Science and Research Committee on Nov. 29th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Great. Wow, that's fantastic.

Next is Mr. Cannings for six minutes, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you to all the witnesses here today.

I'm just caught up in all this talk about caribou, so I'm going to continue on that theme.

Dr. Dragon and Dr. Dubé, you mentioned one project—I forget exactly where it was—in which caribou numbers increased by four times or something. That's remarkable, considering the trajectory of caribou populations farther south in the mountains, where I live.

I'm trying to get at this difference between western science and indigenous knowledge. You mentioned linear features being a problem. If you were to replant...? Is that what happened? Do you change those linear features?

I think that western scientists have known for a long time that linear features are bad for caribou, but they do a study and it gets published and becomes “knowledge”, and that's it. In the projects that you're dealing with, is that indigenous knowledge more a part of a process that is really interlinked with policy so that changes actually happen on the ground? Is that a difference, would you say?

I just want to say that we need to get you guys down to southern B.C. to work on caribou.

[Dr. Monique Dubé]

Thank you for the question.

I think the difference is the partnerships on the land right from the beginning.

To be clear, this is work we've supported and enabled. The role of the Canadian Mountain Network is to build the relationships, sustain the relationships and manage all of the administration that takes away from the work on the ground so that the work can be done on the land.

The difference is that these groups were facing a problem that was insurmountable. When you sit down together and bring the decision-makers to the table from the very beginning, that is how you transfer the science and the knowledge into the policy and the decision-making.

If we are successful in receiving the strategic science fund, one of the first additions to our governance structure will be a federal advisory panel to work with our research management committee—our indigenous circle of advisers and our researchers—so that we can talk about shared priorities and understanding and serve as a liaison. In examples like this with the caribou, we can share those learnings.

If you do the research and you publish the paper, it doesn't get into the policy and regulation. We have learned that over and over again. How is it done? It's done when you work together right from the very start all the way to the end. The end is also through adaptive governance, adaptive policy and regulatory reform to ensure the regulations you've developed are indeed protective. Those relationships are sustained for a significant period of time. That is where success is.

[Dr. Joe Dragon]

That's in the West Moberly and Saulteau First Nations.

I want the committee to think about something. As we look at a western-style approach. Having been a deputy minister of environment and natural resources for the Northwest Territories government, I know that at times we got into very western-style conversations about caribou.

When we had the dwindling herds, one challenge of that conversation was getting into the situation where.... When you have a decrease in a population, typically the first western methodology is stop hunting right now. The push in that conversation is, “I'm Dene. I'm Denesuline. We come from the caribou eaters. Our relationships are with caribou.” There's a saying that we are caribou; caribou are us. If you look at putting in a methodology that cuts that relationship out, you're cutting out that cultural relationship between those two entities. From a western perspective, you get away with it. You publish a paper and you put it into the journals, and they will say that's what you do.

From an indigenous perspective, you've taken that cultural component out of our lives, yet we have to follow those rules because we're put on a moratorium for hunting. We can't practise that relationship. That cultural component, depending on where you go, is so integral to the relationship to the land. It's just not about that one species; it's about everything that the species walks on, eats or drinks. It's everything on the land.

It's just something to consider.

Marsi.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I might add that I suspect that in many of these cases it's not the hunting that has caused the decline in the first place. It's just the easiest thing to say you can't do.

Do I have time?

I don't. Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

There will be some time because we are being very efficient today, and this panel is going quite well.

I love the adaptive governance, and I'm looking around the room thinking there are some lessons there we could probably even look at in Parliament.

We'll go over to Mr. Soroka for five minutes, please.

[Gerald Soroka, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses today for coming.

I'll start off with Mr. Dragon and Ms. Dubé.

You talk a lot about your approach to the system, and I want to learn more about the integration of indigenous knowledge and western science in understanding and managing mountain ecosystems. How come you are doing it so much better than everybody else? What's missing in what others are doing?

[Dr. Monique Dubé]

We are enablers, and it's about relationships. Our goal is to enable and support, with as few barriers as possible, the research that is being done in a place-based context. We are constantly challenging the system in terms of how funding is allocated, how you fund indigenous communities and how you pay honoraria.

In our research programs, the criteria that are required before you go on to the land and work with the people are very clearly established. As a not-for-profit, we have the ability to be highly mobile in terms of the resources, the policies, and, quite frankly, removing the barriers. Many of these communities face capacity challenges. It's our job to make sure that we can build that capacity, and we can also remove some of the barriers associated with colonial administration, as an example.

I'm a western-trained scientist, so I understand the amount of reporting that's required in colonial systems. If I can take that load and help comply with our federal systems and our federal requirements and help those communities build capacity, train within and do the research on the ground, then that puts the money where it needs to be, which is in the research on the ground. We navigate those other spaces that are often time-consuming and resource-consuming for communities.

