Policy Brief
How to Improve First Nations
Housing
Policy Brief No. 31
– October 2008
by
John Graham
&
Gail Motsi
The Institute On Governance (IOG) is a Canadian, non-profit think tank that provides an
independent source of knowledge, research and advice on governance issues, both in Canada and
internationally.
Governance is concerned with how decisions important to a society or an organization are taken. It
helps define who should have power and why, who should have voice in decision-making, and how
account should be rendered.
Using core principles of sound governance – legitimacy and voice, direction, performance,
accountability, and fairness – the IOG explores what good governance means in different contexts.
We analyze questions of public policy and organizational leadership, and publish articles and papers
related to the principles and practices of governance. We form partnerships and knowledge networks
to explore high priority issues.
Linking the conceptual and theoretical principles of governance to the world of everyday practice,
we provide advice to governments, communities, business and public organizations on how to
assess the quality of their governance, and how to develop programs for improvement.
You will find additional information on our activities on the IOG website at
www.iog.ca
For further information, contact John Graham at the Institute On Governance.
tel.: (1 613) 562 0092 ext. 231; e-mail: [email protected]
Most IOG publications and all our policy briefs are available on our website. Sample titles:
In Praise of Taxes: the Relationship of Taxation to Good Governance in A First Nations Context, by
John Graham and Jodi Bruhn (March 2008)
Policy Brief No. 29: Rethinking Self-Government: Developing A More Balanced, Evolutionary
Approach, by John Graham (September 2007)
Policy Brief No. 28: Clarifying Roles of Aboriginal Leaders and their Staff: The Perils of a Portfolio
System, by John Graham (May 2007)
Policy Brief No. 27: Clarifying Roles of Aboriginal Leaders and their Staff: A Model Governance
Policy, by John Graham (January 2007)
Managing the Relationship of First Nation Political Leaders and their Staff, by John Graham
(March 2006)
Policy Brief No. 26: Accountability in a Federal State: How Canada Stacks Up, by John Graham and
Gina Delph (December 2006)
The contents of this paper are the responsibility of the author(s)
and do not necessarily reflect a position of the IOG or its Board of Directors.
How to Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No.31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
Introduction
Television images of First Nations housing
are all too familiar to Canadians: small,
overcrowded dwellings in need of major
repair, often suffering from mould or other
public health hazards set in a backdrop of
unkept yards and abandoned vehicles. A
litany of statistics buttresses these images.
As dismaying as the current state of First
Nation housing is the slow pace of progress,
despite an investment over the past decade
(1997-2006) by the federal government of
some $3 billion. The good news is in the
increase in the number of dwellings over the
decade (from 80,400 to 99,900) and a drop
in the percentage of First Nations living in
crowded dwellings (from 33% to 26% – still
much higher than 3% for the non-Aboriginal
Canadian population). The bad news is that
by some measures the adequacy of housing
has actually worsened. Statistics Canada
reports that in 1996 36% of First Nations on
reserve lived in dwellings in need of major
repair. By 2006, this had increased to 44%
– compared to 7% of the non-Aboriginal
Canadian population 1 .
It should come as no surprise, therefore, that
housing is a major concern of those living in
First Nation communities. In a recent
telephone survey of over 1500 First Nations
residents, “better/more housing” garnered
the highest number of responses to the
question “what areas of your First Nations
community most urgently need attention to
improve the lives of residents?” 2
Like many areas of Aboriginal policy, the
current sitution of First Nation housing
demands some fresh thinking on the part of
all parties: First Nations and their
organizations, the federal government and
1
Statistics Canada, “Aboriginal Peoples in
Canada in 2006: Inuit, Métis and First Nations,”
2006 Census, 47.
2
Ekos Research Associates, “First Nations
People Living On-Reserve,” August 2007, 19.
2
the private sector. This is the intent of this
policy brief.
Treating Housing like a Business
National-level statistics like those above
don’t tell the whole story. There are many
First Nations in every region of Canada
running highly effective housing programs.
Further, many common elements contribute
to these success stories, elements that have
been well documented by the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, the
Auditor General of Canada and various
studies of housing best practices and
evaluations. These elements include:
ƒ Having an appropriate governance
regime in place so that day to day
housing decisions are divorced from
community politics
ƒ Instituting a variety of housing tenures
from quasi home ownership to rental
regimes to rent to purchase to rent
subsidies
ƒ Providing a variety of housing options
from single family dwellings to multiple
units to homes for the elderly
ƒ Developing and enforcing rental
regimes and other housing-related
policies
ƒ Charging for utilities like drinking water
and electricity
ƒ Developing a number of funding sources
to complement government funding
(e.g. from individuals, financial
institutions, band run revolving loan
funds)
ƒ Having housing as part of a wider
community plan
ƒ Implementing sound maintenance and
inspection regimes
ƒ Building homes to code
ƒ Having appropriate insurance to cover
fire losses, among other things
ƒ Having well trained, motivated staff to
manage the program
ƒ Using housing to develop economic
spin-offs
ƒ Having an ongoing community
engagement strategy for housing issues
How To Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No. 31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
3
Not all of these elements are part of every
success story. Nonetheless in interviews
that the IOG has conducted on successful
housing programs, the mantra “we run our
housing program like a business,” was a
common theme, a way of summing up what
combinations of these elements led to.
