Aboriginal Entrepreneurship and Economic Development From Canada's Proposed Mackenzie Gas Pipeline (Summary)

242 Int. J. Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2012

Copyright © 2012 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Getting ready for oil and gas development in Canada’s Northwest Territories: aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development

Aldene H. Meis Mason* Faculty of Business, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, Saskatchewan, S4S 0A2, Canada Fax: +1-306-585-5361 E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author

Leo-Paul Dana Faculty of Management, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8149, New Zealand Fax +64-3-364-2020 E-mail: [email protected]

Robert B. Anderson Faculty of Business, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, Saskatchewan, S4S 0A2, Canada Fax: +1-306-585-5361 E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: This case study uses an interdisciplinary approach to examine Inuit and First Nations perspectives and initiatives to foster sustainable entrepreneurship and economic development related to the forthcoming Mackenzie Gas Pipeline in Canada’s Northwest Territories. The 1,220-kilometer pipeline will connect the Mackenzie Delta to the Alberta Oil Sands and North American markets. These findings will be of interest to business, government and Indigenous leaders involved in resource development. Key aspects include self-government and land claim agreements, approaches to entrepreneurship and economic development, sustainable development, human resource development initiatives, business service support and increased participation of women and Aboriginal peoples.

Keywords: Indigenous; Aboriginal; Northern America; Canada; entrepreneurship and economic development; oil and gas; resource management and sustainable development; corporate social responsibility; globalisation; Arctic.

Getting ready for oil and gas development in Canada’s NWT 243

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Meis Mason, A.H., Dana, L-P. and Anderson, R.B. (2012) ‘Getting ready for oil and gas development in Canada’s Northwest Territories: aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development’, Int. J. Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp.242–266.

Biographical notes: Aldene H. Meis Mason was educated at University of Canterbury, NZ and Ivey Business School, CAN. She is on Faculty at the University of Regina in Entrepreneurship. She specialises in Indigenous entrepreneurship research using ethnographic, case and quantitative approaches. She is a Fellow Certified Management Consultant. She spent 20 years as an administrator in business, government and consulting. Strathmore Who’s Who selected her as one of the top ten members for 2011 in Education.

Leo-Paul Dana was educated at McGill University, CAN and is tenured at University of Canterbury, NZ. He is the Editor Emeritus of the Journal of International of Entrepreneurship. Dedicated to research about Indigenous entrepreneurship, he has conducted numerous qualitative ethnographic studies. He and Robert Brent Anderson of the University of Regina were co-Founding Editors of the refereed Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy.

Robert B. Anderson was educated at University of Saskatchewan, CAN and tenured at University of Regina. He is an Editor of the Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. The U of R honoured him as the outstanding researcher. He has served on national and international boards such as CCSBE, ICSB, CANDO.

1 Introduction

Following federal cabinet approval, the Mackenzie Gas Project (MGP) received a certificate from the National Energy Board of Canada (NEB) allowing it to go ahead in March 2011. The Joint Review Panel (JRP) had given conditional approval in December 2009 after nearly five years of hearings and deliberations. This case study examines the perspectives and preparation of the Inuvialuit, Gwich’in, Sahtu Dene and Métis, and Deh Cho for ensuring sustainable entrepreneurship and economic development related to the development of a 1,220-kilometre pipeline through the Northwest Territories (NWT). In October 2004 Imperial Oil Resources Ventures Limited applied to the NEB for approval of the Mackenzie Gas Pipeline Project (MGP). The proposed pipeline would connect the Mackenzie Delta with the Alberta Oil Sands. The anticipated value of the oil reserves from the MGP hovered around C$3 trillion. The pipeline would carry 1.2 billion cubic feet of gas each day to customers throughout North America. The pipeline costs had increased from C$6 billion to C$16.2 billion since the initial application (Mackenzie Gas Project, 2005).

In the NWT, the route would cross traditional lands of four Aboriginal1 groups: Inuvialuit, Gwich’in, Sahtu Dene and Métis, and Deh Cho. The first three had achieved self-government and land claims agreements with the Government of Canada; the last had been negotiating with Canada for more than 30 years in an effort to achieve the same. The first three had gained ownership of lands and resources as well as funds for

244 A.H. Meis Mason et al.

economic development. They also became responsible for protecting the sustainability of their lands, resources, people, communities and environment. Common challenges facing these Aboriginal peoples and communities included high unemployment, poverty, poor health, lack of education and skills training, and lack of infrastructure.

Speaking of the pipeline project, Nellie Cournoyea, Chair/CEO of the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC) said:

“The oil industry will gain. The government will gain on royalties. Where we have subsurface rights then we will gain by having access to shipping. We have subsurface rights that have been discovered, but we can’t do anything with it and it isn’t worth anything until it starts moving. That is how the oil industry is governed. They don’t get money until they sell something. We don’t get money until we sell the muskrat.” (Cournoyea, 2006)

Many interviewees discussed how NWT communities had experienced boom and bust cycles and minimal benefits in previous economic development and pipeline projects. This was largely a result of the contracts and employment going mostly to companies and people from southern Canada. These projects had left lasting negative social and environmental impacts. Grand Chief Norwegian commented,

“Social impacts…lurking, drug, alcohol…rotational camp life. What kind of longer term impacts? This is the kind of lifestyle. People dealing with boom or bust. People putting tons of money into their pocket. Do what they normally do. At the end things peter out, back to where they were before. That’s a serious situation.” (Norwegian, 2006)

How could Aboriginal peoples and northern communities maximise their involvement and derive greatest economic and social benefit but still minimise the risks and mitigate the negative and adverse impacts? How would they prepare to participate? The paper2 will

1 discuss Indigenous approaches to entrepreneurship and economic development

2 outline the research methodology

3 introduce the Aboriginal groups

4 overview the development of oil and gas in the NWT

5 describe Aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development initiatives

6 conclude with the implications.

2 Indigenous approaches to entrepreneurship and economic development

Indigenous entrepreneurship is an emerging field and little research has been done specifically on this area (Hindle and Lansdowne, 2002; Hindle and Moroz, 2010; Peredo and Anderson, 2006; Frederick and Foley, 2006; De Bruin and Mataira, 2003). Indigenous entrepreneurship is the entrepreneurial process in the form of enterprise that encompasses the desire of an Indigenous person or persons to overcome disadvantages, become self-reliant and have a good livelihood (Peredo et al., 2004). This may involve new enterprise creation and the pursuit of opportunities through culturally viable and community acceptable wealth creation [Hindle and Moroz, (2010), pp.8, 15].


De Bruin and Mataira (2003, p.170) linked indigenous culture with the concept of heritage entrepreneurship whereby Indigenous people undertook activities designed to regain control of their ancestral lands thus expanding their economic capital base. They broadly defined heritage as cultural practices, resources and knowledge systems developed and refined and passed on through generations. Heritage entrepreneurship included direct negotiations; achievement of settlements; methods to fast-track settlements and implementation; development of an Indigenous trademark as an identification and brand for Indigenous products and services; and attempting to protect Indigenous culture and intellectual property rights.

Some limitations of the current theory on Indigenous entrepreneurship included few empirical studies and most tended to be single case-based (Hindle and Moroz, 2010); not differentiating between Indigenous and non-Indigenous cultures (Lindsay et al., 2005); and a tendency to treat all Indigenous communities as homogenous (Lindsay et al., 2005).

International Labour Organization Convention 169 recognised the rights of Indigenous people “to retain their own customs and institutions, where these are not incompatible with fundamental rights defined by the national legal system and with internationally recognized human rights” (ILO, 169 Article 8, 2011). The ILO (2009) Indigenous & Tribal Peoples Rights in Practice explains the conventions in more depth and best practice. In 2005, the World Bank also instituted a new policy and bank procedures with respect to Indigenous people, OP/BP4.10 for its proposed and approved projects. The new policy reflects the success of the Indigenous people in gaining recognition of their distinct cultures and identities and their rights, including those related to land and natural resources. Two key requirements of this policy are:

1 client governments must ‘seek broad community support of Indigenous peoples through a process of free, prior, and informed consultation before deciding on development projects affecting Indigenous peoples’

2 ‘Indigenous peoples benefit from the commercial development of natural resources’.

The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (2007) provides international standards to address discrimination and marginalisation of Indigenous peoples. The Declaration’s preamble (p.2) specifically recognises the importance of land, resources, knowledge, culture and practices to Indigenous peoples and acknowledges their suffering from the loss of these, their rights are inherent, and the rights are essential for the rebuilding of their communities as Indigenous people wish to rebuild them.

