Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Exploring cross-cultural planning literacy : knowledge considerations for planning with First Nations Cook, R. Jeffrey 2002

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2002-0371.pdf [ 10.42MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0090393.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0090393-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0090393-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0090393-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0090393-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0090393-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0090393-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0090393-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0090393.ris

Full Text

EXPLORING CROSS-CULTURAL PLANNING LITERACY: KNOWLEDGE CONSIDERATIONS FOR PLANNING WITH FIRST NATIONS. by R. J E F F R E Y C O O K B.A (Honours) , Queens University, 1991 A THESIS S U B M I T T E D IN PARTIAL F U L F I L M E N T O F THE R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R T S ( P L A N N I N G ) " in T H E F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S (School of Commun i t y and Regional Planning) W e accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September 2002 © R. Jeffrey Cook, 2002 In p resen t ing this thesis in partial fu l f i lment of t h e requ i remen ts fo r an advanced degree at t h e Univers i ty of British C o l u m b i a , I agree that the Library shall make it f reely available f o r re fe rence and study. I fu r ther agree that pe rm iss ion fo r ex tens ive c o p y i n g o f this thesis f o r scholar ly purposes may be gran ted by the head of my d e p a r t m e n t or by his o r her representat ives. It is u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g or pub l i ca t i on o f this thesis for f inancial gain shall n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t m y w r i t t e n permiss ion . D e p a r t m e n t o f laCHcx^L t f CUMMiitJ i TV ;- f? £ G i UM/\L ft-A^»\j>>0G The Univers i ty of Brit ish C o l u m b i a Vancouver , Canada Date S E P ~ t a ,M^c3^ , 2JCC ^_ DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT Under debate is how 'outside' planners can best work with different cultures to ensure inclusion and participation. It is evident why in general planners need to expand their understanding of different cultures if they are to work with them effectively and appropriately, but not enough empirical research has been undertaken on what planners find they need to know in the specific context of working with First Nations. On the basis of a literature review and the author's own extensive experience with First Nations, seven areas of knowledge (themes) were identified as likely to be relevant to outside planners working with First Nations. These seven knowledge themes guided interviews with nine planners who were asked which of these kinds of knowledge they found useful when working with First Nations in western and northern Canada, and Alaska, particularly when facilitating participatory planning. The first six identified themes concern knowledge of First Nations' value and traditional knowledge systems; authority relations; social organization; communication processes; participation processes; and capacity for planning. The seventh theme is knowledge about effective methods that planners can employ to facilitate participatory relationships with First Nations communities and individuals. The findings from the interviews add to our understanding of what outside planners need to consider when they work with First Nations. The findings are particularly instructive in the theme areas of First Nations' communication and participation processes, and in the area of planner practice. It was also found that while the seven areas of knowledge are relevant to planners at all stages of working with First Nations, they are particularly important when planners and First Nations begin their planning relationship, when planners first enter a community, and when planners are helping communities to develop their planning processes. Research is now needed on what First Nations' individuals themselves think planners should know if they are to be effective in promoting culturally appropriate, inclusive, and participatory planning in First Nations settings. T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S A B S T R A C T ii T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S iii LIST OF T A B L E S . v LIST O F FIGURES vi A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S vii 1.0 C H A P T E R 1: R E S E A R C H CONTEXT, P U R P O S E AND ORGANIZATION O F THESIS 1 1.1 RESEARCH CONTEXT 1 1.2 RESEARCH P U R P O S E S INTENTION 4 1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS 4 2.0 C H A P T E R TWO: R E S E A R C H B A C K G R O U N D , A P P R O A C H , P R O C E S S AND ETHICAL CONCERNS. . . . . 5 2.1 RESEARCH BACKGROUND 5 2.2 RESEARCH APPROACH 5 2.3 RESEARCH PROCESS 6 2.4 INTERVIEWS 7 2.5 ETHICAL CONCERNS 8 3.0 C H A P T E R THREE: C O N C E P T U A L F R A M E W O R K AND ORGANIZING S T R U C T U R E ...10 3.1 DEFINITIONS 10 3.2 T H E POTENTIAL APPLICATION OF SANDERCOCK'S INSURGENT PLANNER MODEL 12 3.3 T H E POTENTIAL APPLICATION OF FORESTER'S PROGRESSIVE PLANNER MODEL 13 3.4 EXPLORING SEVEN KNOWLEDGE THEMES BASED ON THE FINDINGS FROM THE LITERATURE .16 3.4.1 FIRST NATIONS' VALUE AND KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS 16 3.4.2 AUTHORITY RELATIONS 21 3.4.3 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 25 3.4.4 COMMUNICATION 27 3.4.5 PARTICIPATION 30 3.4.6 CAPACITY 34 3.4.7 PLANNER RELATIONSHIP 36 3.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY 39 4.0 C H A P T E R FOUR: INSIGHTS AND STORIES FROM PLANNER INTERVIEWEES 41 4.1 BACKGROUNDS OF INTERVIEWED PLANNERS 41 4.2 EXPLORING SEVEN KNOWLEDGE THEMES BASED ON THE FINDINGS FROM PLANNER INTERVIEWS 42 iv 4.2.1 VALUE AND KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS 42 4.2.2 AUTHORITY RELATIONS 46 4.4.3 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 49 4.2.4 COMMUNICATION 54 4.2.5 PARTICIPATION 59 4.2.6 COMMUNITY CAPACITY 74 4.2.7 PLANNER RELATIONSHIP 82 4.3 CHAPTER SUMMARY 99 5.0 C H A P T E R F I V E : A N A L Y S I S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S O F F I N D I N G S 100 5.1 FIRST NATIONS' V A L U E AND KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS 100 5.2 AUTHORITY RELATIONS 105 5.3 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION 110 5.4 COMMUNICATION 115 5.5 PARTICIPATION 121 5.6 CAPACITY 137 5.7 PLANNER RELATIONSHIP 142 5.8 T H E RELEVANCE OF FORESTER'S PROGRESSIVE PLANNER MODEL FOR PLANNING WITH FIRST NATIONS 154 5.9 T H E RELEVANCE OF SANDERCOCK'S INSURGENT PLANNER MODEL FOR PLANNING WITH FIRST NATIONS 161 6.0 C H A P T E R SIX: R E S E A R C H R E F L E C T I O N S , L I M I T A T I O N S , I M P L I C A T I O N S A N D C O N S I D E R A T I O N S 165 6.1 RESEARCH QUESTION... . 165 6.2 RESEARCH APPROACH 165 6.3 INTERVIEW METHOD 166 6.4 SAMPLE SELECTION 167 6.5 PLANNING RELEVANCE AND IMPLICATIONS 167 6.6 CLOSING REFLECTION 170 6.7 PLANNER CONSIDERATIONS -171 A P P E N D I X A : S A M P L E I N T E R V I E W G U I D E 177 B I B L I O G R A P H Y 178 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Typical Characteristics of Traditional and Western Knowledge Systems 21 Table 2: Participatory Roles and Characteristics of First Nations Women Identified by Interviewees 124 Table 3: Participatory Roles and Characteristics of First Nations Men Identified by Interviewees 124 Table 4: Participatory Roles and Characteristics of First Nations Elders Identified by Interviewees 125 Table 5: Planning Methods, Strategies and Techniques to Facilitate Effective Participatory Planning 130 LIST OF FIGURES vi Figure 1: Seven Knowledge Themes for Planning With First Nations 6 Figure 2: Knowledge About Value Systems for Planning with First Nations 103 Figure 3: Knowledge About Authority Relations for Planning with First Nations.... 110 Figure 4: Knowledge About Social Organization for Planning with First Nations.... 115 Figure 5: Knowledge About Communication for Planning with Firs Nations 120 Figure 6: Knowledge About Participation for Planning with First Nations 136 Figure 7: Knowledge About Capacity for Planning with First Nations 141 Figure 8: Knowledge About the Planner Relationship for Planning with First Nations 153 vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you Peter Boothroyd, Penny Gurstein and Stan De Mello for your insight, guidance and patience throughout this research process. I would like to thank the nine participants who volunteered their time. Your knowledge and stories were an important contribution to understanding planning practice with First Nations. I also want to acknowledge First Nations who have endured a complicated history of relationships with "outsiders." The intention of this research was to develop cross-cultural sensitivity and awareness of how planners can practice more culturally appropriate planning. I would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Society for the Preservation of American Indian Culture. Thank you for awarding me the 2001 Lynn Reyer Award for Tribal Community Development to help undertake this research. Finally, to my partner, family and friends, thank you for your ongoing support and encouragement during times of uncertainty, struggle and celebration. 