So the question is this: if there is a fair
degree of consensus about what constitutes a
successful First Nation housing program,
why the slow progress? The answer is that
housing is ultimately a political problem, a
problem of governance. This requires
further elaboration.
Housing as a Problem of Governance
Based on our research, we conclude that
three key factors underlie a successful
housing program:
1. Political will
2. Community support
3. Managerial and technical capacity
This opinion parallels the findings of the
Harvard Project on American Indian
Economic Development at the John F.
Kennedy School of Government. Harvard
researchers began with a puzzle: why do
tribes with the most successful economies
not always have well-educated citizens,
abundant natural resources and access to
financial capital? After almost a decade of
research involving more than 30 tribes
across the United States, the Project had an
answer: “Economic Development on Indian
Reservations is first and foremost a political
problem.” De facto sovereignty is the
starting point, followed by effective
institutions. As the Harvard researchers
noted:
Making the federal government
bear responsibility for improving
economic conditions on Indian
reservations may be good political
rhetoric, but it is bad economic
strategy. When tribes take
responsibility for what happens
economically on reservations and
have the practical power and
capacity to act on their own behalf,
they start down the road to
improving reservation conditions. 3
Paralleling these Harvard findings,
communities will not make progress if they
look to others to solve their housing
problems – that is, viewing housing as
something owed to them by the federal
government for a variety of historical, legal
or cultural reasons. Like economic
development, housing is ultimately a
political problem requiring leadership and
community support. Underlying a
successful housing program would be a long
list of governing instruments, including:
ƒ a community plan that integrates
housing with community infrastructure
at a minimum
ƒ policies on rental regimes, loan funds,
housing inspections, maintenance, and
enforcement
ƒ by-laws on zoning and the establishment
of a housing authority
ƒ a long term financial plan and yearly
budgets
ƒ standard leases and lease to purchase
agreements
ƒ a legal regime for determining home
ownership, recognizing changes in such
ownership and enforcing rental regimes
To develop and then implement these
instruments with community support
represents an enormous undertaking, one
requiring years of sustained effort and
community engagement along with a
considerable amount of technical expertise –
no mean feat for any group of political
leaders. It is a classic problem of ‘short
term pain’ (in the form of rents, utility
charges, evictions, restrictions on the use of
property, householder maintenance
3
Stephen Cornell and Joseph Kalt, “Sovereignty
and Nation Building: The Development
Challenge in Indian Country Today,” Joint
Occasional Papers on Native Affairs, No.200303, 210.
How to Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No.31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
responsibilities) for ‘long term gain’ (in the
form of improved housing, enhanced
individual pride and perhaps equity, and
indirect benefits in terms of better education
and health outcomes).
Thus, “outsiders” cannot solve community
housing problems. True, they can help with
advice, funding and technical expertise. But
they cannot provide the political or
community will that is essential for any
change process to succeed.
Echoing the difficult governance challenges
facing First Nation leaders intent on housing
reform, a body of international literature on
governance comes to this pessimistic
conclusion: rapid progress on complicated
governance issues is possible but rare.
Furthermore, sustainability is a real issue –
when new political actors take charge
successful programs can sometimes grind to
a halt. The World Bank tracks governance
indicators across 213 countries and reports
that there is no strong evidence of a
significant trend of improvement in
governance worldwide from 1996 to 2007,
despite substantial investments. 4
So if housing is in essence a governance
problem that takes considerable political
will on the part of community leaders over a
sustained period to make progress, what is to
be done? What would be a sensible
approach on the part of all parties – First
Nations and their organizations, the federal
government, and the private sector - to make
enduring change in this difficult area? One
answer comes from an unlikely source: the
European Union.
The European Union’s Enlargement
Strategy
In sharp contrast to the overall dismal record
of effecting important governance change is
4
D. Kaufmann, A. Kray and M. Mastruzzi,
“Governance Matters VII: Aggregate and
Individual Governance Indicators, 1996-2007,”
24. www.worldbank.org/governance/govmatters.
4
the entry into the European Union (EU) of
former Soviet Bloc satellites – Slovenia,
Estonia, Czech Republic, Romania.
Slovakia, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia,
Bulgaria and Hungary. Their admission into
the EU was premised on profound economic
and governance changes in a relatively short
period. Here is The Economist’s
assessment, an assessment based on
considerable academic research:
It is, quite simply, the European
Union’s greatest achievement. The
offer of EU membership to its
neighbours in the east and south has
proved a masterly way of stabilizing
troubled countries and inducing them to
make democratic and liberal reforms.
