Economic Ecosystem

A truly sustainable economy is not purely manmade. It is a breathing entity with seasons and fluidity. It is something we work with, something we try to synchronize with as we might do with a regional climate. We fail when we try to control it as western economists do.

Companies always view a quarterly "loss" or stagnation of profit as a bad thing. I think that's wrong; it is a necessary season as the daylight hours lengthen or shorten; or rainfall increases or decreases; or temperature rises or lowers. But when we push too hard for artificial and continual growth we end up with exhausted resources, over-saturated markets, mass consumption culture, etc.  

Rather than thinking of economy as some lifeless abstract concept, think of it as living ecosystem. Now imagine what would happen to any ecosystem if we tried to artificially control some aspect of it. Say we found a way to artificially super heat all the lakes and waterways in a region to force evaporation/condensation, and hence, rain. The ecosystem would experience continual rains, but at what cost?  

A little rain is great for growing crops or ensuring lush vegetation, but if we force it to a level that denies natural cycles, we end up with:

• flooded land
• nutrient stripped soil (as the water run off would leech out the nutrients)
• disrupted river and lake beds
• dying or dead aquatice life, which then affects the food chain
• etc.

Another example - suppose we were to specifically try to eradicate all wolves in a region because short-sightedly concluded that we would have more big game for ourselves without competition from wolves. Although, if we did that, there would be no natural mechanism in place to remove the old and sick from the herds, thereby diminishing overall quality of the wild meat and maybe even threatening us with disease.

Or what if we somehow figured out a way to make it daytime 24 hours a day. Party time! No night! Of course, if we did that, the scorching sun would damage plants, reducing food sources for humans and animals alike. Then entire food chain would begin to fall apart. Not to mention the net negative psychological effect on people and animals with respect to sleep patterns.  

With virtually any aspect of an ecosystem, too much of something is damaging, if not destructive, to the entire ecosystem itself. This is no different when we consider economies. Economies are not simply about money, jobs, businesses; they are holistic in nature. Economies are not rigid structures, but rather, they are fluid, moving, breathing, changing ecosystems. Economies are not one size fits all, but are unique for every region and community, each possessing distinct identities and features.  

This is crucial to understand if we wish to create true sustainable, meaningful community economic development. Too many communities look to mega-corporations from outside that ecosystem to come in and wave a magic economic wand (perhaps a benefit agreement of some sort), expecting that this will fix everything. Benefit agreements or partnerships are not bad, but they cannot be the driver and shaper of local/regional ecosystem (i.e. economy). The mega-corporations lack the understanding, the connection, and the personal stake in caring for the local ecosystem to adequately be able to "develop" it. They often come in with cookie cutter approaches to what the economy is "supposed" to look like.  

This, generally will not be sustainable. They are there to extract maximum benefit as quickly as possible without regard to natural cycles within the ecosystem. They come in like a wooden stake driven into the chest of a local ecosystem and stay until they have taken literally everything they want and then move on, leaving a gaping hole behind. It is not often easy or swift to heal from the hole left behind and often results in communities bleeding their residents who move away to follow the jobs.  

Some may call me idealistic in my thinking, but be that is it may, there a number of actions that people can take.  

On the "idealistic" side, it is an outright rejection of capitalism and its mass-consumption artificial culture. More pragmatically, it means exploring alternative methods for local trade and production and only producing as much as is needed for living. Local farms and gardens, barter exchanges, local stores, locally produced goods, etc. are all parts of the solution. If natural resources are to be developed, then less excessive extraction methods need to be considered and longer term thinking is required versus the short term "extract it all now" type of thinking.  

Coops, worker coops, social enterprises are all tangible mechanisms that can help create a better balance with a greater level of synchronization with the natural rhythms of the economic ecosystem.  

All said, at the core, pure capitalism is inconsistent and at odds with true community economic development in my humble opinion.

Indigenous Thinkers

Over the past few months I have been inspired, honoured with learning from so many great Indigenous thinkers.

For starters, there has been so many great discussions in my LinkedIn Group, Indigenous Economic Development. Generally speaking, everyone is in agreement that economic development is important. However, there are many different approaches to this.

For starters, the word "development" itself carries colonial baggage - often used to mean resource development or development of mechanisms by which a financial profit can be gained from the Earth. Terminology and baggage aside, there is also a tension between colonial (aka mainstream or Western) approaches and culture/tradional ways of life.

In fact, many people often believe that culture and economy are disjoint. The fact is that they are not. Even colonial nations have culture embedded within their economies. The first problem is that economy takes the driver seat and priority over culture. The second problem is that colonial culture intentionally places a greater importance on profit and financial gain than culture, environment, people.

What has set Indigenous peoples apart is that their approach ensures that economy is NOT the driver. Rather each sphere of life plays an interconnected role. Culture, Social, Recreation, Economy, Health, etc., all play a role, holistically, to ensure balanced prosperity of person, spirit, nature.

When you really think about it, what price are we willing to pay for "successful" economic development? Are we willing to adopt colonial practices at the cost of our cultures, our ways of life?

What if we didn't have to adopt colonial practices to be thriving, people, fully meeting our potential? What if we didnt have to sacrifice our culture, our ways of life, our spirits to be "successful?"

Here is what I'm thinking. First we need to define what success means to us. Then we need to articulate how we can meet our needs (core meaning of economy) in a way that honours our ways of life, our cultures, our languages even.

In a future post, I would like to begin diving into this in greater detail. Through your comments/feedback, and through learning from the many great thinkers and leaders I am blessed to be contact with.

Solution Based Pursuits

I was recently reflecting on the challenges in the world today and how to go about making positive change. The Attawapiskat issue has been big on my mind, for a whole host of reasons. It got me thinking to the broader concepts of change, challenge, focus, and economic development.