1 1.0 Chapter 1: Research Context, Purpose and Organization of Thesis 1.1 Research Context Planning theory and practice are being chal lenged for their re levance in a society undergoing immense change and pressure through forces of migrat ion, the rise of post-colonial and indigenous peoples and the emergence of other minori t ies. Comb ined with "the destabi l iz ing effects of global economic restructur ing and integrat ion, these forces are literally chang ing the faces of cit ies and regions" (Sandercock 1998a:164) . Under debate are issues concern ing cultural diversi ty and whether the dominant p lanning pa rad igm 1 is adequate ly address ing issues of inclusion, different w a y s of knowing, identity, social just ice and ci t izenship (Fr iedmann 1998; Sandercock 1998a, 1998b, 1999). The concern for mult icultural planning is not a recent theme, however . Patrick G e d d e s first recognized issues of cultural diversity and the sensit ivity of planning in India dur ing his work f rom 1914 to 1924. He w a s critical of the "cultural bias" that engineers f rom outside India brought wi th their planning schemes (Geddes 1918 in Goodfr iend 1979). Numerous authors have cons idered the compatibi l i ty, bias, transferabi l i ty and appropr ia teness of western planning theory, values, models and approaches to inform planning pract ice that is outside the convent ional western value and planning sys tem of rationality. At issue was the degree to which 'outside' p lanners were adequate ly prepared for dif ferent international p lanning contexts ( U s e e m and Donoghue and Donoghue 1963; Peatt ie 1968, 1969; App leyard 1969; Fr iedmann 1969; Bolan 1969; Smith 1985). Sandercock (1998a) cont inues this d iscussion, c la iming the rise of cultural diversi ty in our society is generat ing new processes of social-spatial restructur ing. A "new politics of mult icultural ci t izenship" is required to enable the "mult iple histories" of society tradit ionally exc luded within the modern western planning parad igm, to be included in more culturally appropr iate ways . The author argues that insurgent planners are needed to work "outside" of the dominant sys tem and groups of society w h o have control led and marginal ized "voice and space." Planners require an awareness and capaci ty to work with smaller, more ethnical ly d iverse cul tures if they are to effectively plan for inclusion. 1 Sandercock defines the dominant planning paradigm as modernist with emphasis on instrumental rationality, comprehensiveness, mastery grounded in positivist science, quantitative analysis, state directive futures and the neutrality of gender and race (1998:27). 2 To equip the insurgent planner, Sandercock (1998a:225-230) proposes a col lection of T A M E D planning l i teracies ( technical , analyt ical, mult icultural, ecological , des ign and ethical inquiry) to assist wi th the "reclaiming of urban and regional space" by indigenous and colonized peoples. Of part icular interest is Sandercock 's concept of mult icultural l i teracy, descr ibed as fo l lows: It suggests a who le different pract ice in which communicat ive skills, openness , empathy, and sensit ivity are crucial; in which w e respect class, gender , and ethnic di f ferences in ways of knowing, and actively try to learn and pract ice those ways in order to foster a more democrat ic and inclusive p lanning. It involves learning to work with diverse communi t ies , rather than speak ing for t hem. A respect for cultural diversity must inform the politics and techniques of p lanning pract ice if w e want to achieve social just ice in mult icultural cities (1998a:228) . However , whi le her insurgent p lanner model is a useful f ramework to consider, a deeper explorat ion is required to operat ional ize her mult icultural l iteracy. Lockhart (1982) recognized the cultural diversity of p lanning wi th First Nat ions and suggests that "outside" p lanners need to know the var ious social, economic and political "process dynamics" of the communi ty they work i n . 2 He w a s concerned about his planning relat ionship wi th the communi ty and how to bring about a "viable distr ibution of solut ion responsibil i ty." Lockhart a rgued that to work effectively wi th First Nat ions, p lanners needed to famil iar ize themselves and gain pract ice in the communi ty 's "process dynamics." However like Sandercock, he did not operat ional ize what he implied by process dynamics . He suggested that this knowledge w a s best left for First Nat ions ( insider) to reveal . This is not to say that the planning literature has neglected the subject of p lanning with First Nat ions. There is a rich col lection of l i terature f rom which to begin explor ing wha t Lockhart (1982) and Sandercock (1998a) did not reveal . Very general ly; the planning l i terature has addressed the value, cultural or knowledge di f ferences between native and non-nat ive society and how these di f ferences implicate: 1) the des ign and del ivery of government based programs and policies (England 1 9 7 1 ; Wol fe and Lindley 1983; S imon and Forster and Alcose and Brabec and Ndubis i 1984; Wol fe 1988; Wol fe 1989); 2) the fo rms and approaches of planning and deve lopment wi th First Nat ions (Smith 1985; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Wol fe 1988; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1989; G a d a c z 1 9 9 1 ; Ndubisi 1 9 9 1 ; St. Denise 1982; Wol fe and Bechard and Cizek and Cole 1992; Boothroyd 1992; Napo lean 1992; Copet 1992; Hoare and Levy and Rob inson 1993; Lane 1997; Zaferatos 1998; Rahder 1999; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999); 3 3) the quali ty of p lanning involvement and part icipat ion of First Nat ions people (England 1 9 7 1 ; Langin 1988; Duerden and Kuhn and Black 1996; Lane 1997); 4) the nature of p lanner -communi ty relat ionships (Lockhart 1982; Boothroyd 1992; Kowalsky and Verhoef and Thurs ton and Rutherford 1996; Ridley and Mendoza and Kanitz and Angermei rer 1994); and 5) the capacity, credibil i ty, role and involvement of outs ide p lanners w h o work with First Nat ions (Wolfe and Lindley 1983; S imon et al. 1984; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1989; Copet 1992; McDonald 1993, Ridley et al. 1994; De Mello and Boothroyd and Mathew and Spar row 1994; Jacobs and Mulvihill 1995; Kowalsky et al. 1996; Zaferatos 1998; Jojola 1998; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1999; Kew and Miller 1999; Rober tson 1999). However , explor ing what practicing p lanners say they are required to know for them to facil i tate effective part ic ipatory planning relat ionships wi thin First Nat ions, and between planners and First Nat ions, wou ld contr ibute to the current l i terature on planning wi th First Nat ions. Ask ing planners what they need to know w h e n work ing with First Nat ions promotes the documenta t ion of more personal ized accounts of pract ice knowledge and stories of wha t they do, how they struggle, what works , and how they interfere with planning. This thesis at tempts to provide such documenta t ion . It contr ibutes to the planning l i terature by present ing the micro-perspect ives of f ive w o m e n and four m e n , Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal , w h o have worked as planners with First Nat ions primari ly in wes te rn and northern Canada , and communi t ies of A laska. It documents what these planners had to say specif ical ly about such matters as: w h y value and knowledge sys tems are important to First Nat ions; the effects of external authori ty imposed on First Nat ions; how they work wi th tradit ional and formal types of authori ty; the signif icance of clan and family systems of organizat ion for p lanning and dec is ion-making; what communicat ion issues and obstacles they encounter w h e n work ing with First Nat ions; how m e n and w o m e n part icipate differently dur ing First Nat ions p lanning; the planning roles of First Nat ions m e n , w o m e n and elders; how planners facil itate communi ty capaci ty; how planners establ ish planning relat ionships and gain entry into communi t ies ; and how they evaluate planning relat ionships with First Nat ions. By becoming knowledgeable about these matters and others, outs ide p lanners w h o work with First Nat ions might better facil i tate the inclusion of people in more cultural ly appropr iate ways . 2 Lockhart argued that, "any new development which is not predicated upon a detailed insider's knowledge of the particular social, economic and political process dynamics of the participating community is predestined to failure" (1982:161). 4 1.2 Research Purpose & Intention The theoret ical chal lenge is to determine how "outside" p lanners w h o are not f rom the communi ty or culture plan in a part icular cultural context and with what effect. The main quest ion guiding this research is: what are the knowledges planners need to facilitate effective participatory planning relationships within First Nations, and between planners and First Nations? The intention of my research is to under take an exploratory study to: 1) identify the actors, factors, issues and obstac les that inf luence a planner 's ability to facil i tate part ic ipatory planning relat ionships; 2) expose how planners facil i tate part icipatory planning relat ionships; 3) document planner responses and stories f rom f i rst-hand personal accounts; and to 4) commun ica te planner educat ion by proposing knowledge themes to operat ional ize a planning literacy for communi ty p lanners w h o work with First Nat ions. 1.3 Organizat ion of the Thesis The thesis is d iv ided into six chapters. Chapter Two of this thesis presents the research background, approach, process, method and ethical considerat ions. In Chapter Three I out l ine the conceptual f rameworks used for my thesis. The models of John Forester 's "progressive planner" and Sandercock 's " insurgent planner" are d iscussed to provide a more genera l , macro analysis of my f indings in chapter f ive. The second conceptual f ramework I use to organize and analyze my f indings is based on seven knowledge themes explored within the l i terature, as wel l as my o w n exper ience. These themes include knowledge about First Nat ions' va lue and knowledge sys tems; author i ty relat ions; social organizat ion; communica t ion ; part icipation; capacity; and the planner relat ionship. These themes informed the interview quest ions I used to guide the interviews of nine p lanners. Chapter Four presents the results of these interviews. In Chapter Five, I provide an interpretat ion and d iscussion of the f indings and their re levance for p lanning wi th First Nat ions. In the last chapter I d iscuss the l imitations of the research f indings, as wel l as the implicat ions for planning theory and pract ice. 5 2.0 Chapter Two: Research Background, Approach, Process and Ethical Concerns 2.1 Research Background This research w a s strongly mot ivated by my o w n planning exper ience. I v iew my communi ty p lanning exper ience and t ime spent in graduate studies, including te rm papers, as ongoing componen ts of my research inquiry. Gradual ly, I became interested in cross-cul tural p lanning relat ionships and how this interact ion impl icates part icipation within First Nat ions, and between planners and First Nat ions. Being an "outsider" (non-Abor ig inal) , I appreciate the impl icat ions of work ing wi th First Nat ions given the cultural and historical c i rcumstances that have shaped cross-cultural relat ions in our society for several centur ies. I wan ted to under take a qual i tat ive study to explore and learn what others exper ienced w h e n they worked with First Nat ions, such as what p lanners did to affect the quali ty of p lanning and how planners worked to facil i tate part icipatory planning relat ionships. 