networks, partnerships &...

2017

Networks, Partnerships & Innovation:

Seventh Annual ReSDA Workshop Report

ReSDA Community Report #7Prepared by Stephanie Pike

Kwanlin Dun Cultural Centre

Whitehorse, YukonOctober 18-20, 2017

Research and Knowledge Sharing:Seventh Annual ReSDA Research Workshop

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe ReSDA network would like to thank the many groups and individuals that supported and contributed to the success of the event:

We would also like to thank the ReSDA network members for their support and contributions to the event.

The Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) for providing core funding for both ReSDA and this workshop.

All the presenters who provided their experiences and insights on mechanisms to share knowledge effectively.

Most importantly thank you to all the workshop participants who took time away from their work and family to contribute to the discussions on creating change and affecting policy.

These contributions provide knowledge and insights from community groups, researchers, government and others to understand current results and support future developments of meaningful research for the North. Their extensive support helped produce results in a very successful event.Thank you!

ReSDA |Seventh Annual Workshop – Whitehorse, YT October 18-20, 2017 Page 1 of 55

Resources and Sustainable Development in the Arctic (ReSDA)

ReSDA is a research network that brings together researchers from a broad range of disciplines and organizations representing communities, government, the private sector and non-profit organizations. Through partnerships and collaborations we conduct and mobilize research aimed at the sustainable development of Arctic natural resources in a manner that will improve the health and well-being of northern communities while preserving the region's unique environment.

More information: Visit us on the web at

www.resda.ca Check us out on Facebook and

Twitter

http://www.resda.ca/

Table of ContentsTable of Contents........................................................................................................................................2

Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................................4

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................6

Background..................................................................................................................................................7

Day 1............................................................................................................................................................8

Evening Reception...................................................................................................................................8

Day 2............................................................................................................................................................8

Opening Remarks....................................................................................................................................8

ReSDA Research: The Last 6 Years, Researchers......................................................................................8

ReSDA Research: The Last 6 Years, Students.........................................................................................11

Session 1A: Community Well-Being, Indicators and Monitoring...........................................................13

Session 1B: Economics, Environments and Agreements.......................................................................16

Session 1C: Research & Policy Directions..............................................................................................19

Session 1D: Indigenous Involvement and Partnerships in Research......................................................20

Session 2A: New Directions, Northern Institutes, New Researchers.....................................................22

Session 2B: Subsistence Harvesting and Food Security.........................................................................24

Session 2C: Economics, Education & Entrepreneurship........................................................................26

Session 2D: Communicating Research...................................................................................................30

Evening Program: Public Film Event......................................................................................................31

Day 3..........................................................................................................................................................32

Presentation Summaries.......................................................................................................................32

Session 3A: Tips for Social Science Research Methods..........................................................................32

Session 3B: Northern Research Ethics and Other Considerations.........................................................33

Session 3C: Considering Film/Video and Photography in Research.......................................................36

Session 3D: Community Engagement....................................................................................................37

Future Directions for the ReSDA, Social Sciences & Research Networks (Panel Discussion).................39

Future Directions of ReSDA...................................................................................................................41

Final Remarks........................................................................................................................................42


Appendices................................................................................................................................................42

Appendix 1 – Agenda for the Seventh Annual ReSDA Research Workshop..........................................42

Appendix 2 – Workshop Backgrounder.................................................................................................47

Appendix 3 – Workshop Participants.....................................................................................................50

Appendix 4 – Participant Evaluation Summary......................................................................................52


Executive SummaryThe seventh annual ReSDA workshop allowed researchers to share their findings, lessons learned and their recommendations for ReSDA moving forward. Discussions explored a wide range of topics related to conducting research in the north. Participants self selected into different breakout groups throughout the workshop and researchers were placed into topics that aligned with their research. The sessions were as follows;

1. Community Well-being, Indicators & Monitoring2. Economics, Environments & Agreements3. Research & Policy Directions4. Indigenous Involvement & Partnership in Research5. New Directions, Northern Institutes, New Researchers6. Subsistence Harvesting & Food Security7. Economics, Education & Entrepreneurship8. Communicating Research9. Tips for Social Science Research Methods10. Northern Research Ethics & Other Considerations11. Considering Film/Video & Photography in Research12. Community Engagement

This workshop was very well attended, bringing together a range of various representatives from various sectors to share valuable knowledge. There were 74 participants in attendance (list of participants in Appendix 3).

Workshop activities included presentations, questions and discussions. Some of the observations and suggestions from presentations included:

Policitical barriers have been recognized as challenges for tracking and monitoring community well-being in the long term;

Improved knowledge around community well-being has the potential to impact broader policy;

Transparency remains a significant challenge for the development and understanding of impact benefit agreements in the North;

The biggest challenge with incorporating research into policy is how exactly research findings are translated and worked into these bigger systems;

Emphasis should be placed on the concept of involving communities in the development and outcome of research;

The structural design of obtaining funding has been recognized as an issue in terms of community involvement;

There is a lack of clarity when it comes to how relationships and partnerships are maintained;

Time and money are two significant factors in determining who is subsistence harvesting and when they are doing it;

Situating training facilities in northern communities is often expensive and time consuming when compared to training facilities further south;


Employment requirements differ from region to region. Consistency would be beneficial;

Sustainable employment is key for long term economic prosperity; While the traditional communication model is appropriate in some situations, there are

other options for communicating research and results; It is crucial to adequately prepare students for the various situations they may come

across in northern communities; The balance between community responsibility and personal responsibility is difficult to

achieve; Determing where responsibility lies in terms of ethics is a challenge faced in many

communities and by many instititutions; The use of film is a great option for communitcating research findings to a wide variety

of individuals; Facilitators/Translaters can improve the quality of research and ease communication

barriers; There is a recognized time constraint for those researchers completing Graduate

degrees. Two years is often not a long enough time to develop relationships and conduct research in northern communities.

ReSDA is in the end of year 7 of 7 for funding from SSHRC. At this point, it is important to think about future directions for the network and how it can be used to make positive, meaningful impact on communities. The second portion of the workshop discussed future research directions and policy tools for ReSDA. Recommendations from workshop participants included:

ReSDA has done great work over the past 7 years, it would be great to see it all together and in one place that is easily accessible.

There was a fair amount of disucsion around how networks like ReSDA can continue to operate in the north.

The workshop concluded with a discussion about the next steps for ReSDA.


IntroductionEach year, the ReSDA network holds an annual workshop that focuses on a central theme. The workshop aims to bring together researchers and northern partners who represent communities, government, the private sector and non-profit organizations that are involved with issues and research pertaining to sustainable Arctic resource developments. The network priorities are on the social and economic impacts of resource developments and ways to ensure greater benefits to northern people.

Discussions with community partners began in 2007 during community research workshops organized by the Social Economy Research Network for Northern Canada (SERNNoCa). Northern organizations were consulted during 2010 as the specific proposal for this program was developed. In 2011, the initial annual workshop was held in Yellowknife. Researchers had the opportunity to reflect on recommendations from communities and discuss how these suggestions could be translated into formal research questions. From the presentations and discussions at this workshop the Management Committee developed a draft research plan to guide the work of the network for the next year. The emphasis was on isolating the main areas for a gap analysis. The ReSDA Steering Committee agreed to prioritize this work as a first step in determining the research needs and requirements of ReSDA. The next workshop focused on the results of the gap analysis research and was held in Whitehorse, YT in 2012. This work was used to formulate the research priorities and main questions to be addressed by the network members. One of the key issues raised at the workshop in Whitehorse was the need for effective knowledge sharing and this resulted in the theme for the next annual workshop held in Iqaluit, NT in 2013. This work shop focused on the best mechanisms to share knowledge among researchers, community members and industry. The next workshop was held in Happy-Valley Goose-Bay Labrador in 2014. The workshop focus was on the well-being of Northern communities in relation to resource developments. 2016’s workshop in Kuujjuaq addressed the topic of subsistence harvesting practices, land claims, and the relationships to resource developments and the experiences and changes over the past 40 years since the settlement of the Land Claims in Nunavik and Alaska. 2017’s workshop in Ottawa focused on presenting research findings and identifying ways in which they could be used to create posivitve change through the empowerment of communities and influencing policies.

The focus of this year’s workshop was an overview of project results, and how policy can be influenced to ensure that benefits are maximized and negative effects minimized. The workshop was held October 18-20, 2017 in Whitehorse, Yukon. Presentations and discussions were devoted to highlighting some of the research, tools and products developed as well as future directions of ReSDA.

The workshop was divided into three different sections. The first day was focused on welcoming researchers and attendees at an evening reception. Two ReSDA products were released during the reception; the Mobile Worker’s Guide and Film and the ReSDA Atlas. Day two was a busy day that started with presentations from researchers and students that focused on findings from completed research and updates for in progress work. The afternoon included small workshops to discuss various topics that were relevant during ReSDA research activities. ReSDA researchers and students worked in the groups most relevant to their own work. Day three provided different workshops for best practices in social science research and communications and the workshop finished off with a broad discussion around the future directions for ReSDA, social sciences and research networks.


BackgroundThe Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada announced funding through their Major Collaborative Research Initiative grants in February 2011 for a new Northern research project called Resources and Sustainable Development in the Arctic (ReSDA). The main focus of ReSDA’s research will be on finding ways to ensure that a larger share of the benefits of resource development stay in the region with fewer costs to communities. The Network will mobilize researchers around the questions of finding out how to maximize benefits of resource development to northern regions and communities and minimize the social, economic, cultural, and environmental costs. The primary objective of the research will be to cultivate innovative approaches to the best ways of natural resource developments s to improve the well-being of northern communities while preserving the region’s unique environment. This issue is all the more pressing given the increased demand for natural resources globally, with many of these resources existing in Arctic locations. As part of the research network activities an annual workshop is held to discuss the current and proposed research with input and direction from community and government representatives across the North.

ReSDA currently consists of fifty-four researchers, including participants from twenty-nine universities in nine different countries. It has over thirty partners, including four key partners and the partners of each individual project, both in Canada and internationally.

To date, ReSDA has over thirty reports on its website, as well as over fifty refereed publications. All research reports on the ReSDA websites are accompanied by plain-language summaries so as to make them more accessible to the public. While they are all currently in English, ReSDA hopes to translate them into Indigenous languages and French at some point in the future. In addition to their academic pursuits, ReSDA has dedicated significant efforts in knowledge sharing. This has taken the form of over twenty community workshops in the North. In drawing from these workshops, ReSDA listens to the remarks of Zacharias Kunuk on the importance of film for knowledge-sharing, and has over 120 videos of researchers talking about their projects on their YouTube channel. With the help of funding from CanNorth, ReSDA also developed an Atlas for its research findings through which partners can easily access research reports and information online. It is accessible through this link http://resda.yukoncollege.yk.ca/

This report is a summary of the presentations and discussions from the workshop. The report is structured to reflect the format from agenda. For some of the detailed group discussions there is more detail provided in an appendix to provide a record for future reference. The report provides an overview of what was addressed over the three days, as well as recommendations provided by the participants for the future direction of ReSDA. All the power point presentations, links to the video recordings and other materials from the workshop are available on the ReSDA website at http://yukonresearch.yukoncollege.yk.ca/resda/knowledge-sharing/workshops/whitehorse2017/


http://yukonresearch.yukoncollege.yk.ca/resda/knowledge-sharing/workshops/whitehorse2017/

http://resda.yukoncollege.yk.ca/

Day 1

Evening ReceptionGrand Chief, Peter Johnston from the Council of Yukon First Nations, Mayor Dan Curtis and ReSDA Director Chris Southcott provided welcoming remarks to all the participants at MacBride Museum.

Day 2

Opening RemarksChris Southcott, Lakehead University, ReSDA Director

Chris opened the workshop sessions by welcoming all guests. Opening remarks began with an acknowledgement that the workshop was being held on the ancestral lands of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation and Ta’an Kwäch’än Council. Information was provided on ReSDA’s origins and recent research as well as the workshop’s schedule and format. This workshop was designed in such a way that participants will have the opportunity to speak directly with researchers.

ReSDA Research: The Last 6 Years, ResearchersBrenda Parlee, University of Alberta

The first project fits into the well-being category and aims to understand how resource development impacts different aspects of well-being. The second project investigats the impacts of cruise ship tourism on local marine protected areas.

A third project was done in northern Ontario with a focus on communities who are annually evacuated due to flooding. The project aims to examine the impacts on the community and infrastructure due to constant evacuations. Some of the questions this project aims to address are;

1. Is this a climate change issue?2. What is driving these impacts?3. What are the implications for other communities in northern Canada who have similar

infrastructure and issues around climate change?

