People’s right to self-determination is a fundamental principle in international law, embodied in the Charter of the United Nations (UN). The UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights state that, “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” In Canada, the right of self-determination for First Nations is only partially recognized. The federal and provincial governments’ recognition of self-determination for First Nations is based on the notion of self-government which is delegated powers and authority from a higher level of government. This idea of delegated municipal powers is not consistent with indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination.
First Nations’ political and economic self-determination are affected by the changing and shifting by external governance and economic systems. First Nations are changing the notion of self- government in the Canadian context to include a demand for jurisdiction over institutions, culture, economic development, and resources. Institution building, participation, control, and the subsidiarity principle (i.e. that decisions should be made as closely as possible to the citizen) provide support for First Nations in their desire for economic and political self-determination.
Impact and Benefit Agreements
Economic self-determination, the ability of a people to take control over their resources, and political self-determination are interdependent. Achieving economic and, by extension, political self- determination requires various support mechanisms. Impact and Benefit Agreements (IBAs) are one such mechanism. IBAs are negotiated binding agreements that establish a formal relationship between a company and a community. In Canada, an IBA is an agreement between a company and a First Nation community that defines the relationship regarding the development of a large-scale resource project, often a mining initiative, within the boundaries of the affected community and ensures that the benefits of the project reach the local population.
The Canadian Institute of Resource Law (CIRL) suggests that mining has the potential to have significant impacts, both positive and negative, on aboriginal people, their communities, and their way of life. IBAs have been employed by government, mining companies, and First Nations communities to address these impacts and provide a basis for mutually beneficial long-term relationships among all the players.
IBAs have two principal purposes for government and First Nations people and communities: 1) to address the concerns regarding the adverse affects of the project on
the community, culture, way of life, natural environment, and land-based economic activities; and 2) to ensure that local people and communities have the opportunity to obtain both short-term and long-term benefits from the project development. Both purposes reflect what the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy posits: that the benefits should be retained in the affected communities and not only the long- term costs of development.
From an industry perspective, the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Mineral Industry of Canada suggests that IBAs between aboriginal communities and companies are designed to: 1) enhance economic opportunities in the local community by encouraging participation in resource development; 2) provide specific opportunities to local businesses and residents for employment, training, business development and contracting services; and 3) promote growth and development of the local community through education, counselling and maintenance of traditional culture and lifestyles.
The following are the most common elements included in an IBA: establishment of employment and training programs; provisions for economic development and business opportunities; development of social, cultural, and community support programs; financial provisions for compensation and equity participation; program implementation and evaluation; and, environmental and cultural protection.
Government, corporations, and First Nations communities agree that mining projects can have enormous social, cultural and environmental impacts on local communities. They may generate pollution, cause land expropriation and displacement, affect wildlife and crops, create social tension and economic inequalities, and disrupt family and community life. Historically, First Nations communities have lived with the legacy of environmental damage and social dislocation from past projects and resource booms. Mining can also bring economic benefits, in the form of employment, contracts, or the purchase of locally produced goods. Very often, however, communities are unable to reap these potential benefits, due to limited experience, a lack of appropriate skills, inadequate access to information, and limited funding opportunities.
Issues of capacity and sustainability are of overwhelming importance for First Nations communities. IBAs present an opportunity to expand the capacity building component of the communities, with regard to systems, community structures and roles, to allow them the ability to enhance their autonomy and integrity while taking advantage of opportunities in the broader economy. Such capacity building extends the benefits of employment and business opportunities. In many cases the aboriginal community may not have the institutional or human resources to implement the IBA. However, the employment training programs and business development initiatives provided for under IBAs do not necessarily address the issue of capacity building within the community as a whole, but focus instead on preparing First Nation individuals to fill roles within the mining company’s processes and structures.
Implications of IBAs on Economic Self-Determination
IBAs advance the ability of First Nations to have control over resources that are within their boundaries. The question becomes: do IBAs advance economic self-determination? Do these agreements provide greater authority, responsibility, and accountability for managing and administering the resources within their geo-political boundaries? Is there greater empowerment of First Nations to become stewards of their own economic well-being?
According to some proponents of IBAs, large scale developments by resource companies can represent a core of local and regional economic activity to which subsidiary activities gravitate. These additional activities may include construction, operation of infrastructure (roads, ports, and airports), transportation services, retail opportunities, and housing. In other words, even if incomes from the sale of the minerals or other company profits do not remain in the region, there are still significant spin-off economic benefits. Establishing employment and training programs under IBAs can ensure that capacity building in human resources and business development for communities are entrenched. IBAs may include provisions that support local businesses’ access and participation in the procurement and service provision to the development project.
Even with benefits to individuals and businesses in the local community, there remains the question of stewardship: the ability to manage and make decisions affecting the resources in the community. The principle of stewardship provides a foundation for development in First Nations communities, whether it is the desire to diversify the economy, develop communities, or increase participation in the policy-making process. First Nations’ meaningful stewardship of local development provides a conduit for economic self-determination. Residents become involved in developing and deciding the future of their lives, their communities, and their development. In terms of governance, First Nation communities are striving to become the stewards of their future with the authority, responsibility, and accountability to manage and administer the natural resources. However, without IBAs, there is a potential to repeat the history of boom and bust, leaving behind increasingly dependent, empty economies.
Conclusion
Even though resource exploitation may generate economic benefits in local areas, in most cases these large-scale operations are linked to the external socio-economic environment. The resource exploitation creates considerable wealth but that wealth is captured by owners of capital outside the region or community where the development has taken place. Still, IBAs hold some promise for First Nations communities’ economic development.
Impact and Benefit Agreements provide a way for First Nations to gain control and authority over their communities so that many of the social, environmental, cultural, and economic impacts of large, resource development projects are accrued to the local community. IBAs can also support the advancement of institutional arrangements and political empowerment of communities for the purpose of self- determination.
