Northern political context

A number of watershed moments have marked a transformation in aboriginal political power in Canada since the 1970s. Much of the political mobilisation of aboriginal peoples in the 1970s, such as the formation of Indian Brotherhood of the NWT (now the Dene nation), was in part triggered with the announcement of a White Paper in 1969. This Canadian policy document proposed a new direction for Indian policy: to close the book on the past, including existing treaties and outstanding disputes, and to assimilate Indians into Canadian mainstream society. Aboriginal people across the country saw the White Paper as the government's newest assimilation tactic and indignantly opposed it. The Trudeau government later backed away from the paper.

The political landscape in other parts of northern Canada and the United States was also undergoing change at this time. To the west, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (1971) set out a resolution to long standing native land claims in anticipation of energy development on the north shore and pipeline construction throughout the state. This settlement was rushed to completion but not without considerable resistance from aboriginal communities which continue to debate the legacy of such settlements on the persistence of native lifestyles (Thomas Reference Thomas1986). Similarly, the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975) was a comprehensive agreement for the Cree people of northern Quebec that opened the opportunity for hydroelectric development in the region. But the agreement was contested with concerns over the impact of hydro development on Cree way of life. These agreements in Alaska and Quebec were freshly completed or under close scrutiny when pipeline development proposals emerged in the Northwest Territories. The Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry (1974–1977) was formed to investigate the issues associated with the building of a pipeline along the Mackenzie Valley. After traveling over 17,000 miles to 35 different communities and hearing from roughly 1000 people in eight languages, the head of the inquiry, Justice Thomas Berger, recommended a 10 year moratorium on the pipeline to allow sufficient time for aboriginal peoples to settle outstanding land claims (Berger Reference Berger1988). In the light of concerns over the rush to settle land claims in Alaska and the James Bay region, the moratorium on pipeline development in the NWT was viewed as a great victory for aboriginal peoples’ rights and an exemplary model for the advancement of social impact assessment (SIA) in Canada and around the world. Then, in 1979, for the first time in history, aboriginal leaders comprised the majority of elected representatives in the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories. Aboriginal peoples’ influence on northern policy was growing more visible.

In the 1980s, the steadfast political organising and lobbying of aboriginal groups in the years previous began to materialise into substantive, legal changes.Footnote ⁵ In 1982, on the heels of the aboriginal political victory in the NWT assembly, the Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA), the first of a number of land claim agreements, was signed.Footnote ⁶ The political climate in the north during the 1980s was also influenced by the National Energy Program (NEP). This federal policy sought to promote Canada's self-sufficiency in energy supplies and thus strongly encouraged resource companies, via incentives and subsidies, to develop the country's northern resources. A number of resource projects, such as the Norman Wells Pipeline, ensued.

In the following decade, the political tone in northern Canada was punctuated by two national events: the voting down of the Meech Lake Accord by aboriginal politician Elijah Harper, and shortly following, the Oka Crisis. In response to these events, and to mounting national concerns over aboriginal rights, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) was appointed. The commission's broad mandate was to ‘investigate the evolution of the relationship among Aboriginal peoples (Indian, Inuit and Métis), the Canadian government, and Canadian society as a whole’ (INAC 1996). RCAP's final report (1996), which concluded that aboriginal and non-aboriginal relations in Canada required a complete restructuring, would establish the raison d'etre of northern aboriginal research in years to follow.

In more recent years, much of the political scene has been dominated by the proposed Mackenzie Gas Pipeline (MGP), as well as the formation of the Aboriginal Pipeline Group (a 100% aboriginal-owned one-third partner in the MGP). National attention is also focused on climate change, its implications for northerners and, with the melting sea ice and increased access to Canada's most northerly shores, Canadian sovereignty (Coates and others Reference Coates, Lackenbauer, Morrison and Poelzer2008). Meanwhile, aboriginal groups continue to lobby the Government of Canada to act on the recommendations set forth by the RCAP report in 1996, with the Assembly of first nations (AFN) recently assigning a failing grade to the federal government for its lack of progress over the last 10 years (AFN 2006). This general political frame can be loosely positioned within a field of political ecology that identifies aspects of culture within land claims and other regulatory frameworks such as the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (Christensen and Grant Reference Christensen and Grant2007).