2.2 Research Approach The thesis research is exploratory and quali tat ive. A s Palys explains, the purpose of exploratory research is "to gain famil iari ty wi th a p h e n o m e n o n or achieve new insights into it, of ten in order to formulate a more precise research prob lem or to develop hypotheses" (1992:80) . The research is d e e m e d to be exploratory because of the small sample of p lanners, the method of open-ended interviews and the nature of the research quest ion. The intention w a s to al low the data to emerge f rom the planner interv iewees, and then to relate the f indings to what has been d iscussed in the relevant l i terature. A s Lather (1986:267 in Creswel l 1994:95) states: Building empir ical ly g rounded theory requires a reciprocal relat ionship be tween data and theory. Data must be al lowed to generate proposi t ions in a dialectical manner that permits use of a priori theoret ical f rameworks , but wh ich keeps a particular f ramework f rom becoming the container into which the data must be poured. Signif icant to this quali tat ive research w a s the need to involve practicing planners and to al low their voices and stor ies to emerge, in the spirit of Forester 's "del iberat ive practi t ioner model . " As Forester states: Insightful analysis of planning si tuat ions can encourage better pract ice not by producing abstract lessons but by showing what can be done through a pract i t ioners' vivid, instructive, and even moving accounts of their successes and fai lures. . . (1999:7) . If w e listen closely, not only to the portrayals of fact in p lanners ' stories but to their c laims of value and signif icance, w e discover an infrastructure of ethics, an ethical 6 substructure of pract ice, a f inely w o v e n tapestry of va lue being w o v e n sentence by sentence, each sentence not simply adding, descr ipt ion by descr ipt ion, to a picture of the wor ld , but adding care by care to a sensit ivity to the practical wor ld , to an at tent iveness to and a prudent appreciat ion of that wor ld . W e learn f rom skillful (and perhaps inept) per formance as wel l as f rom verif ied (or refuted) proposi t ions (1999:45) . 2.3 Research Process I first explored the planning l i terature and on that basis, together wi th my ten years of p lanning practice with First Nat ions, proposed seven knowledge themes regarding what p lanners need to consider w h e n they work with First Nat ions (see Figure 1). These prel iminary themes were used to inform the in-depth planner interviews and analyze my f indings. The themes provided a first level grounding by which to explore and develop a cultural planning l iteracy specif ic to First Nat ions. This is what Lockhart (1982) and Sandercock (1998a) left o thers to elaborate on . The interview process did not impose the seven prel iminary knowledge themes initially. Interv iewees were given the opportuni ty to explore what matters to t hem on a very genera l level w h e n they plan with First Nat ions. I wan ted the interv iewees to emphas ize what w a s important to t hem wi thout prompt ing. Once they were "closing down" or had exhausted a part icular thought or theme, I presented the interv iewees wi th quest ions based on the seven k n o w l e d g e themes one by one, as much as possible (see appendix A) . Seven Knowledge Considerations for Planning with First Nations v ) 1. Value and Knowledge Systems V r > 2. Authority Relations ^ J 3. Social Organization C \ ( ' 4. Communication 5. Participation J < J 6. Capacity f \ 7. Planner Relationship s > Figure 1: Seven Knowledge T h e m e s for Planning Wi th First Nat ions. 7 2.4 Interviews I approached nine planners to part icipate in this research and they all agreed and provided their consent . My o w n voice is provided in chapter f ive as the tenth planner. Planners were selected on the basis of gender , a range of exper ience and educat ion, Abor ig inal or non-Abor ig inal identity, their wi l l ingness to part ic ipate and t ime availabil i ty. I w a s acquainted wi th several n a m e s of p lanners w h o worked wi th var ious First Nat ion communi t ies throughout wes te rn and nor thern C a n a d a , including communi t ies in A laska (see beginning of chapter 4 for descr ipt ions of the p lanners I in terv iewed). The smal l number of interv iewees enabled a deeper qual i ty of data to emerge . Planners w e r e selected on a "strategic" basis in the sense of purposive sampl ing (Palys 1992:147) . The p lanners had be tween 7-25 years of p lanning exper ience work ing wi th First Nat ions, wi th an average of 16 years per person. The nine in terv iewees consisted of f ive w o m e n , three of w h o m w e r e of First Nat ions ancestry, and four m e n , one of w h o m w a s First Nat ions ancestry. The p lanners had worked in var ious relat ionships wi th First Nat ions th roughout their exper ience: 1) directly as an emp loyee wi th a First Nat ion, or 2) directly as an employee wi th a non-nat ive government or non-government organizat ion; 3) in the capaci ty of a consul tant work ing directly wi th a First Nat ion, or 4 ) in the capaci ty of a consul tant work ing direct ly wi th a non-nat ive gove rnmen t or non-government organizat ion. All interv iews were conducted in person and tape- recorded. The durat ion of the interviews ranged f rom forty-f ive minutes to approx imate ly two hours in length. It was important that part ic ipants felt comfor tab le in a sur rounding that was famil iar to them, therefore, I met each part icipant in a sett ing of their choice. Part ic ipants were presented wi th open-ended quest ions asking t h e m to explore their own exper ience and v iews regarding effective part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. Once the interviews were t ranscr ibed, part ic ipants were g iven a copy of their interview to review and correct. This w a s intended as an opportuni ty for the interv iewees to ask quest ions, provide feedback and veri fy wha t w a s said. Only one planner suggested slight modif icat ions to their interview transcript. The interview data w e r e then rev iewed for initial themes and categor ies. It w a s helpful to hear the recorded interview again as I rev iewed the transcr ipts to help refresh the interview exper ience. The second transcr ipt reading produced the scoping out of initial categor ies of 'what matters, ' 'why it matters, ' and 'how planners do things. ' Key paragraphs and stories were highl ighted in the secondary screening and cons idered in relat ion to the seven prel iminary knowledge themes. 8 The third level of analysis consisted of an index card process w h e r e key words and phrases w e r e recorded f rom the second analysis and then c lustered within group ings for potential d iscuss ion. Pert inent and express ive stor ies w e r e highl ighted to expand the scope of wha t mat ters and why , and how planners worked to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. The f inal s tage of the data analysis included returning to the l i terature to compare the f indings of the interviews. A set of p lanner knowledges w a s deve loped as a potential 'cultural p lanning l i teracy' for outs ide p lanners to consider w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. 2.5 Ethical Concerns I w a s concerned about the issue of whe ther "outside' p lanners can speak about 'another ' cul ture. To ease this tens ion, I a t tempted to: 1) speak about cultural knowledge in a respectful way ; 2) have Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal p lanners talk about their p lanning exper ience; and to 3) ensure that the identity of both p lanners and First Nat ions remained anonymous . My intention w a s to ba lance Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal p lanning perspect ives, and to avoid perpetuat ing cultural dominat ion . Fur thermore, the p lanners ' identit ies were protected to help t h e m feel more open and wil l ing to share their exper ience and stor ies. The most important fact about the cultural context of this research is that I a m non-Abor ig inal . I was educated and raised within a whi te European sys tem of va lues and learning. This has huge impl icat ions for cross-cul tural understanding and interpretat ion. Secondly , I have worked personal ly wi th First Nat ions for the past ten years . I have worked wi th approx imate ly six First Nat ions, and numerous First Nat ion individuals, fami l ies, and organizat ions in var ious p lanning, m a n a g e m e n t and training capaci t ies. I have worked in such sectors as housing and capital , tour ism, manufac tur ing , f isher ies, including organizat ional deve lopment , and more broadly in communi ty and economic deve lopment . I have worked as an emp loyee for three years, and have been hired out under contract by First Nat ions for the past seven years . This exper ience has lead me to bel ieve that Abor ig inal peoples deserve a commi tmen t by Canad ians to o v e r c o m e the effects of the pro longed sys tem of dominat ion imposed by Canada on First Nat ions. G o v e r n m e n t policy reg imes have long si lenced Abor ig inal part ic ipat ion. However , land c la im agreements provide p lanners wi th an opportuni ty to enable effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships 9 as a means to genera te better social-spatial condi t ions for Abor ig inal peoples. O n this basis, I advocate a certain radical p lanning practice to bring about more equity into the public p lanning doma in . There are issues of power imbalances, capaci ty, oppress ion , loss of historical voice and identity, distorted communica t ion and emot ional poverty that need to be overcome. If p lanners can enable the voice of Abor ig inal peoples to become manifest dur ing planning processes and relat ionships, it may be an important step to incorporate cultural diversity in more effect ive ways . My exper ience also establ ished a reference point to unders tand and d iscuss wha t other p lanners I interv iewed said they perceived or exper ienced. To minimize bias in my analysis, prior to m y final research decis ion and interview process, I ref lected on my o w n planning pract ice and recorded my own theory and pract ice about work ing wi th First Nat ions. Th is is wha t Kirby and McKenna (1989) refer to as wri t ing out "conceptual baggage," or under tak ing "a review of cultural categor ies" (McCracken 1988) . This exerc ise a l lowed me to "manufacture crit ical d is tance" by developing a crit ical awareness of my exper ience to the research topic (McCracken 1988) , and it provided an opportuni ty for m e to ref ine the interview quest ions. Fur thermore, the exercise enr iched my analysis and ref lect ion on the research f indings. 