Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite growing interest in state race-making, we know little about how race-making plays out in the everyday practice of policy governance. To address this gap, I examine the implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act (1978), which sought to end generations of state policies that denied tribal sovereignty and forcibly removed Native children from their tribes. ICWA’s protections extend to children based on tribal citizenship, not racial status. Marshalling 40 years of archival data from the government agencies charged with ICWA enforcement, I analyze how ICWA implementers determine a child’s Indian status. I find that authorities routinely eschew the requirement to treat Indian as a citizenship category, re-defining it as a race. Yet whether and how state actors racialize Indianness varies by the institutional contexts in which they work. Comparing state child welfare agencies, state courts, and federal courts, I identify three institutional characteristics that organize race-making practices: evidentiary standards, record-keeping requirements, and incentive structures. These characteristics influence whether state decision-makers operationalize “Indian” as a racial category and the cognitive and ideological processes that undergird their classifications. I also demonstrate that changes in these institutional characteristics yield concomitant shifts in whether and how state agents engage in racialization.

Personalization is becoming ubiquitous on the World Wide Web. Such systems use statistical techniques to infer a customer's preferences and recommend content best suited to him (e.g., \"Customers who liked this also liked...\"). A debate has emerged as to whether personalization has drawbacks. By making the Web hyperspecific to our interests, does it fragment Internet users, reducing shared experiences and narrowing media consumption? We study whether personalization is in fact fragmenting the online population. Surprisingly, it does not appear to do so in our study. Personalization appears to be a tool that helps users widen their interests, which in turn creates commonality with others. This increase in commonality occurs for two reasons, which we term volume and product-mix effects. The volume effect is that consumers simply consume more after personalized recommendations, increasing the chance of having more items in common. The product-mix effect is that, conditional on volume, consumers buy a more similar mix of products after recommendations. This paper was accepted by Sandra Slaughter, information systems.

Tribal communities in the Pacific Northwest of the United States of America (USA) have long-standing relationships to ancestral lands now managed by federal land management agencies. In recent decades, federal and state governments have increasingly recognized tribal rights to resources on public lands and to participate in their management. In support of a new planning initiative to promote sustainable land management, we reviewed scientific publications to examine relationships between tribal social-ecological systems and public lands in the region. We identified key ecocultural resources, impacts to those resources, and associated forest ecosystems, and strategies that have been piloted to redress those impacts. We found that many factors stemming from colonization by Euro-Americans have engendered social-ecological traps that have inhibited tribes from continuing traditional land stewardship activities that supported their well-being and maintained ecological integrity. These long-standing factors include legal and political constraints on tribal access and management; declining quality and abundance of forest resources due to inhibition of both natural disturbance and indigenous tending regimes; competition with nontribal users; species extirpations and introductions of invasive species; and erosion of tribal traditional ecological knowledge and relationships that are important for revitalizing resource use. As a consequence, both supply and demand for these forest resources have been reduced, as have the resilience and diversity of these ecosystems. Simply permitting resource harvest by tribal members does not sufficiently address the underlying constraints in ways that will promote tribal well-being. Escaping these traps will require addressing a gamut of ecological and social constraints through cooperative restoration efforts between land management agencies and tribes, several of which we highlight as examples. Because tribally focused restoration strategies generally align with broader strategies suggested to restore national forests in the region, they can foster both tribal well-being and ecological sustainability.

ObjectivesDepression and anxiety are leading causes of youth disability worldwide, yet our understanding of these conditions in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) youths is limited. Research has been sparse in SSA, and prevalence rates and correlates of these conditions remain scarcely investigated. To help address these gaps, this cross-sectional study assessed the prevalence of adolescent depression and anxiety symptoms in a community sample of high school students in Kenya. We also examined associations between those symptoms and psychosocial and sociodemographic factors.MethodsWe administered self-report measures of depression and anxiety symptoms, social support, gratitude, growth mindsets, and life satisfaction to 658 students (51.37% female) aged 13–19.ResultsOnly the measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screen-7), and social support (Multidimensional Scale for Perceived Social Support Scale) showed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach alpha > 0.70) in the study sample. Findings with these measures among Kenyan youths showed high levels of depression symptoms (45.90% above clinical cutoff) and anxiety symptoms (37.99% above clinical cutoff). Older adolescents reported higher depression and anxiety symptoms, as well as lower social support than younger adolescents. Females reported more anxiety than males, and members of minority tribes reported more anxiety than members of majority tribes.ConclusionsThis study highlights the high prevalence of adolescent internalizing symptoms in Kenyan high school students, identifies important correlates of these symptoms, and illustrates the need for culturally appropriate assessment tools.