For anyone involved in economic development, it will not be much of a surprise to state that much of economic development is based on problem solving. Unlike business development, which takes advantage of opportunities a specific economic environment provides, economic development is the process by which we work to create an environment of opportunities.

What greater example of the challenges we face as economic developers than to consider a community such as Attawapiskat. To introduce you to the community and issue here are some points:

·         Located in Northern Ontario, on the shores of Hudson’s Bay, Attawapiskat is a fly-in only community

·         Food, construction materials and goods must be transported via winter road (of which the window of use is shortening due to global warming) or air at high costs

·         There are about 2,000 residents

·         There are limited employment opportunities and very few businesses and employers (mostly public agencies and Band administration)

·         Like all First Nations, Canada discriminates with its funding levels and provides as much as 50% less funding for First Nations people on basic services such as, water and sewage infrastructure, education, child welfare, health care, and housing to name a few.

·         Canada intentionally excluded the people of Attawapiskat from obtaining any form of compensation for De Beers diamond mine operating in their traditional territory. The result is that De Beers is making billions in profits, while the people of Attawapiskat live in the depths of poverty equalled only by the most impoverished regions of Africa.

·         For a community of 2,000 people, there are only 300 homes, 5 large tents, 17 sheds without heating, electricity or running water.

Here is a timeline that was compiled in Wikipedia, of the most severe issues:

·         1979 30,000 gallons of diesel leaked from underground pipes was spilled underneath the J.R. Nagokee School (houses grades 1-8) recently built (1976). It was the largest spill in Northern Ontario. ("Education is a Right: Fighting for Attawapiskat". http://www.attawapiskat-school.com/Information.html. Retrieved December 3, 2011.)

·         May 11, 2001 J.R. Nagokee School Elementary was closed because of health problems related to 1979 diesel spill. Since then the elementary school students are in portables. (Linda Goyette (December 10, 2010). "Attawapiskat: The State of First Nations Education in Canada". Canadian Geographic. http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/dec10/attawapiskat4.asp. Retrieved December 3, 2011)

·         2000 Minister Robert Nault agreed in 2000 to begin plans for a new school. Two successive INAC ministers, Andy Scott and Jim Prentice also promised a new school for Attawapiskat. You can read the full chronology of seven years of negotiations on the departmental website. On April 1, 2008, the new minister, Chuck Strahl, informed the Attawapiskat First Nation Education Authority AFNEA that Ottawa would not finance the new school after all.

·         2004-12-08. During his 2004 mission in Canada, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, UNESC Special Rapporteur, observed first-hand the substandard conditions of on-reserve housing which included deteriorated units, lack of heating and insulation, leakage of pipes and toxic mould. (UNESC. 2004-12-08. "Human rights and indigenous issues: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, Rodolfo Stavenhagen: Mission to Canada.")

·         December 2007 The new Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl cancelled the plans for a new school claiming there were other communities who took priority and that there were no health and safety concerns in Attawapiskat.

·         May 2008 – Hundreds of people are evacuated from the community after a state of emergency is declared. The threat stems from the possibility of ice jams in the Attawapiskat River and subsequent flooding. ("More evacuations expected in northern Ontario due to flood fears". Canwest News Service. MAY 9, 2008. http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=8ee4b129-90d3-44b7-b876-1903d4aa6078. Retrieved December 3, 2011.)

·         2007-11-01 UNHCHR Special Rapporteur, Mr. Miloon Kothari, noted that overcrowded and inadequate housing conditions, as well as difficulties to access basic services, including water and sanitation, are major problems for Aboriginal peoples. He called for changes in federal and provincial government, legislations, policies and budgetary allocation for Aboriginal people (UNHCHR. 2007-11-01. "United Nations Expert on Adequate Housing Calls for Immediate Attention to Tackle National Housing Crisis in Canada." Geneva.)

·         2009 Members of the Attawapiskat First Nation blocked a winter road block near the DeBeers Victor Mine to protest the fact that the Attawapiskat First Nation live in such impoverished conditions alongside this billion dollar project.

·         July 11, 2009 A massive sewage flood dumps waste into eight buildings, which house 90 people. De Beers donated and retrofitted two construction accommodation trailers intended as a short term stop-gap measure, until the homes could be remediated or replaced. They continue to house 90 people who share the four stoves and six washrooms. (Ryan Lux (November 10, 2011). "Hundreds homeless in Attawapiskat MP says, ‘people will die if nothing is done’". Edmonton: The Daily Press. http://www.thedailypress.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3363844. Retrieved December 3, 2011 AND Rebecca Lindell (November 29, 2011). "Putting Attawapiskat on the map". Edmonton: Global News. http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/timeline/6442531868/story.html. Retrieved December 3, 2011)

·         August 21, 2009 Community members traveled to Toronto to confront De Beers Canada about the growing prosperity of the company and the growing poverty in the community.

·         October 14, 2009 – Chief Theresa Hall raises concerns about the federal government’s lack of response to the housing crisis in Attawapiskat caused by the sewage back-up. The government claimed it had committed $700,000 to repair homes.

