRI, 2019).

Data sharing policy
Once the study (i.e. systematic map and protocol) will be complete, all data will be archived at Environment and Climate Change Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. A publicly accessible online version of the systematic map and a queryable database will also be developed.

DISCUSSION
This study aims to produce a protocol and systematic map that will examine the extent, range and nature of the published literature that weaves IKS and Western sciences in terrestrial research, monitoring and management in Canada. Results from the proposed systematic map can serve to support new and ongoing environmental research, management and policy efforts working across IKS and Western sciences. This work will contribute to the growing literature that discusses 'where' and 'how' knowledge systems have been woven together by highlighting methods, processes and frameworks used for weaving knowledge systems, as well as by identifying best practices and evidence gaps. In doing so, we hope this study can ultimately inform discussions on how multiple knowledge systems can support policy development and implementation of evidence-based action towards biodiversity conservation.