American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) experienced some of the highest rates of COVID-19 disease and death in the United States1,2: an estimated 1 in 475 AI/ANs have died from COVID-19, in contrast to 1 in 825 White Americans.3 Infectious diseases have caused catastrophic losses among Indigenous populations since the first contact with Europeans; the distribution of smallpox-infected blankets by colonizers and federal officials is the earliest documentation of germ warfare and remains a devastating memory.4,5 The disproportionate impact of COVID-19 in AI/AN communities is a result of historically rooted systems of colonization, oppression, and marginalization.6 High rates of poverty, lack of running water, inadequate access to healthy food and transportation, poor indoor air quality, and overcrowded housing have all contributed to increased risk from COVID-19, especially on tribal reservations. Lack of electricity, Internet, and cell service, and inadequate infrastructure also created barriers to sharing prevention guidance, access to telemedicine, and health education. Chronic underfunding of the Indian Health Service resulted in insufficient resources and capacity to care for COVID-19 patients; many had to be transported off reservations to regional hospitals. High rates of underlying chronic health conditions, particularly those that contribute to more severe outcomes-including diabetes, heart disease, and lung disease, which are driven by these same social determinants-exacerbated the effects of COVID-19. Public health surveillance during COVID-19 has also failed at times to appropriately count and consider AI/ANs, an issue deemed \"data genocide.\" Despite these challenges, the COVID-19 vaccination efforts in many AI/AN communities have been major successes; AI/ANs have the highest COVID-19 vaccination rate of any racial or ethnic group in the country (Figure 1). How can this success inform the ongoing implementation of vaccination efforts elsewhere? We draw from four decades of work in partnership with tribes to outline several key lessons. Ultimately, we argue that the COVID-19 vaccination effort in AI/AN communities has been successful because it was nurtured at its roots by a deep well of community strength and by respect for tribal sovereignty.

Can fieldwork still be done in today’s most violent warzones? We contend that long-held methodological principles about power and impartiality do not hold in today’s conflict-ridden environments. Research of this kind can still be pursued, but only if the scholar’s place is reconceived as one of limited power and unavoidable partiality. We argue that those still able to do fieldwork in sites of increasing danger do so by virtue of building their own ‘tribes,’ forming and joining different social micro-systems to collect data and, in some cases, survive. Field research must, therefore, be recognized as its own form of foreign intervention. In considering the future of political science research in the most challenging war-torn settings, we examine the risks and opportunities that accompany ‘tribal politics’ of this kind and underline the importance of reflecting on our own positionality in the process of knowledge production.

Under Operation Warp Speed (OWS), the US government invested an unprecedented $10 billion to speed the development, manufacturing, and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine, resulting in emergency use authorizations for two effective vaccine products in a record-breaking 11-month time frame. Although this is a remarkable scientific accomplishment, the United States now faces the urgent task of ensuring widespread acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, and begin to resume normal economic, educational, and social activities. The operational responsibility for ensuring that COVID19 vaccines are safely and efficiently delivered in a jurisdiction falls largely on state, territorial, tribal, and local governmental public health systems that support jurisdiction-wide vaccination efforts for a variety of immunizations, including childhood diseases and seasonal influenza. Ultimately, state and territory governors are responsible for the \"last mile\" of COVID-19 vaccine distribution in their states and ensuring that vaccination is efficiently prioritized for those who need it most, as well as administered, tracked, and reported to the federal government. Although all states and territories have developed plans to increase capacity, enhance data systems, and develop partnerships to support this complex effort, the initial rollout of vaccine allocations did not match federal projections and public expectations; states reportedly distributed roughly one third of allocated doses in the first two weeks of the program.

