The Lancaster Sound Regional Study
An Interview with Peter Jacobs
The Lancaster Sound Regional Study was established in the fall of 1979 by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) to provide a regional context for the evaluation of projects such as Norlands Petroleums' proposal for exploratory drilling in Lancaster Sound. The study was conducted in three phases: first, preparation of a draft green paper outlining development options for the region; second, a public review of the draft green paper; and third, preparation of a final green paper for the minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
The draft green paper was prepared by a team of scientists and administrators from DIAND, the Government of the Northwest Territories, and the federal departments of Energy, Mines and Resources, Environment, Fisheries and Oceans, and Transport, and was based on background studies and maps of the region's resources, existing resource uses, and potential resource uses.1 The public review phase consisted of public meetings in four communities in the Lancaster Sound region and workshops in Resolute and in Ottawa. In August 1981, the chairman of the Lancaster Sound Regional Study public review, Peter Jacobs, submitted his report and recommendations to the minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.2 The final green paper was released in 1983,3 followed by a second public review, chaired by Jacobs and Jonathan Palluq, and the submission of their final report to the minister.4 CARC interviewed Peter Jacobs in October 1985.
CARC: What did the Lancaster Sound Regional Study tell Canadians about planning in Lancaster Sound?
Peter Jacobs: The development of a planning process was one of the objectives for this region that the study was expected to identify. In the public hearings, the developers, the governments, the Inuit, the conservationists-every lobby-agreed that decisions must be made within the context of a regional planning process. All of the decisions that were being made concerning areas of conservation, biosphere reserves, areas of development for drilling or trans-shipment of gas, and the development of village-based economies, should be made within a regional planning process. Such decisions were being made in the absence of any information on how other sectors would be affected.
The Lancaster Sound Regional Study established that a project cannot be evaluated without an understanding of its context. The planning process justifies development activities that are appropriate for the environment, that reflect the policies of government, and that are supported by the residents of the region.
The residents of Lancaster Sound-the Inuit-recognize that development and conservation projects in their region present conflicts as well as opportunities, but the process of development is more important than the nature of the development project. They accept the idea of development, but within two limits: first, a development project must not cause long-term or extensive damage to the environment; and second, a development project must not reduce their economic and lifestyle options, which range from a subsistence economy to a mixed economy to a cash economy.
CARC: Does the northern land-use planning process measure up to the expectations established by the Lancaster Sound Regional Study?
Jacobs: In a word, no. Let me explain why. The Lancaster Sound Regional Study created a context for project evaluation in the Arctic that was more powerful than any that had existed. It was a prototype for a planning process in the sense that government committed itself to cooperation between departments, with scientific groups, and with the residents of the Lancaster Sound region. The level of co-operation achieved in the study resulted from the high stakes involved in northern resource development. On the one hand, the arrow indicating oil prices pointed straight up to the sky and the potential for growth of the Canadian economy was considered enormous. On the other hand there was a commitment to learn more about the environment through which these riches would flow and a commitment to the Inuit, who are most dependent on that environment. There was a moral obligation to ensure that this culture and its relationship to the environment is not destroyed by one economic activity. There was also an understanding that the use of this region is a global concern.
The important message from the public review phase concerning planning was that the process must be regional, easy to understand, and encourage participation. The Inuit had ideas about what they wanted to do. Their approach was cautious and emphasized the regional context of planning. It involved the designation of national parks and biosphere reserves, and the provision of education and training for economic development based on renewable resources, non-renewable resources and tourism. It was a multi-faceted approach to the development of their own region that did not fit neatly into any single government department.
Upon publication of the final green paper, government's co-operative approach rapidly closed down. DIAND's own approach to planning was transformed into a highly centralized, non-participatory, technical planning process. It attempted to define all of the steps and all of the possible consequences of each step, and all of the various powers of each of the actors. Subsequent negotiations with northern interest groups and governments have not corrected this flaw. Such a process leaves no room for changes in economic and political activity.
Since the Lancaster Sound Regional Study concluded in 1983, there have been many such changes. There is increasing talk of devolution; the need to assert Canada's sovereignty in the Northwest Passage, which was implicit for years, has become explicit; the transportation of oil and gas through the Northwest Passage has become a minor issue compared with the need to develop village economies that have nothing to do with megaprojects. The ball game has changed radically, but the structures for planning are in danger of becoming so rigid that the process won't be able to accommodate these changes.
CARC: What can government do to meet the public's high expectations of planning for Lancaster Sound?
Jacobs: Government must change its view of what the planning process is designed to achieve. If it is designed to achieve sustainable development for the arctic communities, then government must not only solicit but also encourage participation of the community leaders. If their participation is solicited after all the key decisions are made, then these people have been put in a straitjacket.
There must also be a shift in focus from non-renewable resource extraction to the management of renewable resources. Such a shift will require federal departments such as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to become involved, not as monitoring agents or as distant scientific agencies, but as partners helping to achieve management goals. Until this shift occurs, the planning process is going to block up like a clogged drain. There must be a Cabinet policy that states: "Thou shalt cooperate, your job depends on it."
Peter Jacobs was chairman of the first public review of the Lancaster Sound Regional Study, and co-chairman of the second public review. He is a professor in the Faculté de l'Aménagement, Université de Montréal.
Endnotes
1. The Working Group on the Lancaster Sound Regional Study. The Lancaster Sound Region: 1980-2000, Perspectives and Issues on Resource Use. H.J. Dirschl, ed. Ottawa: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1980. Draft Green Paper, Lancaster Sound Regional Study.
2. Peter Jacobs. People, Resources and the Environment: Perspectives on the Use and Management of the Lancaster Sound Region. Ottawa: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1981. Public Review Phase, Lancaster Sound Regional Study.
3. H.J. Dirschl, project manager. The Lancaster Sound Region: 1980-2000, Issues and Options on the Use and Management of the Region. Ottawa: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1982. Green Paper, Lancaster Sound Regional Study.
4. Peter Jacobs, Jonathan Palluq, co-chairmen. The
Lancaster Sound Regional Study, Public Review: Public Prospect. Ottawa:
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1983. Lancaster Sound Regional Study.