Sustainability Planning in Arctic Resource Communities

1. Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU Sustainability Planning inArctic Resource Communities Michelle Boyle and Hadi Dowlatabadi, University of British Columbia with Members of the Nunavut Economic Developers Association

2. Acknowledgements • Climate Decision Making Center, Carnegie Mellon University (NSF SES-034578) and former HDGEC • SSHRC, Northern Development Program and Doctoral Fellowship Program • INAC, Northern Scientific Training Program • SSHRC/DFO, Oceans Management Research Network • Nunavut Economic Developers Association • Susan Rowley, James Tansey

3. The Research Project • Historic patterns of development in the arctic and its relationship to communities. • Current community priorities, control and capacity. • Strategic planning tools for adaptation.

4. Agenda • Theoretical frameworks for community adaptation • Comparison with an actual planning process (analysis and results) • Implications for building adaptive capacity in communities

5. Response Models of community adaptation: Climate vulnerability sets priorities Sensitivity to climate change Community priorities

6. Response Models of community adaptation: All vulnerabilities set priorities Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Community priorities

7. Response Models of community adaptation: Local control is limited Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Community priorities Community control

8. Models of community adaptation: A fuller picture Successful Responses Sensitivity to multiple stresses Adaptive Capacity Sensitivity to climate change Community priorities Community control External resources

9. Hypotheses • H0: Communities identify risks from climate change as a special priority. • H1a: Communities enjoy control commensurate with their priorities. • H1b: Communities enjoy control over matters involving climate change adaptation. • H2: CEDO priorities and resources match needs for broader community development planning.

10. Nunavut Economic Development Strategy (NEDS) 2003 THE LAND • Respecting the land • Maintaining our mixed economy • Building on the knowledge of our Elders OUR PEOPLE • Economic development for youth • Education and training • Basic needs: housing, hospitals and schools OUR COMMUNITY ECONOMIES • Community capacity building and organizational development • Small and Inuit business development • Building the knowledge base OUR TERRITORIAL ECONOMY • Putting the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement to work • Sector development and support systems • Infrastructure: from buildings to broadband • Accessing the global marketplace

11. NEDS 2003 143 Action Items (excluding 24 implementation items) NEDA priority identification Our informed judgments about broader community priorities, sensitivity and levels of control Caveats: Action items as units of observation. NEDS as reflection of priorities broad guiding principles 4 forms of capital: E,H,S,P Method

12. High Community Priorities THE LAND • Respecting the land • Maintaining our mixed economy • Building on the knowledge of our Elders OUR PEOPLE • Economic development for youth • Education and training • Basic needs: housing, hospitals and schools OUR COMMUNITY ECONOMIES • Community capacity building and organizational development • Small and Inuit business development • Building the knowledge base OUR TERRITORIAL ECONOMY • Putting the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement to work • Sector development and support systems • Infrastructure: from buildings to broadband • Accessing the global marketplace

13. CharacterizingCommunity Priorities

14. Climate Sensitivity & Community Priority

15. Community Priorities Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change High Community priorities 9% Community control 91%

16. Characterizing Community Control

17. Community Control & Community Priority

18. Community Control &Climate Sensitivity

19. Characterizing Community Priorities

20. Characterizing Community & CEDO Priorities “Make the implementation of the community development plan the primary task of the community economic developer.”

21. Conclusions  • H0: Communities identify risks from climate change as a special priority. • H1a: Communities enjoy control commensurate with their priorities. • H1b: Communities enjoy control over matters involving climate change adaptation. • H2: CEDO priorities and resources match needs for broader community development planning    

22. Implications for building adaptive capacity in arctic communities • Climate adaptation should become mainstream in community planning. • Responsibilities should be better coordinated across scales relevant to resource allocation and regulation in Nunavut. • Responsibilities should be better coordinated across jurisdictions within communities.

23. Questions?

24. Climate Sensitivity and Community Control • communitieshave incomplete control over both climate sensitive and non-climate sensitive items

25. Community Priorities and Community Control • control is not sought for low priority items? • communities have incomplete control over higher priority items