·         October 28, 2011 – Attawapiskat First Nations leadership calls a state of emergency for the third time in three years. Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan claimed that officials in his department were unaware of Attawapiskat's housing problems until Oct. 28, despite having visited the community many times this year. (CBC (December 1, 2011). "Attawapiskat crisis sparks political blame game". http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/story/2011/12/01/attawapiskat-thursday.html. Retrieved 2011-12-03)

·         2011 December 1 The Canadian Red Cross mobilized to help meet immediate needs in the community of Attawapiskat. The Red Cross continues to work closely with public authorities and the community to identify and address urgent, short-term needs. At the request of the community the Red Cross will also take on a donation management role to support these needs as identified. ("Canadian Red Cross to support immediate needs in Attawapiskat". Toronto. November 26, 2011. http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=41678&tid=001. Retrieved December 4, 2011)

·         CBC journalist Adrienne Arsenault visited Attawapiskat to assess the situation on December 2, 2011.  Alarmed at Attawapiskat's housing problems, she dismissed claims by Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan that on an emergency basis there was adequate clean, dry shelter with running water and electricity available in the community, citing public buildings such as the healing centre and sportsplex. Adrienne Arsenault was particularly concerned about the most-at-risk groups, which include elderly people and children: the healing centre building is five kilometres out of town and has neither running water nor phone lines. (CBC (December 3, 2011). "Adrienne Arsenault Reporter's Notebook". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adKggXHA1uM. Retrieved 2011-12-03)

Much can be said about what is NOT being done or about Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s callous response to the emergency situation whereby he ordered the community into third party management instead of sending any aid at all. For any of you who are familiar with what third party management is, you will know that it is a process to make white financiers rich off the misery of First Nations peoples. With rare exceptions (I know of a few accounting firms that actually do have ethics), they do not build community capacity to eventually get out of third party management – doing so would mean they no longer get a lifelong cushy contract at $1,300 per day or more of community money that could be going toward programs of the basic necessities.

However, this brings me to my main point. The tendency of humans is to spot the injustice (which is a good thing to be aware of), but then get caught into a shoving match in an effort to deal with the injustice. The shoving and pressure, is clearly important, but it cannot be the only action taken. We must still pursue what solutions, however small they may seem, that we can.

Let us assume that the Canadian Government will never help this community and that they will continue to intentionally ignore the discriminatory funding deficits. How can we, as economic development professionals, find tangible solutions for the many challenges that this community (or any other similar to it) faces?

In my last post (http://indigenouspeopleintheeconomy.blogspot.com/2011/12/motivation.html), I discussed the importance of motivation to economic activity and I defined economic activity very broadly – including the process of acquiring food to eat. Another blog post I had recently read (http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/how-to-motivate-yourself/) discussed the importance of a tangible focus in the development of motivation. If I am hungry, rather than focus on the pain of hunger, I should focus on forming a plan on acquiring food to meet this need. That, then, becomes my motivation and offers me clear concrete direction.

So, on the ground level, we have motivation stemming from our needs and on the top level, we have the ultimate goal of a thriving sustainable community where people’s needs are met and they have opportunities to reach for their full potential. Before I begin to talk about solutions I will explain what this has to do with economic development and then I will build from the ground up the discussion of motivation from the very basic needs to the highest level of need.

Economic Development and Solution Based Focus

As I had mentioned before, economic development is essentially problem solving and creating an economic environment that encourages entrepreneurship and business development. When viewed in this light, a community such as Attawapiskat is the ideal community for economic developers to consider. If our theories and experiences cannot help communities like Attawapiskat develop, then they are meaningless and only offering an illusion of success in cities or communities that already have economic capacity built. Just as we would not praise an architect for drawing a building that was already constructed, why would we praise an economic developer for developing an economy that is already developed?

This is the reason a discussion such as this is critical to economic development. The creative energies of the economic development profession need to be directed in the right place.

Motivation: From Basic to High Level

By now, most people will have heard about Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. Fulfillment of these needs are often our primary motivators. Maslow laid out this hierarchy as follows:

·         Physiological needs: breathing, water, food, clothing, shelter

·         Safety needs: security of health, body, family, employment, resources

·         Belonging needs: friendship, family, belonging to a larger group, sexual intimacy

·         Esteem needs: self-esteem, achievement, respect of self and others

·         Need to know & understand

·         Aesthetic needs

·         Self-actualization: the drive to meet your own potential

While there are critics of this perspective, I believe they can still be valid for discussion. I do not believe they are strictly a pyramid where one must be fulfilled before the next. I also believe that this can be applied to individuals, as well as communities. I might map it to communities as follows:

·         Basic needs

·         Community safety

·         Sense of community/engagement

·         Community pride/marketing

o   Sense of pride in the community

o   Knowledge of past, present and visioning for the future

o   Community clean-up and beautification

·         Community-actualization

In Attawapiskat, they struggle to deal with the basic needs (housing, access to water, food) and community safety (threat of funding cuts from Government of Canada, threat of third party management, personal safety of community members). Often the discussion revolves around comments, such as:

·         “Why don’t they just get a job?”

·         “Why can’t they just fix up their own houses?” or “Why can’t they build better shelters?”

·         “Why don’t we just privatize their land and allow the people to get mortgages?”

·         “Why don’t they start some businesses?”

What these questions, and others like them, fail to address is the foundational influence of motivation and misplaced energies. There are no jobs in the community. There is no Rona’s or Home Hardware to purchase housing materials, even if the people had the money to do so. There are no roads to transport materials in. Mortgages for the people would be useless since they have not the income to support mortgages – it would only result in wholesale giving lands and territories into direct possession of the banking industry.