Academic context

While the political climate in the north evolved, various research traditions were also undergoing considerable change. For example, the theoretical paradigms underlying anthropology have shifted significantly. Within the north in particular, a mode of anthropological research focused on community impacts and the problems associated with the integration of aboriginal communities into mainstream North American lifestyles. Scholars such as Honnigmann (Reference Honnigmann1965) and Chance (Reference Chance1960) were leaders in tracking the acculturation of aboriginal communities and the challenges along this path of modernisation. Within anthropology, the acculturationist tradition focused on questions of cultural integration and documenting this process with attention to social pathologies and the changing locus of social control from traditional systems to modern systems of church and state.

In contrast to the acculturationist traditions, another way of understanding cultural transformation was taking shape in northern research through the work of Steward (Reference Steward, Moore and Sanders1955) and a host of contemporary scholars in the cultural ecology tradition. Cultural ecology is concerned with the ways in which technologies and practices are utilised in different social and environmental arrangements. Moreover, the notion of cultural ecology is closely linked to the idea of cultural adaptation and an understanding of the ways in which communities are adapted to their biophysical and socio-cultural environment (Wenzel Reference Wenzel2001). That culture is adaptive provides a basic premise within this research tradition. Although these two research traditions were present in the Canadian north during the 1970s, it would appear that the acculturationist tradition, focusing on problems of cultural integration, began to give way to the cultural ecology tradition, focusing on adaptation and resilience (Balikci Reference Balikci1989; Wenzel Reference Wenzel2001).

Similarly, in the field of environmental impact assessment and the sub-field of social impact assessment in particular, a transition in the approach to research can be noted. Much of the early work on social impacts in the north was closely akin to the acculturationist tradition under which social problems were identified as a component of the transition to the modern industrialised economy. Thus, one of the primary areas of focus within this literature involved consideration for social problems. Building on the Durkheimian attention to ‘disturbances of collective order’, this phenomenon of rapid social change within aboriginal contexts is expressed in several ways: ‘social pollution’ (Justus and Simonetta Reference Justus, Simonetta, Geisler, Usner, Green and West1982a), ‘collective trauma’ (Erikson Reference Erikson1976), and the ‘total intrusion effect’ (Waldrum Reference Waldrum1988). These scholars point to what can be generally described as a social disruption hypothesis. While this hypothesis was originally formed through research in non-northern and non-aboriginal communities experiencing oil booms (Davenport and Davenport Reference Davenport and Davenport1980; England and Albrecht Reference England and Albrecht1984; Freudenburg Reference Freudenburg1981; Kohrs Reference Kohrs1974), this focus on social disruption was a key aspect of research on the socio-economic conditions of northern communities.

This focus on social pathologies and social disruption in the 1970s and 1980s has given way in more recent years to a community based orientation to social impact assessment and a set of scholarly ideas that place local actors and local knowledge at the centre of the impact assessment process. Crucial in this turn toward the local is a transition away from top down impact assessment frameworks where indicators and metrics are identified by experts and imposed on the community (O'Faircheallaigh Reference O'Faircheallaigh2007). Slowly, we are seeing more scholarship that is focused on participatory dimensions of SIA and attention to traditional knowledge in aboriginal communities (Usher Reference Usher2000). The participatory approach to SIA goes beyond baseline assessment and trend analysis, to include efforts on behalf of social scientists to secure better futures for communities faced with major project developments (Becker and others Reference Becker, Harris, Nielsen and McLaughlin2004).

In summary, this section identifies the shifting milieus of political activity and academic research that lead to very different approaches to questions of resource development and aboriginal culture. As one might expect, early research into aboriginal culture is more heavily influenced by a politics of assimilation and the acculturationist and social disturbance traditions in anthropology and sociology. Over time, however, attention to new political forces of empowerment and a research tradition that is focused on adaptation and participatory impact assessment has become more prominent. Coming to the key question of this paper then, requires an articulation of literature that takes into consideration these broader forces of change.

Community impacts: 1970s to the mid–1990s

As described above, northern research in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s was primarily underpinned by the acculturationist tradition in anthropology and the social disburbance tradition in sociology. Based on a summary of research from this era, DesBrisay (Reference DesBrisay1994: 108) suggests that the following circumstances lead to an increase in social problems in aboriginal communities:

Not surprisingly, DesBrisay (Reference DesBrisay1994) found that most of the resource projects that are associated with causing severe and persistent social problems are also those that have inflicted significant damage to the land based economy of communities. Much of the research that is summarised by DesBrisay deals with social disturbance along the lines of Durkheimian theory.

