We use a critical incident from Indigenous educational fieldwork on global environmental shift with Kichwa—Indigenous communities in, Ecuador. A community leader’s question, “Who will replace you?” becomes a point of entry to reflect on the many dimensions of community engagement in interdisciplinary weather systems change research. We examine how guesthood and mink’a (obligatory community work) help reframe the roles and responsibilities of researchers working in remote, rural, and Indigenous territories experiencing environmental disruption. Rather than positioning collaboration as a supplement to scientific inquiry, we consider how community expectations around continuity, care, and accountability challenge extractive research paradigms and promote more durable and reciprocal forms of engagement. By attending to the temporal, structural, and epistemic tensions that shape these collaborations, we argue for an approach to research that is future-oriented, relationally-grounded, and responsive to the realities of people in places where land, weather, and water are inseparable from daily life.
AndreottiV. (2016). The educational challenges of imagining the world differently. Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue Canadienne d’études Du Développement, 37(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2016.1134456
2.
Anthony-StevensV.MatsawS. L.Jr. (2020). The productive uncertainty of Indigenous and decolonizing methodologies in the preparation of interdisciplinary STEM researchers. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15, 595–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09942-x
3.
BeckerM. (2008). Indians and leftists in the making of Ecuador’s modern Indigenous movements. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381457
4.
BeckerM.TutilloS. (2009). Historia agraria y social de Cayambe [Agrarian and Social History of Cayambe]. Abya Yala.
5.
CARE Ecuador. (2016). Etnohistoria de los pueblos y nacionalidades originarias de Ecuador. Guía módulos de capacitación [Ethnohistory of the original communities and nationalities of Ecuador. Training module guide] (Vol. 16).
6.
Fondo Intercultural del Agua de Cayambe. (2017). Sistematización de la experiencia del Fondo Intercultural del Agua de Cayambe [Systematization of the experience of the Cayambe Intercultural Water Fund]. Gobierno Autónomo Descentralizado Municipal del Cantón Cayambe.
7.
GaniJ. K.KhanR. M. (2024). Positionality statements as a function of coloniality: Interrogating reflexive methodologies. International Studies Quarterly, 68(2), Article sqae038. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae038
8.
GonzálezP. A.VázquezA. M. (2015). An ontological turn in the debate on Buen Vivir-Sumak Kawsay in Ecuador: Ideology, knowledge, and the common. Latin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies, 10(3), 315–334.
9.
HalquistD.MusantiS. (2010). Critical incidents and reflection: Turning points that challenge the researcher and create opportunities for knowing. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(4), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2010.492811
KerrJ.AndreottiV. (2018). Recognizing more-than-human relations in social justice research: Gesturing towards decolonial possibilities. Issues in Teacher Education, 27(2), 53–67.
13.
KorovkinT. (2010). Between class and ethnicity: Encounters of Ecuador’s Indigenous people with the political left. Latin American Perspectives, 37(5), 331–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/17442222.2010.513831
14.
LangM. (2021). Rehabitando el territorio. Plurinacionalidad, interculturalidad y sumak kawsay en el primer municipio indígena de Cayambe [Re-inhabiting the Territory: Plurinationality, Interculturality, and Sumak Kawsay in the First Indigenous Municipality of Cayambe]. Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar.
15.
LangM. (2022a). Buen vivir as territorial practice: Building a more just and sustainable life through interculturality. Sustainability Science, 17, 1287–1299. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01130-1
MatairaP. J. (2019). Transforming Indigenous research: Collaborative responses to historical research tensions. International Review of Education, 65(1), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09771-4
18.
McAllisterT. (2022). 50 reasons why there are no Māori in your science department. Journal of Global Indigeneity, 6(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.31979/jgi.2022.0602
MontoyaA. J. (2018). Taos Pueblo migration theories: Indigenous push and pull factors [Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University]. KEEP. https://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.49405
21.
PidgeonM. (2016). More than a checklist: Meaningful Indigenous inclusion in higher education. Social Inclusion, 4(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v4i1.618
22.
RadcliffeS. A. (2012). Development for a postneoliberal era? Sumak kawsay, living well and the limits to decolonisation in Ecuador. Geoforum, 43(2), 240–249.
23.
RiosG. C.FloydS.Julca GuerreroF. (2024). ¿Cuántas lenguas quechuas hay? Una estimación del número de lenguas quechuas [How many Quechua languages are there? An estimate of the number of Quechua languages]. Lexis, 48(1), 34–77.
24.
Rodríguez CruzM. (2018). Educación intercultural bilingüe, interculturalidad y plurinacionalidad en el Ecuador: Luchas y experiencias del movimiento indígena desde Dolores Cacuango hasta la Revolución Ciudadana [Bilingual intercultural education, interculturality, and plurinationality in Ecuador: Struggles and experiences of the Indigenous movement from Dolores Cacuango to the Citizens’ Revolution]. Ediciones Abya-Yala.
25.
SaberiL.NgG. H. C.NelsonL.ZhiW.La FrenierreJ.JohnstoneM. (2021). Spatiotemporal drivers of hydrochemical variability in a tropical glacierized watershed in the Andes. Water Resources Research, 57(5), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028722
26.
ShulistS.Pedri-SpadeC. (2022). Lingua Nullius: Indigenous language learning and revitalization as sites for settler-colonial violence. Canadian Modern Language Review, 78(4), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr-2020-0011
27.
SmithL. T. (2005). On tricky ground. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.; pp. 85–107). Sage.
28.
SomersL. D.McKenzieJ. M.MarkB. G.LagosP.NgG. H. C.WickertA. D.YarlequeC.BaraërM.SilvaY. (2019). Groundwater buffers decreasing glacier melt in an Andean watershed—But not forever. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(22), 13016–13026. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085540
29.
Sumida HuamanE. (2020). Mink’a methodologies: Quechua research in the Peruvian Andes. In Sumida HuamanE.MartinN. D. (Eds.), Indigenous knowledge systems and research methodologies: Local solutions and global opportunities (pp. 252–272). Canadian Scholars’ Press.
30.
Sumida HuamanE. (2022). How Indigenous scholarship changes the field: Pluriversal appreciation, decolonial aspirations, and comparative Indigenous education. Comparative Education Review, 66(3), 391–416. https://doi.org/10.1086/720442
31.
Sumida HuamanE.MatairaP. (2025). Comparative Indigenous research: Indigenous communities, knowledges, and mana across lands and waters. In ThomasM.JulesT.ShieldsR.SchweisfurthM. (Eds.), The Bloomsbury handbook of research methods in comparative and international education (pp. 222–236). Bloomsbury.
32.
TrippD. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgment. Routledge.
33.
WhittL. (2009). Science, colonialism, and Indigenous peoples: The cultural politics of law and knowledge. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511760068
34.
WilsonS. (2001). What is an Indigenous research methodology?. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25(2), 175–179.