10 3.0 Chapter Three: Conceptual Framework and Organizing Structure This chapter deve lops the conceptua l and analyt ical f rameworks used to analyze the f indings in chapter f ive. Work ing defini t ions are first provided for te rms used throughout this thesis. Sandercock 's insurgent planner and Forester 's progressive planner models are then out l ined to provide a macro conceptua l f ramework . A l i terature review fo l lows, explor ing and document ing var ious themes authors revealed were important to know w h e n planners work wi th First Nat ions. The f indings f rom the l i terature review w e r e used inductively to create a second analyt ical f ramework to organize the f indings f rom the nine p lanner interv iews descr ibed in chapter four. The combined f indings are then analyzed using both f rameworks in chapter f ive. 3.1 Defini t ions ( The pr imary quest ion guid ing this thesis research is to explore "what are the knowledges planners need to facilitate effective participatory planning relationships within First Nations, and between planners and First Nations?" The term knowledge is def ined in the Collins English Dictionary as the compi lat ion of "facts, feel ings or exper iences known by a person," th rough an "awareness , consc iousness , or famil iari ty ga ined by exper ience or in formed learning" (Hanks 1986:849) . The term knowledges is plural ized to include the seven knowledge themes used within this thesis. The compi lat ion of facts, feel ings and exper iences contain both theoret ical and practical s igni f icance in that they are intended to help explain and inform the types of planning interact ion cons idered effect ive for p lanning wi th First Nat ions. Knowledges are considered f rom three dif ferent levels th roughout this thesis: knowledge about p h e n o m e n a internal to First Nat ions, knowledge about p h e n o m e n a external to First Nat ions, and knowledge about relat ions be tween planners and First Nat ions. For example , " internal" knowledge might consist of knowing the clan and fami ly b reakdown of a First Nat ion. Knowledge about p h e n o m e n a external to a First Nat ion could include knowing how Indian Act legislat ion limits part ic ipat ion and controls planning relat ionships be tween native and non-nat ive society. Knowledge about relat ions be tween planners and First Nat ions could be about how planners establ ish trust or first enter a communi ty . The te rm planner is interpreted as any person w h o is directly involved in assist ing a First Nat ion commun i ty to help organize its resources systematical ly to bring about commun i t y d i rected change 11 through act ion. Outside p lanners implies non-Abor ig inal p lanners, or Abor ig inal p lanners not f rom the communi ty they work in. The term facilitate refers to the act ions p lanners use to get people part ic ipat ing. The te rm effective impl ies part icipatory p lanning act ion that results in more act ive and inclusive part icipation by individuals to affect d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . The te rm participatory planning is where : Each commun i ty member can play an appropr iate role in the planning process, whether that m e m b e r is an elder, heredi tary chief, e lected leader, staff, commi t tee m e m b e r or wi thout any formal role at all. This encourages planning that leads to equi table act ions and decis ions, taps valuable local knowledge, and ensures that the p lanning is truly comprehens ive as all concerns will be potential ly included in the planning process. As a side benefit , part ic ipatory p lanning deve lops Band members ' skills in p lanning; such skills are valuable in var ious manager ia l and leadership roles within and outs ide the communi ty (Boothroyd 1986:21) . Finally, the te rm relationship is unders tood as the associat ion and interact ion be tween individuals and groups wi th in First Nat ions, and between planners and First Nat ions. Other te rms such as operationalize is used to signify wha t p lanners do in pract ice, wha t goes on "in the t renches or on the ground" to bring about effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. The term planning literacy refers to the total knowledge of all seven knowledge themes proposed above. The te rms First Nation, First Nations, Aboriginal, Native, Indian and Native American are used in terchangeably. In most cases the te rm is appl ied in the context that it w a s presented in the l i terature. In other cases, the te rm is selected for ease of read ing. General ly , the te rms refer to ind igenous people within C a n a d a , the United States and Austra l ia . However , this general izat ion does not imply that all ind igenous g roups wi th in these countr ies are the same or wi thout their o w n context and c i rcumstances. The seven knowledge themes used throughout this thesis are used col lect ively as a conceptual and analyt ical too l . T h e term knowledge theme refers to a body of p lanning knowledge gained through pract ice and observat ion . Knowledge within each theme consists of theory and pract ice knowledge, including knowledge of issues and obstacles, practice stor ies, and suggest ions and strategies to bring about effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. The seven knowledge themes pertain to: 1. First Nat ions ' Va lue and Knowledge Sys tems First Nat ions ' va lue sys tems refer to individual and collective principles and beliefs used to inform and guide relat ions, and commun i ty dec is ion-making. Va lues may consist of substant ive va lues, such as respect for elders, or process va lues, such as consensus dec is ion-making. Tradi t ional Abor ig inal knowledge consists of accumula ted understanding through direct exper ience and pract ice. 12 2. Author i ty Relat ions Author i ty relat ions refer to the external and internal, formal and informal mechan isms of power f rom which First Nat ions der ive their dec is ion-making power. 3. Social Organizat ion Social organizat ion implies wha t First Nat ions ' group structures guide interpersonal relat ions and dec is ion-making. Forms of social organizat ion include for example , c lan and fami ly s t ructures, or the change-or ienta ted versus t radi t ional-subsistence groups of a communi ty . 4. Communica t ion Communica t ion refers to the factors, processes and methods individuals and p lanners encounter and use to t ransmit and exchange va lues, thoughts , knowledge and informat ion to one another . 5. Part icipat ion Part icipat ion refers to the factors, processes and methods individuals and p lanners encounter and use to involve people dur ing p lanning. 6. Capaci ty Capaci ty refers to the comb ined authori ty and power, including inst i tut ional, organizat ional and human resource base of First Nat ions to part icipate in planning and dec is ion-making processes. 7. Planner Relat ionship Planner relat ionship refers to the factors, processes and methods p lanners encounter and use in establ ishing their p lanning relat ionship wi th First Nat ions. I 3.2 The Potential Appl icat ion of Sandercock 's Insurgent Planner Model Sandercock (1998a, 1998b, 1999) argues that the current modern p lanning parad igm is no longer adequate to navigate our w a y through the postcolonial and pos tmodern order. S ince the 1970's, the modernis t p lanning parad igm of instrumental rationality, comprehens iveness , mastery g rounded in positivist sc ience, quant i tat ive analysis, state direct ive futures and the neutral i ty of gender and race has not responded to the "cultural polit ics of di f ference," or "d i lemmas of d i f ference " fac ing society today. She quest ions the rationalist foundat ion of p lanning and its theoret ical and methodolog ica l suitabil ity in v iew of the d iverse cultural contexts p lanners work in. The author states that w e need to reposit ion the modernis t p lanning parad igm for four reasons: socio-cul tural forces are chang ing cities in ways outside of the "Chicago model of the rat ional, orderly, h o m o g e n o u s city;" ci t izen rebel l ion against process and ou tcomes "embod ied" in the Ch icago model ; social theory is chal lenging the assumpt ions of the modernist parad igm and its ep is temology; and the sense of h u m a n loss in cit ies as a result of an " ideology of progress" (1998a:27-28) . Sandercock c la ims 13 that w e need to reposi t ion planning by recogniz ing the ethnic and cultural diversity of our planning space in wh ich p lanners have a "pivotal role" to play. She envis ions an ideal "pos tmodern Utopia" based on "dreaming cosmopol is , " whereby issues of identity, d i f ference, social just ice, and ci t izenship are addressed in a "new cultural politics of di f ference." Sandercock proposes an insurgent planner mode l , one that is "more fluid and responsive to context and to rapid change. " The insurgent model is based on : 1) placing more emphas is on practical w i s d o m , in addi t ion to means-ends rationality (opt ions and al ternat ives); 2) negot ia ted, poli t ical, and focused planning versus comprehens ive , integrated and coord inated act ion (mult i -sectoral and mult i -funct ional p lans) ; 3) an expanded ability to access other ways of knowing based on context (e .g. knowing th rough: d ia logue; exper ience; gaining local knowledge (concrete and speci f ic) ; symbol ic , verbal or non-verbal ev idence; contempla t ion ; and learning by doing) , versus knowledge g rounded in posit ive sc ience wi th an emphas is on quant i tat ive model ing and analysis; 4) to facil i tate commun i ty e m p o w e r m e n t th rough bot tom-up approaches to p lanning, versus state-directed futures and top -down approaches ; and 5) to ove rcome the exclus ion of di f ference in a mult icultural society by redef in ing concepts of "public interest" and "communi ty" to ove rcome neutral i ty (gender and race) (1998a:27-30) . These foundat ions of her "post modern praxis" fo rm the basis of her f ive l i teracies ( technical l i teracy, analyt ical l i teracy, mult icultural l i teracy, ecological l i teracy, des ign l i teracy). These l i teracies are required to equip the "passionate pi lgrim planner" to work wi th cultural ly diversity in more effect ive and appropr iate w a y s . This model is a response to the concern of whe ther marginal ized g roups , such as indigenous peoples or First Nat ions, are being " included" in meaningfu l w a y s . Sandercock 's model provides the important background for "why" planning needs to be more sensi t ive and inclusive of cultural diversity, and the urgency of p lanners to "foster a more democrat ic and inclusive p lanning." 