David Natcher, University of Saskatchewan

Dave Natchers work around subsistence harvesting has included areas in Alaska, Old Crow, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut, Oil Sands Region, and Polatuk. Many harvest studies were redone since the initial studies were completed in the 1970’s and 1980’s. The updated harvest studies include information on food sharing networks, mixed economies and the role of hunters support programs. Subsistence remains viable and important to both the culture and economy in northern communities. However, from a policy perspective, there is recognition for subsistence harvesting as a cultural importance but is lacking as a viable component of local economies. A key step for subsistence is to normalize as a viable part of the northern econonmy, not treated as a recreational pursuit.

Catherine Keske/Morgon Mills, Memorial University


Catherine Keske and Morgon Mills have been working on a project related to waste management in Labrador. This work is focused in Happy Valley/Goose Bay and examines waste management strategies for large developments such as the Muskrat Falls Hydro Dam. One of the major questions this project aims to address is how can tipping fees be set at municipal landfills in communities with developments similar to Muskrat Falls and if this can be done, what is the economic advantage in processing the waste within the community? Additionally, this project is looking at the direct production of waste from clearing the reservoir (lumber). The literature review is focused on waste management in remote Indigenous communities and includes discussions on how the general information applies to this specific project.

Andrew Hodgkins, Grant MacEwan University

Andrew Hodgkins work examined training employment programs for resource extractive industries. This work stems from doctoral research conducted for the Beaufort Delta and Mackenzie gas program. The methodology was to follow the same group of workers over a number of years. One of the major findings was that stable employment in the trades in the north is not happening and additionally, there is a lack of both communication and infrastructure.

Ben Bradshaw, University of Guelph

Ben Bradshaws work is focused on impact benefit agreements (IBAs). This work heavily relies on relationships with community leaders and researchers from across the country. While there tends to be mixed reactions with IBAs, some groups like communities, see IBAs as an avenue to a shift in power. There are many issues around community and industry signatories that IBAs are not delivering on their progress. One of the major questions this research aims to examine is; are IBAs a band aid solution?

In terms of ReSDA, there are three outcomes for this project;

1. Knowledge and integration;2. Treat IBAs as one strategic element of a larger structure; and3. Monitor community well-being and adaptive management.

Suzanne Mills, McMaster University

Suzanne Mills work is focused on gender and resource development. The research has two components; environmental assessments (gender analysis) and focus groups. Environmental assessments are embedded in a masculine culture that promotes resource development. While women and traditional economies are often seen as challenges and obstacles for development. One of the major outcomes of this work was that the focus groups led to a series of programming to support youth. The takehome message is there needs to be more thought about how resources can be developed in broader mechanisms.

Lee Huskey, University of Alaska Anchorage

This project is called “Resource Revenue Regimes” and examines how local governments at various scales capture revenues produced by resource extraction. To start, a survey was used to explore how governments do this. The main interest behind the survey was to determine how this type of activity worked in the real world. This research was conducted in Yukon and Alaska. Work was completed for the 1990’s and 2000’s in Yukon during the mining boom and resulted in a map of how money flowed in


and how governments captured rent. A major finding was that non-government spending was not a substantial amount. Other findings indicated that North Slope, Alaska is a community that has done this well. They had their struggles and the ability to capture resources was influenced by the fact it was in Alaska with strong county governments. This project focused on historic cases where the resource economy declined which makes this a strong research topic.

Gertrude Saxinger, University of Vienna

LACE, labor mobility and community participation in resource extraction. The whole starting point is that the Yukon doesn’t have any more fully fledged mining towns, so how do they get their labor force? The drive in or fly in model is one that has become dominant in northern regions and involves living in camps for 14 days and returning home for 14 days. With this type of employment comes a specific lifestyle and coping strategy. This research aims to address questions like how to pursue a meaningful life while employed by the extractive industry where camp life is the norm.

One component of the project is a guidebook; it is called the Mobile Workers Guide and includes 15 chapters that are based on 100 interviews over the past three years. Topics range from family life issues to jealousy, breakups and relationships, drugs and alcohol and training. Pursuing the proper training can be difficult for sporadic and short term employment. Other chapters explore women in mining and their perspective. A major highlight of this project was working with the Nacho Nyak Dun First Nation to develop a research agenda. The second component of this project is focused on community relations. From discussions with pariticpants, a film was created and shown during the ReSDA Workshop Reception at MacBride Museum on October 19, 2018.

Finally, the researchers met with Chief and Council and were happy to hear that this was just the start of this type of research. Chief and Council expressed interest in continuing work on impacts and how mining has impacted hunting practices.

Andrey Petrov, University of Northern Iowa

Andrey Petrov is involved in the Univialuit Baseline Indicators Project. The idea behind this project was to implement a basic framework of social indicators developed for monitoring overall human well-being in Arctic communities. Study components included; applying the indicators and using the framework as a comparative study. We have seen an improvement in indicators, but one of the most important parts is that the gap between regions is persistent and not closing; so while there are positive trends, the gap still exists. Andrey Petrov is also involved in ArcticFrost and has done community workshops which aim to bring community members and researchers from various parts of the Arctic together to share knowledge.

Chris Southcott presents on behalf of those researchers absent

Theirry Rodon, Universite Laval

This research was based around the question of what’s the best way, once we get the money, to distribute it among the community in order to prevent problems? Through a partnership with Makivik Corporation, this project compared different cases and one of the main findings was that of the two main frameworks used (distributed to individuals or invested as a community), the greater benefits


come when the community keeps control of the funds. It has been noted when individual funds are handed out, the subsistence harvesting economy benefits, at least for the short term.

Frances Abel & Josh Gladstone, Carleton University

This research aimed to address the question of once the communities get money, what is the besy way to maximize the money and ensure the funds work to their advantage? In most cases, there are issues around understanding things like taxes and control of assets.

Frances Abel & Josh Gladstone, Carleton University

This project examined what works for mining in Inuit communities. One of the main questions asked was what are the reasons some communities are happy with relationships and what are the issues that other communities have had?

Lisa Freeman, Kwantlen Polytechnic University & Julia Christensen, Roskilde University

This research examined how resource development could occur in a way that would improve housing conditions in the north.

John Sandlos/Arn Keeling/Ann Dance, Memorial University

This project examined the ways to ensure that remediation benefits the communities and that they have some level of control over the remediation. The remediation policy was examined and issues of concern for the communities were explored. There is a whole series of suggestions for improving remediation so that communities can access more benefits and increase control.

BREAK

ReSDA Research: The Last 6 Years, StudentsSusanna Gartler, University of Vienna

Susanna Gartler’s work is a continuation of the LACE (labor mobility and community participation in resource extraction) project under the topic of reconciliation and revitalization role of cultural centres for Indigenous revitalization in the Yukon Territory. The main idea fro this research is to examine different cultural centres across Yukon Territory and determine what lessons can be passed onto the cultural centre proposed in Mayo YT. The second part of the project, which ties into the LACE project is conducting interviews with elders about their opinions on how extractive industry has impacted their way of life.

Kent Spiers, Lakehead University

This project was a comparison study of Yukon and Alaska models used for studying community well-being. This research aimed to identify the similarities and differences in models as well as determine the level of local input used in the models. The first step required a literature review of permit applications, websites, newspapers and any other docment for local input. When the interviews were completed, participants were asked about their understanding of the input. The second step was to conduct a more broad literature review on the notion of community well-being and indicators. 57 keywords were pulled out of the literature review and were sorted them into themes. Statements from academics were pulled


out and compared against the models to determine if the industry was listening to what academics were recommending. The third step was to conduct a series of eight interviews with six people from Alaska and two from Yukon, that had experience working with at least one of the models identified previously. The interviews were further broken down into themes like culture, Indigenous, education, employement etc. On the local involvement side, there was very little and so through the interviews, it was found that the community members had a strong interest in coming together to create these models. One of the significant findings was that there was a lack of consultation and communication, whether it was government or industry. Ideally, these models need to be both qualitative and quantitative. In Alaska, they were quantitative and in Canada, there was more of a mix. Finally, it was found that there’s a growing tension in the communities as consultation is lacking.

Emily Martin, University of Guelph

Emily Martin’s research is on free prior and informed consent (FPIC) in the context of the Yukon and how the discourse of FPIC is occurring throughout the Yukon. Modern governance landscape includes treaties, self-government and land claims. The Yukon has seen attention due to recent resource development. This research has two parts; the first is the Yukon institutional discourse of FPIC and the second is expected consent processes for Little Salmon Carmacks First Nations. Three hypothesis’ have been identified for the limited engagement with FPIC.

1. The first is Yukon First Nation already have been able to operationalize rights related to consent;2. The second is they are waiting for Federal action; 3. And third, FPIC will eventually bubble up in the Yukon but is being slowed.

Work is being done with the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation to discuss expectations and what they think is appropriate. Additionally, a book is being developed that was born out of the work Jen Jones on health and well-being. Carmacks, Pelly and Mayo already have an established series of illustrated books and the aim is to build on this with a book on Yukon Environmental & Socio-economic Assessment Board (YESAB) and how community members may engage with this.

Jen Jones, University of Guelph

Jen Jones is conducting research on how impacts of health and well-being could be better understood. This work aims to determine how do we in our existing governance mechanisms account for and address the ongoing legacies of colonization? This work is being done in partnership with the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nations and is funded through ReSDA and Polar Knowledge.

Colonization continues to have impacts on the health and well-being of community members; how do we account for this? The purpose is to understand and gather perspecitves, develop a framework for communities and those individuals who work in the governance mechanisms. What does it mean to de-colonize? There is a need to develop a framework and consider the colonial past that has imformed ideas of health and well-being.

Jeanette Carney, Memorial University

Jeanette Carney conducted research on the impacts of the Asbestos Hill Mine in Nunavik (1972-1984). This research was the first on this mine and first of its kind in Nunavik and second in the Arctic. The mine was one of those wild west stories where everything started and there was gambling, prostitution, drugs


and alcohol flowing into the mine and the surrounding communities. The research included broad impacts from the mine such as economic, health, environemtnal, social and cultural. A total of 18 interviews were conducted with community members, miners or family members. All were Inuit except one.

Economically, there was no real impact except direct employment due to a nonexistent impact benefit agreement (IBA). Environmentally, as of 2015, the mine is still being cleaned up. Health impacts are tough as many participants mentioned having respiratory issues, but the existing medical records are weak. There is minimal proof to demonstrate that the respiratory issues came with the mine. The entire community associates the health impacts to the mine but cannot prove it. Social and cultural impacts were focused around the inflow of drugs and alcohol, which came with the mine but never left. Optimistically, the experience was so negative that when a new mining company came, the community banded together to have more control and input.

Jason Dicker, Memorial University

Jason Dicker came to ReSDA through Catherine Keske as a research assistant for the waste manamgenet project. Working on this project allowed Jason to use the skills and knowledge obtained through his undergraduate degree. His responsibility to this project was to conduct a literature review and maintain an annotated bibliography to organize how this project would be completed. Anything related to waste management practices in the Arctic was documented.

Todd Godfrey, University of Alberta

Todd Godfrey’s research focused around building tools to monitor community well-being. The goal of this project was to take the original indicator project one step further and create an interactive tool that policy makers could use from available data.

The main challenge with this project was finding usable data. For socio-economic indicators, the 2007 Inuit health survey was the most available. The researchers developed an interactive tool called SEEIT, that shows relationships between key indicators and minor indicators. The user can manipulate the indicators and see how that impacts the key indicators. All the indicators are set to averages but can be manipulated to display different scenarios where policies or social situations change.

BREAK

Session 1A: Community Well-Being, Indicators and MonitoringBrenda Parlee (University of Alberta), Kent Spiers (Lakehead University), Todd Godfrey (University of Alberta)

Introduction

ReSDA researchers start discussions by presenting their research relating to wellbeing and resource development. This discussion will focus on how we are measuring wellbeing and what impacts resource development has had. It will also look at plans, approaches and positive results in the context of resource development in the North. How do communities view, define, and measure wellbeing? How has community wellbeing been affected by resource development and changes to the environment.


Well-being is a complex subject with many sup-topics. As such, the following questions were put forward to initiate and guide discussion;

1. What are good indicators?2. What are appropriate methods for monitoring or tracking well-being?3. What is the global value of tracking community well-being?

Meaningful Indicators

Identifying meaningful indicators is a topic that is commonly brought up during discussions around community well-being in the North and the various challenges have been recognized by academics and communities. When discussing indicators, it is crucial to consider qualitative versus quantitative data. Quantitative data is cross sectional data; a snapshot for what conditions were like at that time, but qualitative data can illustrate a more complete story. Despite the ability of qualitative data to illustrate a more complete picture, quantitative data tends to have a different weight and impact in the academic community.

One of the most significant challenges is the lack of available “codes” for recording indicators in health facilities. The existing codes do not always fit the northern context. For example, time spent on the land has been recognized by those living in the North as one of the strongest indicators for well-being and yet it is not always included in the larger coding process.

