In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Lessons for Social Science in the Study of New Polities: Nunavut at 10
  • Ailsa Henderson (bio)

This year marks the tenth anniversary of Nunavut and as a result provides an excellent opportunity to evaluate the impact of the new territory. There are, of course, two anniversaries for Nunavut, one marking the signing of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement in 1993, and the other marking the birth of the territory in 1999. These twin anniversaries reflect the dual creation of the territory, grounded in a comprehensive land claim for Inuit and a political accord—a dual origin that is only one of the reasons why we might wish to evaluate the impact of the new territory one decade after its creation.

The comprehensive land claim that led to the eventual division of the Northwest Territories (NWT) was signed in 1993 by representatives of the Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, the NWT, and the federal government. The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement provides Inuit title to 350,000 km2 of land in the eastern Canadian Arctic, subsurface mineral rights to one tenth of that, and over $1.1 billion in federal money transferred over 14 years. Inuit beneficiaries of the claim are also entitled to a share of the royalties from oil and gas extraction on Crown land and are granted hunting and fishing rights, as well as the right to participate in decisions over land and resource management. In exchange, Inuit beneficiaries have surrendered their rights to further land or subsurface claims in the area covered by the claim. In this respect, the land claim provides a point of no return for Inuit beneficiaries.

The land claim also contained provisions for a political accord (Canada 1992), and it is this latter document that set out the conditions for the creation of Nunavut in 1999. The new territory now contains 31,000 residents, 85% of whom are Inuit. Meaning “our land” in Inuktitut, Nunavut is home to one fifth of Canada’s land mass and one third of its coastline. The territory contains 25 communities spread across three regions, the Qikiqtaaluk (Baffin), Kitikmeot, and Kivalliq. The legislature, now in its third term, contains 19 members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) who run as independents in territorial elections and select from amongst themselves the territorial premier and cabinet. The cabinet, which thus far has been led by premiers Paul Okalik (1999–2008) and Eva Aariak (2008 to the present), is supported by a territorial administration based in Iqaluit, the capital, and 10 other of the larger communities. Between 1999 and 2008, the [End Page 5] legislature passed 193 acts. Many of these are acts to amend pre-existing NWT legislation while others address issues relevant to the creation of a new polity, such as the Flag of Nunavut Act (1999), Floral Emblem Act (2000), and Nunavut Elections Act (2002). In some cases, though, the acts represent a clear change in legislative direction. Examples of this are the Wildlife Act (2003) and Inuit Language Protection Act (2008).

Beyond these basic figures and facts, Nunavut is also an ambitious example of political change, remarkable both because it occurred within a decade marked by the constitutional failures of Meech, Charlottetown, and the 1995 Quebec referendum—which each proposed ambitious programs of political change—and because it offers the first significant redrawing of internal Canadian boundaries since Newfoundland became a Canadian province in 1949. It is not surprising that it serves as a compelling case study for social scientists, not as an abstract social experiment but as an example of how governments and political communities can strive to improve quality of life for those within the polity.

Any territorial government and administration faces obvious challenges, but the economic and social realities of life in the North provide an additional layer of complexity: public sector employment represents half of all jobs in the territory (White 1999a); territorial housing is insufficient in both quality and number; levels of literacy, numeracy, and educational attainment lag behind other jurisdictions; the cost of living is very high; an above average number of households can be classified as “low income”; and the suicide rate is a national tragedy. In addition, Nunavut is the youngest jurisdiction...

pdf

Share