3.3 The Potent ial Appl icat ion of Forester 's Progressive Planner Model Forester (1989) is also concerned about making planning more democra t ic and overcoming the effects of unequa l power relat ions made possible by "attent ion shaping." W h e n people are unaware or unconsc ious of their posit ion in society, or s imply the condi t ions in wh ich they live and interact - th rough (distorted) commun ica t ion - democrat ic act ion is c i rcumvented. His progressive planner model argues for p lanners to uncover distort ions of communica t ive act ion so that ci t izens can encounter the "al terable, 14 misleading and disabl ing" c la ims made possible by social ly const ructed relat ions of power . The interact ive, social , polit ical, a rgumentat ive and practical nature of p lanning requires that "publicly or iented" p lanners unders tand the practical and communica t ive aspects of their act ion, and how they respond to the ongo ing pract ical, organizat ional and political issues they encounter . The interest is in w a y s "p lanners can ant ic ipate obstac les and respond practically," to nurture more democrat ic p lanning (Forester 1989:7) . Forester a rgues: "a crit ical theory of p lanning helps us to unders tand w h a t p lanners do as at tent ion-shaping, communica t ive act ion rather than as instrumental act ion, as means to part icular ends" (1989:138) . T h e argumenta t ive nature of p lanning requires that p lanners "must rout inely a rgue, practical ly and polit ically, about desi rable and possible futures." They need to consider the communica t ive effects of wha t they do. This is important g iven the structure of power relat ions, confl ict ing interests, and poli t ical-economic st ructures found at three practical scales of interact ion: face-to face, organizat ion, and polit ical-economic st ructures. As p lanners become more aware of the inequit ies m a d e possible by these st ructures and interests, they can "organize at tent ion" to help reduce communica t ive distort ions such as: uneven power and decis ion mak ing authori ty, ja rgon and language, wi thhold ing of in format ion, lack of access to in format ion, control led agendas ; suppressed feel ings or unilateral control ; w h e n meet ings are de layed , funding is den ied , or w h e n "cit izens cannot part icipate equal ly in decis ions affect ing t h e m " (1989:139) . All of these distort ions c i rcumvent meaningfu l part icipation and dec is ion-making and as a result, could impact effect ive p lanning relat ionships be tween groups within First Nat ions, and be tween p lanners and First Nat ions. Planners can help overcome the dominat ion effects of communica t ive distort ions by w h a t they do and say practically. In assess ing the "social and pol i t ical-economic structures as systemat ic pat terns of practical communica t ive act ion" (1989:139) , p lanners can expose and speak about communica t ive distort ions directly to marginal ized groups. As Forester states, p lanners can : Warn o thers of prob lems, present in format ion, suggest new ideas, agree to per form certain tasks or to meet at certain t imes, argue for or against part icular efforts, report relevant events , offer opin ions and advise, and comment on ideas and proposals for ac t ion . . .such e lementary communica t ive act ions are at the heart of the possibi l i ty of any ordinary, cooperat ive work ing relat ionships (1989:142-143) . 15 In act ing on these types of communica t ive act ions, p lanners are mak ing pract ical j udgmen ts and suggest ing practical strategies to affect the qual i ty of part icipation and dec is ion-mak ing. A s Forester states: p lanners "must try hard to say w h a t w e m e a n , using the language and wha tever f rame of reference w e share" (1989:143) . To foster the "mutual unders tanding" of c la ims m a d e by individuals and g roups , and those of p lanners, Forester bor rows f rom Habermas ' theory of communica t ive act ion (1984) and explains four "enabl ing rules that structure our ordinary language." These include comprehensib i l i ty (understanding) , sincerity (trust), legi t imacy (consent) and accuracy (truth). Forester presents these rules as criteria to guide pract ical communica t ion and states that these criteria could assist p lanners to facil i tate an "ideal speech si tuat ion," w h e r e planning part ic ipants realize a state of mutual unders tand ing. Forester admi ts that sat isfying these criteria is difficult. However , the effect in fai l ing to satisfy these criteria is that "we face puzz lement , mistrust, anger, and disbelief; mutual unders tand ing, trust and cooperat ion are all likely to suffer. Moreover , if these pragmat ic criteria are not met, our shared exper ience and our c o m m o n social and political wor lds dis integrate" (1989:144) . Perhaps at the very least Forester notes, p lanners can use these criteria as "diagnost ic quest ions" to "check" the c la ims they make, as they try to facil i tate more democrat ic p lanning. The criteria might also be used to "help to formulate quest ions about the possible inf luence of p lanning pract ice." In part icular, Forester states that p lanners need to pay at tent ion to both "content and context" c la ims, regarding "what is sa id , w h e n and in wha t si tuat ion and wi th w h o m " (1989:145) . Content c la ims consist of wha t p lanners talk about - factual and rhetorical c la ims; context c la ims consist of the historical, political and social relat ions p lanners confront as they p lan. Outs ide p lanners w h o unders tand how informat ion, communica t ion and power can impact mutual unders tand ing might be able to act in w a y s that empower First Nat ions to exper ience more democrat ic p lanning. The re levance of Sandercock 's insurgent planner and Forester 's progress ive p lanner models are d iscussed at the end of chapter f ive to bring a larger, more genera l perspect ive to my analysis. The next sect ion of the chapter documents the f indings f rom the l i terature review to deve lop a second analyt ical f ramework based on seven knowledge themes . 16 3.4 Explor ing Seven Knowledge T h e m e s Based on the Findings f rom the Literature This sect ion reviews the l i terature in relat ion to seven proposed knowledge themes . These are: 1) First Nat ions' value and knowledge sys tems; 2) authori ty relat ions; 3) social organizat ion; 4) communica t ion ; 5) part ic ipat ion; 6) capaci ty; and 7) the planner relat ionship. 3.4.1 First Nat ions ' Va lue and Knowledge Sys tems Many authors say that outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to cons ider the va lue sys tem, including wor ld -v iews and cosmology that funct ion within First Nat ion communi t ies to gu ide planning and dec is ion-making (Brody 1 9 8 1 ; S imon et al. 1984; Shki lnyk 1985; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Wol fe 1989; Ndubisi 1 9 9 1 ; Napo lean 1992; Copet 1992; Wol fe et al . 1992; Goehr ing 1993; Sadler and Boothroyd 1994). Many of these authors note that outs ide planners work ing wi th First Nat ions have of ten been ineffective because of their inadequate understanding of the inherent confl ict in va lue sys tems be tween wes te rn society and Abor ig inal cul ture. Numerous f rameworks have been identif ied by Mander (1991) , Ndubisi (1991) , Nabigon (1992) , Wol fe et a l . (1992) , McKenz ie and Morr isset te (1992) , Goehr ing (1993) , De Mel lo et al . (1994) , Pont ing (1997) and Sherry and Vuntu t Gwi tch in First Nat ion (1999) to unders tand and dist inguish value and knowledge di f ferences between Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal society. ' Ndubisi (1991) for example , studied the value di f ferences and similari t ies be tween planners and First Nat ions, in the case of the New Credit communi ty in Ontar io. Drawing f rom Kluckhohn 's (1951) " theory of var iat ions in va lue or ientat ions," Ndubisi suggested five "recurrent p rob lem areas" that are reflective of va lue or ientat ions in society. These include: 1) the innate nature of humans ; 2) people 's relat ionship to nature; 3) people 's concept ion of t ime; 4) the modal i ty of h u m a n interact ions; and 5) people 's social relat ions to one another. The author 's s tudy found "signif icant d i f ferences" between the va lues of p lanners and the New Credi t communi ty , for example in how people relate to one another (relat ional ser ies: col lateral vs. indiv idual ism), and to their env i ronment (man-nature ser ies: harmony-wi th-nature vs . contro l -over-nature) . The author only e laborated on value di f ferences pertaining to the "t ime or ientat ion" ser ies, stat ing that p lanners preferred the "future or ientat ion" of t ime, whereas the commun i ty preferred "present t ime" to 17 "past t ime." As a result, Ndubisi suggested that whi le the communi ty w a s capab le of th inking in terms long-term goals, it cons idered shor t - term program planning to be more effect ive. It is beyond the scope of this thesis to d iscuss or even list all of the va lues important to First Nat ions. However , it is wor th not ing that De Mello et al . (1994:17-18) d raw f rom Napolean (1992) to offer a sampl ing of relevant va lues for communi ty deve lopment processes: • Spirituality and Culture and its central and pivotal posit ion in guid ing daily life and future di rect ion; • Co-operation and Unity w a s tradit ionally essent ial to successfu l commun i ty l iving. T h e metaphor of the "Sacred Circle" is used to descr ibe this bond of vital co-ex is tence; • Relationship with the Environment, wh ich speaks to the int imate mutual ly suppor t ive and spiri tual connect ion First Nat ions have wi th both the animal and plant wor ld and ecological wel l -being and future of the Earth. This vital point is exquisi tely por t rayed in the Sacred Tree (1984) ; • Respect and Equality for all part ic ipants and people w h o might be af fected by the planning process. This suggests an inclusive process that encourages , respects and va lues diversity in p lanning; • Sharing and Generosity is a corners tone of the Abor ig inal wor ld-v iew. This ethic ensured survival , good will and mutual aid and support that a l lowed bui lding of commun i ty bonds; and • Family (in the broad, ex tended sense) v iewed as the foundat ion of connect ion and means of relat ing and connect ing m e m b e r s of the communi ty . Acknowledg ing these types of va lues does not imply that all First Nat ions adopt or pract ice the same set of va lues. Further, it should not be assumed that all individuals wi th in one First Nat ion share the same set of va lues. There is little l i terature d iscussing value di f ferences and impl icat ions for p lanning within First Nat ions cul tures. Ndubisi 's f ive types of value or ientat ions and "recurrent p rob lem areas" might wel l exist wi th in First Nat ions cul ture. One except ion is Hanson (1985) w h o recognized that g roups wi th in First Nat ions respond dif ferently to the accul turat ion process. Va lue di f ferences within First Nat ions are depic ted in his concept of "socio-cultural strat i f icat ion" (1985:24) . This stratif ication consists of three pr imary groups of people: change-or ien ted, marg ina l , and tradi t ional. The socio-cultural or ientat ion, organizat ional fo rm and personal capabi l i t ies are dif ferent for each group, and as a result, each "requires a unique set of deve lopmenta l init iatives...a dif ferent set of needs, aspirat ions, capabi l i t ies and socio-cul tural or ientat ion in te rms of preferred life-style' (1985:8) . 