Canadian Immigration Policies on Involving Foreign-train Immigrants in the Economic Development of First Nation Communities (Part Two)

July 11, 2022

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

In this article series, our objective is to introduce the white paper “Adjustments of Canadian Immigration Policies – Chances, Preferential policies and Benefits for New Immigrants to live and work in First Nations Communities – Developments of First Nations Communities and land resources,” researching, discussing and analyzing further in the field of
Politics (Federal & Provincial Immigration Policies, Truth and Reconciliation with First Nations, First nations Treaty, etc.)
Laws (Immigration Acts and Regulations, First Nations Treaty process, Autonomous of First Nations Community Nominee for New Immigrants, etc.)
Economics (City Planning, Basic Infrastructure Facilities Supporting, Industrial Reconstructing, Preferential policies for New Immigrant Investors & professional and skilled workers, etc.)

Introduction: Main Point

This article is the second part of the series. I will discuss the potential of creating immigration policies on involving foreign-trained immigrants in the economic development of First nation communities across Canada. There is a long and difficult history to this discussion. It is only because of their race and ethnic origin that both First Nation suffer the adverse impacts,” mentioned in my previous article, adding that the discrimination perpetuates the “historical disadvantage and trauma suffered by both groups.” I hope that tangible achievement of a new immigration policy means that compensation for the systemic bias against both groups will end and cease discriminatory practices.

Indigenous Economic Development: Data and Statistics

In Canada, First Nation peoples have been dispossessed of their traditional territories and forcefully moved to lands in worse locations or of inferior quality to make way for the growth of the settler society. When reserves were created, they were generally located away from the best lands in agriculture and trade as the settler population expanded. As a result, many reserve lands have little natural resources and are located at a great distance from major population centres. While representing 4.9% of the entire population, First Nation peoples hold around 626 000 km² or 6.3% of the total landmass of Canada. Most of it lies north of the 60th parallel. At the same time, in the southern provinces, which are home to approximately 95% of all Indigenous Peoples within Canada, only 37 000 km² are held by Indigenous groups, which is 0.5% of Canada’s land mass. In other words, their lands disproportionally have disadvantageous attributes, which include:

Little Land Base: Approximately 0.5 % of the Canadian land mass south of the 60th parallel.
Limited Commercial and Residential Use: The land allocation policy has largely allocated reserve lands away from high quality and urban lands as the population expanded.
Patchwork Nature: 80 % of First Nations reserves are below 500 hectares in size, which makes it harder to establish infrastructure, development projects and viable businesses.
Limited Natural Resources: Reserve lands generally have low agricultural or mineral potential.
Limited Territorial Expansion Ability: The ability of band councils to expand their land base is reduced, albeit policies such as Additions to Reserve and Specific Claims negotiation process seek to expand these possibilities.
Effects of nearby activities: Surrounding activities and development in close proximity to reserves can place pressure on reserve boundaries and/or cause environmental degradation on or around the reserve.

Struggling Economic Development: Why?

The data shown above show us that First Nation people disproportionately continue to have a small, fragmented land base, with limited commercial and residential use, limited natural resources, far from access centres and little ability to expand. The fair and prompt resolution of outstanding land claims would significantly address this problem. Also, instruments to develop the land base must be consistently adopted, suitable for pre-emption and facilitated land purchases, specific economic policy, and comprehensive claims policy.

Access to First Nation land is a condition for development, however, conceptualized. Considering that they have the right to development, only they can determine if and how to use their traditional territories. They are the ones to establish how eventual uses collide or not with their worldviews, spiritual beliefs and cultural practices. Right to land can generate revenues and create economic opportunities, but it can also be used without any direct monetary benefit for environmental conservation and cultural preservations. The First Nation people should reconcile these goals, depending on how they connect with the land.

Resorting to a private property regime only promises to shift First Nation economic dependency from the colonists to politicians. This is a subtle way of completing the centuries-old goal of the colonizers – assimilation – now re-packaged as “economic opportunity.” This is not to say that an on-reserve private property regime could not be a valuable tool in the hands of our First Nations. Reserves near urban centres, equipped with adequate training, education and infrastructure, sufficient land to meet the needs of their members, and reasonable employment rates, may find some advantage to being able to borrow against and even market portions of their lands. However, the same cannot be applied to remote communities. Lands in these territories will lack any significant market value. These are Canada’s most impoverished reserves, and aside from opportunistic resource companies, little outside interest in these lands exists.

To conclude this session, opportunities for economic development vary according to the land base and the defined land rights regime, as well as by location, proximity to service centres, population size, resource endowment and institutional capacity. A small land base implies lower levels of wealth and restricted ability to host firms, infrastructure projects and housing. Larger places are able to host more firms, which leads to a greater variety of business types and potential for competition among forms in the same type of business. However, as discussed above, First Nation lands tend to be small and fragmented. Reserve lands located in or close to cities have higher value and in such cases, even small reserves may be able to leverage these assets for community economic development.

Conclusion: What Should We Do Going Forward?

The management of First Nation lands and resources has been the object of debate and reforms in the past decades in Canada. It is generally agreed that First Nation communities who hold reserve lands or treaty lands should have more autonomy to manage their territories and correspondingly more administrative, technical and financial capacity to do so. However, without increasing their capability, First Nations communities may not have the ability to comply with regulations or may become unreasonably burdened by them. The following article will discuss how the management of First Nation communities can be adequate for Indigenous peoples. Adequacy here refers to respecting First Nation values, sustaining local capacity and allowing sustainable development opportunities to flourish within the First Nation community.

Bibliography

Anaya, S. J. “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on the Situation of Indigenous Peoples in the United States of America.” Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 32, no. 1, 2015, pp. 51.

Board, National Aboriginal Economic Development, and desLibris – Documents. Improving the Economic Success of Urban Additions to Reserves Achieving Benefits for First Nations and Local Governments – Stage II: Economic and Fiscal Benefits Generated in Urban ATRs. National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, Place of publication not identified, 2015.

Economists, Fiscal R., and desLibris – Documents. Improving the Economic Success of Urban Additions to Reserves – Stage 1: Identifying Success Factors in Urban First Nations. National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, Place of publication not identified, 2014.

McGregor, Deborah. “Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal Relations and Sustainable Forest Management in Canada: The Influence of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 92, no. 2, 2011, pp. 300-310.

Rowinski, John. Why Privatization of Reserve Lands Risks Aboriginal Ruin. vol. 28, Aboriginal Multi-Media Society of Alberta (AMMSA), 2010.

OECD. “The Importance of Land for Indigenous Economic Development.” Linking Indigenous Communities with Regional Development in Canada. OECD Publishing, Paris, 2020.

OECD (2019), Linking Indigenous Communities with Regional Development, OECD Rural Policy Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/3203c082-en.

Larose, Gail, and George Tillman. Valorizing Immigrants’ Non-Canadian Work Experience. Canadian Council on Learning, Work and Learning Knowledge Centre, 2009.

Weiner, Nan, et al. Breaking Down Barriers to Labour Market Integration of Newcomers in Toronto. vol. 14, no. 10, Sept 2008;14, no. 10.;, Institute for Research on Public Policy, Montreal, Que, 2008.

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me. Follow Me on Twitter: @hkpltw And @Terry_Terence97