The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and Caribou Habitat Management
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
IntroductionIn 1993, Inuit completed negotiation of the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement with the Governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories, creating a new institutional framework for the governance of land and mineral resources. Drawing on the case study of caribou habitat management in the Kivalliq (formerly Keewatin) region of Nunavut, I argue that this new institutional framework has, thus far, poorly served Inuit hunters. I provide a history of conflicts over mining and mineral exploration in critical caribou habitat near Baker Lake, from 1970 to the present, with a focus on Inuit hunters' attempts to have mining and mineral exploration banned in critical caribou habitat and areas of high cultural value. This activism has continued after the land claim was settled in 1993, through the Thelon Game Sanctuary Plan development, land use plan development, consultations concerning representative Inuit organizations' uranium mining policy, and screening and reviews of proposals for mining and exploration near Baker Lake. Thus far, none of these attempts to have mining banned in critical caribou habitat have been successful.I argue that this lack of success is due to the actions of the institutions that dominate land and mineral governance in Nunavut: the Federal Government, the Government of Nunavut, and the representative Inuit organizations, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the regional Inuit associations. All of these organizations have failed to represent Inuit hunters' interests in decisions regarding the management of caribou habitat. This is due to the fact that these organizations are all poorly structured to represent the interests of Inuit hunters. They have institutional interests and mandates which are often at odds with hunters' interests in a balanced form of development which promotes some mineral extraction while protecting the long-term viability of wildlife harvesting. The future viability of wildlife harvesting in Baker Lake may depend upon empowering the institutions which represent hunters directly - especially community Hunters and Trappers Organizations - to participate more directly in land and mineral governance in the territory.Baker Lake, The Mixed Economy, and Balanced DevelopmentBaker Lake is located in the Kivalliq region of Nunavut, close to the terminus of the Thelon River. The community of roughly 2000, mostly Inuit residents is called Qamani'tmq (the place where the river widens) in Inuktitut. It is the only inland community in Nunavut, which makes resident Inuit almost entirely dependent upon caribou for sub- sistence purposes. Anthropologists initially referred to the Inuit of the area as Caribou Eskimo, due to their unique reliance upon the land mammals, in comparison to most other Inuit groups' reliance upon sea mammals. Baker Lake therefore makes an ideal case study for Inuit hunters' political action related to caribou habitat conservation vis-a-vis the mining industry.Baker Lake Inuit hunt caribou from five herds (named after the location of their respective calving grounds): the Beverly, Qamanirjuaq, Wager Bay, Ahiak, and Lolliard herds. However, the Beverly herd (which calves north-east of Baker Lake near Beverly Lake) and the Qamanirjuaq herd (which calves south of Baker Lake near Qamanirjuaq Lake) are the caribou populations whose ranges have been the focus of most conservation efforts and political activism by Baker Lake Inuit. This is no doubt due, in large part, to the fact that these herds are a shared resource. The Beverly and Qamanirjuaq herds are hunted by Dene and Metis communities in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and the NWT, as well as the Inuit communities of Arviat, Whale Cove, Rankin Inlet and Baker Lake in Nunavut.Many Inuit families in Baker Lake continue to rely upon what some scholars refer to as the mixed economy.1 Households and extended families pool resources which are obtained through the subsistence harvesting of wildlife (primarily caribou and fish), simple commodity production (primarily furs and art), and wage labour (primarily through the public sector and retail/ services sector, but also, increasingly, from mineral exploration and extraction projects). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».