Among the different coalition members, there are different provisions. Virtually all of them include something about dispute resolution.
There is a range from the Inuvialuit agreement, for example, that includes the possibility of binding arbitration through a series of other agreements. Far and away the most common is arbitration only if both parties consent, and, as President Towtongie indicated, the federal government was loath to ever consent to arbitration.
Part of the NTI's settlement with the government includes amendments to the agreement to enable a unilateral demand for arbitration in specified circumstances, all the way through to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, which includes the Cree-Naskapi Commission as a very effective, albeit non-coercive or non-binding, dispute resolution body.
The short answer to your question is that yes, they have a variety of provisions for mediation, discussion, and negotiation, but rarely for binding arbitration, and that, unfortunately, is one of the reasons so many disputes have ended up in litigation, when one would think that litigation should be the last resort.