INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR INDIGENOUS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Final Report of the Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda

to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country
November 16-17, 2010 Holiday Inn Denver East Stapleton 3333 Quebec Street, Denver, Colorado

A.

INTRODUCTION

On November 16-17, 2010, the International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management (Institute) with the support of the Department of Homeland Security through the Community and Regional Resilience Institute at Oak Ridge National Laboratory; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations National Integrated Drought Information System; and, the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Community Building Program convened the Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country. The Roundtable, the latest in a series of Institute climate fora, brought together high level tribal, NGO, industry, and government educators, scientists, and decision-makers in a series of facilitated dialogues to identify and examine climate mitigation and adaptation technologies; the potential impact of these technologies on tribal interests; and, the science required to support approaches to minimize these impacts and to otherwise build or enhance tribal systems and institutions needed to promote tribal community resilience. B. KEY INSIGHTS Agencies, scientific and research institutions, and others involved in climate science or the management of climate impacts must not ignore nor underestimate the centrality of culture in the identification, assessment, management, and communication of climate science and climate impacts in Indian country. Research on climate mitigation and adaptation technologies and their possible impacts on Indian tribes and Alaska Natives is less of a priority than research on resilient tribal systems and institutions. Similarly, research on effective communication of results and findings of research on climate mitigation and adaptation technologies is more important than research on the technologies. BACKGROUND

C.

The Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country was intended to identify: The climatic, political, legal and other circumstances that encourage the use of adaptation technologies;

Different adaptation and mitigation technologies and processes and the energy, environmental, legal, ethical, cultural, social, and other impacts these technologies and processes will have on tribal interests and tribal resilience; The institutional, human resource, scientific, technical, and other predicates to knowing and informed tribal participation in decision-making on mitigation and adaptation technologies, their deployment, siting, operation, and decommissioning; The institutional, human resource, scientific, technical, and other predicates to the protection of tribal interests and promotion of tribal resilience implicated by the deployment of adaptation technologies and processes;

The Roundtable opened with a facilitated discussion on tribal perspectives and definitions of resilience. Roundtable participants were invited to share their expertise and experience to suggest ways of developing a deeper awareness and understanding of resilience and resilient tribal systems and institutions and their role in managing climate impacts faced by tribes. The Centrality of Culture: After some initial discussions on definitions of resilience and the extension of the term into the political, economic, and social realms, it soon became evident, for the Indian participants, whether they were educator, scientist, journalist, or program manager, cultural resilience was the overriding concern. Culture was the touchstone to which the Roundtable discussion returned time and time again in all definitions of resilience. The environmental, legal, economic, or political implications of any climate adaptation or mitigation technology were much less of a concern than the cultural implications. A Roundtable participant cited an example. Green design suggested the use of radiant floor heating in homes. But home for the native elders was a hogan that was heated by a centrally located wood-burning stove that people would huddle around in one room. People couldnt adapt to radiant heating. They tore it out. We took their wood pile away from them and gave them a hidden technology they couldnt control or relate to. We eventually installed a high-efficiency wood-burning stove that was able to heat the entire home. That it was high-efficiency and technologically superior to the old stove was irrelevant. That it was wood-burning and centrally located was. The report will likewise return to notions of culture and its role in specific issues. Systems and Institutions Defined: Systems: Evident also was the need to clarify what is meant by tribal systems and institutions. Simply put, a system is an organized collection of parts (or subsystems) that are highly integrated to accomplish an overall goal. The system has various inputs, which go through certain processes to produce certain outputs, which together, accomplish the overall desired goal for the system. So a system is usually made up of many smaller systems, or subsystems. For example, an Indian tribe is made up of many administrative and management functions, products, services, groups and individuals. If one part of the system is changed, the nature of the overall system is often changed, as wellby definition then, the system is systemic, meaning relating to, or affecting, the entire system. Those parts of the world that are not subject to a systems control, but that
2

influence the system, are called the environment. A sector of the environment can be integrated into a system by bringing it under system control. Institutions: Here again the centrality of culture is reinforced. Institutions are social arrangements that channel behavior in prescribed ways in the important areas of social life. They are interrelated sets of normative elements norms, values, and role expectationsthat the people making up the society have devised and passed on to succeeding generations in order to provide permanent solutions to societys perpetually unfinished business. Institutions are cultural imperatives. They serve as regulatory agencies, channeling behavior in culturally prescribed ways. Institutions provide procedures through which human conduct is patterned, compelled to go, in manners deemed desirable by society. In generally, tribal institutions, although important, exist external to tribal systems. An exception may be the Din Policy Institute which was established to mesh Western research practices with traditional Navajo values, natural, traditional, customary, and common laws and principles to advise Navajo Nation law and policymakers. D. ISSUES

