Indigenous People and Economic Development

An International Perspective

Katia Iankova, Azizul Hassan, Rachel L'Abbe, Katia Iankova, Azizul Hassan, Rachel L'Abbe

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781472434852
• eBook ISBN: 9781317117308
• Topic: Economics
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Economics

Indigenous peoples are an intrinsic part of countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Finland, USA, India, Russia and almost all parts of South America and Africa. A considerable amount of research has been done during the twentieth century mainly by anthropologists, sociologists and linguists in order to describe, and document their traditional life style for the protection and safeguarding of their established knowledge, skills, languages and beliefs. These communities are engaging and adapting rapidly to the changing circumstances partly caused by post modernisation and the process of globalization. These have led them to aspire to better living standards, as well as preserving their uniqueness, approaches to environment, close proximity to social structures and communities. For at least the last two decades, patterns of increased economic activity by indigenous peoples in many countries have been viewed to be significantly on the rise. Indigenous People and Economic Development reveals some of the characteristics of this economic activity, 'coloured' by the unique regard and philosophy of life that indigenous people around the world have. The successes, difficulties and obstacles to economic development, their solutions and innovative practices in business - all of these elements, based on research findings, are discussed in this book and offer an inside view of the dynamics of the indigenous societies which are evolving in a globalised and highly interconnected contemporary world.

Part I
Socio-Economic Development and Institutional Planning

1
Socioeconomic Dynamics of Aboriginal Communities in Quebec

Ibrahima Diallo and Marc-Urbain Proulx

Chapter Synopsis

There are about 50 Aboriginal communities distributed among 11 nations throughout Quebec, Canada. The analysis in this chapter showed a persistent lag compared with the non-Aboriginal communities in general, but also an interesting positive dynamic between the two survey periods covered (2001 and 2006). This is confirmed empirically by the average and median levels of socioeconomic indicators, which increased overall. Despite the low levels observed in indicators of socioeconomic development, the study showed that communities could diversify in areas of training, profession, and industrial development with a more important stress on secondary sectors with manufacturing and tertiary services. Numerous observations emerged from our analysis. They can be found in the form of factors of success or weakness. Pertaining to success factors, we discuss population growth generating human capital as a source of wealth; the ability of these communities to meet labour demands; the broad range of training offered; diversification in occupations throughout, with diversification indices often close to unity; strong diversification in areas of industrial activity; and the fact that proximity of urban centres encourages openness, and therefore a high level of diversification. However, areas of weakness are rated as low levels of schooling in the community as a whole, and low graduation rates – more than half the population has no diploma, degree, or certificate; the problem of securing an Aboriginal workforce available, increasingly, to meet companies' staffing needs; and lack of openness for some communities is a source of weakness in linguistic diversity and also in the level of income and activity.

Introduction

There are about 50 Aboriginal communities distributed among 11 nations in Quebec. In logical comparison to non-Aboriginal communities, the observation whereby socioeconomic characteristics are generally less attractive is a reality. This is the case with income, education, diversity of activities, diversity of training and industry, and degree of openness. This is however not sufficient for a more detailed insight into situations and movements of these communities and for their own dynamic economic development. The problem of development in Aboriginal communities evolving between tradition and modernism raises several questions. How do Aboriginal communities evolve in Quebec? In recent years, what changes have communities experienced in regard to socioeconomic indicators? In an approach that integrates all the above aspects, have the communities evolved uniformly or have they followed different socioeconomic directions?

Principles of Socioeconomic Development of Communities

For the present study we include in factors of socioeconomic development any that may increase the independence of Aboriginal communities, both economically and socially. For instance, this is the case of diversity reducing dependence on the outside due to reallocating risk as opposed to a strong specialisation which creates dependence on market fluctuations of small numbers of activities.

The evolutionary models of economic development are in line with the same dynamic internalisation process of socioeconomic development. In fact, like the theories that highlight the stages of development – promoted mainly by Modigliani (1963), Vernon (1990), and Rostow (1960) – socioeconomic development is a step in a process that occurs beyond a certain threshold (see Figure 1.1). This view of the concept presupposes a community as part of a progress dynamic which implies supporting the management of wealth accumulation factors as well as shifting populations towards change. Observation of the characteristics of Aboriginal peoples reveals a certain variation with these models partly due to their attachment to the past, to their culture, and to the prominent position held by adults in decision making etc.

Figure 1.1 Rostow's stage growth model (1960)

Source: Author's conception.

An automatic regional equilibrium model reflects a variation of the neoclassical theory at territory level. Indeed, as the name implies, differences in income or socioeconomic development between territories may be a source of inter-jurisdictional mobility of populations, who will tend to migrate to the most profitable areas. Adjustments in wages will then mark an automatic adjustment and, accordingly, a state of equilibrium or socioeconomic development as previously defined. This neoclassical approach may be described as dynamic and horizontal next to procedural approaches present in the economic field rather than vertical.