In addition to the lack of appropriate codes for northern communities, there is a clear separation between available quantitative data and what communities may view as actual good indicators of well-being. There are obvious gaps that exist in determining indicators and additional questions were raised;

1. What are the kinds of indicators that could be tracked to help the community make important day to day decisions?

2. Are we just collecting data about things that the communities already know? Or is this providing new insights?

In addition to identifying meaningful indicators, scale is an important consideration for indicator development and monitoring. The scale of development and monitoring needs to match the scale of interests, values and community capacity. Scale is one of the reasons indicator development has gained resonance; people want to link their experiences to other communities.

Monitoring and Tracking Community Well-Being

Developing and implementing a system to monitor and track community well-being in the North has been recognized as a major challenge. Additionally, monitoring and tracking may remain a significant challenge until issues around appropriate coding are addressed. It is difficult or rather impossible to track well-being if the appropriate tools and information is lacking. If the issue regarding the codes were to be solved, it would be imperative that the monitoring and tracking be community led. However, the challenge with this statement is that communities do not always have the capacity to collect, manage and analyze the data on a consistent basis. This would ultimately require placing a permanent employee in the communities to disseminate information and deal with the data.


A representative from the Government of Nunavut explained that in any given year, there are approximately 250,000 visits to health centers across the territory. Of those 250,000, only 750 visits are recorded as being related to well-being; meaning there is a significant lack of data collection on well-being indicators across Nunavut. For example, if someone were to seek out medical attention for a circulation issue which was related to poor diet and food security issues and that data is not recorded, the result is a gap in the data. If the data were to be collected more consistently, there may be more opportunity to understand underlying well-being concerns that manifest through physical illnesses and ailments. However, as discussed in section one, without the appropriate “codes” to report well-being, monitoring and tracking is very challenging.

Is there potential to utilize information that is already being collected in the context of community wellbeing?

For example, how does having a successful moose hunt impact a family’s well-being and their community well-being? The bulk of this data would come from various harvest studies and would be used by the community to demonstrate the connection between consuming country foods and well-being. Ultimately, the results of this could help illustrate how extractive industries may or may not impact the well-being of the community.

The Global Value of Monitoring and Tracking Community Well-being

The purpose behind collecting data on community well-being is a discussion topic commonly brought up amongst governments, academics and communities.

Communities often find themselves asking why is this information being collected? Who is it valuable to and why?

Communities have expressed interest in obtaining more impactful data on community well-being that can be used within the community, which can potentially lead to more direct action from community members. Having the data and collection process coming from the community opens the doors for a solutions oriented problem solving approach. Participants from this group agreed that northern communities could benefit from collecting this information. If communities could obtain and manage this data on a more consistent basis, the community would be able to use it for leverage in funding applications. For example, when a mine opens, there is an increased pressure on community health centers and not always funding to support these services. Additionally, this information could be valuable when trying to plan projects that are within or impact the community. Collecting data on community well-being can be used to inform residents about the larger community issues. With knowledge around the major issues, income from extractive industry could be spent more efficiently and effectively. This requires the community to be an active participant.

A powerful idea came out of this discussion, which was that knowledge and sharing knowledge is power. If First Nations from each territory could have community to community knowledge sharing rather than government to government, the result could be a shift in power dynamics. The shift of who is doing the work and using it is necessary as governments and academics often use data for very different purposes than the community.

Community Resistance to Participation


1. Is part of community resistance because of research fatigue?2. Are communities tired of being asked the same question year after year?3. Does research fatigue create a barrier for developing indicators?

In some communities and situations, the act of identifying indicators tends to put a real simplification on people’s realities. This could cause some community members to resist any future research.

Conclusion

From a policy perspective, there is a difference in interests for tracking and monitoring community well-being. Although tracking and monitoring community well-being has potential to impact broader policy, there are major barriers reaching that level. The first being that high staff turnover results in what minimal amount of data is collected has the potential to be lost in transition. The second issue relates back to scale. When data is collected, it is being used at a much broader, regional scale rather than at a local level. The third being that collected data is passed through other agencies to be analyzed and returned. For example, in Nunavut, the Bureau of Statistics requires the collected data to produce a socio-economic report and once that is completed the report is given back to the original data collection agency. This process does not make total sense; the collection agency should be analyzing the available data.

Session 1B: Economics, Environments and AgreementsBen Bradshaw (Unveristy of Guelph), Catherine Keske (Memorial University), Stephan Schott (Carleton Univeristy)

Introduction

ReSDA researchers start discussions by presenting their research relating to this area. How can you ensure benefits from resource development are sustainable? What are the costs and how are these being reduced? This panel will look at what is being done to guide northern resource development. It will guide best practices and lessons from examples, and assess whether we are now doing better at managing resource impacts on the environment.

Waste Management Project

1. What steps are required to ensure that waste management procedures are sustainable?2. How do we ensure that waste management procedures are sustainable?

This research took place in the Happy Valley-Goose Bay area due to the complexity deriving from the different types of wastes (the NATO base and Muskrat Falls dam project). The NATO base has waste that is considered extremely toxic and remains undisclosed to the public, but Muskrat Fall Dam is the major focus for this project. The temporary labor forces that come in, the clearing of wood on the land and the municipality together create a significant amount of waste. In addition to high volumes of waste, safety around waste management needs to be made a priority as waste harvesting is an activity that occurs commonly. Despite the encouragement from the municipality to practice good waste management, cost is a continued challenge. From a waste management perspective, the Happy Valley Goose Bay community would benefit from collaboration with the NATO base and Muskrat Falls projects. However, political tensions and privacy concerns have prevented the collaboration potential.


This project aims to characterize the different waste flows to address the following questions;

1. Where is the waste coming from?2. Where is it going?

The same research was conducted in Nain, Nunatsiavut, with the assistance of Jason Dicker, for comparison purposes. Nain posed an interested comparison to Happy Valley Goose Bay due to the level of isolation (Nain is not accessible by road).

Lessons Learned

A major lesson learned during this project was that collaboration is essential in the process to achieve economies of scale. There are plans in the works for the commitments for the second phase by conducting a cost-benefit analysis and perhaps developing a waste to energy project to heat a greenhouse and tackle some food security issues.

Mining Economics, Mining Families

This project was initiated by the Nunatsiavut Government with a request to conduct research on the economic benefits of mining in the North. The Nunatsiavut Government recognized that social and environmental impacts were more commonly studied and the economic benefits were often taken for granted and are underassessed. Surveys and focus groups were the main tools used to assess the business and human development aspects of mining. Listed below are a few questions this project investigated (note: this is not a complete list);

1. How can we assess business and human development impacts of mining?2. How can we make sure that benefits are maximized in the community?3. How do we minimize any barriers to question 2?4. How do firms survive the different stages of mine development? And how does this impact

business and employment?5. What are the concerns with leakage? How is it defined in this context?

The project finished with a comparative analysis of two communities (one from Nunavik and another from Nunatsiavut) that are geographically close, but have totally different government regimes and mining companies. A major difference is that Nunavik has their own mining policy and Nunatsiavut does not. Much to everyone’s surprise most business owners felt they were heavily understudied and welcomed the researchers. Highlights from the business survey included;

1. 70% of business stated that they get 10% or less of their revenue from the mine, mining exploration etc;

2. The remaining 30% received a large share of their revenue from the mine; 3. If the mine was to shut down tomorrow, 40-50% said they would be minimally impacted; 4. The exploration and construction phase were not as important as the operating phase.

One important topic within the business survey was barriers to being awarded contracts. The barriers in Nunavik were not necessarily the barriers identified in Nunatsiavut. In Nunavik, Makivik is the trust company that takes care of assets for the people of Nunavik and is trying to foster economic development which has become a challenge in this situation. Additionally, it was noted that the


contracts were often too big for any business in the communities to bid on. If contracts could be split up than perhaps local businesses would be more successful when bidding.

The introduction to this work sparked the following question;

1. It is interesting that the businesses have so much flexibility in what they can do. Is the skill already in the community? Or do they rely on employees from outside?

In response, businesses do rely on outside employees to fill some gaps however, they also rely heavily on partners. Companies will be a construction company during construction and when that phase has passed they often look to adjust and partner with another company.

Yukon Asset Construction Agreements (YACA)

Yukon Asset Construction Agreements (YACA) are negotiated to provide benefits such as training and employment to local First Nations. In addition to YACA’s, there is collaboration occurring with First Nations around projects like the Casino Mine where traditional territories overlap. North Slope, Alaska is a good example of multi-organization collaboration. This community is divided between local government, state government, regional and village corporations. All levels cooperated in extracting oil, but together they had interests in managing impacts.

Impact Benefit Agreements (IBA)

Impact Benefit Agreements (IBAs) are agreements negotiated directly between the mine developer and First Nation with minimal external input. A major concern with the use of IBAs is the lack of transparency. The option to pass information to the community from the IBAs falls onto First Nation itself. Many additional questions emerged from this discussion.

1. Why is policing and transparency in IBAs important?2. The secrecy of IBAs; who does that really help?3. Is it important for non-signatories to see the agreements within the IBAs?

Regional Land Use Planning

Land use planning is another tool for increasing control of areas where First Nations have traditional land and communities and settlements. For example, the southern lakes region of the Yukon does not have an established regional land use plan and currently, there is a proposal for a gravel pit along the highway. While many individuals may think that this is a good idea, the problem the proposed location is that it lies within sensitive caribou habitat. A regional land use plan would be able to manage some of the challenges with this issue.

Conclusion

Agreements play a crucial role in resource and sustainable development, not only in the North but globally. YACAs, IBAs and Land Use Plans are just few examples of the types of agreements used in northern Canada. Transparency remains a significant issue with agreements like the IBA and questions emerge around communications and who should be aware of the specifics within these agreements.


Session 1C: Research & Policy DirectionsChris Southcott (Lakehead University)

Introduction

What is the relationship between research and government, and how can the two best support each other? This discussion will look at relationships between researchers, research and government. It will draw from ReSDA examples, government practices, and other approaches to find best practices, policy implications, and recommendations for ReSDA research results.

This session was geared towards how researchers can make their work relevant to policy makers at all levels as researchers tend to struggle with producing policy recommendations from their research. The main question for this session is at what level should researchers be providing research results to various levels of government in terms of policy relevant information? ReSDA is at the point where there is a significant amount of results but the challenge is translating that research into policy recommendation.

Yukon Government Perspectives

Yukon government mandate letters state that evidence based decision making needs to be made a priority. This means that yes, research should be provided to policy makers at different levels. Perhaps at the same time, policy makers should be looking to identify and build relationships with researchers who can work to answer specific research questions.

Scale is an important consideration as it impacts both researcher and policy makers. Specific research is used when a quick decision needs to be made whereas broad research may inform various umbrella policies. Another key consideration is the development of a communication framework between researchers and the governments.

In terms of developing relationships and connections, SCOPe (Science Community of Practice) lunch and learns are a good place to start. Although SCOPe may be a good starting point the broad scope may prevent future relationship building and information sharing. Perhaps an event that has a more specific and narrowed audience would have more success. For example, YESAB (Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board) sometimes hosts events but an invitation is required.

Two main challenges for territorial governments are capacity and a very slow shift towards evidence based decision making. Despite these barriers, two potential avenues for getting research into government policy emerged;

1. Present research findings to high-level government officials.2. Work with the community members and have the information filter up to the governments. A

key contact for this method would be a powerful community organization or an elected official such as an MLA.

Federal Government Perspectives

Federal agencies such as NRCAN (Natural Resources Canada) and INAC (Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada) employ numerous scientists so their mindset tends to be different in comparison to territorial


governments. Since these organizations typically have researchers embedded within the organization, the need to create policy recommendations is reduced. Additionally, NRCAN and INAC in conjunction with industry are consistently requesting research from research networks like ReSDA.

Knowledge Mobilization and Policy

Knowledge mobilization is an important piece of conducting research, however it is often left out when the research project reaches completion. It was noted by the group that often the majority of research only gets used in very specific situations or at tailored events. This is a barrier to achieving full knowledge mobilization. It may be worth considering allowing the primary users of the research, whether it be government or industry, to have more input on what the research will look like and how information will be disseminated.

Conclusion

Policy is an important consideration in all aspects of research and academia. The biggest challenge with policy and research is if and how research gets translated into policy. This is relevant for both territorial and federal agencies. There is a clear need for communication and relationships to be improved between researchers and government in order to improve the use of research in policy decisions at all levels.

Session 1D: Indigenous Involvement and Partnerships in ResearchPitseolak Pfeifer (Nunavut Research Institute), Jason Dicker (Memorial University), Jen Jones (University of Guelph)

Introduction

How can we ensure that Indigenous communities are involved in the research that is relevant to them? This discussion will look at examples of successful connections, including ReSDA research partnerships and Indigenous perspectives on the role of research. There is a noted history of relationships with Indigenous peoples being influenced by colonialism. There is an obvious imbalance in the power dynamics, which has informed the world views of many individuals.