During this first phase of research, authors note that some of the most dramatic disruptions in aboriginal communities from resource development have been related to hydroelectric mega-projects, and lessons from the James Bay Hydroelectric Project in particular. These impacts are largely due to staggering spatial impacts and resultant ecological changes, such as the relocation of communities due to the flooding of traditional lands and the subsequent mercury poisoning of fish (Knight and others Reference Knight, Boothroyd, Eberle, Kawaguchi and Gagnon1993; Niezen Reference Niezen1993; Shkilnyk Reference Shkilnyk1985). Severe social impacts from oil and gas development were also documented in the 1970s and 1980s in Alberta. In fact, soon after the oil royalties were distributed among the Stoney and Hobbema reserve residents, alcoholism increased, cocaine arrived, and suicides skyrocketed (for example from 1985 to 1987, the suicide rate for men was 83 times the national average) (Notzke Reference Notzke1994). The cumulative effects of oil sands development in the Fort McKay area of northeast Alberta from the 1960s to the 1980s were also significantly disruptive. Fort McKay residents experienced a loss of trapping areas, a decline in traditional activities, a deterioration of the community's social fabric and ability to control community life (Justus and Simonetta Reference Justus and Simonetta1979; Justus and Simonetta Reference Justus, Simonetta, Geisler, Usner, Green and West1982a; Justus and Simonetta Reference Justus, Simonetta, Geisler, Usner, Green and West1982b). In general, however, a review of post-project impact studies by Knight and others (Reference Knight, Boothroyd, Eberle, Kawaguchi and Gagnon1993) found that studies that compared findings of actual impacts to pre-project projections concluded that the actual impacts were less than predicted.

There may be a number of explanations for this. One explanation involves the changing political landscape and improving resource practices (that is higher environmental standards, training and integration of aboriginal people into a project's workforce) following the conclusions of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry in 1977. Additionally, several studies noted that resource development and wage employment did not significantly affect the level of traditional harvesting (Bone Reference Bone1985; Hobart Reference Hobart and Bowles1982; Kruse Reference Kruse1991; MacEachern Reference MacEachern1983). Usher (Reference Usher1989) identified two important factors that facilitate a harmonious relationship between wage work and the traditional economy: high wage rates and flexibility in labour time through practices such as rotational employment at remote work sites and job-sharing. Usher explains that with high pay and a flexible work schedule, aboriginal people were able to purchase expensive hunting equipment and spend sufficient time on the land. Another positive finding came out of a study by Hobart (Reference Hobart and Bowles1982) which found that workers who participate in the wage economy by commuting on a rotation work schedule, and who do not have to relocate to a town to work, are more likely to continue traditional hunting activities (Hobart Reference Hobart and Bowles1982: 59). Other research, however, has found that rotation employment caused shortages in bush foods (BRIA 1979; O'Faircheallaigh Reference O'Faircheallaigh1995); that aboriginal males withdrew from the traditional sectors as they increased their skills for employment in the modern wage economy (Stabler and Howe Reference Stabler and Howe1990); and that tensions arose between aboriginal persons exclusively pursuing a traditional lifestyle versus those that took up wage work employment and only pursued hunting and trapping activities at weekends (MacEachern Reference MacEachern1983). Furthermore, a study of subsistence productivity in rural Alaska (after an intensive decade of wage employment) found that the following factors tend to decrease community harvest levels: close proximity to urban centres and roads, an influx of non-aboriginal people, and high personal income (Wolfe and Walker Reference Wolfe and Walker1987). Although a number of studies from this period point to the potential for neutral to net positive outcomes, the literature also reveals that outcomes are far from certain, and, in some cases, can be devastating.