Indigenous groups and communities throughout the world vary greatly in willingness, readiness and approaches for entrepreneurship and business development in the global economy (Anderson et al., 2007; Peredo et al., 2004; Wuttunee, 2004; Cornell and Kalt, 2003; Adamson and King, 2002; Shatz, 1987). Our research has shown that

1 Indigenous enterprises can be private, public, community-based, cooperative or not-for profit

2 multiple measures of success are used including economic profit, increased employment, and improved health and social well-being for individuals and communities

3 Indigenous and non-Indigenous partners and stakeholders in the enterprises may benefit.


They may choose one of four approaches to economic development and multinationals enterprises in the global economy on a case-by-case basis: unconditional participation, assertively pragmatic participation, transformational participation, and resistance and non-participation (Peredo et al., 2004).

3 Methodology

The authors were the Canadian team for a four country study involving Alaska, Canada, Norway and Russia which examined perspectives of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility related to oil and gas development in the Arctic. Research propositions and questions pertained to: drilling in the Arctic, sustainability, social issues, environment, power and politics, Indigenous people and local communities, Arctic institutions and organisations and, narratives of the Arctic [Hansen and Langhelle, (2008), pp.87–108].

In October 2006, the authors flew to five remote NWT communities and conducted 32 structured interviews lasting 60–90 minutes with leaders from Aboriginal organisations, government, business, academia, communities and media. Most interviews were arranged in advance of the field trip by phoning potential participants. The interview questions and consent form were e-mailed to the participants thus allowing for thoughtful preparation. While the researchers were in the North, snowball sampling was used whereby interviewees suggested others who should be invited to participate. All interviews were digitally recorded. Extensive photographs were taken to provide community context and a baseline for future comparison.

For the purposes of this paper, responses on the theme of Aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development were drawn from the following questions:

• What do you see as the main arguments or rationale for/against drilling in the Arctic concerning: the economy, local development, technology and improvement in welfare?

• Are there any contradictions between different indigenous peoples/organisations when it comes to oil and gas activities?

• How is the cooperation between public governments and indigenous peoples and other local peoples and organisations on issues regarding oil and gas activities?

• How would you describe the interaction between indigenous peoples and other stakeholders?

• In your opinion, are indigenous peoples managing to respond and act on outside threats and opportunities?

• What do you consider as reasonable and legitimate expectations from oil and gas activities for indigenous peoples/locals?

• Do the oil and gas corporations provide, or take part in the providing of social services (for example health care and education) for the indigenous people or local population?

• How is the cooperation between public governments and oil- and gas corporations on issues regarding social services for the indigenous people and local population?


The field visits allowed for observation of the current state of business, social, and economic development; the environment; and the geography. Additional information was gathered from stakeholder websites, government documents and submissions, and media publications.

4 The Aboriginal groups in the NWT

The NWT total population in 2005 was 42,982 (males 22,093 and females 20,889). The Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal population were almost balanced – 21,413 versus 21,569. The average annual population growth rate was 0.3%. About 44% of Aboriginals 15 years and older spoke only an Aboriginal Language; in smaller communities this rose to 61.9%. Although 67.5% of people had a high school diploma or more education; in smaller communities only 36.8% did. (This information was drawn from the 2005 Canada Census.)

Historically, Aboriginal peoples of the NWT had travelled extensively on land and water following the movement of animals, fish and birds and the seasonal availability of plants. Extended families or clans established particular areas of land for their own use for fishing, hunting, trapping, and harvesting berries, grasses, roots and herbal medicines. In the mid-1950s, the Canadian government encouraged the Aboriginal people to move into small isolated remote communities where they would receive better healthcare, education, and administrative services. A northern academic commented, “Many of the communities in the Arctic were established or at least enhanced in their infrastructure because of the cold war and Canada’s need to demonstrate sovereignty”. Although not incorporated into the land claim agreements, the clan system was still practiced today.

People in the NWT still depended on country food from the land. Shipping costs to the North were very high. Most products were barged on the Mackenzie River during the summer. Otherwise, goods were flown in or trucked over the winter roads (where these exist). Power and fuel costs were significantly higher than those in southern Canada – there was no hydro-electricity nor wind power; diesel fuel was barged in. A northern academic commented, “It’s very expensive to run our communities. We have some of the most expensive electricity in the world”. Although fresh foods were stocked weekly in the Co-operatives and Northern stores, these quickly disappeared and were about three times the cost of similar foods in southern Canada.

For many Aboriginal people, it remained culturally and spiritually important to go out onto the land, to gather/trap/hunt, to share and to eat the country food. A northern government administrator commented,

“People in the North know the land; understand the land in a cultural way. Almost like an instinct, it’s learned through interactions with other people. They are taught by their grandparents. The Northern way of life is different. It is culturally attached to the land, water, animals and vegetation.”

This was partially explained by the Aboriginal spiritual beliefs that every rock and living thing has a spirit and purpose. A key value is that country food should not be sold but is to be shared with kin and community members. The high costs of fuel, snowmobiles, all terrain vehicles, repair parts, and hunting equipment were making it difficult to sustain this way of life. Often other family members with paid employment helped with the cash needed for the supplies. According to a local Sahtu leader,


“It is hard to make a living off the land today. It requires a lot of money for ski doos, rifles, and leg traps. Before, the days were long – fourteen hours every day. You stayed out on the land in cabins many months, only coming into the community a couple times per year. Today, jobs are scarce so oil and gas activities are needed and will give opportunity. The environment is very important and must be preserved for future generations.”

4.1 Inuvialuit

The Inuvialuit Settlement Region is located in the Western Arctic of Canada. The Inuvialuit people are First Peoples and are not referred to as First Nations. The Inuvialuit region has a population of 3,115 Inuit, with an additional 1,050 Inuit living in other regions of the NWT. This region has experienced a 3% decline in population since 1996. Inuit make up 55% of the population of the Inuvialuit region. The Inuvialuit people have more in common with their relatives in Alaska than with other peoples of the Canadian Arctic.

The Inuvialuit Final Agreement was signed with Canada in May 1984. Under its terms, the Inuvialuit retained title to 91,000 square kilometres of land (in comparison, slightly smaller than Portugal), 13,000 square kilometres with full surface and subsurface title; 78,000 square kilometres excluding oil and gas and specified mineral rights. The agreement covers approximately 3,600 people and includes the communities of Aklavik (Aklarvik), Sachs Harbour (Ikaahuk), Holman (Uluksaqtuuq), Paulatuk (Paulatuuq), Tuktoyaktuk (Tuktuuyaqtuuk) and for the purpose of the claim, Inuvik (Inuuvik). The claim settlement also included the offshore and the North Slope of the Yukon Territory over to Victoria Island. Over a 20 year period, the land claim payments to IRC from Canada totalled C$169.5 million. This included a C$7.5 million social development fund and a C$10 million economic enhancement fund.

4.2 Gwich’in

The Gwich’in Tribal Council (GTC) represents the interests of approximately 3,000 Gwich’in people of the Mackenzie Delta of the NWT. The Gwich’in peoples have lived in this area since the earth was created. The Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement was signed in 1992. The Gwich’in Settlement Area (GSA) is located immediately south of Inuvik and occupies an area of approximately 57,000 square kilometres. The Arctic Circle crosses at the lower third of the GSA. Four communities are found within the GCLA: Aklavik, Fort McPherson, Inuvik and Tsiigehtchic.

The agreement gave the Gwich’in fee simple, or private ownership of the surface of 22,422 square kilometres of land in the NWT, which included 6,158 square kilometres of land where the Gwich’in own the subsurface, as well as the surface of 1,554 square kilometres of land in the Yukon. The Gwich’in also received a tax-free capital transfer of C$75 million (1,990 dollars) paid over a 15-year period. In the GSA, they have extensive and detailed wildlife harvesting rights; guaranteed participation in decision-making structures for the management of wildlife and the regulation of the land, water and environment; and rights of first refusal to a variety of commercial wildlife activities. They will receive a share of annual resource royalties in the Mackenzie Valley. Harvesting rights and a role in management were also provided for the Gwich’in in their designated land use in the Yukon, but these were less extensive than the rights in the NWT (INAC, 1992).


4.3 The Sahtu Dene, also referred to as North Slavey People

In July 1993, Sahtu Dene and Métis voted to approve the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement (SCLCA). The governments of the NWT and Canada approved and signed the SCLCA in September 1993. The Sahtu Dene and Métis Land Claim Agreement Act received royal assent on 23 June 1994. The Sahtu Dene and Métis Settlement Area (SSA) covered 280,238 square kilometres (in comparison slightly smaller than the UK) including the area of Great Bear Lake. Less than 3,000 people lived in the SSA. Five communities were located in the SSA: Colville Lake, Deline (formerly Fort Franklin), Fort Good Hope, Norman Wells and Tulita (formerly Fort Norman). The Mackenzie River ran through the eastern portion and one-third of the proposed Mackenzie Valley Pipeline will go through the SSA.