18 Hanson explains that First Nat ions g roups operate a long a reality spec t rum, f rom the " impetus towards accul turat ion/assimi lat ion" to a "sense of cont inui ty wi th a w a y of life wh ich fully served their subsis tence-or iented ancestors for many count less centur ies." A n individual 's reality is largely based on the di f ferences in the relat ionship they have wi th modern industrial society and its insti tut ions. T h e chal lenge for the p rogrammer [planner] Hanson notes, "is no longer a confl ict be tween whi te cul ture and Indian cul ture, but rather a number of complex and interact ing prob lems wh ich deve lop as two contrast ing l ife-styles a t tempt to occupy the s a m e env i ronment (1985;5) . P rogrammers [p lanners] w h o consider w h e r e dif ferent individuals and groups are in relat ion to "modern insti tut ionalized life," might be able to help facil i tate appropr iate p rogramming to specif ic socio-cultural g roups. This might help to ove rcome some of the confl icts found wi th in First Nat ions communi t ies , where one group seeks to " impose their "wil l ," value and organizat ional f o rm on those w h o represent the other contrast ing life-style or reality" (1985:3) . i Authors also point out that it is important for outs ide p lanners to know w h y va lue d i f ferences matter. In Wol fe and Strachan's s tudy (1987:114) of the Inuit in the Keewat in Reg ion , Nor thwest Terr i tor ies the authors recognized that va lues helped to: 1) explain di f ferences be tween cul tures (K luckhohn and St rodbeck 1961) ; 2) inf luence percept ions regarding the definit ion of p lanning prob lems and solut ions (Etzioni 1968; Faludi 1973); and 3) they "mold the patterns of interact ion be tween deve lopment and planning special ists and the client g roup (Bolan 1969)." Ndubisi recognized similar points in his study of the New Credit First Nat ion communi ty and added 4) how values "create the potential for misunders tandings on pert inent p lanning issues and are likely to limit the effect ive per fo rmance of p lanning" (Ndubisi 1991:53) . Further, S imon et al. 's research study (1984) on design values and percept ions relat ing to the physical , built env i ronment of the Burwash Native People 's Project of Sudbury , Ontar io , noted that 5) w h e n outs ide va lue sys tems are imposed on First Nat ions, they create inappropr iate p lanning processes, part ic ipat ion, and solut ions. W h e n this happens "a feel ing and sense of loss and identity by commun i ty m e m b e r s is exper ienced, result ing in a b reakdown of communi ty structure and personal psyche" (1984:4) . Wol fe and St rachan (1987:107-8) e laborate on the signi f icance for outs ide p lanners to unders tand the va lue sys tems of the communi t ies they work wi th : 19 The value sys tem is itself a key determinant in structur ing certa in aspects of the broader social context in wh ich deve lopment and planning occurs . It is the source of the constel lat ion of ideas and concept ions wh ich guide societal expectat ions, preferences and choices... i t impacts directly on the network of socio-pol i t ical relat ionships and the structur ing of socio-pol i t ical institutions . . . [and] whi le the value sys tem def ines the assumpt ions of wha t is and wha t ought to be, the distr ibut ion of power def ines the manner of its appl icat ions. The power relat ionship is in turn a determinant of the degree to wh ich societal st ructures are consonant or in confl ict wi th the values to wh ich m e m b e r s , individually or in g roups , are commi t ted (Etzioni 1968) . First Nat ions ' Tradi t ional Knowledge Sandercock (1998a) argues that p lanners w h o work wi th di f ferent cul tures need to expand their unders tanding and acceptance of di f ferent ways and forms of knowing . T h e author cons iders the concept , meaning and uti l ization of knowledge across culture and how planners especial ly need to gain pract ice in util izing and incorporat ing the part icular knowledge base of cul tures they work wi th . This is part icularly crucial Sandercock argues, g iven that most p lanners have been raised in a sys tem of wes te rn educat ion predominant ly based on an ep is temology of Enl ightenment and empir ic ism. Sandercock (1998a:58) poses many thought provoking quest ions regarding the validity and legi t imacy of knowledge. She is concerned wi th w h a t mode ls of knowing do p lanners use, wha t is exc luded w h e n one type of knowing dominates over another , and w h o decides w h o the knower is? (1998a:76) . All of these concerns could potential ly affect qual i ty of inclusion and part icipation of minori ty g roups such as ind igenous peoples w h o have exper ienced an "erasure of history," under the modernis t p lanning parad igm (Sandercock 1998a) . The impl icat ions for p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions, is that they need to cons ider how First Nat ions create, t ransmit and apply their knowledge, and how knowledge affects dec is ion-mak ing . For the most part, t radit ional ecological knowledge has been d iscussed in relat ion to resource m a n a g e m e n t issues (Johnson 1992; Wol fe et al . 1992; Berkes 1993; Notzke 1994; Sadler and Boothroyd 1994). Wi th in this d iscuss ion, a long debate has ensued over the validity and applicabi l i ty of tradit ional ecological knowledge (Wolfe et a l .1992; Johannes 1993). However , there has been an increasing awareness regard ing the l imitations of the wes te rn scientif ic parad igm and the need to reflect on the compl imentary nature of both knowledge sys tems regarding env i ronmenta l m a n a g e m e n t (Johnson 1992; Johannes 1993; Sadler and Boothroyd 1994). As Boothroyd states: "tradit ional knowledge can balance 20 wes te rn sc ience, turning it f r om an inhuman force of ten hostile to spir i tual and social deve lopment to a benign force serv ing ends of healthy h u m a n ecology" (Sadler and Boothroyd 1994:3) . Sherry and the Vuntut Gwi tch in (1999) highlight knowledge character ist ics of both tradit ional a n d / western knowledge sys tems, as a w a y for p lanners to appreciate di f ferences be tween two cultural sys tems (Table 1). Sadler and Boothroyd (1994) suggest the need to cons ider how knowledge sys tems differ, the relat ionship be tween them and how they may be effectively in tegrated. Briefly s ta ted, there is much l i terature arguing that p lanners need to consider that tradit ional knowledge is based on a • cosmology that p laces nature in an in ter -dependent and in terconnected spiri tual relat ionship wi th humans , that knowledge of the communi ty is g rounded in the pract ical, daily, tradit ional life of Abor ig inal people, that it has been accumula ted over t ime, through several generat ions of careful observat ion and exper ience (Cultural Dene Institute 1994), that it is holistic, intuitive and subject ive (Wolfe et al . 1992) , and that tradit ional knowledge is t ransmit ted through an oral t radit ion of storytel l ing. These knowledge character ist ics are seen as being in contrast to wes te rn scientif ic knowledge, wh ich emphas izes h u m a n dominat ion over nature and knowledge, and is cons idered reduct ionist , analyt ical and posit ivistic. Wes te rn scientif ic knowledge also emphas izes t ransmiss ion through wr i t ten language. The l i terature suggests that for p lanners to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions, they need to ensure that the tradit ional knowledge of First Nat ions communi t ies they work wi th is incorporated into p lanning processes. This is not to say that the tradit ional knowledge of First Nat ions is seen as the only knowledge base useful for prob lem definit ion and solv ing. As Lockhart (1982) noted, it is the dialect ic of knowledge sys tems be tween planners and First Nat ions that is required to bring about a "viable distr ibut ion of solut ion responsibi l i ty." 21 Table 1: Typical Characteristics of Traditional and Western Knowledge Systems Knowledge Characteristics Traditional Knowledge Western Scientific Knowledge Interrelationship Subordinate to Nature Dominate Over Nature Transmission of Knowledge Oral - Direct Experience, Storytelling and Observation Written Thinking Mode Intuitive Analytical Characteristics • Qualitative • Holistic - Interconnected • Collective • Subjective & Emotional • Empirical Observation -Trial and Error • Continuous Time • Quantitative • Reductionist - Break Down Parts • Individual • Objective & Reasoning • Selective Accumulation of Facts • Discrete Time Data Creation Slow & Inclusive Fast & Selective Prediction Cyclical Linear Explanation Spiritual / Inexplicable Mechanistic / Theories & Laws Classification Ecological & Inclusive Genetic & Hierarchical Main Principles • Living & Conscious Cosmos • Natural World Infused With Spirit • Moral • Humans in Nature • Part of the Land • Balance & Equity/Kinship & Interdependency Between Beings • Inanimate/Animate Distinction • Separation between God & Humans • Neutral, Value Free • Humans over Nature • Control the Land • Hierarchy/ Exploit Nature Source: Sherry and the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation with slight modifications (1999:38-39). 3.4.2 Author i ty Relat ions ' Anyone w h o has worked wi th First Nat ions can readily recite the many l i terature c la ims that the recent history of First Nat ions has been determined predominant ly th rough external jur isdict ion and cont ro l . 