The contrast with the United States,
which despite spending billions has
failed to find an equivalent policy for
the countries of the Caribbean rim, is
striking. 5
To join the European Union, a new state had
to meet three criteria known as the
Copenhagen criteria:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
5
political: stability of institutions
guaranteeing democracy, the rule of
law, human rights, and respect for and
protection of minorities;
economic: existence of a functioning
market economy and the capacity to
cope with competive pressure and
market forces within the Union; and
acceptance of the Community ‘acquis’:
ability to take on all the obligations of
membership, including adherence to the
aims of political, economic and
monetary union. The acquis is essential
“Enlarging the European Union,” The
Economist, May 31, 2008, 16. Some of the
academic literature is equally effusive. Gul M.
Kurtogiu-Eskisar, for example, states: “The EU
enlargement process may well be one of the most
successful tools to democratization in history.”
“Emulating the Turkish Experience through
European Neighbourhood Policy – Prospects for
Democratization in the Arab and Muslim World
Considered,” Journal of International and Area
Studies (Dec 2007), 81.
How To Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No. 31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
5
to ensuring legal uniformity in the
whole union.
ƒ
ƒ
Underlying these criteria is a rigourous
accession and monitoring process in which
the prospective members received financial
support from the EU to help effect the
necessary reforms. 6 Poland, Romania and
Bulgaria, for example, received €470
million, €306 million and €161 million
respectively over an 11 year period. 7
ƒ
In sum, the benefits of entering the EU have
provided the incentive for “a transformation
of unprecedented scope and speed,” 8 the
kind of change that, according to the World
Bank, is a rarity.
The next question we address is whether
something akin to the EU could be
developed for First Nations housing with a
set of incentives so alluring that First Nation
leaders, urged on by their communities,
would make the necessary transformative
changes to dramatically improve their
housing.
Towards a First Nation Housing
Accreditation System
An accreditation system for First Nations
housing, if well designed, could have a
impact similar to the EU enlargement
strategy in encouraging significant and
sustainable governance changes. Such
systems are becoming more and more part
of our managerial and governance landscape
because of the obvious benefits they bring.
These include:
6
Ibid, 85.
For a good overview of the daunting challenges
facing a country in creating a market economy
and a liberal democracy, see William Easterly,
The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s
Efforts to Aid The Rest Have Done So Much Ill
and So Little Good (New York: Penguin Press,
2006), 60–157.
8
Peter Hille and Christopher Knill, “It’s the
Bureaucracy, Stupid,” European Union Politics,
7(4), 2006, 532.
7
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
improved services for citizens
enhanced accountability and
transparency for funders and citizens
greater confidence of potential partners
such as financial institutions
better focused capacity building efforts
to attain accreditation
sustainability of reforms because of the
need to be continuously re-accredited
a commitment to continuous
improvement as the accreditation
standards undergo ongoing review and
enhancement
Given these benefits, accreditation is a
common instrument in many fields of public
administration, including health. For
example, many hospitals go through an
accreditation process under the auspices of
Accreditation Canada (formerly the
Canadian Council on Health Services
Accreditation). In the private sector, the
Canadian Chemical Producers Association
introduced the Responsible Care Program in
the mid 1980s and is now considering a
considerable enlargement of that system. In
the non-profit and charitable sectors,
accreditation is becoming a common
approach to engender public confidence.
One of the best known systems in North
America is the Maryland Association of
Nonprofit Organizations’ Standards for
Excellence Program. 9 And finally, meeting
governance and managerial standards is
becoming an important tool in international
development. Paul Collier, for example, in
his award-winning book, The Bottom
Billion: Why The Poorest Countries Are
Failing And What Can Be Done About It,
identifies international charters or norms as
one of four principal development tools in
fighting deep rooted poverty. 10
9
See here www.marylandnonprofits.org.
Paul Collier, The Bottom Billion: Why the
Poorest Countries Are Failing And What Can Be
Done About It (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2007), 135–36. For an even more
pronounced emphasis on the use of standards in
an international development context, see Ashraf
Ghani and Clare Lockhart, Fixing Failed States:
10
How to Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No.31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
Not surprisingly, the idea of applying third
party accreditation in a First Nation context
has also gathered increased currency.
Accreditation Canada has established an
accreditation program for certain First
Nations health organizations. Two First
Nations – Membertou in Nova Scotia and
Sagamok in Ontario – have succeeded in
obtaining ISO 9001:2000 accreditations.
And more importantly from a precedent
standpoint, the First Nations Financial
Management Board, established under the
First Nations Fiscal and Statistical
Management Act, has a mandate to establish
an accreditation system for First Nations
who wish to borrow money for financing
much needed infrastructure in their
communities and use property tax revenues
as collateral.