The Sahtu Dene and Métis received title to 41,437 square kilometres of settlement lands in the NWT (an area slightly larger than Vancouver Island). Of this, 1,838 kilometers or 22.5% included the ownership of subsurface resources (petroleum and minerals). These Sahtu-owned lands are privately owned in fee simple and are not reserves under the Indian Act. The Agreement guaranteed participation in institutions of public government for renewable resource management, land use planning and land and water use in the SSA, and participation in environmental impact assessment and review in the Mackenzie Valley. The agreement also provided for negotiation of self-government agreements that will be brought into effect through federal and territorial legislation. Beneficiaries would receive C$75 million in 1990 dollars paid over a 15-year period.

4.4 Deh Cho

A Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement failed in 1990. The Dene Cho First Nations (DCFN) filed a separate laid claim in 1992 to a territory covering 220,000 square kilometres. They have been negotiating with the Government of Canada since then. The DCFN tribal council included Acho Dene Koe First Nation (Fort Liard), Deh Gah Gotie Dene First Nation (Fort Providence), Tthe’K’ehdeli First Nation (Jean Marie River), Katl’Odeeche First Nation (Hay River Reserve), K’a’agee Tu First Nation (Kakisa), Liidlii Kue First Nation (Fort Simpson), N’ah adehe First Nation (Nahanni Butee), Pehdzeh Ki First Nation (Wrigley), Sambaa K’e First Nation (Trout Lake), Ts’uehda First Nation (West Point) as well as Fort Liard Metis Nation, Fort Providence Metis Nation and Fort Simpson Metis Nation. The Deh Cho represents about 4,500 people.

According to the MGP proposal, 40% of the pipeline and three gas compressor facilities would be located on DCFN territory. The pipeline would pass about 17 kilometres from Fort Simpson a town of about 2,500 people. Fort Simpson was the oldest continuously occupied trading post on the Mackenzie River (which they called the Deh Cho River).

In April 2003, the Canada and the Deh Cho reached an Interim Resource Development Agreement that would last until a final land claims agreement was reached. This provided for royalties (which the Deh Cho could access up 50% of the total each year to a maximum C$1 million) for economic development; 181,299 square kilometres of Deh Cho claimed lands set aside for protected areas; and 50% of the 210,000 square kilometres of the land with Aboriginal title would remain open to oil, gas and mining development, subject to terms and conditions set out by the aboriginal group (Canadian


Press, 2003). The Agreement also provided for the approval and issuing of licenses for mining and oil and gas exploration and production; the formation of oil and gas advisory bodies within communities; and the formation of an economic development body to manage, administer and delivery funds to allow for participation in economic development opportunities arising from resource development.

“Partnerships between DCFN communities, individual and companies, the private sector and government would be key tools in achieving progress on a wide range of challenges including improved access to capital, skill development and increased experience, increased participation in resource development, increased market access, and an improved infrastructure.” [DCFN and Government of Canada, (2003), Appendix C, p.13]

A settlement agreement between Canada and the Deh Cho announced in July 2005 included the establishment of a Deh Cho Resource Management Authority; consultation by Canada before issuing any authorisations or making any decisions relating to the MGP that might adversely affect their Section 35 rights, and, if appropriate, would accommodate DFN concerns; consultation with the DFN on terms and conditions for new oil and gas exploration in the Deh Cho territory; completion of interim land withdrawal negotiations in the Wrigley area to protect environmentally sensitive areas and identify a pipeline study corridor; implementation of an approved and favourably considered land use plan as soon as possible after the Plan’s completion; C$817,352 guaranteed funding for 2005–2006 would be provided to complete the Deh Cho Land Use Plan; C$15 million in economic development funding over three years to assist the DFN in exploring and developing business opportunities; and C$6 million for participation in the environmental and regulatory process; establishment of a process to monitor and recommend mitigation measures regarding environmental assessment and socio-economic impacts of an approved MGP; and C$10.5 guaranteed funding over three years to increase capacity to complete the Deh Cho Process negotiations in an expedited manner (DCFN and Government of Canada, 2005).

In June 2006, Indian and Northern Affairs Minister Jim Prentice tabled an offer from the Canadian government. The package, the first to be tabled since negotiations opened in 2001 included: C$104 million plus interest, to be paid out to beneficiaries over the next 15 years; a resource-sharing component, consistent with other agreements along the Mackenzie Valley, that would include 12.5% of the first C$2 million and 2.45% of any additional royalties; a land and self-government agreement covering 10,000 square miles; Deh Cho control over surface and subsurface rights, allowing them to set royalty rates and collect 100% of royalties; the right of the Deh Cho to make their own laws (Park, 2006).

5 Oil and gas in the NWT

Interviewees frequently referred to previous boom and bust experiences with historic oil, gas and mining development and to the current impacts of the new David Diamond Mine near Yellowknife, NWT. Some mentioned the death of men in Deline from exposure to radium (yellow cake) when they carried it in sacks from the mine to the barges during the 1940s. A northerner commented, “Deline is called the Village of Widows. Those people who packed the bags like coolies got cancer. The Uranium committee did acknowledge occurrence of cancer is higher than others but weren’t sure what the cause was”.


Non-Aboriginal people claim they were the first to find oil in Norman Wells in 1919, however the Sahtu Dene disagree. Francis Nineeye, one of their members, was the first to find oil. He took a sample and gave this to the Hudson’s Bay Manager in Tulita where it was sent out on the boat. The Dene also guided the geologists exploring the region around Fort Norman. In 1919, the Northwest Company, a subsidiary of Imperial Oil Limited of Canada secured oil claims in the Mackenzie Valley about 50 miles from Norman Wells (roughly half way down the Mackenzie River). The first well was drilled in 1920 [Lloyd, (1944), pp.275–276]. This was the most northern oil well in the world (Bone and Mahnic, 1984). Finnie (1942, pp.413–414) commented that by 1925 Imperial Oil capped several wells that had been drilled and withdrew. They reopened the Norman Field in 1933 to support the world’s largest radium mine at Great Bear Lake and drilled more wells. The new refining equipment enabled it to supply all the demand for oil in the Mackenzie area. Imperial Oil continued drilling for oil in the region and completed a new well in 1942. By 1944, 26 wells located on land traditionally used by the Mountain Dene, near Norman Wells were pumping oil.

The Sahtu discussed previous experiences with building pipelines in their settlement area – the CANOL in the 1940s and the Enbridge pipeline in the mid 1980s. To secure war-time fuel needs, the four-inch diameter CANOL (short for Canadian Oil) pipeline was built during the winter of 1943–1944. It was located over rugged land and mountains from Norman Wells to a refinery in Whitehorse, Yukon. Much of the course was unmapped at the time (see Hopkins, 1943). Meis Mason’s, father-in-law, James D. Mason was a mining geologist who was on the surveying crew. Fred Andrew, an experienced Dene hunter, and Edward Blondin and his son George, both Sahtu, were hired to guide the surveyors and work crews. Although more than 20,000 workers completed the pipeline in less than two years, less than 20% of these were local people. During the CANOL construction, 2,650 kilometres of pipeline were laid; 1,600 kilometres of telephone lines were installed; a road was constructed; and more than C$300 million was spent. The first crude pumped through the pipeline in 1944. Output rose from 266,882 barrels in 1943 to 1,2929,310 barrels in 1944. The Japanese threat ended and other fuel sources were found. In 1944, production at Norman Wells dropped to 353,117 barrels. The pipeline was scrapped in April 1945. Although most of the pipe and pump engines were salvaged, today one can still see remains of pumping stations, camps, bridges, trucks and other equipment. While building the CANOL pipeline, major mistakes occurred such as using too small diameter pipe, laying pipe directly on uneven ground, not addressing the expansion and contraction caused by freeze and thaw cycles which resulted in frequent fractures and spills [Natural Resources Canada, 2005; Auld and Kershaw, (2005), pp.60, 66].

Meis Mason had met with communities leaders in the NWT during 1976 to identify opportunities for Aboriginal entrepreneurship which could result from the proposed Mackenzie Valley Pipeline. In 1977, Chief Justice Berger, after hearing the input from 35 communities and other stakeholders, found the Aboriginal people were not ready for the pipeline’s development and their culture would be destroyed. A moratorium on new oil and gas development in the NWT was declared (Berger, 1977). A Gwich’in leader commented,

“Berger put a 10 year hold to give time to train people to fulfill the employment needs. The monies were there. They got certificates where the jobs were going to be in oil and gas. They then either had to give up as there were no jobs and work in other things or they had to move south where the jobs were.”