In general, the literature suggests that the overall impact of resource development largely depends on the social, cultural, economic, and political state of the community, as well as the type, size and pace of the resource project. Ross (Reference Ross1990), for instance, describes that the current state of a community and its ‘adaptive potential’ is a function of the historical impacts endured by the community as well as the current aspirations of its peoples. Also, the literature indicates that, between 1970s through until the mid–1990s, aboriginal people have not only gained more political power, but have become more involved in decisions concerning resource development projects. This has in turn contributed to more positive project outcomes. In short, the face of resource development in the north has changed from the general aboriginal community being ‘dreadfully uninformed’ about development plans and receiving little enduring benefit, to aboriginal communities being involved in resource co-management schemes, environmental impact review boards, and so on (DesBrisay Reference DesBrisay1994; Notzke Reference Notzke1994). In fact, it was the ‘politicisation’ of nonrenewable resource development impacts through the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry (1974–1977), coupled with lessons learned from Alaska experience of settled lands and the James Bay Agreement, that contributed to a more rigorous, human centered approach in non-renewable resource development in the 1980s and forward (Notzke Reference Notzke1994). Because of this new era of resource development, DesBrisay (Reference DesBrisay1994: 111) states, ‘in general, the likelihood that a community will experience significant adverse, social impacts from a development project is decreasing.’

In summary, the early literature in this field seeks to document the cultural impacts of resource development on aboriginal peoples; that is, it seeks to identify changes in communities and cultural traditions via particular markers such as the hunting and gathering of food. These early studies most often took the form of ‘native harvest surveys’ and served to inform public policy with respect to resource management and allocation, support economic planning and project assessment, and aid in impact mitigation and compensation (Usher and Wenzel Reference Usher and Wenzel1987). These studies were consistent with acculturationist thinking in their attention to social problems and issues of integration, but the harvest studies in particular can also be understood as a reaction to this acculturationist tradition. In this case researchers were able to demonstrate the important relationship between money economies and subsistence economies as an adaptive aspect of culture, a theme that is picked up more broadly in the next phase of research in the north. Some studies show no impact from resource development on subsistence harvest, whereas other studies indicate significant impacts. Much of the work was conducted either by government researchers or by outside experts employing conventional social science research techniques (that is quantitative surveys). After this early phase of research, a more reflective phase of research ensued, initiated by several changing traditions within the academic community and ongoing political developments in the Canadian north. We now turn to examine developments in this second phase of research.

Community continuity: mid–1990s to the present

Since the mid–1990s, research on aboriginal community impacts has taken a decidedly reflective turn. Recognising the limitations and eurocentric nature of the ‘passive victim’ research perspective, contemporary scholarship advocates a new research perspective, one that is more responsive to the changing milieu of northern aboriginal peoples, and a perspective which recognises aboriginal peoples as conscious, pragmatic actors in cultural change and adaptation.

This call for a new perspective on northern aboriginal research stems from the growing political power among these peoples, their increasing education levels and political astuteness (Hovelsrud and Krupnik Reference Hovelsrud and Krupnik2006), and the subsequent ‘renewal’ of aboriginal communities today. Champagne (Reference Champagne2007: 338) suggests that aboriginal people increasingly assert their own terms of involvement, in ‘ways that do not compromise their values, culture, and community institutions.’ In addition to this new research perspective, researchers are also calling for a re-examination of research relations. In effect, research in anthropology and sociology has undergone a paradigm shift from ‘one in which outsiders seek solutions to ‘the Indian problem’ to one in which Indigenous people conduct research and facilitate solutions themselves’ (McNaughton and Rock Reference McNaughton and Rock2004: 39). In essence, the earlier phase of research sought to document the level of acculturative stress in aboriginal communities due to resource development. The latter phase of research, in general, seeks to document the presence of enculturation; that is, ‘the process of being actively engaged in living out one's traditional cultural norms and values’ (Wolsko and others Reference Wolsko, Lardon, Hopkins and Ruppert2006: 347) among aboriginal peoples, and the link between enculturation and aboriginal health and well-being. Cultural ecology and participatory impact assessment underpins this new paradigm of research. In addition, we posit that the expanded range of research trajectories in this second phase was, in part, catalysed by the release of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples report in 1996. The second phase therefore may also be characterised as a ‘problem-solving’ phase. Within this phase, researchers are involved in: (1) recognizing the persistence of aboriginal cultural practice, or cultural continuity, in the face of significant social and economic change and the reasons for this persistence, (2) expanding and improving upon the range of research methods and indicators that facilitate links to theory and community centered research, and (3) understanding the implications for an expanded legal and political context as a basis for recognition and renewal of aboriginal cultural practice.

