EVOLVING GOVERNANCE: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY EXPLAINING POSITIVE SELF- GOVERNMENT OUTCOMES FOR NUNATSIAVUT GOVERNMENT AND THE MIAWPUKEK FIRST NATION _____________ A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Political Science Memorial University of Newfoundland _____________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts _____________ by Andrew Robert Merrell April, 2020 Evolving Governance Merrell 2 © 2020 Andrew Merrell, MA candidate, Memorial University of Newfoundland. This research was conducted with approval from the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research (ICEHR), from the Nunatsiavut Research Centre in Nain, and from the Miawpukek Mi’kamawey Mawi’omi Band Council in Samiajij Miawpukek. Funding support was provided through a Memorial University of Newfoundland Graduate Research Fellowship and through a research assistantship and partnership under the Traditions and Transitions of Labrador Inuit Project, which holds a Partnership Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). Principal Investigator: Tom Gordon. Evolving Governance Merrell 3 Abstract There are currently 27 indigenous groups with self-government agreements with the Government of Canada, and many more with other types of governance agreements. All have faced lengthy negotiation processes and institutional barriers in achieving success in self-government. Despite increasing interest in the topic, research on the impacts of self-government at the community level is still limited, and relatively little has been written about the evolution of self-government in Newfoundland and Labrador. Scholars and policymakers continue to debate the benefits of self-government. This thesis conducts a comparative analysis of two case studies. The first, Miawpukek First Nation, is a Mi’kmaq community on the island of Newfoundland that resembles a self-governing community in terms of policy but has no formal agreement. The second, Nunatsiavut Government, is based on a formal self-government agreement and serves the Labrador Inuit. The thesis first analyzes the data to demonstrate the statistical benefits of self- government agreements, comparing the data to that of the two cases. The thesis then uses rational choice institutionalist and culturalist institutionalist approaches to analyze findings from 46 semi-structured, elite interviews conducted with residents of the two communities, together with supporting documentation, such as policy studies and media reports. The thesis concludes that the success of both governments in improving outcomes for residents is not a result of formal agreements with the Crown or of access to resource revenues. Instead, the combination of a well-organized, accountable local government, innovative policy initiatives tailored to community needs, and the financial resources to deliver them, is the key to success in governance. Keywords: Governance, Self-government, Indigenous communities, policy outcomes, multilevel governance, corporate governance, land management, resource management Evolving Governance Merrell 4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................ 8 List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. 9 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................... 11 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................. 12 Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Research puzzle ...................................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Research questions and argument ................................................................................................... 16 1.4 Theoretical framework ........................................................................................................................ 16 1.5 Methods ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 1.6 Thesis overview ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Chapter 2: Institutional friction, rational choice, and the Five Principles of Governance: a review of the literature. ...................................................................................... 22 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 22 2.2 History and the institutionalisms .......................................................................................................... 23 2.2.1 History matters: examining path dependency in Canada. ............................................................... 23 2.2.2 Path Dependency and the Indian Act ......................................................................................................... 24 2.2.4 Historical institutionalism and path dependency ............................................................................... 26 2.2.5 Rational Choice Institutionalism ................................................................................................................. 28 2.2.6 from Path Dependency to Critical Juncture ............................................................................................ 30 2.3 Moving Beyond the Institutionalisms ............................................................................................. 32 2.3.1 The critical-postmodern perspective ........................................................................................................ 32 2.3.2 Classical liberalism and indigenous governance .................................................................................. 34 2.3.3 Multilevel Governance and Treaty federalism ...................................................................................... 37 2.3.4 Finding Common Ground ............................................................................................................................... 39 2.4 What is Governance? ............................................................................................................................. 40 2.4.1 Defining and Analyzing Governance .......................................................................................................... 40 2.4.2 Examining Indigenous Governance ........................................................................................................... 43 2.4.3 Toward a comprehensive definition ......................................................................................................... 46 2.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 48 Chapter 3: Methodology ................................................................................................................... 49 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 49 3.2 Research design ...................................................................................................................................... 49 3.3 Case Selection .......................................................................................................................................... 50 3.4 Data collection ........................................................................................................................................ 52 3.4.1 Interviews ............................................................................................................................................................. 52 3.4.2 Other data .............................................................................................................................................................. 54 3.5 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 55 3.5.1 Three policy Areas ............................................................................................................................................. 55 3.5.2 The time-markers .............................................................................................................................................. 56 Evolving Governance Merrell 5 3.5.3 Five Principles of Good Governance (FPGG) .......................................................................................... 57 3.5.4 Thematic Network Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 57 3.6 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................