|
I. NNI Research
How might Alaska Natives take best advantage of self-governing rights and powers to build successful societies—where success is defined by their own criteria? Specifically, in the area of Native self-governance and service delivery, what is likely to work? In order to answer these questions, the authors begin by distinguishing between self-governance and service delivery; they then review some innovative examples of each among Alaska Natives today. They then turn to the results of a substantial body of research on indigenous self-governance and economic development in the lower forty-eight states and Canada and examine the applicability of that research to Alaska . Finally, they consider the implications of this research and of the initiatives already underway in Alaska for policymakers in all governing arenas—tribal, state, and federal.
What do governance and government mean? This paper—one of a series of papers commissioned by the British Columbia Regional Vice-Chief of the Assembly of First Nations—defines governance and government and describes the critical role both play in human communities. It also examines what effective self- governance involves and how self-governing systems can be built, and it makes a distinction between self-administration—some tim es mistaken for self-government—and genuine self-government. Drawing on a large body of research on governance and development among indigenous nations in Canada and the United States , the paper considers the implications of these issues for First Nations and for federal governments. The paper concludes with a discussion of the specific tasks facing First Nations and Canada in making Aboriginal self-government a reality.
This study explores legal and economic dimensions of current perceptions of (and debates over) the nature and extent of tribal self-rule in the United States , with the objective of distinguishing between myth and reality. The authors address key threads of thought and assumptions that pervade, accurately or inaccurately, discussions in the public policy arena. What emerges is a picture in which tribes do exercise substantial, albeit limited, sovereignty. This sovereignty is not a set of “special” rights. Rather, its roots lie in the fact that Indian nations predate the United States . While their sovereignty has been diminished, it has not been terminated. Tribal sovereignty is recognized and protected by the U.S. Constitution, legal precedent, and treaties, as well as applicable principles of human rights.
The Lakota people are making great strides in recovering and actively using traditional knowledge and practices to overcome oppression. Critically, these efforts include the recovery of indigenous approaches to research and evaluation, processes of knowledge creation that have been supplanted by western ways of knowing. This paper documents a currently unfolding example of that reclamation which is being played out in the evaluation of the Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) Project. Using the models of participatory action research and empowerment evaluation, the Oglala CIRCLE Project evaluation team arrived at a way of working that mirrors the Lakota view of research and evaluation as the process of creating knowledge in order to accomplish an end that is desired by the people.
II. Recommended Reading
In the first of these papers, the authors consider the effect of “cultural stability” on suicide rates of First Nations youth, using data from 1987 to 1992. Adolescent suicide is an enormous problem in some First Nations but unknown in others. The authors develop measures of “cultural stability” that take account of First Nations communities' differential efforts to preserve and rehabilitate their cultures. The measures include factors such as the active pursuit of land claims, the takeover of social service management, and investments in cultural activities, most of which also can be seen as measures of assertions of self-government. The paper systematically compares suicide rates in communities that are acting more to preserve and rehabilitate their cultures with rates in communities that are acting less. The results indicate that suicide rates are lower in indigenous groups who are acting to take control of their own futures. In other words, the authors establish a strong link between First Nations' success at practical self-government and certain health outcomes among their youth. In the second paper, the authors update their research with youth suicide data from 1993-2000 and add several more measures of cultural continuity. Again, these can be interpreted as measures of the extent to which First Nations are exercising self-governance. The findings hold over the longer, 14-year period, which leads the authors to consider policy implications. While they make no specific recommendations, they nonetheless stress the importance of indigenously designed, as opposed to centrally imposed, policy designs.
The authors present a longitudinal study of the relationship between poverty and mental illness in children, conducted in the part of North Carolina that includes the Eastern Cherokee homeland. With their parents' consent, Native and non-Native children from a variety of economic backgrounds were periodically assessed on mental health status. A natural experiment occurred when a casino opened in the Indian children's community and tribal member families received an annual boost in income owing to distributions of casino profits. Analysis of the mental health data showed that many of the children who moved out of poverty as a result of casino distributions showed an accompanying decrease in the frequency of behavioral psychiatric problems over tim e, indicating that poverty is one source of these problems. The results support the argument that there are critical linkages between economic status and health, and that by working to improve their economies, tribes can make inroads on pressing social issues.
These two papers compare data on pre-reservation cultural characteristics of eighty Native American tribes in the western U.S. with 1990 census information to look at the effects of particular cultural characteristics on tribes' economic development. They examine the relationship between culture and social organization on the one hand and levels of development and the distribution of resources to citizens on the other. While the results show no significant link between pre-reservation cultural characteristics and the general level of economic development, they indicate that those characteristics have effects on how income is distributed within tribes. This suggests that, contrary to popular arguments, Indian nations' cultural characteristics, in and of themselves, are not obstacles to successful reservation development.