This moratorium on the pipeline development held for more than 20 years and during the same period three major land claims were settled.

In 1985, the Enbridge pipeline was built to carry oil from Norman Wells to Zama in northern Alberta. According to several Aboriginal interviewees and Aberle as quoted in CARC (2004), many of the 20,000+ jobs again went to unionised non-Aboriginal employees from the south. Several interviewees mentioned the negative after impacts of the Norman Wells/Enbridge pipeline on their communities such as parents not performing family responsibilities while they were in rotational camps, increased alcohol and drug abuse, gambling, fighting, sexual activity, unwanted pregnancies, and resulting family disruption. While in Norman Wells, the authors were shown the rigs, thirteen man-made islands located in the river built to pump crude oil, and the land cleared for surveying and access roads.

Although the moratorium was in place for pipeline development, oil and gas activity continued in the Beaufort Sea north of Tuktoyaktuk, NWT. A young Aboriginal employee commented, “My mom went back to Tuktoyaktuk last year where she was from. She almost cried. All the changes were not for the good. The pipeline although it will bring jobs will make a lot of damage to the environment and our way of life”.

As of 2001, 183 exploration and 66 development wells had been drilled in Canada’s Beaufort Mackenzie [Brackman and GNWT Department of Resources Wildlife and Economic Development (2001), p.7] region resulting in the discovery of 53 oil and/or gas fields [North/South Consultants and Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre, (2005), p.9].

“Discovered oil reserves [in the NWT] are estimated at 2.8 billion barrels of oil with an undiscovered recoverable resource of up to 10 billion barrels; the estimate for discovered natural gas reserves is almost 11 Tcf, with an ultimate recoverable resource of at least 60 Tcf.” [GNWT, (2006), p.59]

Current natural gas production in the NWT is about 70 million cubic feet per day. Given Canada’s total conventional oil and natural gas proven reserves were estimated at 4.5 billion barrels and 58 Tcf respectively in 2004, the NWT is positioned to play a significant role in the North American market. Although exploration has occurred, oil and gas development is in the early stages. If the MGP were approved, a boom would occur for about three years but would then open the door to future economic development.

In July 1999, the NWT Government and Trans Canada Pipeline (TCP) signed a Memorandum of Understanding which identified an alignment of interests and a mutual desire to encourage the timely development of the natural gas reserves of the NWT and the construction of an economic, competitively priced, natural gas transmission infrastructure. In February 2000, four of Canada’s largest energy companies – Imperial Oil Resources Limited, Shell Canada Limited, Mobil Oil Canada and Gulf Canada Resources Limited – launched a joint study into the feasibility of developing and transporting Mackenzie Delta gas though a pipeline to southern markets.

The land claim settlements following the Berger decision provided the financial resources for Aboriginal business development. This combined with the decision of Aboriginal leaders to participate in the market economy led to the formation, in 2000, of the Aboriginal Pipeline Group (APG). This enterprise was created to represent interests of the Aboriginal people of the NWT in the proposed MGP. APG became a full participant in the MGP in June 2003 (APG, 2004a, 2004b). Cattaneo (2004) writing in the National Post, reported that APG and the corporations had agreed that APG would receive an annual dividend of C$1.8 million for the next 20 years if no new reserves were


found and the pipeline carried 800 million cubic feet of natural gas a day, increasing to C$8.1 million after 20 years, when the debt would be paid off. If significant reserves were found and the pipeline was able to move 1.5 billion cubic feet a day, APG would receive an annual dividend of C$21.2 million, increasing to C$125.8 million after 20 years. APG would also have a say in the pipeline’s development and receive the highest possible Aboriginal participation in its construction and operation.

The Deh Cho regional and Aboriginal leadership originally refused to participate in APG because of concerns it would jeopardise their self-government and land management negotiations. They also wanted to ensure they received maximum benefits out of such a big project. Grand Chief Herb Norwegian explained:

“We have lived in these lands since time immemorial. We are the rightful owners, and this pipeline should not be pushed against our will. The Deh cho are not against the project itself. We want to ensure our land claims and rights to taxation are in place first. If it is controlled, it would be a positive thing in our territory. We have completed a Land Use Plan for our entire territory of 220,000 square kilometres. We have been working at it for the past five years. Our people adopted it this past summer. Once we had a Land Use Plan, this becomes the rules of engagement and terms of conditions of how oil and gas development will take place… Forty-eight percent of the Deh cho territory will be protected one way or another under the land use plan. The other half is open for development. We are taking a balanced approach. The Land Use Plan has not been finalized yet as it has to be approved by Canada. This was a three-way joint venture between Deh cho, GNWT and Canada. It will probably take a year or so to be finalized in Ottawa.” (Norwegian, 2006)

While negotiating for almost three years, the corporations actively courted APG. They considered APG’s participation key to a successful project. The corporate attitude was very different from that at the time of the Berger Inquiry. All the parties sought a business-to-business relationship of equals. APG’s inability to finance their share of the C$250 million cost for the project’s first phase caused a delay. It needed to raise C$80 million but the Canadian government refused to help. APG turned to the private sector and TCP agreed to loan APG the money, which was to be repaid later from pipeline revenues. As an illustration of the potential impact, the Sahtu Dene Council created the Sahtu Pipeline Trust to hold their shares in APG for SLCA beneficiaries. Over the 25 year life of the project, the partnership could be worth as much as C$300 million to the Sahtu (APG, 2004).

In October 2004, Imperial Oil Resources Ventures Limited applied to the NEB for approval to construct and operate the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline which is part of the MGP. The application was filed on behalf of the owners of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline – Imperial Oil Resources Limited, the Mackenzie Valley Aboriginal Pipeline Limited Partnership, ConocoPhillips Canada (North) Limited, Shell Canada Limited and Exxon Canada Properties.

On January 25th, 2006, the NEB started public hearings to review the application’s economic, safety, and technical issues. Two weeks later, on February 14th, a seven-member JRP commenced parallel hearings into environmental, socio-economic and cultural issues. The Inuvialuit, Sahtu and the Gwich’in had representatives on the JRP. As owners of the APG, their relationship with government was similar to that of their non-Aboriginal corporate partners, namely a relationship of applicant to regulator.

Consultation and communications were a high priority for the Aboriginal groups. They provided funding and information to communities and groups to assist in


understanding the stakeholders’ perspectives and to ensure their voices were heard during the community consultations. According to Cournoyea,

“Many people use that specific area. It is good for geese and caribou. Through the hearings, we want to minimize the impact […] The people will decide whether they will support it or not. Or the joint panel will decide. Everyone has made their concerns known at the hearings. We helped finance some of the organizations so they are prepared to make representations. So people will have a chance to speak in Inuvik and Aklavik and the outlying communities. It is ongoing until the hearings are concluded. It is as thorough as possible so people had a chance to speak.”

A huge burden was placed on already limited resources, time and people. Consultation was very important because many of the Aboriginal cultures used consensual decision making processes. Furthermore, traditional knowledge was an important consideration in examining social, environmental and economic impacts. An oil company representative at the hearings said, “They can voice their concerns to us. We can hear their concerns and can mitigate these. Thousands of hours of consultations in the communities. By hearing their concerns, better us than the government”.

Aboriginal interviewees mentioned they had gathered information from Indigenous groups around the world to identify concerns and issues which should be considered when negotiating the impact and benefit agreements. Umbrella organisations such as the Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) and the Gwich’in International Council (GIC) were also mentioned. The ICC founded in 1977 had grown into a major international NGO representing approximately 150,000 Inuit of Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Chukotka (Russia). The organisation held Consultative Status II at the United Nations (ICC website). The GCI was established as an NGO in 1999 by the GTC in Inuvik, NWT, to ensure all regions of the Gwich’in Nation in the NWT, Yukon and Alaska were represented at the Arctic Council. The GCI played an active and significant role in the development of policies that relate to the Circumpolar Arctic (Gwitch’in Council International, n.d.).

The JRP concluded public hearings on November 29, 2007. This public hearing phase was extensive: 115 formal hearing days, more than 5,000 written submissions, 40 days of informal sessions, 75 days of technical hearings and over 11,000 pages of transcripts. The JRP had travelled to 27 northern communities to hold its hearings [MGP Exchange, (2008), p.1]. The JRP delivered its report and recommendations in December 2009. The panel recognised,

“The Mackenzie Gas Project (MGP) offers a unique opportunity for a sustainable future in the Mackenzie Valley and Beaufort Delta regions. The Project itself, as a long term infrastructure provides a key basis for future economic development. This opportunity carries the risk of adverse impacts, however…” (JRP, 2009)

The pipeline received conditional approval to go-ahead but there were numerous recommendations which had to be fully met. Various parties reviewed the report and made submissions to the National Energy Board for hearings which began in April 2010. The NEB said the pipeline could conditionally go ahead as long as 264 conditions were met. The federal cabinet of Canada gave its approval in March 2011. The NEB then issued the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. The NEB gave the companies until the end of 2013 to decide whether to go ahead with the project. Even


with the NEB approval, local boards and authorities in the affected communities and settlement areas will still need to grant permits to the companies for land and water use.