Academic World

Academic research is a million-dollar industry that is heavily dominated by institutions and funding agencies. Academic research is often considered an extractive industry and there is a global discussion around how this industry could be strengthened to allow Indigenous communities and people to play a bigger role and receive more benefits. Additionally, researchers have a role to facilitate, motivate and empower communities.

Involvement

When conducting research within a community, it is crucial that the community is involved in the project as much as possible rather than just being test subjects. Involving communities in research allows for programs to be built that provide leadership and skilling building. These programs have the potential to demonstrate how different types of research are conducted in the North. In addition to the development of these programs, there is great potential to involve students in the research process.


This type of involvement is positive as much of the research is relevant to them and can impact their everyday life. Ultimately, involving the community more during the research process can allow individuals to think critically about what is impacting their lifestyle and give them the knowledge and skills to do so.

Mentorship is also an important component of social science research, not only with youth but being open to mentored ourselves. The reality of what the communities are living is an important detail to keep in mind; as researchers can leave the community at the end of the day.

Expectations

A major issue worth elaborating on is expectations and preparation of students. Often when students go into communities to work with partners on a research project, there is the expectation that the student is aware and prepared for that specific community. However, there tends to be a disconnect and many students enter communities unprepared. This can lead to weaker relationships and partnerships.

The Structural Issues

Structural issues embedded within the process for obtaining funding has been recognized as a significant barrier to Indigenous involvement and partnerships in research.

1. It has been recognized that engagement and involvement with communities need to occur long before the research project beings. This stage encourages relationship and trust building between the researcher and community members. The challenge is that for researchers working in northern region, it is expensive to spend live in the communities meaning researchers require funding prior to determining a research question. However, prior to applying for funding, researchers need to demonstrate that they have a developed research question.

2. In many cases, to obtain funding the project must have a principal investigator who is affiliated with a recognized institution. The issue with this is that in many northern communities, there are individuals within the community who are not affiliated with an institution who wish to conduct research. This presents the challenge of finding a principal investigator from an institution who is interested in researching a topic and obtaining funding and resources.

Canadian Mountain Network

The Canadian Mountain Network (CMN) is an organization that has been active in adjusting the requirement for principal investigators to be affiliated with an academic institution. For community level, if a community member were to put forward a proposal they would be identified as the principal investigator. The requirements remain the same in that, the principal investigator must demonstrate that they are qualified.

Maintaining Relationships and Partnerships

There is a lack of clarity when it comes to who and how relationships and partnerships are maintained. This is a discussion that is not often had, which can lead to weakened relationships and partnerships in the future. In addition to the lack of clarity, there are various challenges explored below;


1. Performance evaluations have been recognized as a barrier to maintaining relationships outside institutions. The amount of time and effort required to build and maintain these relationships is not accounted for in performance evaluations.

2. The maintenance is not typically accounted for by institutions. A suggestion emerged that perhaps relationships and accountability need to be treated in a similar way to treaties; if a faculty member is working in an Indigenous community, the institution should be involved in the relationship process as well. Pressure tends to fall entirely on the researcher but where does the accountability exist within the institution?

Embedding Indigenous Research Principals into Institutions

Documents like Ownership, Control, Access & Possession (OCAP), Tri Council Policy Statement (TCPS), Free & Informed Consent (FPIC), and the Naylor Report all have good foundations to work with in terms of principles around Indigenous engagement and research. The principles set out in OCAP have been adopted by various First Nations so there is an opportunity for institutions to adopt them as well.

BREAK

Session 2A: New Directions, Northern Institutes, New ResearchersMorgon Mills (Memorial University), Clint Sawicki (Yukon College), Jessica Dutton (Aurora Research Institute), Jeanette Carney (Memorial University)

Introduction

How are northern colleges evolving in research? What has been done to support graduate students through the ReSDA network? This panel will look at how institutions are building northern capacity for research. It will also explore what exists for students in northern social science research, and what more is needed to support student involvement.

Interests in northern research are continuing to grow for numerous reasons including but not limited to climate change, isolation, and northern sovereignty. Although southern institutions have significantly more capacity than northern institutes, northern institutes have a geographical advantage, along with existing partnerships and relationships. Recognizing that there is existing expertise in the north, is it possible for this way of thinking to shift to having northern researchers based in northern communities and affiliated with northern institutions?

Labrador Institute (NL)

The region surrounding the Labrador Institute has numerous communities and researchers interested in working in them. The local and academic communities communicate in a variety of ways and the Labrador Institute hopes to take advantage of the communication lines and combine these into one community. That being said, the Labrador Institute also recognizes the abundant barriers to achieving this.

For the past 10 years, the Labrador Institute has been encouraging researchers to move North for 3-4 years to develop northern research programs. The development of this program has been a noteworthy achievement for the Labrador Institute and has had good success in terms of keeping researchers based in the north.


Yukon Research Centre (Whitehorse, YT)

The Yukon Research Centre (YRC) shares the same mindset as the Labrador Institute. This is about capacity and how it can be further developed and improved. At the Yukon College, one way that capacity is expanded is through adjunct professors and joint programs with different universities. A notable action by the YRC was bringing in students who needed a workspace for various reasons started small and has grown significantly. This began with only two or three desks and the capacity is now at six which is almost always full. It is not uncommon to have students use a desk space for a while and in the end, remain at the YRC post research. Going forward, having a flow of students coming into the YRC improves the research capacity and the way communication occurs between students, staff and researchers. The YRC is aiming to provide more support to students in addition to assisting with logistics and travel throughout the Yukon. Physically, YRC is exploring options for developing researcher services office as the college transitions. Moving forward, these supports must be in place for the YRC to grow in capacity and participate more on the ground research with students.

The establishment of the First Nations Initiatives Department has been a noteworthy achievement for the YRC. Within this department is the First Nation Research Liaison, who works to improve understanding for licensing and permitting. This position has proven successful in addressing issues around licensing and permitting.

There has been discussion around developing a President’s Advisory Committee for First Nations which would include all 14 Yukon First Nations and various bordering First Nations. Using a bottom up approach, the intent of this committee is to have all representatives come together to work on education related topics and issues using a bottom up approach to address what First Nations want to see done and how do they want to do it. From a research perspective, working on these issues now may provide graduate students with more tools and understanding when conducting research in a northern community. Currently, YRC is working with the First Nations to determine roles and responsibilities.

As the Yukon College transitions into a university, the YRC is looking to learn and improve communications between communities and the college as the transition continues. At a previous meeting, when First Nations spoke about issues in their communities, the YRC could link research to those challenges. This sparked a connection and understanding between the First Nations and the YRC/Yukon College.

YRC has had discussions around developing “chairs” for different research topics like forestry, mining and agriculture and situating them in various communities throughout the Yukon. There has previously been a proposal to develop a network of field research stations but building the capacity to implement and maintain this setup is a recognized challenge. A potential solution would be to provide facilities to encourage more long term projects. This would begin to build the capacity and it could expand to support more students. Additionally, this option removes the burden from community members to take in students during field research, but upkeep and maintenance of the infrastructure is a major concern. To alleviate concerns around upkeep and maintenance, perhaps there is an opportunity for the community to manage the infrastructure. This could potentially improve relationship building between researchers and communities.

Arctic Research Institute (Inuvik, Yellowknife & Fort Smith, NWT)


Arctic Research Institute (ARI) has shares many aspects and thought processes as the Labrador Institute and Yukon Research Center. However, differences emerge due to location and regional needs. For example, YRC has some good models for engagement, but ARI is not moving towards a university model ultimately the engagement models will differ. For ARI, a major boost came recently from receiving Tri Council eligibility, which has the potential to make ARI more attractive to researchers who want to conduct research or establish programs in the North. Like both YRC and LI, ARI is interested in attracting researchers who can move to the North and provide leadership. In addition, ARI is interested in moving forward in more of a leadership role with an equal split between partnerships and academic research. ARI already has the developed relationships and established infrastructure to compete with what southern institutions can offer in terms of building a research program.

Challenges

The Labrador Institute, Yukon Research Centre and the Aurora Research Institute face many of the same challenges. However, these challenges are not unique to these institutions and are faced by many northern institutes.

While attracting researchers and graduate students to the North has been identified as a goal for all three institutions, the question that remains largely unanswered is; how do institutions like the LI, YRC and ARI attract graduate students?

Occasionally, outside researchers view these northern institutions as a middle man or contact point. However, northern communities view these northern institutions as being affiliated with southern institutions. This creates a hesitation from the northern institutions to be contact points. An identified solution would be to encourage researchers to move and remain in the North for a significant period to build relationships and communities may feel like the information is being shared rather than taken from them.

Preparing Students & Researchers

Partnerships are a crucial component in the process of preparing graduate students for spending time in the communities. Prior to entering the community, the researcher or student must gain a bit of context. This can be achieved through partnerships and relationships. There is also potential to have a designated individual in each community who can assist in preparing students. For example, the more the researchers can learn about things that don’t work in the North, the less likely they are to occur. Researchers could gain a bit of perspective on the issues and can avoid offending or disrespecting the community and culture. While having a designated individual assisting in the preparation of students may be beneficial, there is some validity to the statement learning by doing. This is an important piece of conducting research in the North because if students and researchers are not properly prepared, the researcher or community could have a bad experience and create barriers for future research.

Session 2B: Subsistence Harvesting and Food SecurityBrenda Parlee (University of Alberta), Chris Southcott (Lakehead University)

Introduction

How can resource development influence subsistence harvesting and other food security issues in the North? How does resource development influence these? What is being done to support the subsistence


economy? What can be done to address the impacts and issues around subsistence practices and other food security issues? This discussion will explore ways in which the benefits from resource development can be used to create long term and sustainable solutions.

Time Versus Money

This project was very opportunistic and incorporated findings from various communities to determine the barriers to practicing subsistence harvesting in the north. Surveys revealed that time and money were the two most significant barriers. Findings demonstrated that employed individuals had money but no time and unemployed individuals had time but no money. Existing monitoring programs for subsistence harvesting and mining were analyzed and a complex situation emerged. The determination of whether a mine increases or decreases the ability to practice subsistence harvesting remains unclear. Historically, every instance of extractive industry opening in the north results in the subsistence economy struggling. However, there may be an opportunity to have subsistence harvesting flourish given the right conditions. The challenge right now is that the right conditions are unclear. This brings up the question, if under certain conditions resource extraction can be beneficial, how can those conditions be isolated?

Regardless of how resource extraction impacts the community’s ability to practice subsistence harvesting, there are some concerns around residents under the age of 30 who lack knowledge or interest in traditional activities. For example, in some Yukon communities, young men are working in the community or providing services through a wage economy. The end result of this was that the young men were only getting out on the land during a weekend compared to a few weeks prior to a wage economy. In doing so, traditional sharing didn’t occur and youth were not taught how to hunt and fish creating a lack of knowledge or interest as adults.

Harvest Studies

Harvest studies in the North have been a controversial topic for many years due to chronic misuse of data. In other words, findings have not always been used to benefit the community resulting in significant and understandable tension around who is collecting the data and exactly how it is being used. Data has been collected on subsistence species dynamics, but the harvest studies do not show the correlation between population numbers and harvest numbers. Initially, there was an assumption that when a mine opens, jobs become available and food security would increase. However, this assumption has not been adequately tested.

Food Subsidy Programs

There is a whole range of subsidy programs for transportation and selling of food in northern Canada. However, there is research indicating that in most cases the benefits are not passed onto the principal consumer. For example, Nutrition North subsidized $36 million into meat and only $236,000 into country foods. These are the types of issues that researchers and communities need to be pushing for policy development.

As previously mentioned, the prices seen in northern grocery stores do not reflect the subsidy that is provided. Therefore, there a policy issue at the base. Within this is another piece of the northern food security picture; people are more and more dependent on grocery stores as sources of food. However, decreasing food insecurity issues does not necessarily mean the health of the population will increase.


This is partially due to a shift from traditional diets to store bought foods. There are additional issues around safety; this stems from the statement that is it not as safe to take store bought food out onto the land due to difference in nutrient values.

Despite all the above food security is so much more than just food, it is also physical and mental health. Subsistence harvesting plays a momentous role in the cultural component of First Nations life; it allows youth to go out onto the land with elders to learn. There is a need for research to understand the complexities surrounding subsistence harvesting.

Food Sovereignty

The conversation around food security warrants a separate conversation about food sovereignty and how it differs from food security. Food sovereignty is the right of communities and individuals to define their own food systems. It was suggested that when researching food sovereignty and food security to do with the perspective of the government and policy makers, bringing the major question, what is the barrier in government to getting policy through?

An important piece of food sovereignty and food security is an individual or community may have one but not the other. Food sovereignty in the North faces challenges with some migrating species like salmon. In the Yukon River, salmon migrate past 55 communities between Alaska and the Yukon. Some communities have fishing bans. In some communities that have access to store bought foods, they may have food security but since it may not be their food of choice they are not considered food sovereign.