III. Projects
The Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research at the Australian National University and Reconciliation Australia (a non-government, not-for-profit foundation established to provide a continuing national focus for reconciliation among Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians) are undertaking this collaborative, multi-year research project designed to understand how Indigenous governance in Australia operates at the local level—what is working, what is not, and why. It will focus on a sample of Indigenous communities across the country, looking at the models of governance that have been established or are emerging as well as at issues of cultural legi tim acy; governance skills, capacities, and assets; the role and impacts of federal, state, and territorial governments and policies; and the relationship between effective governance and economic and community development outcomes. The project aims to make research “count” by using a participatory, community-based approach and by searching for transferable governance solutions and best practices that will assist other community governing bodies. The project is entering its first year of field-based research. Contact: Janet Hunt at < indigenousgovernance@anu.edu.au >
The Native Nations Institute, in partnership with Chief Dull Knife College (Northern Cheyenne Tribe), Oglala Lakota College (Oglala Sioux Tribe), and the Zuni Community Development and Advocacy Center (Pueblo of Zuni), is carrying out this U.S. Department of Justice-funded project evaluation that considers specific crime and justice-related outcomes of the Department's pilot CIRCLE program at three tribal demonstration sites. The full evaluation, including a publicly available outcomes report, should be completed in Spring 2005. Both a pre-print version of the American Indian Quarterly article (cited under NNI Research, above) and the process evaluation, entitled “Strengthening and Rebuilding Tribal Justice Systems: Learning from History and Looking Towards the Future,” are available now. Contact: Miriam Jorgensen at < miriam_jorgensen@harvard.edu >
The Native Nations Institute and the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development are engaged in a project that identifies and analyzes indigenously generated institutional solutions—tribal, sub-regional, regional—to social, economic, and governance problems facing Alaska Natives. This project continues some of the work summarized in “Alaska Native Self-Government and Service Delivery: What Works?” (see NNI Research, above). Contact: Stephen Cornell at < scornell@u.arizona.edu >
IV. Bulletin Board “Jurisdiction is like a building permit. It acknowledges that we can build our government, but it does not necessarily give us the tools and materials to do so.” - Chief Strater Crowfoot of the Siksika Nation, commenting on nation building in an address to the First Nations Governance Centre's Youth Think-Tank, Calgary, Alberta, October 4, 2004
“If you're not thinking about constitutional reform, you're not in the economic development ballgame.” - John “Rocky” Barrett, Chairman, Citizen Potawatomi Nation, on the relationship between tribal governance and economic development, at a conference at the University of Oklahoma , March 25, 1999
“If donor-conceptualised standards of ‘good governance' were to be more fully elaborated and insisted upon, it would...almost certainly imply an insistence on Western-derived standards of conduct to be adopted in non-Western politico-cultural contexts.... It is in this regard also that one may note a basic distinction between academic and donor discourses on ‘governance'. An academic discourse, at least if it is inspired by some cultural sensitivity, presumably would take cultural variation as its point of departure, and would try to better understand the merits and demerits of different configurations of ‘governance' in different contexts. Donor discourses by contrast are likely to depart from just one general notion of ‘governance', and to demand abiding by it.” - Martin Doornbos, “‘Good Governance': The Rise and Decline of a Policy Metaphor?” Journal of Development Studies 37, no. 6 (August 2001): 100.
V. Networking Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development , John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University , Cambridge , Massachusetts Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy Program , Rogers College of Law, The University of Arizona , Tucson Native Nations Law and Policy Center , School of Law , University of California , Los Angeles http://www.law.ucla.edu/students/academicprograms/nativenations/nnlapc.htm Institute for Tribal Government , Portland State University , Portland , Oregon http://www.tribalgov.pdx.edu/index.php Northwest Indian Applied Research Institute , Evergreen State College, Olympia , Washington http://www.evergreen.edu/nwindian/home.htm Center for Indigenous Law, Governance and Citizenship , College of Law , Syracuse University , Syracuse , New York First Nations Governance Centre , Chilliwack , British Columbia Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR), The Australian National University , Canberra “…(1) To investigate issues relating to the stimulation of economic development for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; (2) to identify and analyse the factors affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participation in the labour force; (3) to assist in the development of government strategies aimed at raising the level of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participation in the labour market.” Reconciliation Australia , Canberra Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre, Alice Springs, Northern Territory , Australia http://www.desertknowledge.com.au/CRC/index.html School of Maori and Pacific Development , University of Waikato , Hamilton , New Zealand http://www.waikato.ac.nz/smpd/
VI. Basics The Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy (NNI) is part of the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, a research and outreach unit of The University of Arizona. Founded in 2001 by the university and the Morris K. Udall Foundation, NNI serves as a self-determination, development, and self-governance resource to Native nations in the United States and elsewhere. Its programs include research and policy analysis, leadership and management training, and strategic and organizational development. Much of NNI's work builds on and continues research originally carried out by the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development at Harvard University . The two organizations share some staff and work closely together in a variety of research and educational activities. Introductions to the research on which NNI/Harvard Project work is based can be found in: Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt, “Sovereignty and Nation-Building: The Development Challenge in Indian Country Today.” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 22, no. 3 (1998): 187-214 http://www.jopna.net/pubs/JOPNA03_Sovereignty.pdf Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt, “Where's the Glue: Institutional and Cultural Foundations of American Indian Economic Development.” Journal of Socio-Economics 29 (2000): 443-70. NNI Research Report is published under the direction of the Native Nations Institute's Associate Director for Research, Miriam Jorgensen. It is posted every few months on NNI's website www.nni.arizona.edu. “Subscribers” are notified by email, free of charge, whenever a new issue is posted. Past issues are archived on the site.
To subscribe or unsubscribe to email notification of new issues of NNI Research Report, or to notify us of material you think we should consider for mention in a future issue, please contact us at nnirr@u.arizona.edu .
Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy
|