6 Aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development initiatives

The Aboriginal land claims settlement agreements play an important role in setting the stage for entrepreneurship and economic development. They provide for the Aboriginal groups: clarity of rights to ownership and use of land and resources; specific rights and benefits in exchange for the relinquishment by the Aboriginal group of certain rights claimed in any part of Canada by treaty or otherwise; recognition and encouragement of the way of life which is based on the cultural and economic relationship between them and the land; encouragement of self-sufficiency to enhance their ability to participate fully in all aspects of the economy; specific benefits including financial compensation, land and other economic benefits; wildlife harvesting rights and the right to participate in decision making concerning wildlife harvesting and management (usually interpreted to include fish, birds, animals, insects, plants, etc.); the right to participate in decision making concerning the uses, management and conservation of land, water and resources; protection and conservation of the wildlife and environment of the settlement area for present and future generations; opportunity to negotiate self-government agreements; receipt of financial payments over a number of years; share in royalties from resource development paid to Canada’s governments; confirmation of hunting and fishing rights throughout the settlement area; and establishment of their exclusive trapping rights. The agreements also guaranteed compensation for damages to wildlife and wildlife habitats, including impacts to future economic use of wildlife resources.

Each Aboriginal group with land claim settlements in the NWT had formed Regional Corporations to receive the lands and financial compensation and to manage the affairs of the settlement. Each Aboriginal group had also established a Development Corporation to ensure separation of the business aspects from government or political intervention and to enable eligibility for particular tax benefits and government grants.

For example, the Inuvialuit Development Corporation (IDC) was created, “…to enable the Inuvialuit equal and meaningful participation in the Western Arctic, circumpolar, and national economies. [In pursuing this objective, IDC says it will] build and protect a diversified asset base, generate financial returns, create employment, and increase skills and development among the Inuvialuit.” [ICG, (1998), p.1].

While some of its businesses ran into difficulties and a few failed, most were profitable. IDC created or acquired over 30 companies operating in eight sectors – technology and communications, health and hospital services, environmental services, property management, manufacturing, transportation, northern services and real estate development. They developed partnerships and joint ventures with key companies from southern Canada involved in pipeline construction and servicing, accommodations, construction, logistics, and transport. These companies operated in the north, throughout southern Canada and internationally. Many of these corporate partners were non-Indigenous companies with international reputations.

The Gwich’in Development Corporation (GDC) was established to pursue commercial opportunities that would earn an acceptable rate of return on its investment.


It is 100% owned by the GTC. In addition, the GDC promoted the training and employment of its membership in the operation of these businesses. All businesses were operated in an environmentally friendly manner. The net investment portfolio was valued at $16.9 million as of December 31, 2005. The investment portfolio is diversified by industry, including holdings in construction (40%), energy development (4%), real estate (52%) and transportation (4%). The companies included: Mackenzie Valley Construction Limited (51%), Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation (51%), Gwich’in Ensign Oilfield Services Inc. (51%), Mackenzie Valley Aboriginal Pipeline Corporation (33%), Camp MKG (25%), and Gwich’in Helicopters Limited (51%). This latter partnership will also assist in training youth for careers in the helicopter business as pilots, engineers and ground crews as the company is the largest operator in the NWT and the third largest in Western Canada [GTC, (2006), pp.50–51].

All Aboriginal groups had committed significant time, resources and energy in researching and defining the specific terms and conditions under which each could support a MGP project and the necessary mitigation and remediation measures.

Where possible, they were already negotiating land access and benefits agreements with the pipeline proponents. One of the biggest environmental concerns from the proposed MGP was the way the land would be dealt with. Concerns were raised about permafrost and muskeg, biodiversity sensitivity, waste disposal, abandoned equipment, and the negative impact of bare seismic survey lines and access roads on the wildlife. An Aboriginal leader commented,

“For the hearings, they have already prepared all the responses and scenarios. They have spent millions. Project is worth billions. The workshops and meetings are on prepared documents. We have to fall in line with their guidelines. Otherwise, the oil and gas companies will stall.”

They also mentioned that as soon as their concerns were raised, the proponents had already considered them and would pull out a binder to show how the concern would be addressed and mitigated.

All Aboriginal groups wished to participate in businesses constructing and servicing the pipeline over the initial three winter seasons of the project. After that time about 50 people in each settlement region would be employed in jobs associated with operating and maintaining the pipeline. In the long-term to keep the pipeline full, the Inuvialuit will gain the most from future explorations and development on their lands and waters including the Beaufort Delta and Arctic Ocean.

According to Cournoyea, “Economically that’s the balance we have to create – if people want to go to work and train for positions to sustain their family. If you don’t have a job, you are living off a government subsidy that is not good for the people. It ends up being too dependent. People get disenchanted with themselves.”

Interviewees mentioned that the northern businesses had already begun stockpiling supplies and equipment in the NWT communities in anticipation of the MGP’s approval. An Aboriginal leader commented,

“Small business has been gearing up for the contracts for the equipment and the suppliers. It’s delayed two years. No work. They can’t afford the delays. Smaller companies also can’t get the work. The big companies then ask us to be a partner so they can use our name for their supplies.”


The authors were driven to see some storage areas. Inuvik had expanded its hotel accommodation in anticipation of the increased business traffic. A northern mayor commented,

“Certainly seen a huge amount of local development in the Inuvik because people have been getting ready for the pipeline. For a town of 3500 people, we have 350 hotel rooms and most of those brand new. It just doesn’t happen. Communities down south have hotel accommodations of 50 for a town of 3500.”

For Aboriginal and northern businesses to develop and participate meaningfully in the regional economic development activities associated with the MGP, their people needed to have access to opportunities as they arise. Agreements for cooperation, participation, and access as well as and permits issued by the Inuvialuit, Sahtu Dene and Gwich’in self-governing bodies should establish priority access to procurement opportunities for Aboriginal businesses owned by their beneficiaries. Between 2000 and 2002, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the Government Regulatory Agencies and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) and Northern Oil and Gas Directorate partnered with the various Aboriginal settlement corporations to develop regulatory roadmaps for oil and gas exploration and development in the NWT. These will facilitate sustainable economic development in the North by helping companies fulfil the regulatory requirements that safeguard human health and safety, protect the environment and encourage economic benefits particularly as both the authorities and the processes for regulating these activities are relatively new (Regulatory Roadmaps Project, 2004). Separate Aboriginal Business Registries had been developed for the beneficiaries of each settlement agreement. For example, IRC reported that the Inuvialuit Business Registry offered a distinct advantage in the contracting business. Since the return of the oil and gas industry in the winter of 1999/2000, approximately 70% of all contracts went to Inuvialuit businesses [IRC, (2006), p.14]. The NWT Government had also established a registry of northern businesses. The Government of Canada had supported Aboriginal business initiatives by creating the Aboriginal Business Council, an Aboriginal Business Procurement Strategy, and a national registry of Aboriginal businesses and by holding public workshops about the benefits and operational features.

Aboriginal businesses in the NWT communities the MGP would run through were remote, small and relatively new. The Inuvialuit were seen as the exception because their land claim had been settled earlier and they had more experience with the Beaufort Delta development. Many interviewees suggested that procurement contracts needed to be broken into smaller pieces thus enabling the participation of the small northern Aboriginal businesses. Partnerships with southern businesses would allow for meeting experience and bonding requirements as well as provide managerial expertise.

Aboriginal interests in the pipeline were focused in three primary areas: economic opportunity, social impact, and environmental protection. Interviewees were particularly concerned about sustainability. Many were concerned about the short term boom and bust of three year construction phase and the longer term impacts on their communities. They felt the MGP operators and companies associated with the construction phase should help address many social issues: such as alcohol and drug abuse; poor personal financial management; aboriginal sensitivity; spousal, child or elder abuse; family isolation while in camps; and increased demands for housing, social and medical services which were already in short supply. An Aboriginal interviewee commented,


“Money comes into the community which is good. However, drugs and alcohol come in from the south, and our own people are selling them. The family falls apart and this hurts the community. The young people can receive training but if they have alcohol and drug problems they won’t be employed. The pipeline companies need to help us prepare – people can’t just change overnight.”