In order to accelerate change, maximize
resources, increase effectiveness, address the
political dynamic, and promote
sustainability, we propose that First Nations,
the federal government and the private
sector seriously consider the option of
applying an accreditation regime to First
Nation housing.
A Framework for a Housing
Accreditation System
Under this option, accreditation in housing
on reserve would be based on a set of
standards similar to ISO (International
Organization for Standardization) but
suitably tailored to a First Nation housing
context. These standards would represent
good practice, not just minimum standards.
They would cover housing governance,
policy, practice, processes, and structures.
They would focus on the First Nation as a
whole rather than individuals within the
First Nation (but could call for certified
experts such as housing inspectors as part of
the standards to be applied).
A Framework For Rebuilding A Fractured
World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).
6
In close partnership with a range of federal
government and First Nation ‘players’ –
including tribal councils, Assembly of First
Nations, professional associations such as
the Aboriginal Financial Officers
Association, building inspectors and housing
managers, an independent third party such
as the Canadian Standards Association, a not
for profit agency which houses the
international secretariat for the ISO 9000
series, could develop the standards. The
standards would be applied equally across
the country to all First Nations but might
need to be flexible enough to deal with such
factors as the size of First Nations. A
national First Nation organization could
eventually take over the management of the
new accreditation system. 11
Accreditation of a First Nation would have
to be renewed annually, thereby promoting
sustainability. If a First Nation were to
‘slip’ and not maintain its accreditation, it
would no longer be eligible for certain
benefits. This would provide a powerful
incentive for new politicians to honour the
hard work of their predecessors and to retain
existing housing staff. Furthermore, there
would be less monitoring required by the
federal government since the accreditation
system itself assumes the principal
monitoring role and provides the assurance
of funds being well managed.
Critical to the success of a housing
accreditation system would be the benefits
accruing to accreditation. These would need
to be substantial and well publicized. They
could be both monetary and non-monetary
and could include:
ƒ tying access to new funding programs to
accreditation
ƒ dramatically reducing the reporting
burden for accredited First Nations
11
The Assembly of First Nations has called for
the establishment of a First Nations Housing
Institute with some functions akin to an
accreditation body. See Assembly of First
Nations, “First Nations Housing Action Plan,”
available at www.afn.ca.
7
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
How To Improve First Nation Housing
Policy Brief No. 31: Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada
increasing the flexibility of housing
funding (for example, to encourage
economic development through
housing)
encouraging third parties like financial
institutions to provide special benefits
(for example, easier access to credit,
lower interest rates)
encouraging construction companies to
provide special benefits (for example,
better financing terms, economic spinoffs or lower construction costs)
The assessment process tied to an
accreditation regime could also provide a
clear indication of what changes would be
required to achieve the accreditation
standards. This could form the basis of a
capacity building plan at the level of the
First Nation, regions, and nationally.
Capacity building would then be driven
more by demand and less by supply, and be
better linked to concrete outcomes.
After initial development and start-up costs,
the actual administration of the third party
accreditation would not be expensive. The
major expense would be related to First
Nations being assessed in terms of readiness
and assisted to reach the accreditation level.
In our view, this assessment and capacity
building assistance should be paid for
directly by First Nations (with a substantial
portion of the funding coming from the
federal government), thereby creating a
market for those services – as opposed to
having services provided nationally or
regionally to First Nations on a no-fee basis.
Assessment and capacity building services
could be provided from a number of sources
– the First Nations National Housing
Managers Association, tribal councils,
regional groups providing technical services
such as those in Ontario and Alberta,
Aboriginal or other colleges, private sector
firms, etc.
Conclusions
An accreditation regime as described above
has the potential to improve dramatically
housing conditions on reserve by addressing
the underlying political dynamic of on
reserve housing in much the same way as
the European Union enlargement process
encouraged transformative political and
economic change in eastern and southern
Europe. It would give political leaders
concrete benefits to point to when gathering
community support to become accredited
and run housing like a business. Further, it
would not call for increased federal
personnel or push the federal government
further into a ‘policing’ role that is
fundamentally at odds with the prevailing
philosophy of greater First Nation
independence from government. Finally, it
might provide a compelling rationale for
increased funding for housing from the
federal government, something that is high
on the priority list of First Nations across
Canada.
If successfully applied in housing such a
system could be expanded to encompass
other areas of capital infrastructure so
critical to First Nation communities such as
water and waste water treatment facilities,
schools, administration building, roads and
bridges.
A housing accreditation system may not be
relevant for all First Nation communities
such as those under considerable distress.
Different approaches may be called for in
these circumstances. Nonetheless, given the
slow rate of progress that now characterizes
the housing situation in First Nation
communities, this approach surely merits
close consideration by all parties.