Although several early studies document significant negative impacts from resource development on hunting and trapping (for example Justus and Simonetta Reference Justus and Simonetta1979, Reference Justus, Simonetta and Yarie1982a, Reference Justus, Simonetta, Geisler, Usner, Green and West1982b; Niezen Reference Niezen1993), by the mid–1990s, researchers were beginning to identify a pattern of persistence and continuity in the traditional activities and cultural practices of many northern communities. In the mid–1990s, although present much earlier in the cultural ecology tradition, authors such as Condon and others (Reference Condon, Collings and Wenzel1995) and George and others (Reference George, Berkes and Preston1995), became more prominent in documenting the ways in which a ‘culture’ of subsistence continued to underpin contemporary conditions in their study communities. In particular, George and others (Reference George, Berkes and Preston1995) maintained a sense that many Cree communities are best characterised in terms of a mixed economy, one in which people ‘going in between’ reflects the complementarities of the wage based economy and the hunter-gatherer economy.

This theme of cultural continuity runs through much of the contemporary literature on cultural practice in northern aboriginal communities. For instance, in her study of the Yup'ik people of Alaska, Fienup-Riordan (Reference Fienup-Riordan2000) notes that continuity between earlier generations and the present generation was as significant as the innovations. In discussing these early continuities, Fienup-Riordan (Reference Fienup-Riordan2000: 15) writes as follows.

These signs of cultural continuity within earlier generations were then compared with cultural continuity in the present generation, in which Fienup-Riordan states that integration into the larger economy remains marginal, and household activity continues to focus on ‘extraction and consumption rather than investment and production’ (Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan2000: 17).

Authors also point to the persistence of traditional food sharing systems. For instance, Collings and others (Reference Collings, Wenzel and Condon1998) described the food sharing system in Holman, NWT, as a functional equivalent to the system described by the early Arctic anthropologist Diamond Jenness in 1922. Also, Wenzel (Reference Wenzel2000) indicates that the traditional Inuit food sharing system (ninguqtuq) in Clyde River continues to be practiced and should be characterised less so as an informal economy and more so as a highly elaborate system of food distribution. Consistent with this theme of persistence and continuity in the subsistence economy, several authors observe no relationship between levels of income within the wage based economy and levels of subsistence activity. In other words, individuals with low and high wage employment appear to be equally engaged in subsistence activities. The international Survey of Living Conditions in the Arctic (SLiCA) of northern residents provides ample evidence for this claim (Poppel and others Reference Poppel, Kruse, Duhaime and Abryutina2007) as does with research from northwest Alaska (Magdanz and others Reference Magdanz, Utermohle and Wolfe2002).

Given this emerging picture of continuity and persistence, we contend that contemporary scholarship has moved into a more reflective phase in comparison with earlier research. For example, Wolfe and Kruse, two Alaskan researchers who were involved in empirical studies during the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s, are now reflecting on their decades of findings, realising the wide range of factors which influence subsistence traditions (Wolfe Reference Wolfe2004), and the importance of cultural continuity research (Kruse Reference Kruse2006). The same reflective tone can be found within some Canadian researchers as well (Coates Reference Coates2004; Goulet Reference Goulet, Morrison and Wilson2004). This does not suggest that survey work has halted entirely, several large scale studies were completed in recent years and government agencies have developed better ways of tracking subsistence activities within their populations. However, compared to the 1970s and 1980s, there does appear to be a dearth of contemporary survey research on the relationship between resource development and aboriginal cultural practice. Instead, a good deal of scholarship is focused on understanding and explaining the significance of cultural continuity, in both the material and ideational forms, within a broader context of adaptation and sustainability.

