Aboriginal peoples and
Download
1 / 48

Forestry across management and knowledge systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 306 Views
  • Updated On :

Aboriginal peoples and forest industries: Many options for collaboration, but... no easy solutions Envisioning Tomorrow’s Forests Sustainable Forest Management Network Conference Gatineau, Quebec, 22 April 2009. An SFMN State of Knowledge project Learn from projects across Canada

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Forestry across management and knowledge systems' - Rita


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

Aboriginal peoples and forest industries:Many options for collaboration, but... no easy solutionsEnvisioning Tomorrow’s ForestsSustainable Forest Management Network ConferenceGatineau, Quebec, 22 April 2009


Forestry across management and knowledge systems l.jpg

An SFMN State of Knowledge project

Learn from projects across Canada

Prepare two “State of Knowledge” reports

Case studies of harmonization of Aboriginal and forest industry interests

Best practices for development and use of traditional land use mapping studies in forestry

Forestry across management and knowledge systems


Research team l.jpg

Stephen Wyatt Université de Moncton

Ron Trosper University of BC

Peggy SmithLakehead University

David Natcher University of Saskatchewan

Martin HébertUniversité Laval

Jean-François Fortier Research Assistant

Garth Greskiw Research Assistant

Solange Nadeau Canadian Forest Service

Luc Bouthillier Université Laval

plus other collaborators

Research team


Project partners l.jpg
Project partners

Grand Council of the Cree

Quebec

Treaty 8 First Nations

Alberta

Daishowa-Marubeni International Alberta

Government of Quebec

FNQLSDI

Quebec

Confederacy of Mainland Mi’kmaq

Nova Scotia

Tolko Industries

Alberta

Government of Alberta


Slide5 l.jpg

Why?

rights

pragmatic

How:

types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide6 l.jpg

1

Why should Aboriginal people and the forest industry collaborate?

Legal obligations

Pragmatic reasons

Dr. Peggy Smith, Lakehead University


Slide7 l.jpg

Collaboration—legal obligations

  • The Crown: constitutional obligation (s. 35) to recognize & affirm Aboriginal & treaty rights

  • Crown, in right of provinces, delegates forest management to industry

  • Industry may suffer the consequences of Crown’s failure to properly consult

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide8 l.jpg

Federal policy

  • National Forest Strategies (1992-2008) & Criteria & Indicators of SFM: acknowledgement of rights

  • Current “Vision 2008 & Beyond” has focused on economic development:

  • “Aboriginals & their businesses have a role to play in the forest economy. They are involved in the development of sustainable forest management practices, notably through the application of their knowledge & practices. As the dialogue between Aboriginals & governments, industry, & other forest sector members continues to evolve, it will create further opportunities that will benefit all & further sustainable forest management.”

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide9 l.jpg

Treaties, rights and title

Historic treaties and modern day land claims

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide10 l.jpg

Supreme Court of Canada decisions

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide11 l.jpg

A “sui generis” (unique) form of land ownership

Rooted in historic occupation & use of land

Existed prior to European settlement

Replaced by more specific rights in treaties

The Sparrow Test

Aboriginal or treaty rights can be infringed if:

there is a valid legislative objective

honour of the Crown is respected

infringement is minimal

consultation has occurred before infringement

Aboriginal Title

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide12 l.jpg

Duty arises when Crown:

knows of potential existence of right or title

considers conduct that might adversely affect this

Purpose of duty:

Reconciliation

Treat Aboriginal peoples fairly & honorably

Trigger negotiations

Accommodate Aboriginal concerns

Principles:

More than minimum acceptable standard

Carried out in “good faith”

Substantially address concerns of Aboriginal peoples

Case specific—community by community

Duty to consult

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide13 l.jpg

Proving occupancy

  • Onus on proving Aboriginal & treaty rights with First Nations & Métis

  • Based on historic use—burden of proof on Aboriginal peoples

  • Therefore, need to document historic & contemporary use

  • Based on oral history, written record, archaeological evidence

  • Mapping is key—traditional land use & occupancy

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration pragmatic reasons l.jpg
Collaboration—pragmatic reasons

