November 14, 2012 US-Canada Northern Oil and Gas Research Forum Anchorage, Alaska Building Sustainable Communities in the Arctic: the Resources and Sustainability.

November 14, 2012US-Canada Northern Oil and Gas Research Forum

Anchorage, Alaska

Building Sustainable Communities in the Arctic: the Resources and

Sustainability in the Arctic Project

L e e H u s ke yU n i v e r s i t y o f A l a s k a A n c h o r a g e

ReSDA?

• Largest social science research project ever proposed for the Circumpolar North currently involves 51 researchers at 29 universities in 9 countries

• The primary objective of the research will be to develop innovative approaches to using natural resources to improve the well-being of northern communities while preserving the region’s unique ecosystem.

• Focus on questions of finding out how to maximize benefits of resource development to northern regions and communities and minimize the social, economic, cultural, and environmental costs.

International Team of Researchers

Why ReSDA?

• The need for research useful to communities: Increased economic activity in the Arctic and limited, scattered, social science research.

• Antecedents: Social Economy Research Network for Northern Canada and its community partners (Northern Research Institute in Yukon, Aurora Research Institute in NWT, Nunavut Research Institute in Iqaluit, Makivik, Labrador Institute, Arctic Co-ops)

• Antecedents: University of the Arctic workshops, ESF Boreas program, Alaska OCS Studies Program

• Funded by Canada Social Science and Humanities Research Council

Initial Projects: Gap Analysis

• What do we know about the effects of resource development on the north? Where do we go from there?

• Main themes: 1. History of Resource

Development2. Impacts of development on

Northern communities3. Measuring impacts4. Resource Revenue regimes5. Impacts assessment6. Regional economic development

7. Community well being and development

8. Community-Industry relations9. Impact Benefit Agreements10. Comprehensive land claims and

protection of livelihoods11. Traditional knowledge and

resource development12. Resources and Environmental

Issues13. Climate change

Initial Project: IRC Social Indicators

• Purpose: develop a set of measurable, reliable and accessible indicators to monitor socio-economic conditions in the Inuvialuit Region with an emphasis on tracing impacts of resource development

• Partners: ReSDA, ASI, Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC), NWT Bureau of Statistics

• Precedents: NWT Diamond mine socio-economic agreement, OCS Social Indicators, Arctic Social Indicators

• IRC Data Base: Early collaboration with NWT Bureau of Statistics (data back to 1991).

Why Social Indicators?

• “Find a small number of tractable indicators that can be used in tracking changes in key elements in the Arctic over time.”

• Track changes in well-being over time and compare. Look at impact of particular events on social welfare.

• Arctic Social Indicators domains: fate control, cultural integrity, contact with nature, material well-being, education, and demographic health.

IRC Project

• Database for long period (1991) • Recent resource development activity• Desire of IRC to understand effects of resource

development. • Problem with the availability and timeliness of

data, especially at the community level.

Inuvialuit Region Trends 1986-2010

• Material well-being• Unemployment –

unchanged• Participation rate • Professional employment• Income support

payments • Ownership rate • Households in core need

• Education Population with high school

diploma

• Social• Lone parent families • Crime • Teen birth • Mobility

• Traditional activities• Hunt & Fish • County food, %• Speak Language

• Positive• Negative

Inuvialuit Region Baseline Analysis• Regional Comparisons:

– Internal differences: drastic gap between Inuvik and other communities • IR better than other NWT regions: unemployment, engagement in

traditional activities, land claim status and fate control• IR close to average: incomes, dependency on government transfers,

consumption of county food, education• IR worse: language retention (23%), Aboriginal leadership,

population dynamics (out-migration)

– Compared to other Inuit communities (in Nunavut):• Generally good in material well-being• Very low in language retention, low on consumption of traditional

food, fate control

Contact Information

• ReSDA http://dl1.yukoncollege.yk.ca/resda • Social Indicators project [email protected] • IRC data base www.inuvialuitindicators.com • ReSDA project leader: Chris Southcott, Lakehead

University, Thunder Bay, Ontario