Along these lines, recent scholarship has taken steps towards understanding the functional role of a vibrant aboriginal culture within, and often in conflict with, the colonising forces of western societies. For instance, in their explanation for the robust qualities of northern mixed economies, Usher and others (Reference Usher, Duhaime and Searles2003) identify a strong ethos of communalism within subsistence societies, in which collective benefits are pursued at the expense of individual benefits. In this text, the authors challenge readers to consider the important role of subsistence economies (through collective hunting efforts and food sharing) in the lives of many northern residents. Along similar lines, Duhaime and others (Reference Duhaime, Searles, Usher, Myers and Frechette2004) articulate the ways in which subsistence economies contribute to social cohesion through collective acts of harvesting, processing and distributing locally harvested resources. Champagne (Reference Champagne2007) also emphasises the way that conservatism within North American Indian culture helps to preserve Indian identity. Champagne's work is valuable, in particular, because it explores how conservatism has assisted aboriginal people to resist colonial assimilation efforts while also providing a source of great strength to achieve some level of cultural preservation. Using Weberian cultural theory and Parsonian theories of social differentiation, Champagne (Reference Champagne2007: 41) offers a theoretically grounded understanding of conservatism within aboriginal communities.

According to this emergent view of aboriginal tradition as an adaptive strategy, participating in subsistence activities is not merely a lifestyle choice based on ‘primeval impulses’ (Usher Reference Usher and Freeman1981: 59), but is economically rational (Coates Reference Coates1988; Usher and others Reference Usher, Duhaime and Searles2003). Therefore, if resource development and wage based activity cause people to lose their ability to participate in the traditional economy, it will not be consistent with sustainable development (Bowles Reference Bowles1981; Wismer Reference Wismer, Anderson and Bone2003). This does not necessarily mean that each member of the community needs to participate in the traditional economy all of the time, but that ‘the store of traditional knowledge and capacity of community members – both young and old – to participate. . .must not be impaired’ (Wismer Reference Wismer, Anderson and Bone2003: 416).

Based on this contemporary phase of research on community continuity, there are several general trends that can be noted in the literature. The first is methodological, in which authors are utilising qualitative methodologies, such as critical ethnography (Stern and Stevenson Reference Stern and Stevenson2006), and narrative inquiry (Cruikshank Reference Cruikshank1998, Reference Cruikshank2005; Morrow Reference Morrow and Nagy2002), as powerful tools to explore themes of aboriginal culture. Arctic ethnographer, Stern (Reference Stern2001), for example, investigates the role of wage work in Holman, NWT. Contrary to belief that hunting serves as the moral basis of Inuit culture, Stern found that ‘people in Holman have come to regard wage work as necessary and important to the achievement of personal goals and to the social stability of the community’ (Stern Reference Stern2001: 90). In addition, research in Holman revealed that the Inuit system of reciprocity and food sharing, ningirsiniq, has been extended to other things besides country food. Jobs, expertise, time, childcare, store bought food, clothing, and tools are now incorporated into this traditional social system. Based on these findings, Stern (Reference Stern2001: 218) advocates for a new approach to the research, from how Inuit have become ‘victims of progress’ to how ‘Inuit are active participants in the making of their own history.’

Less optimistically, Whiteman's ethnography (Reference Whiteman2004), which explores the economic development impacts on the Cree tallymen (hunting leaders), shows how the social order of a community can be significantly destabilised through the emergence of a mixed economy. Loss of control over resources, environmental degradation, and erosion of respect for traditional roles within the community have ‘had a strong emotional impact on individual tallymen and to some degree have caused a schism within Cree culture’ (Whiteman Reference Whiteman2004: 434). The qualitative methodologies employed by these scholars have complemented and expanded the range of insights associated with social science research in aboriginal communities. Work of this nature has contributed to a more reflective phase and a theory of practice that continues to challenge former notions of culture and how it is assessed.

A second trend relates to developments within the political sphere and SIA, both within the courts and within public policy. Recent court ruling that allow for the legal standing of oral histories has stimulated a considerable amount of research to resurrect, document, and preserve the oral histories of many cultures. These changes correspond with new interests in traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), and a variety of related concepts, that signal a growing interest and political force behind the historical and cultural uses of particular landscapes and places. The introduction of a TEK policy in the NWT (1996), the rise of recent developments in environmental impact assessment and the use of TEK within this context (Galbraith and others Reference Galbraith, Bradshaw and Rutherford2007; O'Faircheallaigh Reference O'Faircheallaigh2007; Paci and others Reference Paci, Tobin and Robb2002; Usher Reference Usher2000), and the development of co-management and community based monitoring programmes in the north (Kofinas and others Reference Kofinas, Aklavik, Crow, McPherson, Krupnik and Jolly2002), all signal a movement toward community empowerment and enhanced political control over the management of natural resources and traditional lands.