Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU Sustainability Planning in Arctic Resource Communities...

Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU

Sustainability Planning inArctic Resource Communities

Michelle Boyle and Hadi Dowlatabadi,University of British Columbia

withMembers of the Nunavut Economic Developers

Association

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

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.

Agenda

• Theoretical frameworks for community adaptation

• Comparison with an actual planning process (analysis and results)

• Implications for building adaptive capacity in communities

Climate vulnerability sets priorities

Sensitivity to climate change

Community priorities

Models of community adaptation:

Response

All vulnerabilities set priorities

Sensitivity to multiple stresses




Response

Response

Community control

Local control is limited





Successful Responses

A fuller pictureModels of community adaptation:

Adaptive Capacity

Community control




External resources

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.

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

Method

• 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

High Community PrioritiesTHE 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

CharacterizingCommunity Priorities

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Community Priorities

Actions

None Low Medium High

Climate Sensitivity & Community Priority

0

8

16

24

32

40

48


Climate Sensivity

Action Items

Not a priority Low priority Medium priority High priority

Community control




High Community priorities9%

91%

Characterizing Community Control

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Community Control

Number of Action ItemsNone Low Medium High

Community Control & Community Priority

0

8

16

24

32

40

48



Number of Action Items

No Control Low Control Medium Control High Control

Community Control &Climate Sensitivity

0

8

16

24

32

40

48


Climate Sensitivity


No Control Low Control Medium Control High Control

Characterizing Community Priorities

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Number of Action ItemsNone Low Medium High

Characterizing Community & CEDO Priorities

0

20

40

60

80

100

Community CEDO

Priorities



“Make the implementation of the community development plan the primary task of the community economic developer.”

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

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.

Questions?

Climate Sensitivity and Community Control

• communities have incomplete control over both climate sensitive and non-climate sensitive items

INCIDENCE (RATIO) Community Control

Climate Sensitivity

No control Low Medium High

Not Sensitive 0.35 0.26 0.26 0.14Low 0.48 0.10 0.24 0.19Medium 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.05High 0.33 0.50 0.00 0.17

Community Priorities and Community Control

• control is not sought for low priority items?

INCIDENCE (RATIO) Community Control

Community Priority

No control Low Medium High

Not a priority 0.94 0.06 0.00 0.00Low 0.68 0.11 0.11 0.11Medium 0.25 0.25 0.32 0.18High 0.20 0.34 0.31 0.14

• communities have incomplete control over higher priority items

Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU Sustainability Planning in Arctic Resource Communities...

Documents

Transcript of Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU Sustainability Planning in Arctic Resource Communities...