The Roundtable discussions suggest six overarching explanations for the failures of tribal climate systems as they operate today. First, gross systemic imbalance impedes policy integration because federally-funded autonomous tribal agencies are coupled with weak integration mechanisms. Second, the various climate-related tribal agencies are not managed as a cohesive system but are addressed as discrete components. Third, lower levels of tribal government also lack strong integration tools, forcing coordination and integrative management responsibilities onto an overburdened tribal council. Fourth, the current tribal climate apparatus suffers from the absence of an effective system for developing strategies that connect available resources, desired end states, and implementation procedures. Fifth, tribal institutions are generally neither charged with climate-related responsibilities nor integrated within tribal climate systems. Sixth, systems for communicating climate policies and programs between and among policymakers, department heads and the wide range of stakeholders are poorly organized or nonexistent. First Problem: The Effects of Non-Coordination or Non-Integration The negative effects of non-coordination or non-integration on tribal climate policy and program development are readily apparent. Bureaucratic decision-making mechanisms fail to produce unified strategic guidance. Individual agencies typically lack the ability to compel action, while interdepartmental authorities, if at all present, are often ambiguous. Information sharing is not the norm. Communication flows follow vertical channels. Disorganized, nonexistent, or otherwise flawed strategies result from these conditions. Although climate impacts affect tribes as a whole, most tribal agencies conduct climate-related activities as discrete functions of their own agendas very often failing to integrate tribal cultural institutions such as associations of basket makers, weavers, and elders. On-reservation and offreservation impacts are treated separately notwithstanding that the impacts and management thereof are closely related. One of the more significant effects of such non-coordination or nonintegration is the subversion of tribal governmental legitimacy or the broad-based belief that
3

social, economic, or political arrangements and outcomes are proper and just. Legitimacy is acquired by building trust and confidence among various parties and includes process legitimacy (which relates to the way in which decisions are made) and performance legitimacy (which relates to action, including the delivery of public goods). Second Problem: The Paucity and Poverty of Integrating Mechanisms Tribal departments have vision, expertise, experience, and tools that could be brought to bear on climate challenges, but more often than not, the mechanisms to integrate the various dimensions of tribal climate policy and to translate that policy into integrated programs and actions are extremely weak, if they exist at all. Components of the system are dispersed throughout the tribal government. Tribal institutions, state and local entities, the private sector can also contribute. Yet, no overarching strategy grounded in tribal culture connects these components. Without unified strategic direction, the system lacks unity of purpose. Without the grounding in tribal culture, the systems legitimacy is questioned. Furthermore, this lack of cohesiveness encourages policymakers and department heads often bypass established decision-making mechanisms and employ informal structures and processes that can lead to suboptimal choices. The widespread use of informal structures comes at the expense of interdepartmental accountability and integration. Without delineated policy processes, leadership is difficult. Third Problem: Whos in Charge? The paucity of effective climate policy integration processes forces the chief executive of the tribe to manage many climate efforts. The tribal chairman or president does not have the time to become intimately involved in the management of multiple agencies. Yet, he or she is ultimately responsible for making decisions based on their findings. Efforts to delegate authority have generally taken one of two ineffective methods to integrate policy development and administration: appointing a lead agency or a lead individual. The lead agency approach generally results in other agencies providing insufficient support for common efforts. Typically, lead agency really means sole agency as no one will follow the lead if its directions substantially affect their organizational personnel and financial resources. Likewise, a lead individual ends up depending on his or her relationship with the tribal chairman or president. Neither of these solutions has provides authority to compel action by tribal agencies or departments. The result tends to be a breakdown in communication and a lack of concerted effort. Problem Four: Underdeveloped Resource Allocation Mechanisms The allocation of resources to support tribal climate policies is due in large measure to the nature of the revenue streams that support tribal programs. Departmental budgets are supported by a wide range of federal agency sources, most of which are categorical and require strict compliance with the authorizing statutes purposes. The underdevelopment of tribal resource allocation mechanisms mirrors that of the federal system. In general, the federal climate system provides resources for national climate mitigation or adaptation functions, not national missions. Nor are tribal cultural institutions looked at as resources. As a result, tribal resource allocation processes do not provide the full range of required capabilities. They also do not permit the system to surge in response to emergencies, or allow sufficient resource flexibility in response to
4

