The High Stakes of Protecting Indigenous Homelands

Abstract

In 2000, eight First Nations and the Council of the Haida Nation formed an alliance to protect their traditional territories from powerful economic, political and ideological interests that were moving to determine the future of coastal British Columbia. Their organization, Coastal First Nations (formerly, the Turning Point Initiative), has become a significant player with governments, industry and environmental groups in defining the parameters for transforming coastal B. C. into a conservation-based economy, following ecosystem-based management principles. Because environmentalists initiated their Great Bear Rainforest Campaign in the homelands of Coastal First Nations members beginning in 1995, Coastal First Nations provides a window into understanding the complex unfolding of relationships between First Nations and major environmental groups. Based on an analysis of interviews with First Nations and environmental group leaders, it is proposed that their relationship has evolved through four phases (confrontation, relationship building, becoming allies, and shifting terrains). By speaking with one voice while respecting the autonomy of its members, Coastal First Nations has provided a strategic vehicle for increasing Indigenous self-determination and self-sufficiency in First Nations homelands in the face of ongoing colonization and global forces.

The Remapping of Forest Governance: From Shareholder to Stakeholder

“…This organization helped resolve confrontations between ENGOs and industry and encouraged more constructive bargains based on shared knowledge and common areas of agreement. Meanwhile, the Turning Point Initiative depended on recognition by the provincial government that negotiations with indigenous peoples would be "government to government" (G2G), rather than merely stakeholder to government (Davis, 2009). In this regard, a series of court decisions have empowered First Nations, who, from being excluded, have become highly influential, and whose interests, knowledge, and consent must now be explicitly included in forestry decision making.…”