The last question may have some of the answer, but not in the traditional sense. If they community created social enterprises or co-ops that could respond to the needs they have, they may be able to venture down the road to greater sustainability. Certainly, this could not happen without some sort of an initial investment (perhaps government funding or private sector donations), but here are some potential ideas:

·         Start a sizable greenhouse to begin growing food to supply to the community – it can either be sold in a store run by the community. (Not only would an investment of funds be necessary to build the greenhouses, but training/mentorship in running greenhouses)

·         Request that universities send engineering students to create/innovate some housing/shelter concepts that could be implemented using the resources around the community

·         Request that the military consider the community for practical field exercises

·         Communicate with companies like GE regarding water filtration machines – perhaps a donation or discount price or government support at full price

·         Consult the Elders on the viability of setting up a rabbit farm or perhaps a sheep or alpaca herd

·         Consult with traditional medicine men and women about reintroducing this health option, which has the potential of using natural medicines of the traditional territory

·         Consider establishing a construction company as a joint venture with an experience company and a clear exit strategy to take advantage of housing funds that do come into the community. This builds capacity and opens the potential of the community making use of the resources around them to build further houses (perhaps using Frontier Foundation’s program of establishing local sawmills). This construction company could also take on the work to build the new school (if Canada ever offers the funds).

·         Start a grassroots program where community members gather regularly to clean up around the community as a team, or to conduct basic repairs. Already, being as a group makes things more fun, but also offer a free meal/feast and perhaps some entertainment while people are working through the community. The concept here is that no person should have nothing to do.

There are other ideas that can be thought of, but these are merely examples. When we begin to take our energies and focus them on something more tangible, like a specific solution, we make, what we once though unattainable, attainable. Focusing these solutions to meet our needs today, we fuel them with the energy of the proper motivation and, in the process, build the necessary capacity to rise to the next level.

Will there be other challenges? Absolutely, but the confidence gained in rising past one will encourage us to move beyond the next.

Knowing the problems and challenges is one thing, but if we do not start dreaming up the solutions we enable and perpetuate the problems.

So, as economic developers, let us work with the communities that truly need assistance; walk in with both ears open to find out what their needs are and how they would like us to help; put on our thinking caps and build an economic environment in the community that matches their values, their needs, and their hopes and dreams for the future.

Indigenous People and the Betty Crocker Axe at Our Necks

I recently came across a call for papers from Indigenous Policy Journal for their “Special Issue of Indigenous Policy, Spring 2012.”

This was of great interest to me because it treats the subject of a current court case in Alaska where Indigenous people there are literally fighting in the courtrooms for the recognition of their existence.

The story starts back in 1989. Exxon Valdez, an oil company had been responsible for a serious oil spill in Alaska on March 24, 1989. Between 260,000 and 750,000 barrels of crude oil had been spilled. According to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council (www.evostc.state.ak.us/History/FAQ.cfm). The immediate effects were wildlife deaths in the hundreds of thousands and the complete destruction, permanently, of the fisheries in the region.

The local economy, environment and entire way of life had been completely and utterly destroyed in a single devastating event. Many people, including the mayor of one town in the region, committed suicide after the spill. Even now, 22 years later, the toxins have not been removed and the environment has not been restored. The economy still remains in ruin. Because the Indigenous communities there are remote, fishery and wildlife was the cornerstone of the local economy. Now, there are limited economic options or hopes.

Exxon should have fairly compensated the local people for the destruction they caused, right? Apparently, many others thought so too. They took it to court. Exxon ultimately won by “proving” that the Indigenous people there (the Alutiiq people) were no longer Indigenous people by the time of the spill and, therefore, their culture could not have been damaged. So, no compensation required.

How did they prove this? They argued that the Alutiiq people were no different than average middle class Americans because they had been observed using Betty Crocker cake mix.

In a second trial regarding hunting and fishing rights in 2008, the US government denied the Alutiiq people their rights, arguing that they did not exist as a pan-Alutiiq people prior to contact (they were several groups who amalgamated in identification) and so they could not possibly have Alutiiq rights.

Although these are American court systems and laws, the approach of trying to deny Indigenous people their rights on the basis of “modern” practices is well used by colonial governments all over the world.

Pamela Palmater, in her blog, summarized many of the key points to this backward way of thinking. The main point that applies here is that the rights of Indigenous peoples can NOT be “frozen” to pre-contact times, as repeatedly clarified by the Supreme Court of Canada

Consider the ramifications of the Exxon and the US government’s flawed logic. If what they say were to be relevant, then USA and Canada have no rights selling computers, electronics, automobiles, modern housing (with drywall and vinyl and the many modern materials) because all of these items were no traditionally traded by these colonial governments pre-contact. Skyscrapers, subways, and all the modern conveniences would all need to be torn down and done away with as they are irrelevant to traditional Americans and Canadians. Obviously, this is ridiculous.

The problem comes from a flawed understanding of what trade and economics truly mean. Usually it is Wall Street thinkers that struggle to wrap their heads around the broader, more accurate understandings of trade and economics. Allow me to illuminate so that we are all on the same page.

Wall Street thinking of “trade”: financial transactions

True understanding of trade: any exchange of goods or services whether or NOT they make use of a common trade medium such as currency. If I catch a fish and trade it with my uncle for his solar-powered calculator, this is trade. It is a transaction. No money was employed, but it is an economic activity and it is a commercial activity regardless of whether the two parties or related or not.

Wall Street thinking of “economics”: currency, GDP, financial profit

True understanding of economics: the process by which people obtain what they need or want. This is often done through the science of incentives (I want something, an incentive, so I need to negotiate how I will obtain it). An economy can exist and be thriving and successful and never ever involve money. In fact, currency (money) is an imaginary system created to simply facilitate easier trade (See my earlier post on barter systems and discussions on the meaning of economy here, and here).

So a community that had fished for consumption in the past did in fact, have an economy. Fishing for consumption is an economic activity and just because it did not involve the exchange of money or a direct trade between two people, it did involve a trade of time and skill for an economic reward (fish). In this way, this economic activity was also a commercial activity.

Furthermore, just because a people did not engage in one specific form of economic activity in the past, does not mean that they have no right to do so in the future. To deny them that right means that every nation on this planet must be denied their right to produce and trade every modern product.

