To log or not to log? How forestry fits with the goals of First Nations in British Columbia

Abstract

Commercial forestry has played an important role in the Canadian economy. Yet, First Nations (FNs) communities have not shared equitably in the benefits. Since 2002, the government of British Columbia (BC) has actively sought to address this inequity by increasing the volume of forest harvesting tenures to FNs. The rationale is that rights to harvest will also enhance economic and then social outcomes, as well as address broader legal and political disputes. However, whether these rights can translate into the expected benefits has received little attention. This paper seeks to help address this knowledge gap by interviewing FNs experts and forestry professionals in BC to understand the long-term goals of FNs in forestry, to strategically evaluate how (and if) opportunities from forestry arise, and to identify institutional factors that influence successful participation in forestry. What we found is that forest tenure can promote economic outcomes, but it often comes at the expense of other intrinsic forest values. We conclude that a rights-based approach alone will not achieve the diverse outcomes related to forestry without effective governance by FNs to evaluate and capitalize on the opportunity in ways that are legitimate to the individual community's values.Résumé : La foresterie commerciale tient un rôle important dans l'économie canadienne. Toutefois, les nations autochtones ne tirent pas leur juste part de ces bénéfices. Depuis 2002, le gouvernement de la Colombie-Britannique cherche activement à corriger cette iniquité en augmentant les attributions de récolte à travers des modes de tenure autochtone. On espère ainsi que les droits de récolte vont améliorer la situation économique et sociale tout en contribuant à régler des litiges plus larges de nature légale et politique. Mais on a peu cherché à savoir si ces droits produisent les résultats escomptés. Cet article vise à combler cette lacune. Nous avons interviewé des experts et des professionnels forestiers autochtones de la Colombie-Britannique afin de comprendre les visées à long terme des nations autochtones envers la foresterie. Quand de telles visées existaient, nous avons tenté de cerner la manière dont les initiatives forestières étaient évaluées et les facteurs institutionnels qui en favorisaient la réussite. Nous estimons que des modes de tenure autochtone peuvent induire du développement économique, mais cela se fait souvent aux dépends d'autres valeurs intrinsèques à la forêt. Nous concluons qu'une approche fondée uniquement sur l'attribution de droits de récolte ne parviendra pas à combler les nombreuses attentes envers la forêt sans qu'une réelle gouvernance autochtone puisse évaluer les retombées de ces occasions de développement et en tirer profit d'une façon qui apparaît légitime en regard des valeurs spécifiques à chaque communauté autochtone. [Traduit par la Rédaction]

Reimagining energy in the Canadian boreal zone: policy needs to facilitate a successful transition to a low-carbon energy future1

“…It is important to work with communities to identify their goals and aspirations around their lands and traditional territories (Nikolakis et al 2017;Beaudoin et al 2016). At the same time, there are also insights to be gained from an assessment of the structural challenges and opportunities these communities face and ways in which policy and more systemic institutional change can support these efforts (Nikolakis and Nelson 2015). An important and overlapping theme is ongoing community efforts in rebuilding Indigenous governance institutions for those that are moving towards greater autonomy (where progress is slow, uneven and not uniform (Nikolakis and Nelson 2015)).…”

Growing together: A principle-based approach to building collaborative Indigenous partnerships in Canada’s forest sector

“…Indigenous community representatives often have little formal training in forest management, which results in even greater power imbalances in resource governance and, ultimately, a diminished ability to derive meaningful community benefits from development (Wyatt et al 2015). To compound this issue, limitations imposed on First Nations governance structures by the Indian Act make it difficult to develop the appropriate institutional structures necessary to counteract these imbalances (Nikolakis and Nelson 2015). As a consequence, Indigenous communities may eventually be forced to "play within the rules" of state-sponsored governance arrangements, simply to access the tools and benefits communities need to participate in the forest sector (Stevenson 2006, p. 172).…”

“…Through understanding and implementing these lessons, Indigenous and non-Indigenous actors can ultimately begin to work more effectively toward "the development of a 'co-existence' relationship, " (McGregor 2011, p. 307) and toward providing Indigenous communities with the tools they need to successfully identify and take advantage of the opportunities facing them within Canada's forest sector (Nikolakis and Nelson 2015). For personal use only.…”

Maintaining accountability between levels of governance in Indigenous economic development: Examples from British Columbia, Canada

“…Many Indigenous communities own businesses for the purpose of economic development that meets community goals (Cornell ; Booth and Skelton ; Anderson ; Nikolakis and Nelson ) such as employment for community members, access to training and skills development and financial transfers to support programs and service delivery. Effective self‐governance is often understood to require strong and sustainable economic development (Cornell and Kalt ; Anderson, Dana, and Dana ; First Nations Leadership Council and B.C.…”

“…These EDCs are owned by the community but intended to operate independently of political decision‐making (Cameron ; Atkinson and Nilles ; Ratcliff & Company ). While having some degree of separation between business and politics is highly correlated with success of Indigenous community‐owned businesses (Jorgensen and Taylor ; Nikolakis and Nelson ), complete separation can result in lack of communication and generate misunderstandings that can equally harm economic prospects (Trosper et al ; Booth and Skelton ). Cornell and Kalt () note that successful Indigenous economic development places “management in the hands of appointed boards of directors that are accountable to [political leaders] in the long run, but are genuinely independent of it in the day‐to‐day management of business operations.” This article examines the practicalities of this situation, asking: how do Indigenous communities create governance systems that provide both accountability and separation?…”