Social, cultural, and economic state of knowledge

Social, cultural, and economic state of knowledge The context of Social Cultural Economic Impact Assessment (SCEIA) in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region (ISR) Presented by Simon Routh Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC)

Summary • Background • As part of its responsibilities related to the Mackenzie Gas Project’s (MGP) Socio-Economic Impact Fund, IRC is assessing the state of SCE knowledge in the ISR and its various contexts (territorial, national, &c.). • The outcome of this work is a survey of the dominant SCE issues in the ISR and of the indicators presently available to assess them.

Summary • This presentation will: • Outline the context of SCEIAs in the ISR; • Examine what works and what needs improvement in present SCEIA practices; and • Identify some of the major issues that must be considered in any SCEIA undertaken in the ISR.

General context of SCEIAs • BSStRPA is a new part of the much larger, on-going process of Inuvialuit self-determination in the region and Canada. • Any development in the ISR has and will have its greatest impacts on Inuvialuit. • SCEIAs must be governed by this consideration, and directed by Inuvialuit.

Specific context of BSStRPA • BSStRPA follows numerous other assessment, planning, and governance initiatives in the ISR: • Joint Review Panel; • Beaufort-Delta Self-Government and Agenda; • MGP Socio-Economic Impact Fund; &c. • The overarching framework for all of these processes within the ISR is the Inuvialuit Final Agreement (IFA).

Specific context of BSStRPA • The basic goals expressed by the Inuvialuit and recognized by Canada in the IFA: • (a) to preserve Inuvialuit cultural identity and values within a changing northern society; • (b) to enable Inuvialuit to be equal and meaningful participants in the northern and national economy and society; and • (c) to protect and preserve the Arctic wildlife, environment and biological productivity. • BSStRPA must be guided by the objectives of the IFA, and use the best practices learned from previous SCEIA experiences.

What works? Ensure that SCEIAs result in appropriate outcomes. Examples MGP Socio-Economic Impact Fund (future) North Slope Borough/Institute for Social and Economic Research (Alaska) SCE Impact Assessments Communities have greater role in determining SCEIA process. Use of long-term planning practices by stakeholders has increased. More data that are collected over time (longitudinal) and large areas (cross-sectional) are available.

What works? Good community-based planning provides an existing framework and articulated objectives with which to conduct and evaluate SCEIAs. SCE Impact Assessments Communities have greater role in determining SCEIA process. Use of long-term planning practices by stakeholders has increased. More data that are collected over time (longitudinal) and large areas (cross-sectional) are available.

What works? Examples Beaufort-Delta Agenda (regional-level planning) Establishment of interagency approaches in ISR (community-level planning) SCE Impact Assessments Communities have greater role in determining SCEIA process. Use of long-term planning practices by stakeholders has increased. More data that are collected over time (longitudinal) and large areas (cross-sectional) are available.

What works? SCEIAs don’t have the ability to generate these kinds of data, but they are crucial to an effective SCEIA. Examples Aboriginal Peoples Survey (federal) NWT Addictions Survey (territorial) SCE Impact Assessments Communities have greater role in determining SCEIA process. Use of long-term planning practices by stakeholders has increased. More data that are collected over time (longitudinal) and large areas (cross-sectional) are available.

SCE Impact Assessments • What needs to be improved? • Data • The quality and extent of available SCE data must be assured into the future. • Current gaps in sampling and frequency on relevant issues must be collaboratively filled by relevant organizations.

SCE Impact Assessments • What needs to be improved? • Stakeholder contributions • There must be clearly defined expectations of what each stakeholder in the SCEIA will produce and contribute to the process. • There must be accountability to ensure those commitments are fulfilled.

SCE Impact Assessments • What needs to be improved? • SCEIA Outcomes • The SCEIA must be accurate, and tailored to the objectives of the particular stakeholders. • SCEIAs should not just identify impacts. The process should incorporate the development of robust, practicable planning to address those impacts—assessment must be linked to action.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • IRC has consulted with individuals involved in community, economic, and social development in the ISR, and reviewed relevant existing literature and data. • We have produced a list of on-going issues in the ISR, potential indicators presently available related to these specific issues, and gaps in coverage or quality of data. • The result can be used to derive some of the general considerations that any ISR SCEIA must take into account.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Examples from the issues/indicators list include: • Housing • Healthy individuals • Healthy families/communities • Education • Capacity and Economy

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Examples from the issues/indicators list include: • Housing • Adequate/affordable housing • Homelessness • Healthy individuals • Healthy families/communities • Education • Capacity and Economy

Present issues in the ISR • Adequate/affordable housing • Existing possible indicators • % homes needing major repairs [Census/GNWT] • Number of persons per bedroom [Census/GNWT] • Rent/owner costs as % of income [Census/GNWT] • Basic household amenities [APS] • % living in Social Housing [GNWT] • Persons on waiting list for Social Housing [GNWT] • Average length of time on waiting list for Social Housing [GNWT] • Persons on Income Support [GNWT] • Persons excluded from Income Support [GNWT]