What about the question of culture?

Are our rights, our ways of life and our very culture itself restricted to historical stereotypes and caricatures? If I am not living in a teepee year round and wearing buckskin clothing, do I cease to be Ojibwe? Do my rights cease?

Naturally, the answers are a resounding NO. For the sake of argument, however, let us assume that this is the case universally. I will liberally borrow an idea from one of Dr. Pamela Palmater’s presentation of the “traditional” Canadian.

The traditional Canadian historically wore black robes, sported long locks of white or grey hair and was white. Their traditional way of life included squatting, consuming massive amounts of alcohol (Sir John A McDonald was a well documented drunk), arguing over legal terminology, and judging other people. In their traditional culture, homosexuality was criminalized and punished, people suspected of witchcraft could be burned at the stake. Now, if Canadians cease to practice these traditional ways and dressing, their rights are null and void. They are no longer Canadian citizens.

Since Canadians no longer outlaw homosexuality or burn people at the stake their Canadian culture is dead and no longer exists. Therefore they have no rights any longer and America may take the land, for example.

Ridiculous, no? Yet this is exactly what the white colonial governments attempt to do to Indigenous people in order to justify their continued expropriation of land and resources. Just as Canadians have been allowed to evolve as a culture and change over time, so must we be allowed.

The fundamental problem is when the colonials attempt to treat our nations as a culture or a race. We are neither; we are nations. Our nations do have a specific culture and majority of our citizens are of a specific ethnicity, but that does not deny the fact that our nations were historically and are now still nations.

So, let’s have a Betty Crocker revolution! Let us hold a box of Betty Crocker cake mix in the air and proudly proclaim that we still retain our cultures and our inherent rights as Indigenous peoples!

The Economy of Language

I want to talk about the effect of language on culture and culture on economy. I have been on a linguistic and cultural journey throughout my life. As a background I will explain where I am coming from, the culture that is embedded into language, and then how that affects our ways of viewing the world around us and our approach to economic development.

My Background

My first language was French, taught to me by my father. My mother had already lost her own language, Ojibwe, by that time. When the day came to start school, it was around the era in the early 80's when the French had begun fighting in the Supreme Court for their linguistic rights. They had suffered decades of oppression and assimilatory practices (sound familiar?) by the hands of the English. French school children had to hide their books in ceiling panels when English inspectors came.

As the court case was working its way through, the hatred and aggression against the French by English people was at an al time high. My father feared that if he continued teaching me French, I would never get a job when I got older. So, well meaning, he placed me in English school and I lost everything.

Fast forward. Years later, after growing up entirely in the city, disconnected from my community, I set out on my own distancing myself from extended family and met the woman who would become my wife. I eventually immersed myself into her French language and culture, being fully accepted with wide open arms by her family. Her family became my family and her language became a beautiful gift to me.

Fast forward. Although I have spent most of my career involved in Indigenous business development, economic development and employment; it has only been in the past year I have begun having inexplicable longings to return to my home community. I say inexplicable because I have never actually lived there, only visited. Nonetheless, without going into too much detail, I have begun forming connections and friendships with my fellow Anishinaabe citizens*, reconnecting with relations, and now pursuing my native tongue.

Throughout this linguistic and cultural journey, I have learned a great deal. Through looking at 3 languages, I have seen how embedded and inseparable the culture is from the language and vice versa. Let's explore this together.

English Language and Culture

What do we know of the culture of English speakers here in Canada? With some modest generalizations I note the two common points: 1) there is one way to do things right, all others are either inferior or less effective; 2) in the mainstream English speaking world of Canada, we are taught to be bold, aggressive, and confident, sell yourself in job hunting

The English language is such that consonants are very hard sounding; bold, in-your-face. I know this after seeing how the same consonants in other languages (French, Spanish, Ojibwe) are often softer, smoother, and generally more gentle sounding. This makes sense when we consider the pervasiveness of English culture and language globally.

With English, grammar is such that there is a rigid structure in place with complex rules and syntax. This results in a rigid structure that leaves only one "correct" way of saying something. You might change the vocabulary, but the structure must always be in that one way. Anyone speaking like Yoda (Star Wars), would not be viewed as intelligently as someone with a "commanding" grasp of the English language.

One other embedded cultural element contained in the language is that of assimilation. The very language itself assimilates words of other languages, English-icizes their pronunciation, and more often than not, replaces the Indigenous language that was there first.

The English language is based on a subject-object relationship where, philosophically, they are independent of one another and the subject “does” something to the object as though the object has no role or say in the matter. In Ojibwe and many other Indigenous languages, subject and object are interdependent and not differentiable. They are not doing something “to” one another, but having an experience together.

Naturally, you can see how historic and contemporary English-speaking culture parallels these elements of the language. In fact, so embedded is it that the influence of the language construct sub-consciously reinforces specific world views and approaches to treating people. From English tendency to assimilate people, to viewing themselves and their ways as superior, to their views of dominance over the environment and the exploitation of natural resources, to their ways of interacting with one another, we can see the culture influenced by the language.

French Language and Culture

In the French language, there is also some rigid structure involved in how you say something, but with one key difference than that of the English language. In French, you have several options of how you wish to say something. I am not talking simple vocabulary switches here either, I mean complete phrase structure changes between these options.

The language is still based on subject-object, but sometimes the subject come after the object and in many cases, the phrases are indirect. With English, it is subject does something to object. In French, there are forms in that structure where object is affected by subject in such and such a way, rather than strictly "subject does action to object". Culturally, there is some acceptance of different ways of being (as there are some options of different ways of speaking a phrase). However, it is limited acceptance.

