Gender relations and gender-based analysis at the
resource development/traditional economy interface
Suzanne Mills, Sheena Kennedy Dalseg, Deborah
Simmons, Emilie Cameron, Rauna Kuokkanen
October, 2016
Background
Previous research has focused on:
• Examined health impacts
• Positioned women as victims of resource development
• Focused on negative social outcomes
There has been less research examining:
• Gendered dimensions of institutions involved in
resource development decision-making
• Women’s leadership roles and strategic
perspectives vis à vis resource development
projects
• How the increasing influence of resource
extraction in communities is influencing gender
roles and relations more broadly than impacts on
women
Research objectives
a) How are decision-making processes governing participation
in northern resource extraction gendered?
b) How do northern Indigenous women understand:
a) the relationship between increased resource
development and gender relations? and;
b) important policy interventions with regard to resource
development decision making and
governance/implementation?
Research
a) Scan of Environmental Assessment/decision-making
processes on three projects in northern regions: Mackenzie
Gas Project (NWT), Voisey’s Bay Mine and Mill (Nunatsiavut),
Meadowbank Gold Mine (NU)
b) Focus groups with women living in Nain, Nunatsiavut and in
Tulít’a, NWT
c) Validation and communication of research results including
cross-regional dialogue (Summer 2017)
Environmental Assessment Scan
(Sheena Kennedy Dalseg, Emilie Cameron)
How gender was reflected in the content of
environmental impact statements
• Women characterized as passive subjects and victims of
development
• Over-emphasis on the impacts of resource-based employment
and women’s participation in employment
• Focus on the economic participation of men in subsistence
activities and paid employment, women’s participation in
Indigenous knowledge production and the social economy
overlooked
• Gender narrowly conceived as ‘impacts on women’
Environmental Assessment Scan
(Sheena Kennedy Dalseg, Emilie Cameron)
Women’s interventions
• Varied because of different institutional structures
• Drew attention to anticipated negative outcomes of the shift to
greater reliance on resource extraction for families,
communities and the environment
• Encouraged proponents and governments to broaden their
methods and address the social/traditional economies and
political concerns more fully
Focus groups Nunatsiavut
(Charlotte Wolfrey, Johanna Tuglavina, Jean-Sebastien Boutet)
• In partnership with Departments of Education and Economic Development
and Lands and Natural Resources, Nunatsiavut Government
• Two day long discussions with 16 Inuit women in Nain, July 2015
• Representatives from Nain, Hopedale, Makkovik, Rigolet, and Postville
• Open-ended discussions about changing gender relations and community
wellbeing, what could be improved and what the future economic
development should look like
Voisey’s Bay mine/Nunatsiavut
Increasing wealth amidst continued poverty
• Increased wealth and access to employment in communities
• Rising inequality
• Wealth generated by Voisey’s Bay was not helping to alleviate poverty or food
insecurity
“It's one thing to have these healthy foods made available, but it's a whole [other] thing
if people do not have access to it because it's unaffordable to most local people in town.“
Decreased sharing in the community and increased focus on cash transactions
“My grandson filled up my wood box not too long ago, and I thought he was going to run
on, and he was still lingering there, and I say: “what you waiting for?” And he said “you
won’t pay me?” [Laughs]... He’s only twelve years old.”
Voisey’s Bay mine/Nunatsiavut
Unequal Access to Mining Opportunities
• Women perceived employment to be the predominant way that people
were benefitting from the mine
• This included wage and non-wage benefits: improved confidence, access to
addiction supports, healthy food and money to support time on the land
(time trade off)
• Dissatisfaction with the low number of people living in coastal communities
who were working at the mine
• Barriers to accessing employment: need for internet, lack of communication
about job opportunities, knowledge about how to apply
• Felt that adjacency principle in Inuit Impact Benefit Agreement was not
effective
Voisey’s Bay / Nunatsiavut
“If you look at the stats it will probably still say that there’s forty something percent Inuit
working over there. But if you look at where are they out from, where are they really
from, where do they live, it’s mostly Goose Bay.”
“there are all kinds of excuses but really our IBA says if you have the qualifications and if
you are from Nain or Natuashish, you should have the first job.”
“[Workers] thought they’d have more opportunity to go on the land, because they had
more money for gas, they had more money to buy a reliable machine and stuff like that,
but I don’t think that’s really the case. You would have to make it a priority to go and do
that ... Generally everybody in Rigolet is going out less, to be honest with you.”
Key issues for future research
• In context of rapid social change research processes need to
acknowledge and accommodate feelings of being unsettled as
part of the research design
• In the scope of this project it is possible to collaboratively
identify research questions
– Trade offs between wealth provided by mining employment and
negative social consequences
• Project can build on existing processes and give voice to
existing consensus
Recommendations from Nunatsiavut
•
•
•
•
Remove barriers to employment
Increase social supports for families and communities
Stronger IBAs and an ombudsperson
Future resource development should only occur if the benefits and
opportunities are greater and if the social and environmental costs were
lower than they are for Voisey’s Bay
Sahtú Settlement Area (Kuokkanen & Simmons):
• In conjunction with SSHRC-funded research project on
gendered dimensions of Indigenous self-governance.
• Focus group with women in Tulít’a in June, 2014
• Women from the community of Deline as well as Tulít’a
• 22 interviews, 13 with women including leaders, elders, youth
• Collection of documents
pertaining to gender and
governance
• Analysis ongoing
Sahtú Settlement Area (Kuokkanen & Simmons)
Outcomes:
• Women spoke in detail about their own experiences but their biggest
concern was to ensure that the cross-generational impacts of their
experiences be mitigated
• Creation of a space for youth to develop their own self-organized activities
• Catalyst for establishing the Sahtú youth network across five communities
• Opportunity for cross gender discussions
• Youth programming has become central to the Sahtú Renewable Resources
Board
• Pro-active strategic initiatives around maintaining a traditional economy
Overall recommendations
• The scope of Environmental Assessment and programming to
address impacts needs to encompass all economic activities
(social/traditional and resource economies), all generations and
women and men
• Attention to gender in northern communities needs to bridge
and address challenges in maintain healthy economies that
include resource development and traditional economies
• Addressing gender impacts involves men as well as women and
youth as well as older women, focus groups limited