Research Spotlight: Understanding Indigenous women’s role in water governance

As issues such as mining resource development increasingly impact Indigenous communities, the role of indigenous women – as traditional protectors of water – is being explored by Professor Patricia Hania.

Professor Hania, who teaches business law at the Ted Rogers School of Management, is researching how current water governance processes leave Indigenous women out of the decision-making process despite that in many First Nation communities they hold the role to speak for water.

Her interest in this topic is rooted in her doctoral research conducted at Osgoode Hall Law School, where she examined the shift in Canada, at a provincial level, to a mode of participatory governance (or shared governance) in the water sector. In Ontario, this shift to a new participatory legal water governance model was a result of the Walkerton drinking water tragedy (external link)  of May 2000, which eventually led to the introduction of the Clean Water Act, 2006.

Under the Act, a water plan is developed collaboratively by a localized water source protection committee with participation from municipalities, business sectors, individuals interested in environmental and health issues and First Nations representatives. However, Hania believes that through this legislation, we see limits to the law.

Hania’s doctoral research investigated who actually participates in the creation of a water plan, who holds the power in the decision-making process and how First Nations, and First Nations women specifically, participate in these committees.

Why is water so important an issue for Indigenous communities?

I think this is a question that should be directed at a First Nation, and recognizing that each First Nation’s response may differ based on their unique Indigenous laws, governance systems, and of course, the water needs and challenges facing their community.

As a social-legal scholar, this question for me raises the importance of upholding treaty and aboriginal rights under s. 35 Constitution Act, 1982.  For example, I ask: Is the treaty right to fish effectively terminated when the effects of climate change upon a river has reduced the water flow leaving members of the affected First Nation unable to access the river to fish?

Generally, a non-Indigenous view of water is grounded in rights where water is viewed as a resource to be harnessed for economic benefits. In contrast, an Indigenous worldview of water is one of relationship, responsibility and respect, and where water is viewed as alive. Water may hold a spiritual, political, cultural, natural, and social meaning for a First Nation community.

In your paper, titled “Revitalizing Indigenous Women’s Water Governance Roles in Impact and Benefit Agreement Processes Through Indigenous Legal Orders and Water Stories,” you look at how women play a pivotal governance role for water in Indigenous communities. Can you explain that relationship further and what your research seeks to discover from it?

Indigenous water governance scholar, Professor Deborah McGregor and others, have long argued for the recognition of Indigenous women in water governance decision-making because as she explains that as an Anishinaabe woman she holds a responsibility to speak for water. This responsibility to speak for water reflects a worldview where women hold a special relationship to, and a responsibility for water.  

But, the problem in the water source protection committee under the Clean Water Act, 2006 is that the process is gendered, and Indigenous women did not participate. Indigenous women and their worldview of holding a responsibility to speak for water is overlooked in the water planning processes that I examined in Ontario, Alberta and the Yukon.

During my post-doctoral research at Ryerson I wanted to understand: Why are Indigenous Women missing from water governance in mainstream regulatory systems? I wondered how Indigenous stories as a source of knowledge could be brought into a participatory process.

In the article, I expand upon Graben, Cameron and Morale’s emerging gendered approach to impact benefit agreements (IBA) and argue that mining, women and water are interconnected. Mining is an activity that impacts aquatic systems and implicates Indigenous women and their role as a water knowledge holder. Advancing the idea of participation as a means to bolster Indigenous women’s involvement in the IBA law-making process is essential but offering Indigenous women a place at the IBA negotiating table is meaningless without recognizing their responsibility to speak and their relationship to water. This responsibility and relationship to water establishes a decision-making role for Indigenous women in governance regimes where water is impacted.

This research led to a collaboration with Dr. Sari Graben (Ryerson’s Faculty of Law) and the forthcoming article entitled: “Stories and the Participation of Indigenous Women in Natural Resource Governance” to be published in Canadian Journal of Women and the Law.  

In your research paper mentioned above, what would be the greatest impact?

The greatest impact will be to foster law and policy reform as well as create awareness and educate regulators, policy makers and the business community on the important role that Indigenous women in many First Nation communities hold with respect to carrying out their responsibility to be stewards of water.

My research has consistently pointed to the opportunities for knowledge translation, respectful decision making processes and learning different worldviews that can only strengthen participatory processes to be inclusive and adopt a pluralist perspective of natural resources.

How does your research relate to current news stories and events happening in Indigenous communities? What can be learned through your work?

Media reports earlier this year on the Coastal GasLink project exposed the difference between the Band Council (on the reserve) under the Indian Act and Indigenous governance (on traditional territory) under Indigenous law.

The Indian Act is the legal instrument that set out the Band Council and governance function that mirrored the British tradition of male-based governance authority. In short, the implementation of the Indian Act silenced Indigenous women governance roles by disregarding Indigenous governance systems that uphold Indigenous law and the roles of women.

In the natural resource sector, and in particular in mining communities, numerous NGOs have reported on the harm experienced by Indigenous women and their children when an extractive economic development project reshapes their community. Given women are directly impacted by these development projects, it seems reasonable that they should be given a seat at the impact benefit agreement negotiation table, and offered the opportunity to discuss their relationship as well as responsibility to protect water sources, and be involved in the decision-making process.

What are the next steps after this?

To continue examining the participatory governance mode of law-making. I intend to expand upon the eco-resiliency framework that I developed in my doctoral work and explore how law and policy reforms can be responsive to ecological and societal change within natural resource management planning sectors that are considered significant economic drivers in Canada.