One very interesting difference is that in English, emotion is all but stripped out of the language so that English speakers are forced to use descriptor words to explain emotion. In French, emotion and romanticism is embedded. The French culture has always been noted for their romantic natures, charm, and often their seductiveness (not saying this in a negative way). These cultural tendencies are rooted in the very language itself.

There is no way to say “I like you” in French. You either LOVE them or ADORE them, nothing less. Pronouns and adjectives for people are often terms of endearment, embedded into the language. Even the method in which the words are spoken involve animated hand motions to the point that expression is a well known trait for French people.

Ojibwe Language and Culture

In Ojibwe, there is an interesting trait of the language. The word order does not matter in most cases. Rather than a rigid, “one right way,” structure, an Ojibwe speaker may use whatever order they wish. It is, in many ways, like the cultural view that one must find their own way. It is truly a liberating feeling coming from the rigidity of the English language.

Consonants in Ojibwe are ALL much softer than in English. A “g” is spoken closer to a “t” sound and a “b” closer to a “p” sound, etc. This is very much in parallel with our culture of being softer spoken, more tentative and respectful, and exhibiting gentleness. As our language is not at all “in your face,” our culture is very much about humility.

In English, we operate under the rigidity of subject + action +object. The philosophical underpinning of that structure is that subject and object are independent of one another and the subject may do as it pleases (action) to the object (ie. Environment), with or without consent.  In Ojibwe and many Indigenous languages, there is little difference between subject and object. One is not “doing” something TO the other, but rather they are sharing an experience together.

Practically, English speakers (subject, ie. Government) wish to do something (action, ie. Improve social-economic status) to Indigenous people (object, as though they are separate and apart from English speakers and no interdependency). This is why such efforts ultimately fail. The subjects are not sharing in the experience, good or bad. As a result, it is impossible to effect real change.

In that same example, from an Ojibwe linguistic and cultural perspective, the solution lies in both “subject” (ie. Government) and “object” (Indigenous people) to have a shared experience improving socio-economic status. This approach means it is not just a job some hired bureaucrat does, but rather it is a whole community (both English speaking mainstream Canadians and Indigenous people) approach that transcends a 9-5 job. It becomes something that we live. It means we are not going to talk about how bad poverty is and then go home at the end of the day to our Steak dinner in front of our 60" flat screen tv and 6.0 surround sound system.

Culture and Nationhood

I have learned a great deal from the French people, whose culture I was happily accepted into. The French in Canada also have a history of oppression and persecution at the hands of the English. They had lost the war against the British (which, sadly was about controlling a land that did not belong to either of them) and suffered as the losers of the war at the hands of the victors.

One thing I had learned was the way they had maintained their culture and nationality over time. They did this through the protection of their language above all else. Not land, not programs, not individual communities could have enabled the French in Canada to survive to the point where they are today. I have observed when French people hear another person speak French, even a complete stranger, and the instant sense of connection that they demonstrate.

I have felt this connection as well. It is these lessons that have shown me the critical importance of our Indigenous languages to protecting our cultures and identities. These identities, cultures and linguistically influenced world views are absolutely critical to cultivating the wisdom required to recreating local, national and global economies that are better integrated and interconnected with the land, the environment, people and animals.

I feel this connection again as I am in the process of learning my own native tongue.

Effect on Economic Development

Now we can see how language intrinsically influences and shapes culture (and vice versa). Together, language and culture influence and shape our world views and hence, our approach to economic development.

The mainstream approach to economic development has been driven, in large part, by the English speaking world. As a result, consciously or not, people have adopted a separated view of themselves and our environment – a philosophy of disconnect between all that exists in this universe. This has led to exploitation of resources, harmful corporate practices, even genocide (when the perpetrators view the victims as disconnected from themselves). This philosophy has led to the belief that animals and resources exist to be dominated by humans without the acknowledgement of the interconnectedness that exists.

(NOTE: this is not to say that there are not many English speaking people who have altered their perspectives on these issues. Certainly there are many who have and many who are champions for a new way of developing and approaching this world - but these shifts in perspective generally have come from education and awareness, not from intrinsic and subconscious influence of their spoken language)

The alternatives to this approach stem from our Indigenous languages. The embedded cultural world views are full of the wisdom required for the changes this world is going through. Economic Development can be done in a different way than exploitation and profit above all else. The key to finding these alternatives lie in our understanding of the world views that come from our languages.

Concluding notes:

There are gifts that can come from every language. The trouble begins when we allow for one language (any one) to dominate the others. The same global issues could have stemmed from a different language if it had gained dominance. Our global strength lies in our diversity.

Notes:

*I say citizens because our nations are not simply communities, but nations with the power of citizenship, even if our current leaders are not exercising that power.

Economic success in a community

Success. What does this even mean? In today’s world of ever increasing accountability and public scrutiny, we seek to measure the success of every activity. Community economic development is not exempt from this either. But how do you measure the success of a community?

There are over hundreds and hundreds of First Nation, Métis, and Inuit communities across Canada. Some are a couple dozen people big, while others number in the thousands. Some are remote, others are situated on main highways. Some have traditional occupations (hunting and trapping), while others have CEOs and large corporations. Which ones are successful? How do you define it?

Some have tried to take the “socio-economic conditions” approach. There is some merit in this approach where people are compared against the ideals of urban life. Here we look at access to health care, access to clean water, access to transportation, access to markets, employment rates, income levels, education levels, perceptions of safety, etc. Certainly some of this can shed a bit of light on the issue, but it does not tell the entire story.