Oil and gas development cannot be seen in isolation. Aboriginal and community groups were concerned about adjacent, community, regional and cumulative impacts. Cizek (2005) prepared A Choice of Futures: Cumulative Impact Scenarios of the Mackenzie Project which used GIS mapping to show scenarios to 2,053 or 2,059 based on total gas deliverability forecasts of the pipeline. Also, several interviewees mentioned the pipeline would be competing for skilled personnel against the developing diamond industry in the NWT.

The Inuvialuit began working on the Beaufort Sea Integrated Management Planning Initiative in 1999. Consultations were held with communities including representation from committees of elders, youth, hunters and trappers as well as community corporations. Concurrently, consultations were held with industry and industry organisations representing oil and gas, shipping, marine and air transport, and tourism. Finally, other government departments and other governments were engaged such as Departments of Transportation, Renewable Resources, Marine Coast Guard, Environment Canada, the Yukon Government and the GNWT (Elliott and Spek, 2004; Fast et al., 2005). A northern mayor commented,

“Ensure that people can participate fully. Ensure people that need to be trained get the training. Increase their level of literacy or their job skills to enter the job market. Currently $10 million by the federal government was put into a fund for oil and gas and mining readiness training that has been given to the Aboriginal groups.”

All Aboriginal groups were up-grading beneficiaries’ knowledge and skills so they would qualify for jobs in pipeline construction and maintenance, exploration, drilling and environmental monitoring. The groups had undertaken human resource assessments of individuals within their communities. Also, adults and youths had been encouraged to complete high school with the appropriate math, science, literacy and other essential skills. Aurora College had provided upgrading programmes for adults which they could access in their home communities. This allowed northerners to stay with their families and also their communities benefited from projects which constructed buildings, bridges, and roads.

The Pipeline Operations Training Committee (POTC) was formed in 2002 to develop and implement training programmes thus preparing Aboriginal and other northern workers for the long-term employment opportunities associated with the MGP project. The committee was made up of representatives from APG; the construction industry; Aurora College; the pipeline proponents; Canada’s Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development; GNWT’s Departments of Education, Culture and Employment and Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development; along with the following: Northern Student Education Initiative; Aboriginal Human Resource Development Strategy Delivery Agents; IRC; DCFN; Sahtu Dene Council; and GTC (POTC, 2004). The POTC developed a Training and Employment Framework including job descriptions, competency profiles, and several targeted technical training programmes for operation or maintenance personnel, heavy-duty mechanics, electricians, instrumentation and millwrights. Cooperation agreements between Aurora College in the NWT and technical


institutions in Alberta enabled qualified Aboriginal students graduating from the POTC to enrol seamlessly in two year technical programmes.

The GTC, after negotiating the Access and Benefits Agreements, used the monies received from the agreements to establish an Education Fund and Business Capacity Fund, and to put more money into education and wellness programmes.

An Aboriginal leader said, “Even though oil and gas companies put their employment strategy on a website with future employment requirements and future contract requirements, the small business people and the one person company will need to have access to technology. Aboriginal organizations will have to be out in the communities, teaching people and also providing computers.”

The Inuvialuit established a partnership with Bow Valley College in Alberta (a leading assessor and provider of work place essential skills) to provide a Work Place Readiness programme which would help their beneficiaries gain and keep employment through in-class and on-the-job training. Between 2004 and 2006, the Inuvialuit had accessed about $4 million from the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Agreement for education upgrading and career readiness training.

The Deh Cho had been preparing for several years to maximise their opportunities to participate in the economic benefits of the MGP project and future exploration, drilling and production. According to Grand Chief Norwegian,

“Participation is always key. You want to make sure your young people are well prepared to take on these opportunities. When they actually are taking place in your back yard or home land, you want to be in the driving edge of that. Key is to get involved.”

Their preparation had begun in 2002 with about 50 DCFN leaders attending a two-day workshop Aboriginal Oil and Gas Management. Regional staff from the GNWT Departments of Education, Culture and Employment, and Resources Wildlife and Economic Development also attended. Topics included: petroleum geology, GNWT career development programmes and services; mineral rights in the North, northern industry economics, regulating the northern seismic project; finding and producing oil and gas; producing operations in the North; northern public safety, cultural and environmental aspects; northern lands administration; northern royalties; joint venture agreements; and northern employment and business opportunities in oil and gas (GNWT Department of Education, Culture and Employment, Wildlife and Economic Development, 2002). The Deh Cho had some small businesses but these were still in their early stages. They also had a Business Development Center (BDC) which used funding provided by the GNWT Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development. In May 2004, the Deh Cho BDC offered a three-day oil and gas conference featuring an overview of the natural gas industry, three small business workshops, presentations from industry representatives regarding pipeline-related opportunities and funding organisations provided descriptions of services for small business in the region [DCBDC, (2005), p.5].

The Petroleum Human Resources Sector Council of Canada, a national NGO, consisted of 11 oil and gas national and regional industry organisations and one union. Their consultations with a variety of stakeholders from industry, government, unions, education and training providers and diversity serving agencies resulted in A Strategic Human Resources Study of the Upstream Petroleum Industry: The Decade Ahead


(Petroleum Human Resources Sector Council of Canada, 2004). With specific reference to Northern development and the Alberta Oil Sands, the report indicated the North was in a startup phase of the industry cycle. If the MGP project did go ahead, key focuses for industry and local communities would be to minimise the boom and bust economic impact for the region and to ensure employment for Aboriginal peoples. They recommended attracting and providing access to employment for non-traditional workers such as women, Aboriginal peoples, and new immigrants. The sometimes difficult progression from education and training to long-term employment needed to be better understood and managed. Other suggestions included:

1 increasing the appreciation of the differences in Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultures

2 targeting prerequisite and bridging programmes to meet the occupational needs of the region as well as the needs of Aboriginal peoples

3 portraying role models and providing mentors

4 providing more information about careers and entry-level requirements

5 encouraging students to obtain prerequisite high school courses such as mathematics and science

6 engaging in local labour market development and planning to fulfil regulatory commitments.

The study also pointed out that Aboriginal peoples as well as Northern residents would likely be key resources as they were already acclimated and were located geographically nearby. Industry needed to continue striving for lasting partnerships with Aboriginal communities to support the creation of related business development such as service industry.

The Status of Women Council of the Northwest Territories (SWC) was an NGO which acted as an advisory agency to the NWT government. It promoted the political, economic and social equality of women in the NWT. In 2005, there were 20,889 females in the NWT; women were 48.7% of the NWT population; 24.5% of NWT females were under age 15; and women were 46.7% of all NWT workers. The Council’s six Directors lived in six communities along the Mackenzie River. SWC also had an Elders Council.

“In the past, women in NWT communities have experienced bad effects from oil and gas, mining and other resource development projects. Women have also received very few benefits from these projects. The Status of Women Council believes that if women have a voice in decisions about development projects, there will be less risk of past mistakes being repeated in the future.” [SWC, (2006b), p.1].

They recommended the JRP apply the precautionary approach in evaluating information in the Environmental Impact Statement regarding residual effects on community wellness conditions. “Even though we may not be able to prove for certain there is a serious risk, we should still make cautious decisions” [SWC, (2006a), p.1]. SWV also recommended that gender-based analysis be applied to all socio-economic impact assessment, public participation, and monitoring information received. In addition, they were concerned that the consultation and decision making processes were biased towards males and women’s concerns were not taken seriously. SWC felt men in business would likely be favoured


with regard to business opportunities/procurement. Northern business women could provide many services to camps such as workshops, counselling, financial management training, and conflict resolution training. However, capacity supports for developing businesses and company procurement decision processes were geared towards men as well as non-locals. In 2005, SWC received C$1.7 million from Human Resources and Social Development Canada under the Pan-Canadian Innovations Initiative for the Northern Women in Mining and Oil and Gas Project to increase the attraction, training and retention of women for trades and industry opportunities in mining, oil and gas (SWC, 2005).

In summary, the many communities along the MGP had very little infrastructure and economic development compared to those in southern Canada. Infrastructure that had been developed to support the military and reinforce Canada’s sovereignty was aging; experiencing reduced funding; and was inadequate to support future growth. Many people expressed concerns about providing a future for the young people and increasing self-reliance by moving away from dependency on transfer and welfare payments which removed the peoples’ pride. They felt the Aboriginal groups were ready and able to participate as equals in this new economy. The MGP, if approved subject to conditions which would enhance the benefits and mitigate the negative and adverse impacts, would provide the foundation for a sustainable future.

