1 Department of Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, H3G 1M8, Canada. siralexanderbruce@gmail.com.
2 Department of Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, H3G 1M8, Canada.

Parks Canada, in response to commitments undertaken towards reconciliation, has signaled its readiness to reassess the participation of Indigenous peoples in the co-management of national parks, national park reserves, and national marine conservation areas (NMCAs). However, the effectiveness of co-management, as the established framework underpinning these and other longstanding partnerships between the state and Indigenous groups, has been disputed, based on an uneven track record in meeting the needs, interests, and aspirations of Indigenous communities. This paper explores the potential of co-management to facilitate reconciliation within national parks, reserves and NMCAs by developing a typology of various types of co-management agreements. Addressing a critical knowledge gap in co-management governance, we provide a comprehensive review of 23 negotiated co-management agreements involving the state and Indigenous groups in a national park context. The resulting typology categorizes these agreements according to contextual factors and governance arrangements, offering insights into the feasibility of shared governance approaches with Parks Canada. Moreover, it identifies the strengths and weaknesses of co-management agreements in fulfilling reconciliation commitments. Our findings indicate that, although Parks Canada has implemented innovative approaches to co-management and shown a willingness to support Indigenous-led conservation efforts, true shared governance with Indigenous groups, as defined by international standards, is limited by the Canadian government's evident reluctance to amend the foundational legislation to effectively share authority in national parks.