An example for improving the understanding of food security and food sovereignty is bringing individuals from one community to visit another and vice versa. This has been done with communities along the Yukon River to understand how important the salmon are to each other. There was a realization that the government was not going to solve the problem; this needed to be done community to community.

Relationships and Partnerships

When discussing food security and food sovereignty in the North, relationships and partnerships are crucial. The voice of the people should be considered equal to scientific research thus requiring strong relationships with the people. A key partnership in the North is Arctic Co-ops as they are the major, if not the only, provider of store food for many communities.

Outstanding Questions

1. Is there a way to carve off some of the country food export that is destined for European and Asian markets and make this available to Arctic communities?

2. What are the different ways communities are adapting and what is the effectiveness?3. How can stories for traditional methods of harvesting be preserved and used as a

communication and sharing tool?4. What are the ties between environmental distress and language loss?5. What about cumulative effects? How do we steady community effects?6. What is the interconnectedness of all issues related to health?


Session 2C: Economics, Education & EntrepreneurshipAndrew Hodgkins (Grant MacEwan University), Lee Huskey (University of Alaska, Anchorage), Andrey Petrov (University of Northern Iowa)

Introduction

How can resource development support local employment, firms and entrepreneurship, and economic diversification? How can education enhance this? This discussion explores resource developments opportunities for local firms and workers and how linkages between local economies and resource projects can promote growth. It will also explore best practices for resource sector training.

Through investigating the link between resource development and growth, how can resource development support local employment, firms and entrepreneurship and economic diversification? This question encompasses it all; if out of resource development there is the beginnings of economic development, how do communities go from getting more jobs and local business opportunities to having something when the mine has closed? This is true economic development because if the people end up in the situation that they were in prior to mine, it is not sustainable economic growth.

Training to Employment Programs

A few questions were posed to the group to start this section;

1. Will trained individuals be successful in getting employed at the mine? 2. What is sustainable? And what does it look like in terms of employment?3. Is a laborer a sustainable employment position?

Training Program in Inuvik versus Training Program in northern Alberta

When these two training programs were examined there were a few clear differences. The first being cost; in Inuvik, it cost approximately $830,000 to train one journeyperson. Not only was the same training in northern Alberta cheaper ($150,000) it also took less time. In Inuvik, very few trained people got jobs due to challenges passing the trades entrance exams. So, the question emerges, why was the training program in northern Alberta more cost effective? And were the outcomes better?

The success of the program in northern Alberta is three-fold; role models, numbers, and geography, all of which are interconnected to one another play a role in the success.

1. Many families had been previously employed by the mine, which created a culture around the positives of mine employment. In addition to parents or family role models, there was a committed employer that was dedicated to the training process which also resulted in a strengthened relationship with the community. These positive role models within the communities, which in turn resulted in more applicants for training and employment at the mine.

2. The positive role models tie into the second reason for success, numbers. With more trained and qualified individuals remaining in the communities, there is a higher number of applicants to choose from.


3. The third component to success for this program is simply the geography; northern Alberta is much closer to major urban centers than more northerly training locations which in turn results in more applications.

This discussion resulted in the question of how can we use these mines as an avenue to get students into the trades so that when the mine is gone, there are individuals in the community who are trained and can be employed in another project?

Successful Employment Requirements

It was suggested that perhaps the organizational structure of the extractive industry is a barrier to successful employment; different mines have different employment requirements. For example, Red Dog Mine in Alaska requires a high school diploma for employment. This encourages students to finish high school before seeking employement. Whereas in Nunavik and Nunatsiavut, you can still get a job, diploma or not. Perhaps this is a requirement that needs to be implemented in mines throughout the North.

There is a need for a designated person to make decisions about where the employment goes. For example, the labor market operates at one scale and the impact benefit agreement (IBA) operates on a separate scale. If the employment program is to allow security, it must match the scale of the labor market. To achieve sustainable employment, there must be flexibility and accommodation.

Capacity

The capacity of a community to fill the needs to extractive industry has been identified as a challenge, particularly in smaller communities. In small communities, population is not the only aspect of capacity that is a challenge. These communities more often than not do not have individuals who are trained or qualified to fill the needs of the industry.

Is there a way to draw out projects so that this dramatic demand for workers is not concentrated?

While this is a good idea conceptually, in reality it is not an option. The communities do not have control over the timing of projects.

Funding

Funding in the Yukon is certainly not an issue, as the Yukon Government will pay students $6,000 annually for 5 years to travel outside for school. The funds are there, but many students will leave their community for education and few will return.

Carcross/Tagish First Nation have been quite innovative in addressing this issue. The First Nation was interested in building tiny houses to address housing issues. They hired a First Nations carpenter trainer on their own and their responsibility is to work with the people in the community so that they receive proper training to build these tiny houses. In addition to hiring the trainer, the First Nation also hired a social worker. The social worker was responsible for maintaining employment throughout the training process. This community also began peacemaker training as the community recognized the importance of having individuals with skills who can work to resolve problems. This training was developed through work with a local judge and elders and in the end participants come out with a peacemaker certification.


The community of Teslin, Yukon implemented a similar program for game guardians. This is a form of environmental stewardship, which involves combining environmental monitoring skills with the Yukon Conservation Program. Individuals emerge from this program with legal powers to enforce environmental laws and it has been very successful.

People versus Place Prosperity

An important piece of extractive industry employment is that the young people in the community may have other aspirations outside of the community. This leads to the discussion around the culture or quality of the employment.

For those individuals who want to remain in the community, there is a need to create resilient people who can find work and the ideal situation would be for the people to find work where they live. People have attachment to their homes and communities, thus the need to have jobs within their communities.

Benefits of Sustainable Employment

There is a conversation to be had around the traditional definition of employment. Perhaps there is opportunity to break down the traditional definition and reclassify employment opportunities. This may provide more flexibility and in turn improve sustainability.

Many times, individuals must travel out of their community to receive training and during training the support system is extensive. However, when those individuals leave training and become employed those same supports that were in place during training may not exist.

Another consideration for sustainable employment is how the community views success in terms of economics. Economic Development Corporations might be a catalyst for this approach.

A high proportion of people are living on social assistance in First Nation communities, which takes a lot out of them, so there is a serious need to get those people off social assistance and into a better situation. With employment comes pride and that can improve the health of the community.

Challenges with Achieving Sustainable Employment

1. Impulsive Funding; this can create additional problems on top of precarious contracts/employment;

2. Standard Employment Relationship;3. Neoliberal Approach to Training;4. Fragmented Governance; causes people to fall through the cracks of employment.

Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in northern communities as it can provide employment opportunities. Three entrepreneurs have the potential to turn the entire community around. Many community members had different livelihoods prior to being entrepreneurs. However, when resource extraction began, many saw the opportunity to become entrepreneurs and opened businesses. It is important to keep in mind, particularly in northern communities, entrepreneurship may not always be a


9-5 type of business. For those who are already established entrepreneurs, profit is not the major driver for business, long term sustainability is.

Challenges for Entrepreneurship in the North

Entrepreneurship in the North is challenging due to factors like social housing policy, obtaining business licenses and registration, and funding. The social housing policy does not allow people to operate a business within a home, but the people cannot afford space outside of the home or the space does not exist. Obtaining a proper business license and registration is not only complex, but often difficult to achieve in remote communities. If obtained, there is additional paperwork and planning that comes with owning a business like developing a business plan, accounting etc. The extra paperwork and planning required to own a business often discourages local entrepreneurs.

Session 2D: Communicating ResearchPitseolak Pfeifer (Nunavut Research Institute), Susanna Gartler (University of Vienna), Kelly Saxberg (Shebafilms), Ron Harpelle (Lakehead University)

Introduction

How can we make information on resource development and other research more accessible to all those who might be impacted? How are other research programs ensuring that they communicate effectively with partners and communities? This session looks at approaches and best practices in knowledge mobilization using successful examples throughout the North and in ReSDA.

There are many ways for researchers to communicate their research, whether it be an academic paper, a film, a pamphlet etc. Although a shift in what output the research is communicated in is required. Traditionally, the researcher would decide what the final output of the research looked like, which is typically an academic article. However, there is a shift happening where the researcher has begun approaching the community and inquiring about what they would like the output to look like. This allows for the community to receive the benefits of the research and the researcher could still publish. A major theme identified during this session to know who the audience for the research is.

The Traditional Communication Model

The traditional communication model is one that is seen most commonly throughout academia, industry and government. In this model, the presenter is at the front and the findings are revealed. This has been the operating model for the past several decades and while it does work in some situations, it may not be suitable for all types of research.

Communicating Outside the Box

The discussion was focused around the question of do researchers need to communicate the macro perspective or create literacy within the community? If the literacy around understanding research and impacts exists, perhaps the more specific details would be easier to interpret and utilize. The idea of focusing more on the fundamentals of research rather than the specifics of a single project.

Mobile Workers Guidebook & Film


A good example of allowing the community to have input in the final research product was with Gertrude Saxinger and Susanna Gartlers work in the community of Mayo, Yukon. This work was done in collaboration with the Na-cho Nyak Dun First Nations in the community of Mayo. The Mobile Workers Guidebook and film were produced together to convey a message that the community wanted to put out there to students, policy makers, mining companies or anyone else that had an interest. A website was also created to compliment the film and guidebook and overall the content of this research was presented in a way that was easy to understand for those who needed it.

Despite this project having success, it was not without barriers. A major barrier was finding room in the budget to have the additional pieces of work produced in such a way that would be appealing to users. Within the production of the guidebook, there were issues with the design of the book and what format the information should be presented in. The researchers pushed for an illustrated book with pictures and quotes that were easy to read, however there was some pushback regarding the cost of this compared to something more simplistic but less eye catching and harder to read. With time and negotiations, there was an agreement that this was the best way to communicate this research.

Benefits of Using Films as a Communication Output

There is a growing opportunity to capitalize on different groups of people and what they are interested in; which is often telling stories. Short films are a great use of technology to share stories. This is mostly due to their ability to communicate with or without language. Language barriers are common when trying to communicate research to different audiences. For example, many elders speak their native language, which is rarely the same language that the research findings are produced in. So, when the researcher goes to reveal findings and communicate with the community there are issues. Films offer a potential remedy to this. The use of English subtitles within a film is perhaps the most useful way to incorporate various languages. This allows the interviewee to speak in their native language, which will produce better and more accurate results. Films can also be used as a communication tool without language. Films can be created using video clips, photos, text etc.; all of which are effective communication tools.

Challenges of Using Films as a Communication Output

While films can be a useful communication tool, they also come with challenges. These challenges are often centralized around resources; people, time and money. Additional concerns were raised around the need for the shared information to be subjective. The researchers that completed the Mobile Workers Guide and Film overcame this challenge through consistent communication. When the film was completed the file was sent to all interviewees for approvals. The researchers then visited the community to have a streaming event and invited those who were in the film. This approach allowed interviewees to watch the film independently and as a community, which resulted in the community approving the film.

Communication Strategies

When a partnership agreement is developed with a community, the communication strategy must be clearly articulated. It is very common for research to be conducted, completed and put on a shelf rarely to be used again. This is a message that communities have been saying for many years. While putting the research into an academic publication benefits the researcher, it may not benefit the community. When working with a community, it is important to have flexibility in the final outcomes of the research.


Many researchers start a project with clear ideas of what will come out of the research and many times the community has different expectations for outcomes.

BREAK

Evening Program: Public Film EventFrom 7:00-9:00pm at the Yukon Beringia Centre, the following films were shown;

1. Guardians of Eternity; http://www.guardiansofeternity.ca/2. The Bishop Who Ate His Boots; http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/sgc-cms/expositions-

exhibitions/eveque-bishop/english/fullstory.html

The film showing was open to all workshop participants as well as the public. Attendance was approximately 30 people.

Day 3

Presentation Summaries

Session 3A: Tips for Social Science Research MethodsChris Southcott (Lakehead University), Brenda Parlee (University of Alberta), David Natcher (University of Saskatchewan)

Introduction

How can communities collect and maintain their own data? What resources are available to support this? How can researchers help build the local capacity? We will explore tips for meaningful results and tools for qualitative analysis (NVIVO), data collection, monitoring, analysis, and storage methods used for research and communications. The session began with a roundtable where the group identified challenges, questions and tensions. Major themes included concerns around preparing students for fieldwork and how this could be improved, community engaged research and how it is often overplayed, and overused language about community engagement and capacity building. A major take home message from this session was when working with a community it is crucial to encourage the community to have a voice and decision making power around the research question.

Preparing Students for Fieldwork

Many graduate students enter communities to conduct research and may not have been fully prepared for the various situations or cultural norms of the North. Particularly, issues were raised around students not understanding the responsibility associated with having the expertise and label of a large institution. There is also a responsibility that researchers have to the community and to their own academic career and discipline. The balance between community responsibility and personal responsibility is difficult to achieve.