3 A l f red (1999) notes how the structure of authori ty relat ions and gove rnmen t pol ices have had profound impl icat ions for indigenous identity, ex is tence, spirituality and government . There is w idespread agreement that, as Sandercock (1998a) states, ind igenous peoples have exper ienced an "erasure of history, context and culture." Zafera tos (1998) is c lear that p lanners need to unders tand the power basis control l ing Nat ive Amer i can Tribal reserve communi t ies and to know the "character of the obstac les" to advance tribal 3 Over five hundred years of colonial rule have disrupted the lives of many indigenous peoples throughout the world. The fur trade, Christianity, treaty-making, reserve system, enfranchisement, residential schooling, and the 1969 'White Paper" were powerful forces resulting in the "appropriation of voice" for many Aboriginal peoples in Canada (Ponting 1997). The two most potent instruments of assimilation have been the Indian Act and subsequent government policies. These created a system of hegemony based on a "modernizing" and "civilizing" that justified control through assimilation (Carstens 1991). The Department of Indian Affairs determined that it could modernize the reserve system through structural changes at local and national levels and decision-making powers were placed in the hands of "Indian agents". 22 concerns . To bring about " in formed planning act ion," he says that p lanners cannot plan "in isolation of the political economy. " Many authors report that external authori ty relat ions have imposed planning approaches and programs, (Wolfe 1982; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1988; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Wol fe 1989; Copet 1992; Zafera tos 1998), al tered dec is ion-making control and implementat ion (Boothroyd 1986; Ndubisi 1 9 9 1 ; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999), produced culture bound w a y s of communica t ion , enabled jur isdict ional and program control , c reated funding dependenc ies and affected issues of representat ion (Wol fe 1982; Smith 1985; Shki lnyk 1985; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Lane 1997). First Nat ions have tradit ionally used their o w n political and dec is ion-making sys tems and structures, based on clan representat ion, fami ly groupings and inter-tr ibal relat ions (Jojola 1998; Al f red 1999; Kew and Miller 1999) . These political st ructures are explained fur ther under social organization. However , p lanners need to unders tand how the Indian Act has radical ly al tered elect ion sys tems and dec is ion-making st ructures on a formal basis (Wolfe 1989) . As a result, First Nat ions opera te under a combined author i ty base of two types to carry out communi ty dec is ion-making (Wol fe 1989; Ndubis i 1 9 9 1 ; Kew and Miller 1999) . Dec is ion-making for the New Credit commun i ty w a s for example , acknowledged by Ndubisi (1991) as consist ing of "legal author i ty der ived f rom the Indian Act and tradit ional author i ty based on acknowledged competence on commun i ty issues." As he explains: Legal author i ty endows the band government wi th powers to formulate and implement policies regard ing the heal th, safety, and genera l wel fare of the communi ty . In contrast , t radit ional author i ty is g rounded within the tradit ions of the commun i t y including, their value sys tem, and is exerc ised through a tradit ional sys tem of chiefs and elders (1991:61) . The "d ispersed forms" or "divided authori ty" wi thin First Nat ions has been problemat ic however (Wolfe 1989; Ndubis i 1991) . In the case of the New Credi t communi ty , the tradit ional sys tem of authori ty w a s w e a k e n e d by government intervent ion (legal author i ty) . The commun i ty s t ruggled to comply wi th government fund ing condi t ions whi le trying to satisfy communi ty d e m a n d s . Legal author i ty was v iewed as "per ipheral to tradit ional native social s t ructures" and the communi ty w a s "hesitant to enforce their powers . . .as c i rcumscr ibed in the Indian Act (1991:61) . " Wol fe e laborates on the chal lenge for First Nat ions: 23 Equal ly or more crit ical may be the ability of communi t ies to m a n a g e the tensions and apparent contradict ions arising be tween tradit ional st ructures and processes and those imposed upon t h e m , wh ich have become necessary to their effect ive interact ion wi th external agenc ies, in ways wh ich are symbiot ic rather than dysfunct ional (1989:71) . Fur thermore, external author i ty relat ions have impl icated government policies and p rograms for First Nat ions wi th respect to involvement and part ic ipat ion. For example , Copet (1992) acknowledged that the l imited success of government policy and p rograms in Mani toba w a s due in part to the s t rong emphas is on "outside" p lanners for project specif ic activit ies and the level of bureaucracy. These "often entai led insensit ivity to cultural qual i t ies of the communi t ies , [result ing] in ineffective and somet imes damag ing planning pract ices," such as those exper ienced in the Grand Rapids Hydro Project dur ing the 1960's (1992:39) . Other authors such as England (1971) in his case study analysis of the Cape Crocker commun i ty of Ontar io observed how the Indian Act and turnover of federal agents inhibited commun i ty involvement . Wol fe (1982) noted how the structure and "external locus of dec is ion-making" l imited local invo lvement in the planning and del ivery of services to a remote commun i ty in nor thern Ontar io and finally, Shki lnyk 's (1985) case study analysis of the forced relocat ion of an Oj ibwa communi ty in 1963 i l lustrates the impl icat ions for government involvement and the lack of part icipation and control for a commun i t y "caught in the void be tween two cul tures" (1985 :34) . 4 As important as knowing the history and impacts of author i ty relat ions, several authors note that p lanners need to know that First Nat ions have been undergo ing new relat ionships and opportuni t ies for part ic ipat ion and decis ion making control th rough var ious comprehens ive land c la im agreements , devolut ion of powers and legal decis ions for the past f i f teen years (Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Wol fe 1988; Wol fe 1989; Copet 1992; Jacobs and Mulvihil l 1995; Sandercock 1998a; Kew and Miller 1999; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1999): Wol fe and St rachan (1987:12) acknowledge the signi f icance of changing author i ty for the Inuit in the Canad ian north Keewat in District: 4 Shkilynk also noted the impacts of government intervention created a change in roles, responsibilities, qualifications, tenure and authority within the First Nation. Sanctions on social behaviour and forms of self-help were replaced by a system of paternalistic controls and administered social assistance that was external to the community. Government was also seen to set into motion a class society, creating a lack of equal access to resources. This created fiefdoms of power and influence becoming exclusive to kinship groups. Latent historic interfamily tensions have intensified the process (1985:101). 24 Shift ing power relat ionships and emerg ing new structures, funct ions and roles, are all int imately connec ted wi th how decis ions are made , w h o def ines the issues, w h o structures the dec is ion-making process, and which cultural va lues prevai l : Kew and Miller (1999) , for example , state that new authori ty s t ructures are chang ing the nature of the relat ions be tween Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal society and alter ing the polit ical and economic landscape. Jacobs and Mulvihil l (1995:7) add that land c la ims can be v iewed as an oppor tuni ty to restructure previous relat ions of the past, leading to a more "viable in terdependence be tween societ ies" and further, Kl iger a n d Cosgrove (1999:51) v iew land c la ims as "a m e a n s to mainta in a n d recover tradit ional cu l ture. . . [and are] about just ice and the acceptance of di f ference." Finally, Wol fe notes the signif icance of increased powers as "se l f -government ensures native Canad ians the au tonomy, authori ty and power to take decis ions wh ich make sense f rom a native perspect ive" (1988:230) . However , as two authors state, shift ing powers and control may not in themse lves guarantee more effect ive control and part icipation (Wolfe 1988; Lane 1997). Also relevant is the p lanning approach used by the planner (Boothroyd 1986; Wol f 1988) , as wel l as the structural and sys tem suppor ts necessary to deve lop the capaci ty of a communi ty to part icipate (Wolfe .1988; Lane 1997) (see under participation and capacity). Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions might reflect on Wol fe 's quest ion (1988:212) : W h a t then are the opportuni t ies for native communi t ies to gain exper ience in p lanning, wi th in exist ing st ructures, so that, as future sel f -governing enti t ies, they will be able to determine, plan for and manage their deve lopment ef fect ively? This is part icularly signif icant s ince part icipation and control have been den ied to Abor ig inal peoples. If p lanners can gain an awareness of the condit ions and history of author i ty relat ions for the communi ty they work in, this knowledge may explain past and current at t i tudes towards part ic ipat ion and direct wha t tact ics and strategies p lanners under take to enable effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. Ndubisi (1991) for example suggests "mixed field controls" as a consequence of the author i ty condi t ions noted in the N e w Credi t communi ty . The author suggests creat ing part ic ipatory p lanning processes to foster communi ty suppor t for local issues and agenda , the "select ive" exerc is ing of powers to minimize al ienat ion, and the offer ing of mater ial incent ives as a way to "complement normat ive compl iance." Appropr ia te "insti tut ional a r rangements" such as a non-hierarchical st ructure are important to facil i tate part ic ipat ion. 25 Zafera tos (1998) suggests a f ramework for tr ibal p lanning that consists of knowing the processes that d imin ished abor iginal tribal sovereignty, as wel l as knowing the causes of underdeve lopment and the legal basis of a tr ibe's contro l . O n c e planners are aware of these var ious factors, they need to devise p lanning methods that can preserve the communi ty ' s cultural identity by enabl ing a commun i ty to exerc ise author i ty over its terri torial, social and political affairs. If p lanning in part cons iders the historical exper iences and external factors, perhaps there is a better opportuni ty for p lanning to satisfy "emancipatory object ives". 