  • For Aboriginal peoples:

    • Obtain a share of economic and employment benefits created by forestry

    • Maintain and demonstrate use of the land

    • Protect values, sites and uses of land

    • Apply and maintain knowledge

    • Control or influence land management

    • Develop skills and experience in contemporary land management

    • Exercise title and treaty rights

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration pragmatic reasons15 l.jpg
Collaboration—pragmatic reasons

  • For forest industries:

    • Maintain access to timber resources

    • Avoid potential conflict

    • Improve forest management practices

    • Minimize costs and maintain profits

    • Demonstrate social corporate responsibility and maintain social licence to operate

    • Comply with laws, policies and certification requirements

    • Increase the available labour pool

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration pragmatic reasons16 l.jpg
Collaboration—pragmatic reasons

  • For governments:

    • Fulfill constitutional obligation to recognize & affirm Aboriginal & treaty rights

    • Fulfill commitments to achieve sustainable forest management

    • Manage public forest for greater good

    • Promote environmental protection, including maintenance of habitat essential for wildlife, biodiversity conservation, linked to cultural diversity & traditional land use

    • Promote economic development to sustain employment & government revenues

Why?rightspragmatic

How:types

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide17 l.jpg

2

How can Aboriginal peoples and the forest industry collaborate?

Five principal forms of collaboration

Outcomes of collaboration

Balancing different forms of collaboration

Dr. Stephen Wyatt, Université de Moncton


Five principal forms of collaboration l.jpg
Five principal forms of collaboration

Economic roles and partnerships

Agreements, treaties and MOUs

Forestland mapping, planning and management

Influence on decision-making

Forest tenures

with more than 40 different sub-types

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide19 l.jpg

Economics Roles and Partnerships

Obtaining an economic stake in the forest industry

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Sub-types

Secondary transformation

Primary transformation

Harvesting & operations

Forestry planning

Employment agreements

Revenue & profit sharing

Silvicultural contracting

Services – camps, etc

Others, eg. carbon

  • Effective for jobs, revenue and economic development

  • Not always effective for forest management & traditional values

  • Often established within existing forestry regimes

  • Different forms are possible

  • Nation-owned

  • cooperatives

  • joint ventures

  • private


Slide20 l.jpg

Agreements, Treaties & MOUs

Nation-to-Nation arrangements

Nation-to-industry

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Sub-types

Self-government & comprehensive claims

Co-management agreements

Sector specific MOUs

Case specific MOUs

Specific claims

  • Establish rules or framework for other forms of collaboration

  • Can provide access to land and control of activities

  • Rarely provide benefits such as employment or revenue

  • Often related to judicial processes


Slide21 l.jpg

Forestland mapping, planning & management

Establishing control over activities on the land

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Sub-types

“Nirvana” - Aboriginal management

Comprehensive planning for all

Planning for management

Management activities

Mapping land use & occupation

Documenting traditional knowledge

  • Contributing knowledge and information to a plan

  • Setting objectives for land

  • Planning or deciding what will happen

  • Undertaking activities in accordance with a plan

  • Monitoring and follow-up

  • Aboriginal peoples are rarely involved in higher levels of management


Slide22 l.jpg

Influence on decision-making

Influencing decisions and actions on the land

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Sub-types

Autonomy

Delegated authority

Joint decision-making boards

Advisory multi-party round tables

Information sharing

Information providing

Different levels of decision

  • policy

  • planning

  • management & operations

  • Crown and industry are typically obliged to consult

  • Certification and C&I also require consultation

  • Consultation is booming across Canada

  • Need to build upon traditional governance

  • How much power or influence do Aboriginal people have?


Slide23 l.jpg

Forest Tenures

Obtaining management rights from government

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Sub-types

Aboriginal-controlled lands

Tenures designed by Aboriginal people

Land Trusts

Long-term tenures (NAFA I)

Significant volume (NAFA II)

Short-term / enterprise (NAFA III)

Minor (NAFA IV)

Emerging, e.g. carbon, NTFPs, etc.