Community Engaged Research


Community engaged research has various definitions and uses depending on both the research and attitude of the community. While community engagement is crucial for much of northern research, it is important to discuss with the community the extent of engagement desired. Additionally, some communities are more organized and prepared to manage research proposals than others. The responsibility falls onto researchers to be cautious when working with a community that may not be as organized and prepared.

Community Gatekeepers

Some communities have individuals who are interested in research and potential researchers entering the community. Throughout the Yukon, the First Nations Governments act as gatekeepers for research in their communities. However, this poses the question of what does the remainder of the community want to see in terms of research? The challenge with having a gatekeeper to a community is, the gatekeeper makes the decision on what research is being done, leaving out the rest of the community from the decision-making process. The interests of the gatekeepers or government may not align with community interests.

Case Studies as a form of Community Engagement

While the case study approach is useful on a community needs basis, it presents some obstacles for publications. These types of projects require a balance between macro and micro analysis to be useful for the community but also for publication purposes.

Community Engagement and Capacity Building

A major question that came out of this discussion was, if the research does not incorporate and build capacity, is it community based and engaged research? This is because research can quickly lose community value and support if it is lacking in capacity building. A topic commonly brought up, is that researchers want their work to have impact. Capacity building will have a major impact on the community.

An example of this comes from Stephan Schott’s work where satellite trackers can be used to monitor locations. This builds off the existing harvest studies and is currently being developed into an application to be tested by hunters. This adds some security to hunters but is something that later down the road could be used by another organization or group within the community.

A second example stems from the Tracking Changes project, led by Brenda Parlee. This project was initiated to explore issues around the oil sands in Alberta and what impacts communities downstream were experiencing. The communities were interested in getting into researching and networking around this issue and the outcome was improved communication.

Methodology

There is a push for physical scientists to work with the communities more and use Indigenous methods. However, many academics have raised concerns in regards to risk. Physical scientists, because they do not have to go through an ethics approval process, they may be lacking the necessarily training or background. However, is the ethics process that social science researchers undergo currently effective at protecting people and data? It has been recognized that more often than not, the ethics process sees


only one way of working with a community and that all communities operate in the same manner. However, this is entirely not factual.

Session 3B: Northern Research Ethics and Other ConsiderationsValoree Walker (Yukon College) and Jessica Dutton (Arctic Research Institute)

Introduction

What do you need to know when doing research in the North? We will explore important parts of a successful application, including information on timelines, approvals, and supports. It will go over protocols such as TCPS2, OCAP, research permits and other considerations. The topic of northern research has been a controversial one for many years. This session was heavily focused on responsibility and where it lies in social science research. Research ethics exists at many different levels from community level to major institutions and each region has a different process. For example, conducting research in the Yukon is different from Northwest Territories. In the academic world, researchers must follow the Tri Council guidebook for research ethics or funding can be lost.

Northern Research Environment

The research community in northern Canada is relatively small and this presents a challenge for the process of recording and launching complaints within the community within the licensing structure. While there are challenges for launching complaints within the community, the Review Ethics Boards (REBs) should be reporting back to the Tri Council on noncompliance.

Ethical Research

Conducting ethical research tends to come down to three points; although they are different they also have similarities.

1. Researchers must be ethical;2. Researchers must be respectful, develop relationships and behave appropriately (this may be

different than being ethical);3. Quality; research is generally higher quality when the community has an interest and is behind

the research.

TCPS (Tri-Council Policy Staatement 2)

Chapter 9 is on research with Indigenous groups although it is lacking a step by step explanation on how to enforce reciprocity and respect. Chapter 9 is designed very loosely to apply to a wide range of communities, which presents a challenge in a country with such a wide variety of communities.

The Stamp of Approval

For many researchers, the process of ethics from a major institution is simply a stamp of approval and one small requirement prior to field work. However, there is a shift in how researchers see ethics in the overall research process. This needs to stem not only from the researchers but perhaps from the ethics boards as well. A major question that needs to be asked in regard to research ethics is, it this the best way to minimize risk for participants? Is the process of ethics approval elevating the quality of work


being done? It was suggested that some of the major institutions see ethics as a protective step to keep the university from being sued.

Understanding Ethics and Consent

There is a need for researchers to ensure that participants fully understand what information they are providing and what it will be used for. This is where the idea of training and preparing communities comes in. Consent forms are required for all human related research and the forms must include contact for the ethics board that approved the consent form. However, issues arise around whether community members would contact the ethics board if things were not being handled appropriately or would the researcher report if an issue emerged?

Monitoring

The idea of monitoring research ethics was presented numerous times during this session. Currently, monitoring of ethical research is not required and it was noted that not only would this be incredibly challenging, but where does the responsibility fall? Is it the community? The researcher? The supervisor? The institution? The ethics board? There is no clear answer to this question.

Unethical Actions

When researchers behave unethically, there needs to be stricter consequences such as an accountability list. This would be an ongoing list that shows previous and currently research endeavors and the ethical status. The increased accountability may drive researchers and institutions to monitor and ensure that research is being done ethically. While REBs can report to the Tri Council, researchers are not red flagged in the long term. Perhaps another solution to this issue is to have a community mentor type position, where a member of the community can communicate with the researcher if something is not being done unethically.

Responsibility

There was a lot of discussion around what exactly the researchers are responsible for when it comes to research ethics, what are the institutions, supervisors, and communities responsible for? There is a responsibility to properly prepare students for work in the communities. It is critical that institutions acknowledge that communities are not learning centers. It is the responsibility of perhaps all who are involved in the research, to understand what it means to conduct research in northern communities. There is a personal responsibility of all researchers to ensure that all research is being conducted ethically.

Physical Science Researchers

Issues were raised around the topic of ethics for physical science researchers and how they interact with members of the communities. Many researchers, including natural researchers, do not fully understand the human implications of conducting and communicating research with communities. Combining this with researchers who have little to no experience researching in the north is a recipe for disaster.

Steps for Ensuring Research is Ethical


This was a point brought up throughout the conversation. Since the process for ensuring research is ethical may be different depending on the region and community, it is very difficult for researchers to know what steps need to be taken.

Review Ethics Boards (REBs)

Review Ethics Boards (REBs) operate differently depending on their location and institution association. Some First Nations have their own REBs and others rely on the government to complete this process. However, it was noted that projects should only to go the ethics boards if the community has approved the research and idea. Additionally, REBs only deal with research involving human participation which brings in the challenge of how natural researchers would go through an ethics process.

The Community

Perhaps the communities could be responsible for providing feedback to the REBs and associated institutions on how the research went and any issues that emerged for the researcher or community. A challenge with this, is that it is common for researchers to enter and move through the communities rather quietly, which may hide issues that arise. An additional issue around community research and community involvement, is who is speaking on behalf of the community? Generally, it is the Chief and Council that makes decisions regarding research, but there are communities with overlapping political organizations (such as multiple First Nations). This can create significant challenges in terms of open communication lines and cooperation if relationships have been damaged or if there is tension. In situations like this, the researcher may need to recognize that it is not the right time to enter that community as research may become very difficult.

Capacity Building and Available Resources

Capacity building in combination with giving back to the community and dissemination are fundamental building blocks to conducting research in northern communities. While capacity building is a critical component to northern research, it is important to note that in many communities’ capacity is not always the barrier, resources are more often than not the major barrier. This is because resources refer to finances and if the community is lacking in money than regardless of capacity, the resources prevent progress.

Moving Forward

Polar is hoping to develop a tracking tool in order to have a better idea of what kind of research is taking place in northern Canada. Additionally, if researchers were to move into northern communities and develop research programs, the relationships and research would be of higher quality. By integrating researchers into the communities, trust is gained, research topics are easier to come by and projects are more productive. However, finances for this are a barrier. It is one thing to visit a community, but the cost of living in these northern communities is very high and without funding, it is very challenging to have a researcher live in the community for an extended period of time.

Session 3C: Considering Film/Video and Photography in ResearchKelly Saxberg (Shebafilms), Ron Harpelle (Lakehead University), Gertude Saxinger (Univeristy of Vienna)


Introduction

How can researchers utilize media format such as film/video and photography? We will explore tips and techniques for success in research using film and video. If possible, interested participants should bring a device you might have that can produce video clips. They will be guided on ways to create materials for various scenarios. A major take home message from this session was that it is not just about the product, it is about the process. The use of film and photography in research is a simple product to give back to the community.

Access

Despite the wide range in audience that film and photography can reach, there are barriers in terms of accessing expensive equipment and editing systems in remote locations. Getting access to the right equipment and editing systems can be expensive. However, with technology in its current state, most people have decent cameras on their phones and there are online editing sites resulting in high quality videos at a much cheaper cost.

The Preparations

There is a significant amount of preparation that go into the development of a film or video product. The biggest challenge is students/researchers need to know how to do the necessary preparations in order to capture the stories in an interesting way. The most important thing to remember when communicating with visual methods is to learn the basic concepts as to why it is important to build relationships with the participants. In terms of training, workshops can provide an opportunity for researchers to learn by doing. Workshops allow researchers to think about the networks available and the steps required for success.

Budgets

Budgets are always a significant challenge; if there is extra money, producing a film can be done relatively easily. In order to make the most of a budget, it is recommended that researchers collect a variety of shots including B role; landscapes; different parts of the community etc.

Tips for Filming

1. You may need to conduct a lot of interviews to find the right combination of information to make the film interesting and accurate;

2. Films are not restricted to video, photos with text can be just as powerful and interesting;3. Building strong relationships with participants at the beginning of the project is crucial.

Session 3D: Community EngagementPitseolak Pfeirfer (Nunavut Research Institute), Susanna Gartler (University of Vienna), Emily Martin (University of Guelph)

Introduction

How should you start a research project? What are the best ways to connect with communities or for communities to find researchers? What are some of the best practices for project design,


implementation and completion? Looking at ReSDA and other research examples, we will explore how to do this right and develop partnerships that create meaningful research projects in the North.

Relationships are important for meaningful engagement and research projects. Building trust is crucial for maintaining relationships however, this tends to be a challenge for many researchers. For example, in order to develop relationships with the community, the researcher must spend a signficant amount of time there. However, from a cost stand point, this is very expensive. Additionally, many researchers enter a community with specific expectations. More often than not, these expectations need to be adjusted throughout the project.

For Students

Walking into a community that has pre existing partnerships and relationshps as the community perception is both important and complicated. Without this, it can be difficult to step into a new project and learn about a new culture so quickly. We speak about community engagement; but what does community mean? In these northern communities, repercussions are significant and word travels quickly through residents.

Creating Opportunities

There was a reminder from many individuals in the group about spending time with the community and the value of being of service. Many communities lack capacity and researchers/graduate students come with a lot of skills. If they can contribute to a proposal for funding it will go a long way.

Costs Associated with Engagement

Facilitation and engagement is a science and skill, but is often overlooked in most projects. However, it is possible to hire a professional to assist with this and it is well worth the cost. There was an individual in the Yukon who had earned the trust of many communities and was used as a facilitator for various projects. Many members of the communities trusted him. Along with a facilitator, it can be helpful to have the assistance of a translator. Having a translator present may produce entirely different results as the language barrier is removed.

Resources

The topic of resources is crucial for research. Academics talk about the importance of building trust, but unfortunately that takes a significant amount of time and funding which isn’t always available. Hisotrically, the larger institutions did not always feel the same way about the importance of building trust but that attitude is changing. There is a balance between needing funding, and needing to be in the community to qualify for funds.

Work & Research Conflicts

Many First Nation communities and governments are understaffed and overworked. How do researchers set up projects in a way that community members benefit more from our time there than they lose from their own work? It is important for researchers and institutions to recognize that knowledge has value and participants may be compensated $40/hour but they may get paid $75/hour at their regular job. This difference needs to be recognized and accounted for. However, some individuals


may find the idea of honorariums confusing as people begin to expect to be paid to share knowledge which leads to the question of what mentality is this fostering?

Time Constraints

The majority of graduate degrees are two years in duration and many questions arise around how can in two years, a student meet the community, engage, conduct research and communicate results? This is a difficult time constraint and some communities respond by not wanting research conducted by people who will leave.

Gender & Research

Gender can impact the data received during field work and sometimes it is not just gender that impacts the outcomes. Characteristics like age can also play a role.

BREAK

Future Directions for the ReSDA, Social Sciences & Research Networks (Panel Discussion)Panel Presenters; Gertrude Saxinger, Pitseolak Pfeifer, Jessica Dutton, Aynslie Ogden

Introduction

The next part of the workshop is setup as a panel discussion to explore what the researchers should be looking at doing now, suggestions from the communities, partners and researchers themselves. The main topic of discussion is whether we should continue down the same roads we have been on for the past 11 years, try new roads or stop the journey. Each member of the panel will speak for a few minutes about what they think the future should look like.