[Dr. Joe Dragon]

I think providing that forum is the key. The key is to provide the opportunity for indigenous...a lens into what we consider western science and what we consider being on the land. We're seeing now a lot more of that on the land with indigenous-protected areas. We're getting a lot more capacity there. I think there's a huge growth potential in this conversation in those areas across Canada as we, as indigenous people, look at providing our governance. As well, as was mentioned earlier about your systems, our governance is different from the current governance that is on those lands, and I think it's provided a forum.

I would also say that when you look at trying to provide the space for this conversation to happen where it hasn't happened before.... In the bison reintroduction in Banff National Park, that conversation between the Stoney Nakoda through our project is the first time they've actually got together to come up with a model for bison reintroduction. If we are the enabler, then great; it's whatever we can do to help the conversation. I think indigenous groups are looking at it as an opportunity, but with more opportunity, if we get more time and more funding, I think we would have even more results right across Canada.

Marsi.

[Gerald Soroka, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I think that's a prime example of how with government it's always the bureaucracy, the idea that if we're going to do something, we need more regulations put in place. That seems to be the biggest problem.

You're saying it's more cultural to adapt, as you said. With the caribou, part of it was that we still want to hunt them, and they were like, “No, no; that's not the right way to do things.” I think that's where the traditional knowledge is really helpful and beneficial. Wouldn't you agree, or am I off base with that?

[Dr. Joe Dragon]

Thank you.

Again, I think it's an opportunity to think of the governance and management of species in a different way. When we look at it from a western scientific approach, it's very black and white. It's developed that way, having gone through the system.

In our government approach, we're trying to satisfy the interests and needs of everybody around the table. I can look at the example of you MPs from all over Canada; each of you has interests from your regions. It's very similar in indigenous cultures. In their regions, they have very specific areas that line up to that conversation. They just want to be a part of it, so that's what we're trying to do.

Marsi.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

Dr. Jaczek, you have five minutes.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you to all our witnesses, in particular Dr. Dragon and Dr. Dubé, and Olivia for the gift.

Every time each of us looks at the braid, I think we will remember what we were learning from this very interesting study.

To get back to the purpose of the study, it's how to best integrate indigenous traditional knowledge and science into government policy development. Our analysts have given us some examples of what other countries have done, in particular Australia, the United States and New Zealand.

Australia has developed IP Australia. This government agency, which administers intellectual property, started a number of initiatives related to indigenous knowledge, as an example. The United States has put together particular guidance for federal agencies on recognizing and including indigenous knowledge in federal policy and decision-making. New Zealand, I think, is quite far ahead. They have also put together various vision statements.

Starting with Dr. Dragon and Dr. Dubé, could you give us some suggestions on how the federal government could perhaps use some of these mechanisms that have been tried elsewhere and could be useful?

[Dr. Joe Dragon]

I'll start, and then I can pass it over to Dr. Dubé.

When you look at the development of policy surrounding indigenous culture and how you make that real, I think you'll see that we're all trying ways of doing that and ways of integrating it into our approach.

When people put those measures through in Australia and the U.S. and New Zealand, that was their approach to their dilemma in their region. In my region in Denendeh in the Northwest Territories, if you look at all the different cultures and all of the different areas of belief, you see that the culture changes so much between those communities. We can't put them all in the same basket.

I believe that we have to be able to understand that conversation going out to indigenous peoples and see how they want to be involved in the conversation. It's not trying to make anything different; it's just trying to bring that conversation up.

I will leave that with you. It's providing an opportunity for them to be involved in the conversation in a meaningful way, in a way that means something to their culture, their being, and who they are and how they've been raised. That's been taken away for a long time.

We're trying to have that type of re-emergence in this area, and that's what we've tried to provide with Canadian Mountain Network.

Marsi.

[Dr. Monique Dubé]

I would say there are many examples of how to do this well and there are many examples of how to not do it well. Bring your policy analysts out to the land, in the communities that have concerns in a particular policy area that's of interest to the government, and they will see exactly how this is done well in a good way. That is the solution.

It's through training, experience and awareness. These knowledge systems can come together in a braid and can solve some of the greatest challenges that are before us with respect to climate change, the biodiversity crisis and natural resource development, but we must have the understanding that this knowledge is much deeper and much more holistic than the limitations of western science, and I am a trained western scientist. We require the understanding and, I would say, also the awareness that our direction for policy and regulation is very siloed. You heard that earlier in the witness testimony.

What we're learning.... I sit on the Crown-indigenous working group for potential development of federal regulation for treatment and release of oil sands mining water. It's an industry need, and it's a highly emotional issue in the region, but it is absolutely essential that we understand that the integration is not just about the Fisheries Act and it's not just about UNDA and it's not just about the Canada Health Act; it's about how those policies and regulations have to interact in a more holistic way.