This special feature presents articles on the cross-scale interactions among law, ecosystem dynamics, and governance to address the adaptive capacity of six watersheds in the United States as they respond to rapid environmental change. We build on work that assesses resilience and transformation in riverine and wetland social-ecological systems across the United States at a variety of scales, levels of development, and degrees of degradation, focusing specifically on the Anacostia River, Central Platte River, Klamath River, Columbia River, Middle Rio Grand River, and the Everglades wetlands. All of these cases involve complex institutional systems, histories involving ecological and social regime shifts, and are operated under similar constitutional and legal frameworks for the division of authority among federal, state, local, and where applicable, tribal governments. We focus on the legal dimensions of watershed governance that directly relate to ecological resilience and transformability of the social-ecological systems. We synthesize the results of these assessments to advance our understanding of the role of law and governance as a trigger, facilitator, or barrier to adaptation and transformation in the face of rapid environmental change, including shifting climate. This introductory article defines terminology and theoretical concepts to present a bridging framework between U.S. law and ecological resilience that can be used by the remaining articles in this special issue.

There are 574 federally recognized domestic dependent tribal nations in the United States. Each tribe is separate from its respective surrounding state(s) and governs itself. And yet, none of them have the power to send representatives to Congress. Our democratic representative structures function as if tribal governments and the reservations they govern do not exist. But tribal citizens do not simply live within a state and are not simply governed by that state like any other state citizen. Rather, it is tribal law and tribal governments-not state law or state governments-that primarily govern and shape the lives of tribal citizens living on reservations. Tribal governments are not complementary or subsidiary to state governments-they are frequent rivals for power and resources. This system, simply put, doesn't make sense. Tribes should have their own representation in the federal government. This Article makes the case for why and examines how this seemingly obvious omission in our democratic structuring came to pass. This Article examines the democratic mismatch between existing governments-which include not only 50 states, but also 574 federally recognized tribes-and the representative democratic structure that is built into the Constitution around the institution of the state. It details the failed attempts of tribal governments to obtain representation, either as states or outside of statehood. This history reveals a story about race, power, colonialism, and institutions. Attempts by white majorities to hold onto political power within states included denying Native peoples' individual rights and denying statehood to largely Native areas until Native people assimilated or white citizens outnumbered them. These dynamics, which this Article dubs \"assimilative colonialism,\" have not only shaped our existing democratic structures but have also had a lasting effect on Native relationships with political power. The nefarious brilliance of assimilative colonialism was to offer American political power to Native peoples-whether citizenship, statehood, or delegates-only and always at the cost of what made them Native. As a result, many Native people justifiably view American political power not as empowering but as dangerous. Assimilative colonialism has thus held back the emergence of Native movements for political reform by making it impossible to even imagine tribal representation in a real sense since it seemed only possible through assimilation. It is long overdue that we step back and examine the legacy of assimilative colonialism in American representative democracy. We ought to think about structural reform and what representative structures could-and maybe should-have been on the table for tribal governments and their citizens since the beginning. We ought to be asking: What would American democratic structures look like if we truly incorporated tribal governments as equal sovereigns within the United States?

As the impacts of climate change increasingly and disproportionately affect indigenous peoples, equitable approaches to regional climate change adaptation must center the voices, needs, and priorities of Indigenous communities. Although the tribal climate change principles identify actionable recommendations to address the unique needs of Indigenous peoples in the contexts of climate change adaptation efforts undertaken at the Federal level in the United States (U.S.), there has yet to be exploration of how such principles might be applied at the regional level. Through semi-structured qualitative interviews with 18 representatives from inter-Tribal organizations and non-Tribal organizations engaged in regional climate adaptation in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, this research sought to describe challenges faced by, and opportunities available to, non-Tribal entities when engaging with Tribes on regional climate adaptation initiatives. All respondents reported high levels of motivation to work with Tribes on climate adaptation and identified several perceived benefits of integrating Tribal partnerships and indigenous ways of knowing into regional climate adaptation initiatives. Respondents underscored the need for strong, trusted relationships that respect the sovereignty and priorities of Tribal nations to guide engagement. However, non-Tribal organizations’ own capacity constraints, perceived Tribal capacity constraints, and institutional cultures rooted in colonialism and structural racism were discussed as obstacles to meaningful engagement. As such, we identify an urgent need to prioritize sustained investments in both Tribal and non-Tribal actors’ partnership capacities and climate change adaptation capabilities to place Indigenous voices and needs at the forefront of regional climate change adaptation planning and implementation.