Gertrude Saxinger (University of Vienna)

Gertrudes perspective on this topic is that we are not done with research on resource development and extraction in the Arctic. There tends to be a power struggle between communities that are impacted by mining and the stakeholders involved. Starting research from the understanding of the community allows for valuable connections and relationships that can provide insight into the political environment and dynamics. Understanding the hisotical record from mining impacts is critical for reconciliation. The other piece of this is long term monitoring; it is very unfortunate that some projects only go for three or four years. It would be of value for companies to have at least ten years of data to access upon entry into the community.

Pitseolak Pfeifer (Nunavut Research Institute)

Pitseolak Pfiefer highlights that due to his work as a researcher but also an Inuk person, he can bring a different perspective. There are many challenges with academia and research in general. Communties tend to be split between two perspectives; pro development or no development. Most northerners see development as a solution to poverty issues. However, within the realm of sustainable development we


must consider sustainable communities. There is the drowning out of how important free market systems are used to move the markets forward. There is work to be done in raising the level of literacy around impacts but are we helping to raise the level of literacy around economic structure? The focus should be on community driven projects rather than community based; money should be put in the hands on the communities to determine the research. Funds need to be funnelled as efficiently and effectively as possible.

Jessica Dutton (Arctic Research Institute)

The territorial colleges and research institutes have been major partners in ReSDA. Aurora Research Institute is looking at how to foster leadership in research within the institution and in the region. Aurora Research Institute is in a unique position because as a college; there is both research and education activities occurring. Working to build partnerships between researchers from southern institutes and ARI is important in creating authentic community engagement. As a northern institute, ARI is looking to attract research funding, which is very competitive. Additionaly, ARI is looking to attract top researchers to work at our institutes and partner with us. We are looking to improve our capacity to co-lead research in our communities. Research networks like ReSDA have been positive opportunities to have us sit at the table and be part of the discussion about how research programs are developed. Collaborating with researchers is always positive for ARI and we want to move into being more than just logistical support and knowledge translation support for researchers and are hoping to play a key role in ensuring the research occurring is high quality. We are in the position to assist in bettering the research in the North. As a final point, we would like to see some opportunity to develop our role in research. These conversations are an opportunity to discuss how college students could be embedded in this research.

Clint Sawicki (Yukon Research Centre)

The Yukon Research Centre has grown and evolved quite a bit over the years. We are becoming more mature in how we administrate, partner and collaborate on projects. However, there is still a lot of work to do. The setup of ReSDA was ground breaking and gave the Yukon College SSHERC eligibility. The Yukon Research Centre aims to do more and have stronger collaboration to provide more services and we need to continue working on the social science research. The more that we can work on the model that has been built through SERNNoCa and ReSDA the better.

Aynslie Ogden (Yukon Government)

Relationships with Territorial Governments has been an issue that has emerged time and time again.

It has become very clear to the Territorial Government that social science is critical to development in the North and enhancing sustainability. This has been clearly articulated in the science strategy and Pan Northern approach to science. Natural sciences can only get us so far, but working with people and developing a platform of knowledge is another option to further research. Science Strategy was released in January 2016 (previous 1986) and is a modern and new attempt to articulate Government of Yukon’s priorities for science and research. Science is a big system to change and implement and what the government needs to do it figure out its’ role in that is and how it could be improved. Yukon

Yukon Government’s priorities very much fall on the applied research, solutions oriented, research that generates solutions and opportunities for residents of the Yukon to be involved in the process and shape


that process. With a recent change in government, came a platform that included commitments to advance scientific knowledge and research. The platform comes out and the government translates commitments to mandate letters. Yukon Government is working to advance open data and there is some work going on around that and how YG is contributing to this. Providing some of the fundamental datasets will be a major contribution. YG also committed to developing a policy collaborating with First Nations to incorporate traditional knowledge into our actions, which is not entirely new. The research YG is involved in and the research licensed needs to have benefits for Yukoners. At this point, YG is in the midst of pulling this all together in an action plan for the next 4 years.

There are four recommendations;

1. We need to develop metrics for how research is being done and how it is changing; can be very powerful to show change.

2. There is a big movement to support fundamental science but many of us see fundamental science as what has been funded up here for many years. This community needs to advocate that fundamental science is important but from a northern perspective this can’t take away from the growing research community that is supporting indigenous communities and research.

3. The third recommendation is not only influencing modern policy envelopes; this group needs to have more of a presence in decision making forums. You need to be on my colleagues speed dial. Need to be an access point; that will help the government advance their commitment to evidence based decision making.

4. Last recommendation is around benefits. Conversation needs to take place about what this means and what the communities will receive in terms of benefits? How can you structure the network to reflect this?

BREAK

Future Directions of ReSDANCE Proposal: Northern Centre of Exellence Proposal

The NCE proposal is based around the idea of building sustainable communities in Canada’s Arctic. The quality of life in northern Canada is significantly different than in southern Canada. This proposal aims to develop research that will be helpful to these northern communities in building a more sustainable future. Historically, there has been a separation between researchers studying well-being and researchers studying illnesses. Over the past few years, that separation has become less prominent as the research is merging. This is the idea that health can be determined by social conditions.

Three main research themes for the NCE proposal are as follows:

1. Benefits from resource development (includes other types of resources, both extractive and renewable includes tourism and entrepreneurship);

2. Capacity building; and3. Well-being.


The chances of this proposal making it through the letter of intent (LOI) stage are slim however, we feel we need to make an important statement. Even if we don’t get the funding, it is still an important statement and working on building capacity.

SISARD Proposal: Social Innovation and Sustainable Arctic Resource Development

This project builds on the growing body of social science and humanities research dealing with extractive industry impacts in the Arctic by focusing on how communities can best ensure that any short-term benefits of extractive resource development can be transformed into long-term sustainable activities. This project would focus on the following themes;

1. Managing impacts on northern communities;2. Food security, subsistence, and culture;3. Enhancing community well-being; and4. Building capacity and diversifying the economy.

More information can be found here http://yukonresearch.yukoncollege.yk.ca/resda/sisard/

Final Remarks Chris Southcott, Lakehead University, ReSDA Director

Thank you to all who attended the workshop, and we hope that it has been a valuable experience.

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Agenda for the Seventh Annual ReSDA Research Workshop

Day 1 – Wednesday October 18th

Afternoon SessionYukon Research Centre

1:00 – 4:00 pm (3 hours)

ReSDA Committee Members/Partners Meeting - small working group discussions for next steps and plans for moving forward

Evening Opening Session/ReceptionMacBride Museum

6:30 pm(15 min)

Welcoming remarks

6:45 pm(15 min)

Workshop Introductions (Chris Southcott)

7:00 – 7:20 (20 min)

Grand Chief Peter Johnston, Council of Yukon First Nations

7:20 -7:30 (10 minutes)

ReSDA Projects – Tools and Products


http://yukonresearch.yukoncollege.yk.ca/resda/sisard/

7:30 -7:40 pm(10 min)

ReSDA Book and Film – Mobile Workers Guide Gertrude Saxinger and Susanna Gartler

7:40 – 8:10 pm(30 min)

ReSDA Atlas site launch and demo (remarks from ReSDA, CanNor, MakeIT)

8:10- 9:00 pm(50 min)

Socializing / Networking

Day 2 – Thursday October 19th

8:00 to 9:00 Breakfast

Morning Session PlenaryKwanlin Dun Cultural Centre – Multi-purpose Room

9:00-9:30(30 min)

Opening remarks and workshop Introduction Chris Southcott

9:30 – 10:30 (60 minutes)

ReSDA Research– The last 6 years. Research results and what these mean for communities, governments and industry. Findings and relations to the objectives of RESDA for projects for now. Brief overview by each researcher (~5 minute) and then there will be additional details provided in the breakout sessions.

Brenda ParleeDavid NatcherCatherine KeskeAndrew HodgkinsBen BradshawSuzanne MillsLee HuskeyGertrude SaxingerAndrey PetrovChris Southcott

10:30-10:45(30 min)

Networking Break

10:45 - 11:30(45 min)

ReSDA Projects Students – project highlights (about 5 minutes each) Short summary of the research projects. Additional details to be provided in the breakout sessions.

Susanna GartlerKent SpiersEmily MartinJen JonesJeanette CarneyJason DickerTodd Godfrey

11:30-12:00(30 min)

Q & A

12:00 - 1:00(60 min)

Lunch

Afternoon SessionsKwanlin Dun Cultural Centre

Session 11:00 - 2:15 (75 min)

Session 1A -Community Well-being, Indicators and Monitoring LOCATION: Elders Lounge ReSDA researchers start discussions by presenting their research relating to wellbeing and resource development. This discussion will focus on how we are measuring wellbeing and what impacts resource development has had. It will also look at plans, approaches and positive results in the context of

Brenda ParleeKent Spiers

Todd Godfrey


resource development in the North. How do communities view, define, and measure wellbeing? How has community well-being been affected by resource development and changes to the environment. Session 1B- Economics, environments and agreements LOCATION: Classroom AReSDA researchers start discussions by presenting their research relating to this area. How can you ensure benefits from resource development are sustainable? What are the costs and how are these being reduced? This panel will look at what is being done to guide northern resource development. It will guide best practices and lessons from examples, and assess whether we are now doing better at managing resource impacts on the environment.

Ben BradshawCatherine KeskeStephan Schott

Session 1C- Research and Policy Directions LOCATION: Multi-purpose Room What is the relationship between research and government, and how can the two best support each other? This discussion will look at relationships between researchers, research, and government. It will draw from ReSDA examples, government practices, and other approaches to find best practices, policy implications, and recommendations for ReSDA research results.

Chris Southcott

Session 1D - Indigenous Involvement & Partnerships in Research LOCATION: Multi-purpose Room How can we ensure that Indigenous communities are involved in the research that is relevant to them? This discussion will look at examples of successful connections, including ReSDA research partnerships and Indigenous perspectives on the role of research

Pitseolak PfeiferJason Dicker

Susanna GartlerJen Jones

2:15- 2:45 Networking Break

Session 22:45 – 4:00 (75 min)

Session 2A - New Directions Northern Institutes, New Researchers LOCATION: Multi-purpose RoomHow are northern colleges evolving in research? What has been done to support graduate students through the ReSDA network? This panel will look at how institutions are building northern capacity for research. It will also explore what exists for students in northern social science research, and what more is needed to support student involvement.

Morgon Mills Clint Sawicki

Jessica Dutton Jeanette Carney

Session 2B - Subsistence Harvesting and Food Security LOCATION: Multi-purpose Room

How can resource development influence subsistence harvesting and other food security issues in the North? How does resource development influence these? What is being done to support the subsistence economy? What can be done to address the impacts and issues around subsistence practices and other food security issues? This discussion will explore ways in which the benefits from resource development can be used to create long-term and sustainable solutions.

Brenda ParleeChris Southcott

Session 2C -Economics, Education and Entrepreneurship LOCATION: Elders LoungeHow can resource development support local employment, firms and entrepreneurship, and economic diversification? How can education enhance this? This discussion explores resource development’s opportunities for local firms and workers and how linkages between local economies and resource projects can be promote growth. It will also explore best practices for resource-sector training.

Andrew Hodgkins Lee Huskey

Andrey Petrov

Session 2D - Communicating Research LOCATION: Classroom AHow can we make information on resource development and other research more accessible to all those who might be impacted? How are other research programs ensuring they that communicate effectively with partners and communities? This session looks at approaches and best practices in knowledge mobilization using successful examples throughout the North and in ReSDA.

Pitseolak PfeiferSusanna Gartler

Kelly SaxbergRon Harpelle

4:00 – 4:30 Networking break4:30 – 6:00 ReSDA Steering Committee Meeting (Antoinettes)


Public Film Event (evening of Thursday October 19) Beringia Centre

7:00-9:00 PM Film showing – “Guardians of Eternity” and “The Bishop Who ate his Boots”

Day 3 – Friday October 20th

8:00 -9:00 AM Breakfast

Morning SessionKwanlin Dun Cultural Centre (Multi-purpose Room)

9:00–9:20(20 min)

Overview of what has been discussed in the first two days and structure for today’s sessions

9:20 – 10:30 (70 mins)

Presentation/Summary from Breakout Groups (5-10 minutes each)

10:30 – 11:00 Networking Break

Session 311:00-12:30 (90 minutes)

4 workshops looking at methods and best practices in social science research and communicationsSession 3A - Tips for social science research methods LOCATION: Artist StudioHow can communities collect and maintain their own data? What resources are available to support this? How can researchers help build the local capacity? We will explore tips for meaningful results and tools for qualitative analysis (NVIVO), data collection, monitoring, analysis, and storage methods used for research and communications.

Chris Southcott, Brenda Parlee Dave Natcher

Session 3B - Northern research ethics & other considerations LOCATION: Classroom AWhat do you need to know when doing research in the North? We will explore important parts of a successful application, including information on timelines, approvals and supports. It will go over protocols such as TCPS2, OCAP, research permits and other considerations.