  • Delegation of management rights and responsibilities within existing regimes

  • Does not imply recognition of Aboriginal rights or title

  • Existing tenures typically designed for industry

  • Should Aboriginal people accept the existing system?


Slide24 l.jpg

Outcomes of collaboration

Social capital

Leadership

Relationships

Cultural capital

Sharing knowledge

Customs & values

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Ecologicalcapital

Biodiversity

Wildlife

Forest health

Economiccapital

Revenue

Employment

Training

Collaborativeproject

Institutional capital

Capacity to make decisions

Systems and processes


Slide25 l.jpg

Balancing forms of collaboration

Each form of collaboration is a scale from low to high

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide26 l.jpg

  • Economic

  • 2 production

  • 1 production

  • Harvesting

  • Planning

  • Employment

  • Revenue

  • Contracting

  • Services

  • Others

  • Agreements

  • Autonomy

  • Co-management

  • Sector MOUs

  • Case MOUs

  • Specific claims

  • Management

  • Aboriginal

  • Comprehensive

  • Planning

  • Actions

  • Land use maps

  • TK studies

  • Influence

  • Autonomy

  • Delegation

  • Joint decisions

  • Round tables

  • Sharing info

  • Providing info

  • Tenures

  • Control

  • New tenures

  • Land Trusts

  • Long-term

  • Major volume

  • Short-term

  • Minor

  • Emerging

Balancing forms of collaboration

Each form of collaboration is a scale from low to high

Partners need to establish where they are on each scale

Outcomes, or capital, depends upon investments in collaboration

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide27 l.jpg

Balancing forms of collaboration

Low collaboration across the board

Unlikely to satisfy aspirations of Aboriginal peoples or to promote reconciliation

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide28 l.jpg

Balancing forms of collaboration

High on economic, low on others

Provides revenue and jobs, but does not meet other objectives of Aboriginal peoples

Unbalanced

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide29 l.jpg

Balancing forms of collaboration

Resolution of Aboriginal rights can create conditions for other arrangements

Agreements alone do not provide full range of benefits

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide30 l.jpg

Balancing forms of collaboration

Adaptive, resilient and sustainable relationships are likely to require building collaboration across all forms

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide31 l.jpg

3

How are Aboriginal people and the forest industry collaborating across Canada?

An inventory of:

- Practices on the ground

- Research studies

Jean-François Fortier, Université de Moncton / Université Laval


An inventory of experiences studies l.jpg
An inventory of experiences & studies

  • Collaborative experiences

    Trends across Canada and within provinces

    Studies and research

    Synthesis of our knowledge regarding relationships between Aboriginal groups and forest sector

    Does the research follow the trends?

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration across canada l.jpg
Collaboration across Canada

  • Practices on the ground

    Quebec, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Maritime provinces

  • Inventory of research studies

    Across Canada

    Involving Aboriginal groups (Métis and First Nations)

    Specific cases

    Assessing experiences of collaboration

    • Factors

    • Processes

    • Results

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


How was inventory achieved l.jpg
How was inventory achieved?

  • Practices & Studies

    Academic and ‘grey’ literature review

    Annotated bibliographies

    Key informants

    Workshops

    Research assistants

    Database

    Limitations

    Impossible to achieve an inventory of every single experience

    Practices evolve faster than our knowledge

    Accessibility to information

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration across canada35 l.jpg
Collaboration across Canada

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration in quebec l.jpg
Collaboration in Quebec

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


What can we learn l.jpg
What can we learn?

In some provinces, all communities are players in forest industry

All Maritime provinces except NF

Economic participation is the most popular

Economic partnerships in practice (60%)

Aboriginal land use & occupation

One of common practices among Aboriginal communities (37,1%)

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Why are economic roles so popular l.jpg
Why are economic roles so popular?

Some suggestions:

Answer common objectives

- Access to resources and benefits

Policies encourages this approach

Negotiation processes are long and expensive

Context is favourable: economic liberalism

Might be seen as door that leads to other experiences of collaboration such as co-management

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide39 l.jpg

Does research follow practice?

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Yes

No


Does the research follow practice l.jpg
Does the research follow practice?