changing priorities. Resources cannot simply migrate between departments when needed. Furthermore, the individual departments are rarely, if ever, offered incentives for funding interagency activities, resulting in limited integrated efforts. A tribal department will frequently respond to another departments request for a coordinated effort by asking what account will be charged for the joint work. Problem Five: Failure of Oversight In general, tribal councils oversee each tribal agency and program individually, with committees more or less corresponding to the structure of the executive branch agencies. No committee has oversight jurisdiction over the entire tribal climate system, its core missions, or interagency operations. Instead, the committees for natural resources management, economic development, environmental protection, transportation, and other tribal executive departments strictly divide the subject matter pie, leaving oversight of interdepartmental operations unaddressed. As a Roundtable participant pointed out, the proposed development of the Crow Nations coal resources results in conflicts between the Crow Nations need for economic development and employment and its desire to be green. The organization of the Crow Nation includes subsystems to oversee coal development, green construction, and economic development. The integration and oversight of these subsystems as part of a cohesive green strategy is no committees responsibility. Problem Six: Failure to Communicate In general, modern society, including Indian tribes and other indigenous peoples, is awash in information. American society, especially, positively wallows in information. And, the flood of information shows no sign of abating. For example, there is actually a great deal of information regarding the effects of global climate change on Indian tribes and Pacific Islanders. Some information is specifically identified as climate-related. For example, native peoples in the Northwest and in the Pacific are already experiencing and observing some of those effects including major economic and cultural impacts caused by rising sea levels and coastal erosion due to storms. However, many of these observations of climate-induced phenomena support international and national emissions capping strategies and provide very little of the kind of information on climate-induced impact to support localized decision-making on sustainable development strategies or more importantly, to gain tribal community support for proposed adaptive responses to local climate change impacts. The superabundance of information presents other problems. Decision-making may be delayed by managers who are paralyzed by uncertainty. So, while information is the lifeblood of strategies to manage adaptation to climate impacts, the problem for tribal and other indigenous leaders and decision-makers, is that: there is too much information; much of the available information is simply irrelevant to such adaptive management strategies or operations; there are no tribal systems to integrate information into decision-making processes; much of the available information is not scaled appropriately; needed information is either not collected or unavailable tucked away in archives, depositories, and file cabinets; and, needed information is filtered in ways that are culturally biased.

E.

