IRPP STUDY February 2019 | No. 69 Indigenous Self-Determination in Northern Canada and Norway Gary N. Wilson and Per Selle CANADA’S CHANGING FEDERAL COMMUNITY Indigenous Self-Determination in Northern Canada and Norway ABOUT THIS STUDY This publication was published as part of the Canada’s Changing Federal Communi- ty research program under the direction of F. Leslie Seidle. The manuscript was copy- edited by Zofia Laubitz, proofreading was by Barbara Czarnecki, editorial coordination was by Francesca Worrall, production was by Chantal Létourneau and art direction was by Anne Tremblay. Gary N. Wilson is a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Northern British Columbia. He is the president of the Association of Canadian Univer- sities for Northern Studies (ACUNS) and a member of the Council of the International Arctic Social Sciences Association (IASSA). His research focuses on Inuit governance and Inuit-state relations in Canada and the Circumpolar Arctic. Per Selle is a professor of comparative politics at the University of Bergen and UiT, the Arctic University of Norway, in Tromsø, Norway. His main research interest is how modern Indigenous politics interacts with the state in developed democracies. He has written extensively on the Sámi in Norway, and on civil society and the welfare state. His most recent book (in Norwegian, with Torvald Falch) is an analysis of the Norwe- gian Sámi parliament (2018). To cite this document: Wilson, Gary N., and Per Selle. 2019. Indigenous Self-Determination in Northern Canada and Norway. IRPP Study 69. Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the staff at the IRPP, in particular Leslie Seidle and Francesca Worrall, for their helpful suggestions and comments. We are also grateful to Aaron Spitzer from the University of Bergen for reviewing and com- menting on earlier drafts of this article. The opinions expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IRPP or its Board of Directors. IRPP Study is a refereed monographic series that is published irregularly throughout the year. Each study is subject to rigorous internal and external peer review for academic soundness and policy relevance. If you have questions about our publications, please contact [email protected]. If you would like to subscribe to our newsletter, IRPP News, please go to our website, at irpp.org. ISSN 1920-9436 (Online) ISSN 1920-9428 (Print) IRPP Study | February 2019 CONTENTS Summary .................................................................................................................................4 Résumé ....................................................................................................................................5 Introduction ............................................................................................................................7 Understanding Self-Determination .....................................................................................8 Inuit Self-Determination in Canada ...................................................................................13 Sámi Self-Determination in Norway ..................................................................................22 Comparing Inuit and Sámi Self-Determination ................................................................30 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................34 References ............................................................................................................................36 Indigenous Self-Determination in Northern Canada and Norway SUMMARY Over the last several decades, two circumpolar Indigenous peoples — the Canadian Inuit and the Norwegian Sámi — have made great strides in developing innovative govern- ance regimes to foster greater Indigenous self-determination within their respective states. Their experience, say authors Gary N. Wilson and Per Selle, highlights two different yet complementary dimensions of Indigenous self- determination: self-rule and shared rule. Self-rule is the notion that Indigenous communities should exercise some degree of autonomy over policy decisions at the regional and local levels. Shared rule is the idea that communities should be connected with other, non-Indigenous governments so they can influence decisions that affect them. The Canadian part of this study reviews developments in four Inuit regions: the terri- tory of Nunavut, the Inuvialuit Settlement Region in the Northwest Territories, Nunavik in northern Quebec and Nunatsiavut in northern Labrador. Since the 1970s the Inuit in these regions have focused on building institutions of self-rule within the context of a federal system of government, by negotiating land claims agreements and by creating regional governance institutions with varying degrees of jurisdictional authority. In contrast, the Norwegian Sámi have made considerable progress in developing non-territory-based, shared-rule institutions at the national level, within a unitary sys- tem of government. In particular, they established a national Indigenous parliament, the Sámediggi, which represents the Sámi from all parts of the country, provides limi- ted jurisdictional authority in areas such as language, culture and education, and has close links with departments of the Norwegian government. In recent years, both Indigenous groups have made progress toward creating a better balance between self-rule and shared rule. In Canada, an example is the creation of the Inuit-Crown Partnership Committee, which brings together Inuit leaders and sen- ior Canadian government representatives. A Norwegian example is the establishment of the Finnmark Estate, a land management body whose board is composed of three representatives from the Sámediggi and three from the Finnmark County Council in northern Norway. Despite the progress in both countries, there is still work to do to. For the Inuit, this means continuing to develop regional governance institutions and creating new struc- tures enabling Inuit representatives to interact with and influence the federal, provin- cial and territorial governments. The Sámi need to work toward greater regional self- rule as a complement to the institutions of shared rule at the national level. Although the Inuit and the Sámi continue to face inertia and resistance to change from non-Indigenous governments at all levels, continuing the development of robust and effective institutions of self-rule and shared rule is critical to the success of Indigenous self-determination in Canada and in Norway. 4 IRPP Study | February 2019 RÉSUMÉ Les Inuits du Canada et les Sámi de Norvège — deux peuples autochtones circum- polaires — ont fait d’importantes avancées ces dernières décennies en élaborant des régimes de gouvernance novateurs qui favorisent leur autodétermination au sein des États respectifs. Selon les auteurs de cette étude, Gary N. Wilson et Per Selle, leur parcours met en lumière deux aspects à la fois distincts et complémentaires de l’autodétermination : l’autonomie et le partage du pouvoir. Selon le premier concept, les communautés autochtones exercent une certaine autonomie dans les décisions politiques de niveau local et régional. Quant au partage du pouvoir, il consiste pour ces communautés à collaborer avec des gouvernements non autochtones en vue d’in- fluer sur les décisions qui les concernent. Le volet canadien de cette étude examine les avancées dans quatre régions inuites : le Nunavut, la région désignée des Inuvialuit des Territoires du Nord-Ouest, le Nunavik du Nord québécois et le Nunatsiavut du nord du Labrador. Depuis les années 1970, les Inuits de ces régions ont misé sur la création d’institutions autonomes au sein du système de gouvernement fédéral, négociant à cet effet des accords sur des revendi- cations territoriales et créant des institutions de gouvernance régionale aux pouvoirs juridictionnels variables. À l’inverse, les Sámi norvégiens ont privilégié des institutions non territoriales de par- tage du pouvoir au niveau national, au sein du système de gouvernement unitaire. Ils ont notablement institué un parlement autochtone élu, le Sámediggi, qui représente les Sámi de tout le pays, exerce certains pouvoirs juridictionnels en matière de langue, de culture et d’éducation, et cultive des liens étroits avec les ministères du gouverne- ment norvégien. Au cours des dernières années, les deux groupes autochtones ont trouvé un meilleur équi- libre entre autonomie et partage du pouvoir. En témoigne au Canada la mise sur pied du Comité de partenariat entre les Inuits et la Couronne, qui réunit des leaders inuits et de hauts représentants du gouvernement canadien. De son côté, la Norvège a établi un orga- nisme de gestion des terres, le Finnmark Estate, formé de trois représentants du Sámedig- gi et trois représentants du Conseil du comté de Finnmark du nord du pays. Mais en dépit de ces avancées, il reste beaucoup à faire dans chaque pays. Les Inuits doivent ainsi poursuivre le développement d’institutions de gouvernance régionale et créer de nouvelles structures qui permettent à leurs représentants d’influer sur les gouvernements fédéral, provinciaux et territoriaux. Pour leur part, les Sámi auront tout intérêt à renforcer leur autonomie régionale en complément des institutions natio- nales de partage du pouvoir. Inuits et