Photo: Zainab Mogul, Cambridge Bay, NU Sustainability Planning in Arctic Resource Communities Michelle Boyle and Hadi Dowlatabadi, University of British Columbia with Members of the Nunavut Economic Developers Association

Acknowledgements Climate Decision Making Center, Carnegie Mellon University (NSF SES ) and former HDGEC SSHRC, Northern Development Program and Doctoral Fellowship Program INAC, Northern Scientific Training Program SSHRC/DFO, Oceans Management Research Network Nunavut Economic Developers Association Susan Rowley, James Tansey

The Research Project Historic patterns of development in the arctic and its relationship to communities. Current community priorities, control and capacity. Strategic planning tools for adaptation.

Agenda Theoretical frameworks for community adaptation Comparison with an actual planning process (analysis and results) Implications for building adaptive capacity in communities

Climate vulnerability sets priorities Sensitivity to climate change Communit y priorities Models of community adaptation: Response

All vulnerabilities set priorities Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Communit y priorities Models of community adaptation: Response

Community control Local control is limited Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Communit y priorities Models of community adaptation:

Community control Adaptive Capacity A climate focus is only a partial picture Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Communit y priorities Models of community adaptation:

Successful Responses A fuller picture Models of community adaptation: Adaptive Capacity Community control Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change Communit y priorities External resources

Hypotheses H 0 : Communities identify risks from climate change as a special priority. H 1a : Communities enjoy control commensurate with their priorities. H 1b : Communities enjoy control over matters involving climate change adaptation. H 2 : CEDO priorities and resources match needs for broader community development planning.

Nunavut Economic Development Strategy (NEDS) 2003 THE LAND -Respecting the land -Maintaining our mixed economy -Building on the knowledge of our Elders OUR PEOPLE -Economic development for youth -Education and training -Basic needs: housing, hospitals and schools OUR COMMUNITY ECONOMIES -Community capacity building and organizational development -Small and Inuit business development -Building the knowledge base OUR TERRITORIAL ECONOMY -Putting the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement to work -Sector development and support systems -Infrastructure: from buildings to broadband -Accessing the global marketplace

Method NEDS 2003 –143 Action Items (excluding 24 implementation items) NEDA priority identification Our informed judgments about broader community priorities, sensitivity and levels of control Caveats: Action items as units of observation. NEDS as reflection of priorities –broad guiding principles –4 forms of capital: E,H,S,P

High Community Priorities THE LAND -Respecting the land -Maintaining our mixed economy -Building on the knowledge of our Elders OUR PEOPLE -Economic development for youth -Education and training -Basic needs: housing, hospitals and schools OUR COMMUNITY ECONOMIES -Community capacity building and organizational development -Small and Inuit business development -Building the knowledge base OUR TERRITORIAL ECONOMY -Putting the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement to work -Sector development and support systems -Infrastructure: from buildings to broadband -Accessing the global marketplace

Characterizing Community Priorities

Climate Sensitivity & Community Priority

Community control Community Priorities Sensitivity to multiple stresses Sensitivity to climate change High Communit y priorities 9% 91%

Characterizing Community Control

Community Control & Community Priority

Community Control & Climate Sensitivity

Characterizing Community Priorities

Characterizing Community & CEDO Priorities Make the implementation of the community development plan the primary task of the community economic developer.

Conclusions H 0 : Communities identify risks from climate change as a special priority. H 1a : Communities enjoy control commensurate with their priorities. H 1b : Communities enjoy control over matters involving climate change adaptation. H 2 : CEDO priorities and resources match needs for broader community development planning

Implications for building adaptive capacity in arctic communities Climate adaptation should become mainstream in community planning. Responsibilities should be better coordinated across scales relevant to resource allocation and regulation in Nunavut. Responsibilities should be better coordinated across jurisdictions within communities.

Questions?

Community Priorities and Climate Sensitivity most community priorities are not sensitive to climate little added emphasis in community priorities for items of high sensitivity to climate change impacts.

Climate Sensitivity and Community Control communities have incomplete control over both climate sensitive and non-climate sensitive items

Community Priorities and Community Control control is not sought for low priority items? communities have incomplete control over higher priority items