THE RESEARCH AGENDAS

First Research Agenda: Countering the Effects of Non-Coordination and Non-Integration The facilitated discussions reinforced the notion that systemic non-coordination or nonintegration is the normnot only in Indian country, but everywhere. One participant suggested the larger the region of interest, the more impossible it was develop coordinated or integrated climate systems. How do you approach regional coordination? Its not possible. In a region comprising eight large western States there are a LOT of ad hoc groups working on a range of climate issues. Some groups include federal, tribal, state, and local government representatives, and private sector members have been looking at needs, gaps and other issues. Theyve invested a lot of money and spent 1.5 years on it. They even had two full-time graduate students committed to the process but they finally threw their hands up because they couldnt get their arms around the number of issues involved. Another participant suggested that coordination and integration might be possible under conditions that were more community-based and more focused. The way to avoid the non-integration is to avoid having two climate conversations going on at the same time. Instead of holding conversations about whats interesting about climate, hold conversations grounded in whats changing and what can we do about it? Start by identifying and examining consequences, the connections between changes that are likely climate driven and other changes. This moves people to look at changes in their community more systematically, with better information, better data sets, and more community engagement in the technologynot just scientists bringing in information, but people out there doing it themselves. If the climate issue can be an opening wedge to systematize and raise the level and the degree of public participation in the assessment of change, whatever the cause, two things happen. One, people become better consumers of scientific data generally and can visualize the connections between ongoing climatic, demographic, economic and other processes that they hadnt thought of before. Second, people see things they can do something about and those they cant. They become conscious of scale of actionwhich is great. The facilitated dialogues suggested a research agenda that first examines the coordination or integration dynamics of discrete, community-based projects before embarking upon whole of tribal government approaches to integrated climate strategies. Indian tribes are uniqueas cultural, political, and social entities and in their relationships with the federal government. A series of case studies to assess how these unique attributes affect the dynamics of coordination or integration should be the first order of business. Demonstrations of the integration of cultural institutions into project design, management, and oversight should be conducted. Tribal-specific assessments of impediments to up scaling these dynamics should follow.
6

Second Agenda: Building or Improving System Components and System Integration The protection and advancement of tribal interests affected by climate mitigation and adaptation technologies should be considered at two levels. The first is a more metaphysical examination of mitigation and adaptation technologies. Some of these proposed technologies, e.g., plans to sow the oceans with iron to trigger plankton blooms, which would absorb carbon dioxide, die, and settle to the sea floor; plans to send a trillion mirrors into orbit to deflect incoming sunlight; a plan to mimic the planet-cooling sulfur-dioxide miasmas of explosive volcanoes by an artillery barrage of sulfur-dioxide aerosol rounds fired into the stratosphere, are unlikely to come to fruition. However, for the purposes of this report, their likelihood is not the issue. Rather, these proposals reveal modern societys persistent belief in the technological fix. Although Roundtable discussion on climate mitigation and adaptation technologies initially focused on tribal perceptions of the role of science and engineering can play in mitigating the effects of climate change it was increasingly evident that participants framed the issue somewhat differently. Success in adaptively managing the impacts of climate change depends in part on establishing a good tribal structure and processes that can weigh the benefits and costs of technology deployment, but more than a few Roundtable participants suggested that having superior human capital is even more important. One participant said, Weve invested a lot of effort and time to encourage Din college students to undertake research in a culturally relevant wayto look at the problem using the Navajo knowledge as a means to identify the problem, frame the research questions, and identify data sources so that we have a Navajo understanding of the research results. A participant from Oneida similarly remarked: I want to come back to Lisas comment about the small project being the big projects and youth being an essential part of tribal resilience. There are two important points to be made: first, youth are our future and second, prophecies tell us those who are close to the land and know the land will survive. We carried out some youth projects with water that tied in languagefrom an environmentalist or water management perspective, but also from an Oneida perspective. When I told them how to say water in Oneida they perked up because it gave them that sense of belonging, that what they were doing was relevant and important to their lands and their people. They understand thateven at a young age. Power is with the youth, its still in them. Theyre what will create resilient tribes in the future while addressing immediate concerns as well. The question here is: How do tribes and tribal colleges use existing partnerships with federal agencies, non-tribal colleges and universities, and NGOs as the foundation for developing a comprehensive professional education and training program that focuses on nurturing collaborative skills and creates a positive collaborative culture throughout tribal climate systems and institutions? The notion that small ideas are actually big ideas and that small projects are actually large ones was reinforced by several Roundtable participants. This is a pragmatic and adaptive approach to
7