Jessica DuttonValoree Walker

Session 3C - Considering film/video and photography in research LOCATION: Classroom B

How can researchers utilize media format such as film/video and photography? We will explore tips and techniques for success in research using film and video. If possible, interested participants should bring a device you might have that can produce video clips. They will be guided on ways to create materials for various scenarios.

Kelly SaxbergGertrude Saxinger

Session 3D - Community Engagement LOCATION: Multi-purpose Room

How should you start a research project? What are the best ways to connect with communities or for communities to find researchers? What are some of the best practices for project design, implementation and completion? Looking at ReSDA and other research examples, we will explore how to do this right and develop partnerships that create meaningful research projects in the North.

Pitseolak PfeiferGertrude SaxingerSusanna Gartler

Emily Martin12:30-1:30 Lunch

Afternoon Plenary (Friday October 20th)Kwanlin Dun Cultural Centre (Multi-purpose Room)


1:30 – 2:15(45 min)

Wrap-up Discussions: Feedback from the workshop sessions and materials / highlights Q & A

2:15 - 3:15(60 min)

Where to now? Future directions for the ReSDA, social sciences and research networks.

Researcher perspectives, College perspectives, Government and Community 3:15-3:30 Networking break3:30-4:15 Final comments, recommendations and closing remarks

Optional Saturday morning meeting (October 21st ) - TBD


Appendix 2 – Workshop Backgrounder

Annual ReSDA Research WorkshopKwanlin Dun Cultural Centre

Whitehorse, YTOctober 18-20, 2017

Background

The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada announced funding through their Major Collaborative Research Initiative grants in February 2011 for a new Northern research project called Resources and Sustainable Development in the Arctic (ReSDA). The main focus of ReSDA’s research is on finding ways to ensure that a larger share of the benefits of resource development stay in the region with fewer negative impacts on communities. The Network has been mobilizing community partners and researchers around the questions that will help determine how to maximize benefits of resource development to northern regions and communities and how to minimize the social, economic, cultural, and environmental costs. The primary objective of the research is to cultivate innovative approaches to the best ways of natural resource developments to improve the well-being of northern communities while preserving the region’s unique environment. This issue is all the more pressing given the increased demand for natural resources globally, with many of these resources existing in Arctic locations.

Throughout the past six years of this project a number of priority research areas were identified by the communities, ReSDA researchers and our northern partners. As a result, research has been done that examines past and present resource developments, the flow of revenues from these developments, how economic benefits have been secured by communities as well as the social, cultural and environmental impacts that are often connected to these. A number of the projects have been or will soon be completed and the final results, policy directions and tools and resources are now available from the network activities.

History of ReSDA Workshops

Each year ReSDA has organized an annual research workshop based on a central theme. The workshop brings together researchers and northern partners representing communities, government, the private sector and non-profit organizations that are involved with issues and research relating to sustainable Arctic natural resource development. Discussions with community partners about research priorities began in 2010 as the proposal for this program was developed. In 2011 an initial workshop was held in Yellowknife with researchers reflecting on initial recommendations from communities and discussing how these suggestions could be translated into formal research questions. From these discussions, the ReSDA committee drafted a research plan to guide their work for the next year. The emphasis was on


isolating the main areas for a gap analysis to determine research needs and priorities. The second workshop held in Whitehorse provided the results of the gap analysis and further recommendations from community partners to establish a research plan and directions for the network with 14 priority areas identified. The third workshop in Iqaluit in 2013 focused on the best mechanisms for knowledge sharing in the ReSDA network. Various mechanisms were examined that are used in the northern context to help in the creation of a ReSDA communication strategy and toolbox. Face to face discussions were one of the top ways to share information between communities and researchers so the workshops provide one avenue to do this. In 2014 we hosted a workshop in Labrador that focused on resource developments and community wellbeing. This is a key area identified for research. The understanding of how resource development contributes to or adversely affects community well-being is increasingly required by government and industry. Finally in 2015 a workshop was held in Kuujjuaq, QC to discuss issues relevant to the theme of sustainable cultures. This included issues of subsistence based economies and engagement with extractive industries with the view to understand the perspectives from community members, researchers, regional governments and other organizations. In 2016 a workshop held in Ottawa was designed to include the policy voice in the discussions of this research. Many representatives from various government sectors attended and shared perspectives and directions from the policy side. There were also a number of research presentations for ReSDA projects that have been completed or were near completion. Finally this workshop also allowed for the start of discussions on future directions of this research. This included input from some of the new and existing networks that are focused on similar issues in other circumpolar countries such as the REXSAC and ArcticFROST. All these past workshop discussions and recommendations are summarized in a series of reports, presentations and videos available through the ReSDA website at www.resda.ca

This Workshop

This year the ReSDA workshop in Whitehorse will be a culmination of the results of our research, the tools and resources created from this research, ways to include in policy development and some of techniques that have made this a successful model of social science research. The information from the subprojects will show how the research has addressed the central objective of ReSDA – How can Northern communities benefit most directly from resource development? There will be one day involving presentations and panels dealing with subproject research areas as well as breakout sessions on some of the designated areas of the network. Where possible this will include the lead investigator, a representative from the partner organization and any students involved in the research. It is hoped that the workshop will be a dynamic interaction of researchers, partners, community members, government and industry representatives who will contribute to discussions on the results, their impacts and innovative directions for the future requirements on resource development in the north. Using ReSDA’s basic research question regarding the potential to increase benefits from resource development flowing to northern communities we hope to determine whether new innovative social and economic mechanisms can be developed and what policy changes might increase the ability of northern communities to build their capacity and improvement their involvement in the sector. We will look at what has been done for research and what the future directions might include.

Themes and structure

The workshop focus is on the last 6 years of ReSDA research results, the tools and resources created by this research, the partnerships developed and what this all means for communities and policy


http://www.resda.ca/

makers. We will hear from ReSDA researchers, students, community partners and other partner networks. The event starts with some targeted meetings for planning and development of the ReSDA network on the afternoon of October 18th. This includes a technical session on the ReSDA Atlas that will review the comments provided on the design and content by those surveyed. This meeting is intended to determine what is still needed, and recommendations on what changes or additions will improve this knowledge sharing tool. What is still needed for the content, format, search criteria and what other improvements can be made to this site. There will be an opening session the evening of Wednesday October 18th with an official launch of the ReSDA Atlas tool. This is a resource created as a one stop location for all the information that has been identified by the researchers and other sources. This online map allows users to search for information using various themes and categories that are modeled on the research priorities and themes of the ReSDA network.

The workshop sessions and presentations on Thursday October 19th and Friday October 20th include:

1. ReSDA Research Results (a) Overview of projects(b) Theme summaries(c) Subproject highlights and new projects

2. Breakout sessions (these focus on specific ReSDA research areas, some of the key considerations of the ReSDA network including knowledge sharing and policy influence and community partner involvement). This allows participants an opportunity to discuss issues of particular interest in more depth.

Wellbeing and healthy communities Indicators, economics and environmental considerations Policy makers and research linkages Communicating research Northern Colleges and Institutes – building research capacity Social Science graduate students in the North Partnerships and indigenous involvement in research Future research directions and priorities

3. Training sessions (tools, tips and resources available to support social science research in the North)

Social science methods and tools and training available to support researchers Northern research ethics – who, when and how – knowing who to contact and

ensuring that ethical requirements are met for research involving human participants

Using film and video in research Community engagement – the best ways for ensuring success.

On Thursday evening there will be a public showing of two films produced through supports provided by ReSDA. This includes the film “Guardians of Eternity” that was developed by the Toxic Legacies project in partnership with ReSDA. This is a documentary film about the toxic legacy of an abandoned gold mine in northern Canada (Giant mine). It is presented from the point of view of the Yellowknives Dene First Nation who are on the front line as the mine is located on their land. For more information visit the home site for the film at https://gaurdiansofeternity.wordpress.com/ . There will also be a showing of the film “The Bishop who ate his boots”.


https://gaurdiansofeternity.wordpress.com/

Appendix 3 – Workshop Participants

First name Last Name AffiliationKatharine Ballegooyen Kluane First NationAnteneh Belayneh Carleton University Carrie Boles Yukon CollegeBenjamin Bradshaw University of GuelphHector Campbell Nacho Nyak Dun Development CorpJeanette Carney Memorial UniversityKenneth De La BarreSuzanne De la Barre University of VictoriaJason Dicker Labrador InstituteAndrijana Djokic Nacho Nyak Dun Development CorpShailyn Drukis Council of Yukon First NationsJessica Dutton Aurora Research InstituteJacey Firth-Hagen Yukon CollegeGreg Finnegan Nacho Nuak Dun Development CorpSusanna Gartler University of ViennaTodd Godfrey University of AlbertaHolly Goulding Yukon GovernmentMeagan Grabowski Jane Glassco Northern Fellowship (2015-17)Amanda Graham Yukon CollegeRon Harpelle Lakehead UniversityAndrew Hodgkins University of AlbertaJoella Hogan First Nation of Nacho Nyak DunAllison Holmes University of OttawaLee Huskey University of Alaska AnchorageAmelie Janin Yukon GovernmentDanna Jennejohn Yukon CollegeJen Jones University of GuelphCatherine Keske Memorial University/Grenfell CampusChristine Leroy Polar Knowledge CanadaEmily Martin University of GuelphDeanna McLeod Yukon CollegeMorgon Mills Labrador InstituteSuzanne Mills McMaster UniversityStephanie Muckenheim Yukon GovernmentDavid Natcher University of SaskatchewanDavid Neufeld


Angela Nuliakyok-Rudolph Polar Knowledge CanadaAynslie Ogden Yukon GovernmentBrenda Parlee University of AlbertaAllison Perrin Yukon Research CentreAndrey Petrov University of Northern IowaPitseolak Pfeifer Nunavut Research InstituteChristine Plante Yukon GovernmentStephanie Pike Yukon CollegeBonnie Rear Trondëk Hwëch'inDavid RoddickClint Sawicki Yukon Research CentreKelly Saxberg ShebafilmsGertrude Saxinger University of ViennaStephan Schott Carleton UniversityPeter Schweitzer University of ViennaScott Slocombe Wilfrid Laurier UniversityChris Southcott Lakehead UniversityRon Sparkes Labrador InstituteKent Spiers University of CalgaryHelen Stappers Council of Yukon First NationGreg Thibault Government of NunavutDon Toews Northern Council for Global CooperationCoral Voss Trent UniversityStefan Voswinkel Ylynx Management Consulting Inc.Valoree Walker Yukon Research CentreTracey Wallace Northern Council for Global CooperationDennis Zimmerman Big Fish Little Fish ConsultantsNicole Tom Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation


Appendix 4 – Participant Evaluation SummaryOttawa Workshop 2017 - Participant evaluation summary

Was this Workshop helpful to you? not at all slightly fairly helpful very helpful extremely 0 1 3 8 3Comments:-There seems to be a rehashing of previous discussions and lack of seriousness to knowledge mobiliations in light of a room filled with YT community members.During the event, was there enough time for:

not enough almost enough

perfect amount

little too much

too much time

networking with other participants 0 1 14 0 0

presentation of issues 1 4 8 2 0

discussion of issues 1 5 8 1 0How would you rate the Workshop in terms of the organization, facilitation and location.

poor fair good very good Excellent organization 0 2 4 4 5facilitation 0 1 2 4 5location 0 0 0 4 11

How would you rate the length of the Workshop? too short just right too long 1 13 0

Were the panels and discussion groups well organized (yes or no)? yes no 13 1

Comments:Should this event be repeated (yes or no)? yes no Other 14 0 0If this event was repeated, what specific changes would you recommend?

don’t do it

again no opinionmust do it

againPanel discussions 1 3 9Presentations 1 1 10Reception 1 3 8

Comments:-A better evening reception would be good. Everyone ended up doing their own thing. -Sharing with community OR gathering as a network; this needs to be clear from the beginning.-Researchers need to be on board with team goal.-Do not do the panel discussions unless you identify expectations of presenters.-Would be nice to see more information on the research findings.-Summaries from breakout groups but a bit too long; but had tons of good information.


-Presentations on research were well-done; short, focused on key outcomes.

Based on the presentations made on communication methods and ReSDA's research do you feel this is relevant and useful to northern issues and priorities?

relevant not relevant don’t know 12 0 2

Further comments and suggestions (including possible future research)-Consider reaching out individually to key people in the local/host community to enrich the discussion and broaden participation.-Be clear on why hosting events in northern communities and inviting northern participants.-Make sure researchers understand presentation expectations.-The breakout groups were very well and were a refreshing addition.-More discussion in some of the breakout groups.-Would love to learn how to access ReSDA findings for my future research.-Having the session summaries made chosing breakout groups easier as you got an overview of all the disucssions.-ReSDA has been really valuable to me as a student re networking and as an introduction to conference presentations.