7 Implications

Indigenous entrepreneurship is an emerging field. This topic is relevant and timely as resources of many circumpolar regions are largely untapped. With increasing world demand for resources, more economic development projects involving Indigenous people are likely to occur. Because many Indigenous people are close to the land and have a holistic world view; environment, economic, and social development are closely intertwined and cannot be separated. With heritage entrepreneurship, they are seeking or have gained ownership and control of their resources. Sustainable development requires a balance between the needs of people, nature’s other species and future generations. Sustainability is also about recognising and working with limits and complex interconnections and interdependencies. Concepts such as cumulative, adjacent and regional impacts; incorporating externalities; precautionary principles; mitigation, risk minimisation and remediation; intergenerational equity; interconnected and nested layers of ecosystems; environmental, socio-economic and cultural impacts; as well as human diversity need to be addressed.

Much has changed over the past 40 years. First, many land claims have been settled. Second, as a result of these settlements, Aboriginal organisations that emerged have the right to choose whether to engage (or not to engage) in the market economy. Third, companies are prepared – maybe even eager – to have the Aboriginal groups participate as equal equity partners in the MGP. Nellie Cournoyea, Chair of the IRC, expressed this new business climate as, the biggest change since the 1970s. The oil and gas industry realises aboriginal people are an integral part of development, and that they must receive a fair share of resource revenue and have the opportunity to invest directly in pipelines and offshoot businesses (Bergman, 2000). Fred Carmichael, President of the GTC and Chairman of the APG summed it all up by saying “We’re ready”, at the opening of the NEB Hearings (Jaremko, 2006). In Canada, self-government and land claim agreements


have been very powerful in giving Indigenous people the rights, capital and resource ownership. Thus, they are able to come to the table as equal partners. For other countries, The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (2006), The World Bank Policy on Indigenous People BP4.10 (World Bank, 2005) and the ILO 169 have also been helpful.

Global information sharing has played a key role in shaping the consultations, actions and impact and benefit agreements negotiated. Advances in internet and communications technology have enabled not only the powerful multinational oil and gas companies but also the Aboriginal groups and communities to rapidly share information. Indigenous groups, governments and civil sectors have also benefited from global historic and current experiences with resource development.

Both collective/cooperative/community and private/individual approaches to entrepreneurship and economic development were observed. A commonly held belief is that collective or community approaches hinder Aboriginal economic success while private/individual approaches are more efficient. Aboriginal governments had created separate business development companies that had been or were in the process of becoming successful. Many partnerships and joint ventures had been established with non-Aboriginal companies with global experience to derive benefit. The Aboriginal groups had joined together and taken a shareholder position in the pipeline project which allowed for a say in the development and longer term benefits.

Aboriginal groups had embarked on education and training for occupations related to the pipeline. After gaining work experience, this would allow individuals to grow their own business enterprises. Partnerships with the oil and gas companies were important in forecasting and identifying occupational needs and establishing creative workplace and post secondary training programmes. They had also established regulations to enhance entrepreneurial participation. With the creation of business services centres, credit services for small businesses, translation of small business materials into Aboriginal languages, and training programmes; Aboriginal enterprise start-up and success rates should improve. Placing this resource material on the internet has also expanded awareness and accessibility in remote communities.

This research also suggests the role of women in development, and in particular Indigenous women, could be enhanced further. Women could actively participate in opportunities arising from the pipeline if they were provided with information, involvement and consultation opportunities, education, technical and vocational skills training, small business advisory services, and credit granting opportunities. Government and business can play important roles in legitimising women’s concerns and supporting women’s efforts to engage in entrepreneurship and economic development. In addition, longitudinal research is necessary to track the effectiveness and impacts of policies and programmes targeted towards Aboriginal peoples and women.

Future research still needs to be community specific and qualitative thus providing a set of principles and ideas in how to best approach entrepreneurship and economic development. It will be important to establish holisitic impact measures so that longitudinal research can follow up on the economic, environmental and social impacts over time.


Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the many residents of the Northwest Territories and Alberta who participated in the interviews for this research. Funding was provided by Royal Dutch Shell International and the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

References Aboriginal Pipeline Group (APG) (2004a) ‘Aboriginal Pipeline Group [brochure]’, Aboriginal

Pipeline Group, Inuvik. Aboriginal Pipeline Group (APG) (2004b) The Aboriginal Pipeline Group: An Exceptional Deal, a

presentation to the Senate Standing Committee on Energy, 8 March 2004, available at http://www.mvapg.com/media/docs/an-exceptional-deal.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2011).

Adamson, R. and King, J. (2002) ‘The native entrepreneurship report’, First Nations Development Institute, Freerocksburg, VA.

Anderson, R.B., Honig, B.H. and Peredo, A.M. (2007) ‘Communities in the global economy: where social and indigenous entrepreneurship meet’, in Steyaert, C. and Hjorth, D. (Eds.): Entrepreneurship as Social Change, pp.56–78, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

Auld, J. and Kershaw, R. (2005) ‘Fur trade’, in Auld, J. and Kershaw, R. (Eds.): The Sahtu Atlas: Maps and Stories from the Sahtu Settlement Area in Canada’s Northwest Territories, p.6, Sahtu GIS Project 2005, Norman Wells, NWT.

Berger, T. (1977) The Probable Economic Impact of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline in the Arduous Journey: Canadian Indians and Decolonization, edited by Ponting, J.R., McClelland and Stewart, Toronto.

Bergman, B. (2000) ‘From new pipe dreams’, MacLeans, 17 July, p.34. Bone, R.M. and Mahnic, R.J. (1984) ‘Norman Wells: the oil center of the Northwest Territories’,

Arctic, March, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp.53–60. Brackman, C. and Government of Northwest Territories (GNWT) Department of Resources,

Wildlife and Economic Development (2001) Northwest Territories Petroleum Industry, Northwest Territories Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development.

Canadian Arctic Resources Committee (CARC) (2004) ‘Pipelines past’, Northern Perspectives, Summer, Vol. 29, Nos. 1 and 2.

Canadian Press (2003) ‘Natives sign land deal’, Regina Leader Post, 19 April, p.D7. Cattaneo, C. (2004) National Post, 26 July, Ont., p.FP.1, Don Mills. Cizek, P. (2005) A Choice of Futures: Cumulative Impact Scenarios of the Mackenzie Gas Project,

Prepared for Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, available at http://www.carc.org/2005/ A%20CHOICE%20OF%20FUTURES%20final.pdf (accessed 24 October 2005)..

Cornell, S. and Kalt, J.P. (2003) ‘Sovereignty and nation-building: the development challenges in Indian country today’, Journal of Aboriginal Economic Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp.86–100.

Cournoyea, N. (2006) In interview, 25 October 2006. De Bruin, A. and Mataira, P. (2003) ‘Indigenous entrepreneurship’, in De Bruin, A. and Dupuis, A.

(Eds.): Entrepreneurship a New Perspective in a Global Age, pp.169–182, Ashgate Publishing Company Burlington, USA.

Deh Cho Business Development Centre (DCBDC) (2005) ‘Dehcho Business Development Centre Annual Report 2004–2005’, available at http://www.dehchobdc.ca/Main/About/ DCBDC%20annual%20reports/Annual%20Report%202004%20-%202005.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2011).


Deh Cho First Nation (DCFN) and Government of Canada (2003) Interim Resource Development Agreement, Appendix C, available at http://www.dehcho.org/documents/agreements/ dehchoirda_e.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2011).

Deh Cho First Nations (DCFN) and Government of Canada (2005) ‘News release and backgrounder’, Government of Canada and Deh Cho First Nations Reach Agreement, 11 July, available at http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/aiarch/mr/nr/m-a2005/2-02689-eng.asp (accessed on 16 December 2011).

Elliott, G. and Spek, B. (2004) ‘Integrated management planning in the Beaufort Sea: blending natural and social science in a settled land claim area’, available at http://sampaa. org/publications/conference-proceedings-1991-2000/2003-proceedings/collaboration-across-boundaries-1/Elliott%20and%20Spek%202004.pdf/view (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Fast, H., Chiperzak, D., Cott, K. and Elliott, G.M. (2005) ‘Integrated management planning in Canada’s Western Arctic: an adaptive consultation process’, available at http://www.umanitoba.ca/institutes/natural_resources/canadaresearchchair/Fast,%20Chiperzak,%20Cott%20&%20Elliott%20Chap%205.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2007).

Finnie, R. (1942) ‘A route through the Northwest Territories’, Geographical Review, July, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp.403–416.

Frederick, H.H. and Foley, D. (2006) ‘Indigenous populations as disadvantaged entrepreneurs in Australia and New Zealand’, The International Indigenous Journal of Entrepreneurship, Advancement, Strategy and Education, pp.1–16, available at http://www.indigenousjournal. com/IIJEASVolIIIss2Frederick.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) (2006) Energy for the Future: An Energy Plan for the Northwest Territories, Industry, Tourism and Investment and Environment and Natural Resources, available at http://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/energy/pdf/Whitepaper.pdf.

Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) Department of Education, Culture and Employment, Wildlife and Economic Development (2002) Oil and Gas Update, September, Vol. 1, No. 8, available at http://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/publications/2007/MiningOilGas/oilgas_ update2002.pdf (last accessed 16 December 2011).

Gwich’in Tribal Council (GTC) (2006) ‘Gwich’in Tribal Council annual report 2005–2006 – ownership for us all’.

Gwitch’in Council International (n.d.) ‘About the Gwitch’in Council International’, available at http://www.gwichin.org/.

Hansen, O.H. and Langhelle, O. (2008) ‘Framework and methodology: regulation and discourse analysis as a research strategy’, in Mikkelsen, A. and Langhelle, O. (Eds.): Social Issues and Sustainable Development in the Arctic: Challenges for the Emerging Oil and Gas Industry, Taylor and Francis, Routledge.

Hindle, K. and Lansdowne, M. (2002) ‘Brave spirits on new paths: toward a globally relevant paradigm of indigenous entrepreneurship research’, Proceedings of the 22rd Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Babson College, Babson Park, Mass., pp.1–29, available from Deakin Research at http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30029649 (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Hindle, K. and Lansdowne, M. (2007) ‘Brave spirits on new paths: toward a globally relevant paradigm of Indigenous entrepreneurship research’, in Dana, L-P. and Anderson, R.B. (Eds.): International Handbook of Research in Indigenous Entrepreneurship, pp.8–19, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

Hindle, K. and Moroz, P. (2010) ‘Indigenous entrepreneurship as a research field: developing a definitional framework from the emerging canon’, International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, Vol. 6, pp.357–385, available at http://www.springerlink.com/ content/2270530x07w1207g/fulltext.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Hopkins, O.B. (1943) ‘The ‘Canol’ project’, Canadian Geographical Journal, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp.238–249.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) (1992) The Gwich’in (Denis/Métis) Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement, available at http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/info/info22_e.html.


International Labour Organization (ILO) (2009) ‘Indigenous & tribal peoples rights in practice’, available at http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---normes/documents/ publication/wcms_106474.pdf"www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---normes/documents/publication/wcms_106474.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2011).

International Labour Organization (ILO) (2011) ‘C169, Convention concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries, 1989’, available at http://www.collectionscanada. gc.ca/webarchives/20071115152303/http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/agr/gwich/gwic/index_ e.html (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Inuvialuit Corporate Group (ICG) (1998) ‘Inuvialuit Corporate Group: 1997 annual report’, Inuvialuit Corporate Group, Inuvik.

Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC) (2006) ‘Board summary and newsletter’, March/April, p.14, available at http://www.irc.inuvialuit.com/publications/pdf/2006-01%20March.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2006).

Jaremko, G. (2006) ‘Bring on the pipeline, job-starved Arctic says’, The Edmonton Journal, 26 January, available at http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=b15a83f5-ec58-4070-baae-0a7c9d9871a9&k=78474 (accessed on 16 December 2011).

Joint Review Panel (JRP) (2009) ‘Foundation for a sustainable Northern future: report of the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project’, available at http://www.ngps.nt.ca/PDFs/JRP_ report_ExecutiveSummary_E.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2010).

Lindsay, N., Lindsay, W. and Jordann, A. (2005) ‘Toward an inclusive theory of opportunity recognition: nascent indigenous entrepreneur attitudes toward opportunity recognition’, in Gillin, L.M. (Ed.): Regional Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 2005: Proceedings of the Second Annual AGSE International Research Exchange Regional, The Australian Graduate School of Entrepreneurship Hawthorne, Australia, pp.78–298.

Lloyd, T. (1944) ‘Oil in the Mackenzie Valley’, Geographical Review, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp.275–307. Lloyd, T. (1944) ‘Oil in the Mackenzie Valley’, Geographical Review, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp.275–307. Mackenzie Gas Project (MGP) (2005) ‘Pipeline of opportunity [information kit]’,

‘Overview: gathering system pipeline construction [brochure]’, ‘Surface facilities [brochure]’, ‘Pipeline of opportunity: the project [CD]’. construction [brochure]’, ‘Surface facilities [brochure]’, ‘Pipeline of opportunity: the project [CD]’, produced by Esso Imperial Oil, APG, ConoccoPhillips, Shell Canada and Exxon Mobil, available at http://www.mackenziegasproject.com (accessed on 16 December 2011).

Mackenzie Gas Project (MGP) Exchange (2008) ‘Joint Review Panel hearings phase concludes’, The MGP Exchange, February, No. 14, available at http://www.mackenziegasproject.com/ moreInformation/upload/MGPNewsletter_2008_Final.pdf (accessed on 2 April 2008).

North/South Consultants and Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre (2005) ‘Marine ecosystem overview of the Beaufort Sea Large Ocean Management Area (LOMA)’, March, prepared for Fisheries and Oceans Canada, available at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/320674.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2011).

Norwegian, H. (2006) Interview on 2 November 2006. Park, G. (2006) ‘Dealing with the Deh Cho: Canada tables offer to end Mac conflict; prentice

positive, Deh Cho hesitant’, Petroleum News, Vol. 11, No. 24, week of 11 June 2006, available at http://www.petroleumnews.com/ pnarchpop/060611-02.html (accessed on 15 December 2011).

Peredo, A.M. and Anderson, R.B. (2006) ‘Indigenous entrepreneurship research: themes and variations’, in Galbraith, C.S. and Stiles, C.H. (Eds.): Developmental Entrepreneurship: Adversity, Risk, and Isolation, pp.253–273, Elsevier, Oxford, UK.

Peredo, A.M., Anderson, R.B., Galbraith, C.S., Honig, B. and Dana, L.P. (2004) ‘Towards a theory of indigenous entrepreneurship’, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 1, Nos. 1–2, pp.1–20, available at http://inderscience.metapress.com/content/ NG7KKUTN74X327CX (accessed on 15 December 2011).


Petroleum Human Resources Sector Council of Canada (2003) ‘A strategic human resources study of the upstream petroleum industry: the decade ahead’, available at http://www.petrohrsc.ca/ media/5257/the-decade-ahead-final-2004.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Pipeline Operations Training Committee (POTC) (2004) ‘Pipeline and operations training [poster]’, available at http://www.mackenziegasproject.com/moreInformation/upload/POTC%20Ad1. pdf (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Regulatory Roadmaps Project (2004) ‘Oil and gas approvals in the Northwest Territories: Inuvialuit Settlement Region, Sahtu Settlement Area, Gwich’in Settlement Area, Southern Mackenzie Valley, and Beaufort Sea’, available at http://www.oilandgasguides.com/aguides.htm (accessed on 15 December 2011).

Shatz, S. (1987) ‘Assertive pragmatism and the multinational enterprise’ in Becker, D.G. and Sklar, R. (Eds.): Post imperialism: International Capitalism and Development in the Late Twentieth Century, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., Boulder Colorado.

Status of Women Council of the Northwest Territories (SWC) (2005) ‘The Northern women in mining’, Oil & Gas Program, available at http://www.statusofwomen.nt.ca/ed.htm (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Status of Women Council of the Northwest Territories (SWC) (2006a) ‘Presentation to the Gas Project Review Panel General Hearing 16 February 2006’, by Gerri Sharpe-Staples, President, available at http://www.statusofwomen.nt.ca/download/PresentationtoJRP.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2006, accessed on 21 November 2011).

Status of Women Council of the Northwest Territories (SWC) (2006b) ‘A ‘how to guide’ for participating in socio-economic impact assessment (SEIA) in the NWT’, available at http://www.statusofwomen.nt.ca/download/SEIA_How_To_Guide.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2007).

United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (2007) available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2011).

World Bank (2005) ‘The World Bank Policy on Indigenous Peoples OP/BP4.10’, available at http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/EXTPOLICIES/EXTOPMANUAL/0,,contentMDK:20553653~menuPK:4564185~pagePK:64709096~piPK:64709108~theSitePK:502184,00.html (accessed on 21 November 2011).

Wuttunee, W.A. (2004) Living Rhythms: Lessons in Aboriginal Economic Resilience and Vision, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal & Kingston, Canada.

Notes 1 When referring to the Indigenous peoples of Canada, the authors will use the term

‘Aboriginal’ as recognised in Section 35(1) of The Constitution Act, 1982 referring to the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples. For original peoples elsewhere, we will use the term ‘Indigenous’.

2 Best paper in Entrepreneurship and Family Business, Enterprising Our World, Sustainable Business in Action, 2010 Administrative Sciences Association of Canada Conference held in Regina Saskatchewan on 22–25 May 2010.

Documents

Aboriginal Entrepreneurship and Economic Development From Canada's Proposed Mackenzie Gas Pipeline (Summary)