the acknowledged shortcomings of tribal systems and institutions in formulating and actualizing cohesive climate strategies and the fiscal realities that make the necessary comprehensive reforms highly improbable. An example shared by a doctoral student is illustrative. We had elders come along as we were doing field work. In the beginning they were quiet, merely observing. After a while they began sharing stories. They complained that bitterroot cant be harvested now. Its gone. The flower is gone. We then explained the effects of climate changethat plants and medicines will come up later than usual. We talked about it, and she went along not quite convinced looking for the flowering plant. The students took out their GPS units, marked where it was. The woman elder noted it and said we could do the ceremony now. She wanted to know more about climate change. She was happy to see the evidence of the plant there, but was concerned because it was two months later than it should have been. She brought her sisters to look at the berries.they discussed that we used to have glaciers.then started looking and thinking, talking. Elder wanted to know if she could use the GPS unit? Sure! The big project ideas are local project ideas. The elder wanted to know how to use the GPS unit she liked it she needed to own it.because she was going to look for her berries, her plants, she wanted that knowledge to be hers, for the information to be safe. She said sometimes I forget. If I use this, I can find it again. A participant from a scientific research laboratory cited another example. I was talking to colleagues and tribal leaders about the decline in rock fish population in our waters. It had been leaked that state of Washington was going to respond to this by building rock fish hatcheries. It is a perfect example of technological fixes. Its really important to start with question of whether a particular technology addresses the real problem, in this instance; overexploitation is the real problem vs. fixing what turns out to be a political problem. Limiting takes is a politically unpopular stance; fish hatcheries less so. The state is making an enormous investment in technology that is likely to further degrade natural processes that will lead to further declines in the resource. The mistrust these technology decisions engender is just part of a historical lesson that now stands as a barrier to trying things out that might actually be very useful. These examples reinforce the notion that for most end users, the technologies behind the devices or technologies they use are irrelevant. In the first instance, the elder has no interest in the databases, data centers, satellites, and sensors that make the GPS unit valuable to her. In the second, for the end user whose only concern is maintaining a certain harvest level is likewise unconcerned about the ramifications of the proposed technology. For other end users though, the long-term consequences of the technology are a significant consideration. What this example suggests is that we need to understand the end users needs before embarking on costly and timeconsuming data and systems integration efforts. But we also need to anticipate the needs of an increasingly sophisticated end user such as the tribal elder as well. The hard work will be to determine just how big big enough is. To the extent the work entails appropriate science and
8

appropriate technology, collaboration with federal and university science agencies and institutions to identify the science and technology requirements is strongly recommended. Third Agenda: Enhancing Command and Control Mechanisms The paucity of effective tribal climate policy integration processes theoretically forces the chief executive of the tribe to manage many climate efforts. But here too, pragmatism and adaptive approaches are required since, as was stated earlier, tribes confront fiscal realities that make the necessary comprehensive reform of tribal systems highly improbable. The challenge can be stated thusly: How does tribal leadership exercise command and control over climate programs in the absence of a comprehensive, integrative climate policy and without viable command and control structure and processes? Stated another way: Can well-informed tribal agency personnel organize and coordinate their climate activities from the bottom-up? The questions below follow; How does tribal leadership establish a common operating framework with shared culture, doctrine, processes, procedures and understanding of the leaderships intent? How does tribal leadership establish shared situational awareness throughout the whole of tribal government? How does tribal leadership establish trust throughout the whole of tribal government? How does tribal leadership empower subordinates to organize and coordinate their climate activities? A network-centric, information/knowledge rich approach seems to be part of the response to the challenge. But how does tribal leadership marry the required information technologies and information systems with the common operating framework, shared culture, doctrine and training? Fourth Agenda: Improving Resource Allocation Mechanisms Here again fiscal realities require pragmatism and adaptive approaches. It may appear counterintuitive, but tribal leadership may actually have more success integrating nondepartmental resources into the tribal climate system than departmental ones. As mentioned earlier, departmental revenue streams generally flow from federal categorical grants, contracts or cooperative agreements. Also tribal leadership generally does not consider tribal cultural institutions, tribal and non-tribal NGOs, colleges and universities, federal, state and local government agencies, and the private sector as resources that can be directed toward tribal ends. The challenge is to identify means by which these resources can be most efficiently leveraged, managed, and overseen. Here too consultations with tribal cultural institutions, tribal and nontribal NGOs, colleges and universities, federal, state and local government agencies, and the private sector is strongly recommended.

