The conventional archaeological model that prevailed for most of the twentieth century treated human remains and associated artifacts as public scientific resources — property of states or institutions, available to researchers according to their professional interests and the relevant legal frameworks, with Indigenous communities having at most an advisory role in decisions about how their ancestors were studied and displayed.

This model was not universally imposed — there were always exceptions, always specific situations where researchers and communities worked in more respectful ways.

But the norm was one that privileged scientific access over Indigenous governance.

NAGPRA in the United States and parallel legislation and policy frameworks in Canada have changed this norm significantly.

The recognition that Indigenous nations have governance rights over the treatment of their ancestors — rights that are not simply derived from federal Indian law but from the Indigenous communities’ own inherent sovereignty — has shifted the balance of authority in research situations like the Kwäday Dän Ts’ìnchi case.

The Champagne and Aishihik First Nations’ governance of the Kwäday Dän Ts’ìnchi research was not simply a matter of approving a research protocol that scientists had designed.