School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
J Environ Manage. 2021 Apr 1;283:111922. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111922. Epub 2021 Jan 20.
Indigenous nations worldwide are working with and lobbying private and public resource developers to ensure meaningful engagement in decisions tied to resource development in their territories. The diversity of approaches for engagement can be framed along a continuum, with voluntary practices at one end and legal responsibilities at the other. Given this continuum, the roles and responsibilities of various actors involved have become blurred, which leads to poor practice. In an effort to bring clarity, the aim of this research was to understand the distinctions between voluntary practices and legal responsibilities among key actors, identify how key actors understood their different roles and responsibilities, and explain the implications of these differences. In partnership with a First Nation and a public power utility in Northern Saskatchewan, Canada, we employed semi-structured interviews and group workshops with Indigenous, industry, and government actors who participate in environmental management and resource development decisions. We found that actors had distinct motivations for interacting with one another, that perceptions of voluntary practices and legal responsibilities aligned among some participants but not among others, and that participants were indeed confused about their roles and responsibilities in relation to legal requirements and voluntary engagement activities. Furthermore, we learned that clarifying the intended roles of those involved in resource development decisions would be insufficient for improving practice. This is because improved clarity may not address underlying mistrust of government by Indigenous people, or may not be possible where rights and interests are intertwined under a broad conception of Indigenous rights. Findings also suggest the need for government and industry to work with Indigenous nations as self-determining entities, rather than imposing unilateral processes upon them. Consequently, more serious scrutiny, understanding and action is needed by government and industry when employing and assessing voluntary actions and legal measures for Indigenous inclusion in resource development decision-making processes.
世界各地的土著民族正在与私营和公共资源开发商合作，并进行游说，以确保在其领土内与资源开发相关的决策中有意义地参与。参与方式的多样性可以沿着一个连续体来构建，自愿实践在一端，法律责任在另一端。鉴于这种连续性，各种参与者的角色和责任变得模糊不清，导致实践不佳。为了澄清这一点，本研究的目的是了解主要参与者之间自愿实践和法律责任的区别，确定主要参与者如何理解其不同的角色和责任，并解释这些差异的影响。我们与加拿大萨斯喀彻温省北部的一个第一民族和一个公共电力公用事业公司合作，对参与环境管理和资源开发决策的土著、工业和政府参与者进行了半结构化访谈和小组研讨会。我们发现，参与者之间有着明显的互动动机，一些参与者对自愿实践和法律责任的看法是一致的，但其他参与者则不然，而且参与者确实对自己在法律要求和自愿参与活动方面的角色和责任感到困惑。此外，我们了解到，明确参与资源开发决策的人员的预期角色对于改进实践来说是不够的。这是因为提高清晰度可能无法解决土著人民对政府的不信任问题，或者在广泛的土著权利概念下，权利和利益交织在一起的情况下，可能无法实现。研究结果还表明，政府和工业需要与土著民族合作，将其视为自主实体，而不是将单方面的程序强加给他们。因此，政府和工业在采用和评估自愿行动和法律措施，将土著人民纳入资源开发决策过程时，需要进行更认真的审查、理解和采取行动。