People have tried to use the “economic measures” approach, whereby they examine how many local businesses are in operation, GDP, local revenues, income levels, employment rates, etc. In reality, this is limited to looking at economic activity, which is still useful information. However, it does not tell the entire story either.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of our approaches are comparative in nature to some ingrained ideal. These ingrained ideals are taught to us, culturally, by mainstream society from a very early age. Some of these include:

·         For Individuals:  

o   personal wealth

o   home ownership or size/appearance

o   type of car or truck

o   employer or position at work

·         For communities:

o   Entertainment options

o   Shopping centres

o   Traffic

o   Number of BIG businesses located in the community

Granted these types of “indicators” are mostly taught to children growing up in urban centres. However, the people working in governments, making program and policy decisions, conducting ‘research,’ are typically those in urban centres.

For some, these indicators might resonate. For others, they may leave a bad taste in the mouth. The key here is that people do not define what they mean by economic development. They do not define what success looks like to them, and they do not ensure their views are in alignment with the underlying values of the community.

I have seen many communities, including one First Nation that is a fly-in community (call it community A) with plenty of access to in-home running water. In this community, there are almost no employment options, rampant welfare, violence, alcoholism, drug abuse, marital unfaithfulness to the extreme, child neglect, etc. I have seen another community that is also a fly-in community (call it community B), but that has less than half their people connected to running water. Despite the employment options being few, this community does not share the same level of social dysfunction.

Why? What causes one to have different results than the other? Many people use some of the aforementioned approaches to defining economic success and conclude that both communities are failing. While community B certainly has its challenges, I disagree. I believe that community B is a successful community. Many of the people there are happy in spite of the challenges of water access and distant health care.

What happened to community A? Did they lose hope when outside urbanites came in and repeatedly told them they are failures and that they must strive to be like the big cities? Were they driven to despair when their own definitions of success was trampled on by well-meaning, but misguided bureaucrats, and replaced with an urbanite definition of success?

Often the presence of a flat screen TV or IPod Touch or IPad in the home is a sign of individual economic success. But is it really? Is it a success when we spend more of our time melting into a couch in a zombie like state while being spoon fed mental fodder? Is it truly a success when our children turn away from their soccer balls and become sedentary in front of their tech toys and video games?

Or is it more successful when they do not have these distractions and instead, walk along side the older generations, learning skills and knowledge?

There is no single answer, as it will vary person to person according to their cultural upbringing, personal and communal views. One thing for certain, measures of success are pointless if success has not been defined.

For program or project managers, and especially for government workers, it is absolutely critical to listen to a community about how THEY define success and shape the measurement of success from that.

Community Economic Development tools

What is community economic development? Many people ask the question, but few receive a clear answer. Some receive confusing answers while others do not wait for an answer. Still others, simply write it off as "left wing" or "socialist" or "communist."

Really, in simple terms, community economic development (CED) is economic development +. It is economic development, but not just that. It is much more than that. CED encompasses all aspects of a community, just as in reality, our lives do as well.

That being said, I find it somewhat irritating when people talk about CED in terms of "business development" and "entrepreneurship" only. Our focus on infinite profit and selfish individualism are not particularly conducive to developing productive, safe, happy communities. I will not repeat the research on CED, but I will encourage you to read this link, which has a pretty good description:

http://www.manitobaresearchallianceced.ca/Documents/51-CED_as_mainstream_alternative.pdf

Interesting to note is that this paper was written on the subject of the merit and value of CED as a mainstream alternative to the current neo-classical system of capitalism BEFORE the global financial meltdown was caused by the same neo-classical Wall Street elite who have since profited from it.

Here is another link that explains CED: http://www.manitobaresearchallianceced.ca/Documents/Thematic_Summaries/CEDandtheNewEconomyNorthern-WEB.pdf

However, I want to focus on the fact that many communities and people interested in CED often miss out on some valuable resources available to them. I will list a few of them here:

• http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/epb/sid/cia/comm_deve/cdhbooke.pdf
• CED Path-finder: http://www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/ri/ced/pdf/cedpathtoc.pdf
• List of Data sources: http://www.reddi.gov.on.ca/data.htm
• Free CED Capacity tool: http://www.communitydevelopment.uiuc.edu/surveys/index.html

Currently I am working on a tool that I hope that be able to distribute in the next few months. Initially it is only focused on MB, but it may well growth from there.

Ken

Economic meaning

Many people have been drawing up conclusions that economic development is the path to empowerment and autonomy for communities - specifically First Nation communities. To some degree, I agree with this.

However, one must ask, what does economic development even mean? What does progress look like?

For starters, here in North America, we live under an economic system that is dominated by "new classical" economic philosophy and the culture of consumerism, materialism, and mass production. As Indigenous nations begins to build their own economies and strive to break free of the shackles of opression and poverty, it is important to ask the questions above and answer to what type of economic system is desired?

The prevelence of new classical and the predessors, "free market" and  neo-classical, greatly concerns me because it is essentially based, at least partly, on the following principles:

• That currency has actual meaning
• Infinite accumulation of profit is the highest goal to be pursued at any cost
• Immediate profit gains equate to progress and success
• Supply and Demand are the greatest drivers of what society needs and wants
• Government has no place in regulating or interferring with the economy

All of our current top business magazines and university courses continually drive these messages into the brains of anyone with entrepreneurial ambitions. In turn, media, marketing and business that have bought into this system preach the messages of consumerism and materialism to the general public, shaping and forming what society is supposed to want.

While there have been some definite positives that have come out, we often forget to ask "at what price?" and "to who's benefit?"

With the first principle listed above, currency has meaning, we have lost the very meaning of work and life. Currency, was never inteded to have value in and of itself. It was, in its original use, intended to facilitate efficiency in trade between people and groups.