Relations with the outside world, with the interregional adjustment model, benefit the community and are likely to provide them with a surplus, allowing accumulation of income and eradication of disparities between Aboriginal communities and the rest of Quebec. This trend, however, is not observed in the evolution over the period of two analyses of median incomes and levels of employment and unemployment in Aboriginal communities.

From a different angle, this idea comes from theories on the exporting base (Aydalot, 1985) which implies competitiveness at local level (the base) outwards. This allows the territory to record positive benefits because of the multiplier effect of gains from the marketing of local products to outside markets. Thus, beyond the dynamic nature of this model, openness to outside markets appears to occupy a prominent place. In regard to Aboriginal communities, revenues are different at this level and depend on multiple factors – such as distance from the central markets and proximity to the Montreal/Toronto axis. These reasons are physical alongside others that we considered institutional, namely the lack of acknowledgement of certain communities due to the remoteness of their reserves.

Admittedly, in the analyses above models tend towards equilibrium, a fact made possible only with external interaction. In addition, the concept of socioeconomic development cannot be dissociated from the ability to manage through mechanisms intended for the relevant communities and work in the long term. This dimension of understanding of the concept is widely supported by the theory of endogenous development. It places at the centre of its reasoning endowments of communities remaining favourable to their own undertaking through their development.

Conventional economic analysis models of the propensity for Aboriginal communities to become involved in capitalist areas is often difficult since there are significant differences between traditional Aboriginal cultures and Western culture on how to manage business and understand wealth. They manifest themselves in collectivism, community property, division of property, consensus, the social, the traditional, etc.

Aboriginal communities are unique in regard to cultural and organisational levels and also in composition, not only because of their heterogeneity but also because of their differences in economic management. Moreover, they are not evenly distributed across reserves and show increasingly differentiated dynamics of development (see Table 1.1).

Table 1.1 Differences between Native and non-Native culture

Non-Native Culture	Native Culture
Capitalism	Collectivism
Individuality	Community
Separation of property	Division of property
Prioritising innovation and change	Entrenched traditional values
Decisions by majority	Consensus
Gender centred	Matriarchal
Close to power	Far from power
Sedentary lifestyle	Recently settled population
Involvement of elders in the decision-making process	Age is not a determining factor
Traditional economy	Social economy
Modernisation	Traditional activities (hunting, fishing, trapping)

The fact that these communities value cooperation between members, focus on family obligations, and consider the community as unity of action, the importance of the abovementioned values, leads to a more suitable conceptual field through which Aboriginal communities situate themselves – namely, social economy. Hence, the importance of their desire to enter the economy with the appropriate tools and to integrate, as best as possible, these differences. Such a situation highlighting the hybrid or associative character of the economic dynamics of Aboriginal communities is evident at two levels.

Firstly, it concerns an entry framework as part of a capitalist and individualistic logic (Anderson et al.2004). Following this logic, the active accommodation requirements of the capitalist economy is one of the attitudes observed in the communities. They emphasise that Aboriginal communities have opted to act from within through struggles for land and other rights in order to contribute to the economy. Our analysis of socioeconomic development incorporates this attitude through key indicators of the level of entrepreneurship, and for which verification is possible from available sources of harmonised data. Essentially, it is about activity levels and median income.

Secondly, taking into account the multi-faceted nature of economics leads to exceeding the market logic and integrating other requirements of a domestic or distributive nature (Polanyi, 1944), or of combinations of the above-mentioned approaches (Laville, 1995). This leads us into a social economy that, in its reasoning, gives priority to three basic dimensions taking us a step closer to the model of Aboriginal communities: redistribution, reciprocity, and the market.

The literature on organisational dynamics applied to Aboriginal communities underpins the argument of specialisation or dispersion as characteristics of economic development. In fact, based on Fayol's (1916) study on the structural plan of a community, socioeconomic development may be observed from its structure. At the elementary level, the so-called sun or basic structure reflects a society in which specialisation is the exception and the rule is dispersion. Depending on the development, management bodies deal with an increasing number of specific tasks. This reasoning is consistent at community levels with the diversification of activities as a relevant index for assessing socioeconomic development.

Sustainability, which is a fundamental feature of socioeconomic development, is difficult to observe in a context where communities are struggling to follow the cyclical fluctuations in the levels of production fields and management methods as well as socioeconomic and demographic changes. The fluidity of inter- and intra-community migration as well as flows with the outside, the multiplicity of courses of study, levels of activity of the population are all factors facilitating flexibility as well as adaptability of communities (see Table 1.2).

Its numerous other features may be guessed from its definition. All the above evidence certifies it is true, of a prolix field of understanding of the concept, but will not be included in the models of this study. However, based on thes...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Contributors
• Introduction
• PART I SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING
• PART II INDIGENOUS ENTERPRISE
• PART III SUSTAINABILITY AND INDIGENOUS TOURISM
• PART IV POVERTY ALLEVIATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
• Conclusion
• Index