That's also another learning with respect to policy development.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Asselin, thank you for the clarifications you provided earlier in response to my questions. One of the things you talked about was the distinction between belief and knowledge and the need to validate and replicate experiences. We understand that science is not perfect either.

I would like to talk about the work of Yves Gingras, sociologist for science and Canada Research Chair in History, Sociology and Science. According to him, indigenous knowledge sometimes has a spiritual connotation, which can't be clearly or materially palpable. So it's difficult to compare it with the scientific knowledge acquired using a very specific scientific method. We can think of scurvy, for example, on which both traditional and scientific knowledge exists.

However, he says that we're pitting indigenous people against non‑indigenous people, thinking that they are two homogeneous groups, when they are two heterogeneous groups with differences, including knowledge and expertise, within them.

Can you comment on that?

[Hugo Asselin]

Yes, it's important. No one group is homogeneous. There was a comment made in the first part of the meeting today about not generalizing. It's important to consult each of the groups and communities, as well as various scientists. You have to drink from a variety of sources.

Some research groups have messages to pass on. Someone mentioned earlier that researchers aren't purely objective and that they're driven by their vision of things.

It's true that indigenous knowledge has a spiritual aspect that can be difficult to address and understand when you have a western scientific background. However, that doesn't mean that the knowledge isn't valid or accurate. Often, through research, we manage to find a scientific explanation of what indigenous peoples tell us from their more spiritual or philosophical point of view.

It's just a different way of looking at things. If we approach this from the perspective that we don't trust it because it's spiritual, it's not scientific, and we don't want to know anything about it, we're not going to go anywhere. We have to go there with confidence and tell ourselves that this is what is before us.

Generally, what indigenous people tell us, we see it. We don't always understand the explanation we're given, but we see the phenomenon. So it's working. The question is, how do you translate that into scientific language if that's what you need to develop a policy?

The fact that we don't understand the path doesn't mean that the destination doesn't exist.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Okay. That's terrific. Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Cannings for the final two and a half minutes, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

I'm going to turn back to Dr. Dragon and Dr. Dubé to keep talking about caribou and other things, and about this whole concept that in western science, knowledge isn't knowledge until it's published. I know biologists who have been working on fish in some lakes for 30 years and still haven't published, and everybody knows they're pretty knowledgeable.

You were talking about some of the big projects where community knowledge and policy collide, whether it's the oil sands, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska with oil drilling and caribou, or British Columbia forest harvest policy and caribou. How do you see that?

You have two minutes. Can you can tell me how your projects would address those?

[Dr. Joe Dragon]

I'll start with the project we had up in the Sahtu region of the Northwest Territories and looking at a way of.... What they did was create a plan for research monitoring and then land protection that looked at the Dene way of life and incorporating it, including the Dene language, which is very important when we talk about how much language incorporates into culture, and then further on into management, and then Dene law in coexistence with caribou.

That's how this project was able to be formed. From that there was a lot of great learning, so there are examples of creating a forum that gives a little flexibility in looking and not necessarily just publishing.

Marsi.

[Dr. Monique Dubé]

I've been fortunate in my career. I spent 25 years in the energy sector—forestry, pulp and paper, uranium-based metal and diamond mining—and that interface or nexus between indigenous knowledge, western knowledge and natural resource development.

I have to say that I'm tired of the narrative that these things are at odds, because if in fact you investigate the true experience and you put the time into those relationships on the land, the solution to natural resource development in a sustainable manner that also provides for economic opportunities is in the braiding of knowledge systems together, and that's including areas where this is most significant, like the oil sands of Alberta.

I've seen it with my own eyes. I am grateful for the patience that indigenous communities and indigenous people in this country have provided to western scientists like me to be patient and to allow us to understand. I truly believe that the solutions to some of our biggest challenges in Canada lie in the braiding of knowledges and deepening the breadth of our understanding to answer those questions in a way that's meaningful and sustainable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you very much. We went over, but it was valuable to go over. I appreciate your testimony.

Thank you for being here, Dr. Dragon and Dr. Dubé, as well as Dr. Asselin. They were tremendous testimonies, and there were also great questions by committee members, very thoughtful questions. I'm learning a ton in this study and I keep forgetting that I have to watch the time.

Thanks to all of you for your great questions and your great answers. Again, any written information that comes in to the clerk would be appreciated.

Our next meeting in regard to this study is on Monday, December 4, in the first hour, and in the second hour we'll do some committee business in looking at future studies. We'll continue with this topic next Wednesday as well.

It looks like people are getting ready to adjourn. Is that what we're doing?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you. I'll adjourn.