The research does not always follow trends

Economic partnerships in practice (60%)

Economic parnerships in studies (17%)

Why? Some ideas...

  • Traditional trends in research (cultural anthropology, human ecology, etc.)

  • Conceptions of researchers towards Aboriginal peoples

  • Industry vs Aboriginal peoples (irreconcilable interests)

  • Participation of communities in forest industry is recent

  • Confidentiality of financial information

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide41 l.jpg

4

Collaboration needs to be built:

It doesn’t just happen

Relationships and collaboration are not static

Martin Hébert, Université Laval

Stephen Wyatt, Université de Moncton


Stakeholder relationships are dynamic l.jpg

Capacity builds as partners gain experience

Roles of stakeholders change

Context of forestry changes

Actors reflect on their experiences and adapt

Hierarchy of goals changes through time

Conditions of success include:

Communication about interests and goals

Equity and fairness in processes and negotiations

Building sustainable institutions

Monitoring and evaluation

Positive attitudes, relationships, trust & confidence

Stakeholder relationships are dynamic

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Collaboration as a process l.jpg
Collaboration as a process

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers

Mutual gains possible

Fast-track

Capital:

Social

Economic

Ecological

Institutional

Cultural

Communication:

Clarify goals & interests

Institutions& processes

for implementation

Monitoringevaluationfollow-up

Pos Neg

Slow-track

Negotiation:

Where mutual gain solutions are difficult

Attitudes underlying the relationship

Confidence, trust, respect, open-mindedness, patience, etc.


Slide44 l.jpg

Conclusion

Implications for managers and practitioners

in Aboriginal communities

in forest industries

in government agencies

Stephen Wyatt, Université de Moncton


Slide45 l.jpg

Must choose between different forms of collaboration

Needs, priorities and capacity of community

Opportunities provided by policy or partners

Coherence with the community’s strategy

Several forms can be used at same time

Ensure that these are complementary

Establishing rights creates space for collaboration

Other forms will be needed for benefits

Fighting for rights has proved effective, but can make collaborative relationships more difficult

Implications for Aboriginal communities

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide46 l.jpg

Must choose between different forms of collaboration

Needs, priorities and capacity of company

Opportunities provided by communities

Framework created by government policy and/or certification

Company will probably require different arrangements with each community and in each province

Recognise that Aboriginal goals and interests are not limited to economic returns and timber products

Investments in collaborative capacity can help secure timber, avoid conflicts and attain social goals

Implications for the forest industry

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide47 l.jpg

One size does not fit all

Need to negotiate clear framework—especially on consultation and rights

Make resources available—capacity-building

Permit and encourage flexibility/local adaptation

Need to promote awareness among general public/vested interests (i.e. industry, stakeholders)

Need to promote learning within public sector

Implications for government agencies

Why?rightspragmatic

How:typesbalancing

Practice & studies

Building

For managers


Slide48 l.jpg

Mutual gains possible

Fast-track

Capital:

Social

Economic

Ecological

Institutional

Cultural

Communication:

Clarify goals & interests

Institutions& processes

for implementation

Monitoringevaluationfollow-up

  • Economic

  • 2 production

  • 1 production

  • Harvesting

  • Planning

  • Employment

  • Revenue

  • Contracting

  • Services

  • Others

  • Agreements

  • Autonomy

  • Co-management

  • Sector MOUs

  • Case MOUs

  • Specific claims

  • Management

  • Aboriginal

  • Comprehensive

  • Planning

  • Actions

  • Land use maps

  • TK studies

  • Influence

  • Autonomy

  • Delegation

  • Joint decisions

  • Round tables

  • Sharing info

  • Providing info

  • Tenures

  • Control

  • New tenures

  • Land Trusts

  • Long-term

  • Major volume

  • Short-term

  • Minor

  • Emerging

Slow-track

Negotiation:

Where mutual gain solutions are difficult

Attitudes underlying the relationship

Confidence, trust, respect, open-mindedness, patience, etc.

To take home ...

Resilience

Panarchy

Complexity

Seeing reality through others’ eyes

Getting the system in the room

Building a container


ad