Fifth Agenda: Improving System Oversight Mechanisms Once more fiscal realities require pragmatism and adaptive approaches. The challenge here is similar to that of the Third Research Agenda: How does tribal leadership exercise oversight in the absence of a comprehensive, integrative climate policy and without oversight structure and processes? Here too, the solution may lie beyond the reservation borders. Oversight is not a continuous operation. Done well, it requires periodic, intensive reviews. The question here is how can tribes use tribal organizations such as the Council of Energy Resource Tribes, National Tribal Environmental Council, or Native American Finance Officers Association to perform system oversight? Sixth Agenda: Improving Communications Mechanisms Communications strategies today are generally about transferring information (as opposed to knowledge) to the consumers of information. The Roundtable discussions suggested that there is a key difference between knowledge and information and suggests that a communications strategy must encompass both knowledge, especially traditional knowledge and information. A tribal college administrator reflected on his recent experience with media. The American Indian/Alaska Native Climate Change Working Group pulled together funding from NASA to do videos on climate change. The Menominee used that funding to develop the concept of community-based journalism and mentorship. The approach is not about reporters reporting and leaving, its about Menominee making movies of Menominee. Students pulled together information to understand climate change; they interviewed elders to get their historical and cultural knowledge. The community saw the video. They saw their kid on screen, or saw themselves sharing their knowledge about climate change. The result is the creation of expectations, of wanting to get things done, not everywhere, not in some abstract academic exercise, but in their watershed, in their place. An indigenous filmmaker made the following observations: Kids today are surrounded by media. Ive been learning how powerful messages are to students. If you can turn that around and help them to see themselves as experts; to emphasize that they come from oral cultures; and help them acquire the tools and skills to tell their stories the way they want. Branding and key messages are essential. I started this work seven years ago and it was just last year, that I realized that I needed to look at this as a business and that Im being looked to as having expertise in this arena. We need to understand the power of making and delivering our messages. Branding and key messages are important not commodifying our people, but to give our people the tools to communicate messages and subjects of issue.

10

A native architect stated: Climate change is very abstract to most people. To stir people to action we need a starting point. For example, people will talk about accident rates, increased traffic flows and pedestrian safety but getting a traffic signal installed on a busy neighborhood street has an immediate affect on their lives which is important with poor people who have a lot going on immediate concerns. Its only the wealthy elite that can sit around and worry about climate change in the abstract. For Indian tribes, we have to contextualize the issueput the issue in a context where they can see the change. Like in the movie, Once There Was an Island, people wouldnt act until they saw the rising tide wash through their houses. At that point, the scientists and scientific advice were valued. The people wanted an explanation. Some thought the island was sinkingnot that the water was rising. Its a difficult notion to get their mind around. If were approaching tribes, we have to get it into a context that is meaningful to the tribe and has immediate value to them, to their own tribe. The facilitated dialogues suggested a research agenda that identifies and examines issues related to communication of climate impact information and knowledge including: Who are the tribal end users of climate and adaptation information and knowledge? For what purposes are climate and adaptation information and knowledge used, for example, legislation, program design, natural resources management and development? How do these uses shape communications strategies and influence communication media and dissemination technology choices? How are the climate-related experiences, observations, and knowledge of tribal elders best communicated? And relatedly, what general and tribal-specific protocols govern the gathering of information, knowledge, and other intellectual property from elders? How can the tribal experience be communicated and not exploited? How do tribes assess the efficacy of their communication strategy? CONCLUSION Although many of the Roundtable participants agree with the problem analysis and recommendation research agendas set forth in this report, the question as to whether such comprehensive reforms that are contemplated in the analysis are possible. Climate and its impacts on the wide range of tribal interests are a litmus test of tribal governance and legitimacy for the 21st century. We have tried to avoid suggesting incremental, ad hoc adjustments to tribal systems that are fundamentally unsuited to the development and actualization of comprehensive, integrated climate policies. But we similarly have eschewed unrealistic and therefore, improbable recommendations. In a real sense we have applied the you take your victim as you find him rule of the common law. We recognize that the flaws of tribal systems designed for a world that no longer exists and we hope that our analyses and recommendations go beyond tinkering at the edges. In a world of heightened uncertainty brought about by a changing climate, the challenge for tribes and their allies is come up with innovative and creative approaches that can mesh with, enhance, but not overburden an anachronistic tribal system.

11