What I mean by this is that suppose you were skilled in making clothing. I might require some clothing and since, for example, I have a garden of vegetables, I come to you to offer a trade with the excess of the vegetables I have for some clothing. If you were in need of vegetables, great, we have a deal. But if you were not, then I would need to inquire what you are looking to trade for and find someone to trade vegetables with in order to get the trade items I need to meet your needs. Obviously that could lead to a long chain of trades. This is where currency simplifies things. Dollars represent, not value in and of themselves, but a representation of either a service rendered or a good produced. Hence, trade is simplified between us and we have no need for a long complicated chain of intermediate trades.

Thinking of things like this, work done in one country will carry an equal value in any other country - exactly as one would fairly expect. Unfortunately, this is not the reality. I can do the same amount of work here in Canada as someone in Congo, let's say, and my work will carry many times the value. What is the reason for this?!?

We have allowed banks and the financial sector to change their roles from safe storehouses of our representative symbols of goods and services (currency/money) into regulators and definers of what the symbols mean and what are their value. It is precisely this issue that gave rise to the current recession and near global economic collapse. It is precisely this enormous power we have allowed the financial sector to take that enabled them to manipulate the value of our goods and services - our very skills.

Placing an artificial value on an otherwise meaningless item (a dollar), gives rise to the pursuit of infinite profit. With the goal of infinite profit, little or no thought is given to environmental sustainability, future generations, ecological impact, fair benefits for local people, fair wages for workers, etc. So many examples of this could be given - oil spills, strip mining operations and toxic deposits left behind, mercury piosoning of Grassy Narrows, nuclear waste poisoning by nuclear projects, clear cutting of forests, pollution of water ways and lakes, sweat shops, human trafficking, slave labour and/or incredibly unfair wage rates, etc.

While profit is not a 'dirty' word in and of itself, when it becomes the driving principle, it loses its purpose. Progress should not be measured by the accumulation of endless profit. There is no reason why a business or corporation needs to strive for infinite profit. Yet in our current system, this is what shareholders demand so that they in turn can receive maximum gains for their investments. In our current system, our stock traders and financiers all demand infinite profit that they may siphon off their cut.

As a mini case study, why does Wal-Mart need to be a global empire with more buying power than nearly every country in the world? Why does CEO of this empire get to profit 587 of times more than the average worker [Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Definitive Proxy Statement (Form DEF-14A) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 20, 2009, p. 36]? Does he do thousands of times more work? Not likely.

In a recent article (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-10-08/wal-mart-to-end-employee-profit-sharing-in-february.html), Wal-Mart anounced that they plan to end their employee profit sharing program by February 2011. Why? Why is it that this empire needs to pocket even more of the share of the pie? This is precisely the problem with the pursuit of infinite profit to the exclusion of all else. Virtually every ranking system we have counts profit and growth as the supreme indicators of success. Even leaders, CEOs, Managers are all judged in their resumes with these very false indicators.

To draw an analogy, this is like slaughtering an entire herd of bison to trade its fur or horns, rather than hunting the one or two individual bison required to feed your family. It is like clear cutting an entire forest (gone forever) to become rich trading all the wood, rather than cutting only the few trees you need to build a home.

Obviously, as my third listed principle states, this is prioritizing immediate gain at the ignorance of future loss. Who cares that our processes are polluting the world with plastic? Who cares if I am creating a nation of poverty among workers? Who cares if I am crushing the livelihoods of local businesses? As long as I get immediate gains and profits, my resume and accomplishments will look good.

The fourth principle I have listed, that of supply and demand being the best indicators of the will of the people, is rather deceptive. On the one hand, people may reason, "if people didn't like it, they wouldn't buy it. Hence they support the product and its practices." Although, what is often forgotten is the fact that supply and demand are manipulated by media/marketing and by the selective exclusion/inclusion of choices in communities. Will my quality of life truly be lower if I do not buy the latest 70" flatscreen 3D HD LCD television? Suppose you have an appliance that runs perfectly fine except for one single part that you need. Good luck finding it. It is in th best interests of companies to stop supplying such a product so that you will have to throw away the appliance and buy a new one.

Companies have purposefully stopped making high quality items (like the cars or tv's of 40 years ago that are still running in near perfect condition), because they cannot pursue infinite profit if a customer has no need for another product for 40 or 50 years. So items are now produced with a much shorter lifespan. Who cares what damage that will have to our environment with burgeoning garbage dumps?

Supply and demand? Supply mixed with skillful propaganda (marketing) is the driver and demand is the dependent in reality.

Finally, we come to the role of Government. What is government? The representation of the will of the people (ideally... but politics is another topic entirely). Naturally, it is in the best interests of a company pursuing infinite profit to have little or no regulation. This way, they operate however they wish to maximize their profits without those pesky human rights and corporate responsibility concepts. If government has no power or influence or control over the parameters by which business operates, what voice or hope do the people have?

Who is there to stop a business from bumping toxic waste into the fishing lake? Or leaving toxic deposits behind on the land where run-off guides the toxins into the playgrounds and school yards of children?

All of these thoughts are simply that, my thoughts. I do not claim to be some infallible authority on the subject by any means. However, I will offer some closing thoughts.

Whether or not the economic system, nationally (or even globally) as a whole can be fixed, changed or altered, I am not sure. However, I do believe that local economies within communities can strive to be different and build a system that is more balanced and conducive to the human element. This can only happen if people begin to question what "economy" truly means and what is it they wish to see in their communities. Who should benefit from their work and by how much? Should the manager of a local IT shop make 10 times the amount of the technician who actually does the work? Is that the system desired? Who determines the value of specific occupations? Is sheer profit the goal? Or is it that a business is built to supply the needs of the community, not only in what it produces, but in what and how it compensates those involved?