Present issues in the ISR • Adequate/affordable housing Housing, by type of repairs needed and suitability1 problems Data available to assess housing are fairly comprehensive and generally of high quality in terms of sampling, coverage, and frequency. Source: GNWT (2004) 1. Suitable dwelling units have enough bedrooms for the size and make-up of resident households, according to National Occupancy Standard requirements.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Housing • Healthy individuals • Substance abuse/FASD • Sexual health • Tobacco use • Adequate health-care infrastructure • Healthy families/communities • Education • Capacity and Economy

Present issues in the ISR • Substance abuse/FASD • Existing possible indicators • Number of alcohol-related Offences [GNWT] • Number of drug-related offences [GNWT] • Incidence of heavy alcohol use (self-reported) [APS/GNWT] • Incidence of other substance abuse (Self-Reported) [GNWT] • Alcohol-related deaths [GNWT] • Drug-related deaths [GNWT] • % suffering harms to self/others from alcohol/drug use [GNWT] • % of expectant mothers consuming alcohol (self-reported) [APS] • % of school population that are diagnosed with FASD [GNWT] • Hospitalizations for alcohol-related illnesses [GNWT] • Hospitalizations for other substance-related illnesses [GNWT]

Present issues in the ISR • Substance abuse/FASD • Gaps • There are very few prevalence data on fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD): • good diagnostic guidelines have only recently been developed; and • FASD has understandably strong associated stigma. • This lack of data represents a challenge to securing funding and assessing the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation initiatives.

Present issues in the ISR • Substance abuse/FASD • Potential indicator development example • GNWT has recently incorporated the T-ACE screen for high-risk drinking behaviours into its pre-natal screening. • The T-ACE screen has a sensitivity of 69% compared to a 30-40% range for most other screens, and a specificity of 89%, which is on par with most other screens. • Consequently, an annual aggregation of the pre-natal T-ACE screening results could provide data which, while not measuring actual prevalence, would provide a benchmark that could be tracked over time. • A number of challenges and potential hurdles would be associated with realizing this example: consistent implementation; privacy issues; sufficient resources to ensure assessment can be followed with intervention where necessary.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Housing • Healthy individuals • Healthy families/communities • Social supports • Adequate social services • Spousal abuse • Affordable nutritious food • Lack/loss of culture and language • Community participation • Education • Capacity and Economy

Present issues in the ISR • Social supports • Existing possible indicators • Someone you can count on to listen to you when you need to talk [APS] • Someone you can count on when you need advice [APS] • Someone to take you to the doctor if you need it [APS] • Someone who shows you love and affection [APS] • Someone to have a good time with [APS] • Someone to confide in or talk about yourself or your problems [APS] • Someone to get together with for relaxation [APS] • Someone to do something enjoyable with [APS]

Present issues in the ISR • Social supports • Existing possible indicators • When linked with objectives measures, subjective indicators of well-being enable assessment of the more intangible social impacts of development. • The availability of this type of data allows SCEIAs to ensure that social and cultural impacts are assessed as rigorously as economic impacts, where the data have historically been stronger.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Housing • Healthy individuals • Healthy families/communities • Education • Early childhood education/daycare • Grade-level equivalency • Adequate special education services • High-school completion • Participation and success in post-secondary education • Capacity and Economy

Present issues in the ISR • Education • Grade-level equivalency • Canadian Test of Basic Skills for Grade 2 and Canadian Achievement Test for Grades 3-12 scores are an example of an indicator with a wide range of variables underlying it. • Assessment in this case needs to begin first with an assessment of the problem’s dynamics. A realistic assessment of the impacts that a development might have is otherwise not possible.

Present issues in the ISR • State of knowledge • Housing • Healthy individuals • Healthy families/communities • Education • Capacity and Economy • Underutilization of technology • Lack of skills • Participation in economy • Self-reliant individuals/families • Mobility

Conclusion • Context of SCEIAs • ISR assessment processes should be based on their context. In the ISR, this means: • Inuvialuit-directed; • based on the objectives of the IFA, and regional and community plans; and • using best practices/lessons from previous assessments.

Conclusion • Aspects of SCEIA that work • Communities have greater role in determining SCEIA process. • Use of long-term planning practices by stakeholders has increased. • More data that are collected over time (longitudinal) and large areas (cross-sectional) are available.

Conclusion • Aspects of SCEIA that need improvement • The quality and range of existing data must be maintained, and gaps should be addressed. • Clear, accountable deliverables should be set out for all stakeholders involved in the assessment. • The assessment process needs to be tailored to the objectives of the stakeholders and include a focus on utilization of assessment findings.

Conclusion • Major SCEIA considerations • There is a set of issues and challenges that exist within the ISR regardless of a development project’s specific impacts. • These issues should be addressed in any SCEIA, and the extensive local knowledge about them used to ensure good assessment outcomes. • The impact assessment process is the first step in a three-part process of assessment, mitigation, and measurement.

Social, cultural, and economic state of knowledge