3.4.3 Social Organizat ion To enable effective part ic ipatory relat ionships wi th in First Nat ions, p lanners require knowledge about the social organizat ion of First Nat ions. Several authors e laborate on the signif icant fo rms of tradit ional social organizat ion such as kinship, family, c lan, tribal and confederat ion networks and sys tems (Wolfe and Lindley 1983; S imon et a l . 1984; Shki lnyk 1985; Wol fe 1989; Lane 1997; Jojola 1998; Kew and Miller 1999; Al f red 1999). These types of social organizat ion helped to explain pat terns of part ic ipat ion, including the spatial and territorial relat ionships, for Abor ig inal g roups in nor thern Queens land (Lane 1997), decis ion mak ing for the Sto: lo Nat ion in British Co lumbia (Kew and Miller i 1999), social control and leadership for the Oj ibway in Ontar io (S imon et a l . 1984) , and the planning "superstructure" for the Pueblo Counci l in the United States (Jojola 1998) . Planners can apprec iate the signi f icance of social organizat ion for example wi th the Oj ibway, w h e r e "the ex tended fami ly is the basic unit of society, upon wh ich all o ther social convent ions are founded" (S imon et a l . 1984:74-76) . Kinship is signif icant in terms of re lat ionships and involvement . Tradit ional ly, kinship determined membersh ip in the communi ty , it af fected fami ly and commun i ty interact ion, and it exerc ised the most effect ive m e a n s of social control and leadership. The social and spatial organizat ion of fami l ies w a s based on the govern ing roles of kinship t ies. Shki lynk 's s tudy of the Oj ibway emphas ized the impor tance of h u m a n relat ionships and the fami ly prior to the forced relocat ion of the Grassy Nar rows communi ty in 1 9 6 3 . 5 The author s t ressed st rong 5 Shkilynk stated: The family group, for all practical purposes, was a community unto itself: it was a factory, a school, a hospital, a shrine. The bonds of family were very close because the extended family had the responsibility of providing for the physical survival of its members, educating the young, sheltering the dependent, curing the sick, and transmitting the moral and spiritual values of a culture. In a society with very few public institutions and no formal associations, membership in a family was the individual's primary source of identity and support. The family was the point from which one fixed one's place in the larger universe, visible and invisible (1985:79). 26 family bonds and how the concept of fami ly w a s composed of people w h o worked together. These relat ionships w e r e bound by responsibi l i ty and f r iendship, including t ies to f r iendship. With in the group, there w a s cont inuous cooperat ion and shar ing, and support for mutual a id. T h e fami ly unit worked and persisted in a society economical ly , social ly, psychological ly, and spiri tually (1985:90) . Jojola explains how clanships are considered a "basic e lement" of society for the tr ibes of Amer i ca , "serving as the basic social unit for mobi l iz ing their communi t ies" (1998:105) . A s he states: T o know a c lanship is to unders tand both the spatial and social re lat ionships of many tribal communi t ies . It is the superst ructure on wh ich m a n y tribal societ ies base their most wel l founded plans. The clan is akin to a ne ighborhood in p lanning theory. But it supersedes mere boundar ies; people in tribal c lans are united in t ime and space as wel l . He d iscusses the re levance of var ious polit ical and tradit ional dec is ion-making st ructures of tr ibes and how levels of polit ical associat ion fo rm an overal l regional p lanning model to organ ize and "govern collective concerns. " Severa l other authors suggest numerous prob lems wh ich have persisted around the neglect of p lanners and planning to unders tand and incorporate the nature of tradit ional and con tempora ry social organizat ion and representat ion dur ing planning processes (Wolfe and Lindley 1983; S imon et a l . 1984; Lane 1997; Jojola 1998) . For example , dur ing an envi ronmenta l p lanning process for a new Wor ld Her i tage Area in nor thern Queens land , m a n a g e m e n t fai led "to apprec iate the impor tance of Abor ig inal social and territorial organizat ion in unders tanding patterns of Abor ig inal part ic ipat ion" (Lane 1997:309) . In the case of pre-contact of Austra l ian Abor ig inal society, Stanner (1965 in Lane 1997) dif ferentiated be tween "estate" and the " range" of the patri l ineal c lan group. The estate w a s seen to be the core terr i tory "possessed" by the c lan, and "central to Abor ig inal social organizat ion and cultural identity." The range consis ted of the land a clan used for survival and economic reasons. Howit t (1993:132 in Lane 1997:312) noted the impl icat ions these territorial re lat ionships had for part ic ipat ion, stat ing that "western not ions of delegat ion and representat ion in political dec is ion-making sys tems are inappl icable." The signi f icance of the " local ized nature of Abor ig inal social and territorial organizat ion, render approaches based on de legated representat ion inappropriate." Whi le it is impor tant to unders tand the social and territorial organizat ion of Abor ig inal peoples, two authors state that p lanners should not assume these tradit ional sys tems remain in tact (Stanner 1965 in 27 Lane 1997; Jojola 1998). These sys tems evolve into "neo-tradi t ional" polit ical st ructures o v e r t i m e and as Chief Steven Point of the Sto:lo Nat ion suggests , st ructures within the commun i ty "must be f lexible" (Kew and Miller 1999:57) . Further, outs ide p lanners should not assume that Abor ig inal g roups represent a unif ied or coherent who le . Homogene i ty notes Dixon (1990:66 in Lane 1997:312) , is a "false doctr ine of Abor ig ina l l y . " The assumpt ion that Abor ig inal communi t ies are "geographical ly bounded and social ly cohes ive, wi th democrat ica l ly e lected leaderships wh ich legit imately represents the communi ty , " has resulted in ineffective government sponsored communi ty deve lopment p lanning (Wolfe 1993:40 in Lane 1997:312) . In the case of the m a n a g e m e n t plan for the N e w Wor ld Her i tage Area in nor thern Queens land , many Abor ig inal g roups remained marginal to the p lanning process because it w a s assumed that one group had a "representat ional mandate . . .espous ing a pan-Aboriginal ist concept ion of social organizat ion" (Lane 1997:309) . In this instance, the d ia logue w a s "monopol ized ' by one group claiming voice for other g roups. Outs ide p lanners also need to be aware of the confl ict wi th in First Nat ions. Wo l fe notes that internal confl ict is "often organized social ly into fact ions, a long kinship l ines" and that this impl icates the ef fect iveness of " internal personal communica t ion networks (Wolfe 1989:70) . Confl ict may also be based on rel igious sch isms (England 1 9 7 1 ; Wol fe and St rachan 1987) or va lue di f ferences be tween groups within First Nat ions (Wolfe and Lindley 1983; Hanson 1985) . However , p lanners should recognize that for some First Nat ions such as the Coast Sal ish: Networks al low for shor t - term bouts of disaffi l iation by individual m e m b e r s , communi t ies , bands, or other const i tuent g roups wi thout substant ively affect ing the long- term social sys tem, disrupt ing cultural cont inuity, or dissolv ing the boundar ies of the Coast Sal ish moral universe (Kew and Miller 1999:58) . Kew and Miller go on to explain that individuals may "disaffi l iate themselves" f rom their governments , may elect not to part icipate dur ing meet ings, may not agree wi th communi ty decis ions on part icular mat ters or they might try to " inf luence internal political processes." However , this disaffi l iation is not permanent . Individuals are re-aff i l iated back into the communi ty "without penalty." 3.4.4 Commun ica t ion Abor ig inal peoples have long pract iced their o w n tradit ional p lanning and dec is ion-making sys tems, emphas iz ing part icular fo rms and styles of communica t ion such as storytel l ing (Boothroyd 1986; 28 Wol fe 1989; Jojola 1998; Cooper 1998; Cru ickshank 1998). However , centur ies of colonial rule have at t imes eroded language and si lenced the voice of Abor ig inal peoples wi th vary ing consequences and implicat ions. Abor ig inal peoples have exper ienced a "shared forget fu lness ' and a "shared m e m o r y suggest a more profound approach to examin ing Nat ive communica t ion" (Cooper 1998:41) . Cooper 's (1998) interest in reveal ing and teaching cultural bias be tween native and non-nat ive society and how w e might ove rcome it, is useful for p lanners to incorporate into their p lanning reg ime. This is a similar concern of Forester (1989) w h o points out in his crit ical theory of communica t ive p lanning, how communica t ion and unders tand ing be tween individuals and g roups becomes "distorted," and wha t the subsequent impl icat ions are for p lanning act ion and ou tcomes . Cooper d ist inguishes be tween nat ive and non-nat ive fo rms of commun ica t ion . This is critical for outside p lanners to consider. He explains that language is v iewed as having two pr imary funct ions: expression and communica t ion (Barf ield 1973 in Cooper 1998:17) . Expression str ives to represent ful lness or sinceri ty whi le communica t ion aspires towards accuracy. Cooper suggests that ancient native commun ion is based on the express ion funct ion, mot ivated by "outer feel ings, amb ience and sacred sensings," whereas , modern industr ial ized societ ies are guided by the commun ica t ion funct ion, "given our informat ion explos ion, communica t ion revolut ion, and fact d ispensers - f r om compute rs to tex tbooks to journal ists" (1998:17-18) . Di f ferences are fur ther emphas ized be tween tradit ional and modern societ ies, wi th native society relying on internal t ransmiss ion character ized by intuit ion, si lent commun ica t ion , memor ized myth and invisible power s torage, versus modern or European society wh ich relies more on external ly imposed methods of communica t ion (1998:31) . Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions might consider Cooper ' s three assumpt ions for communica t ion b iases: 1) that l iterate cul tures are superior; 2) complexi ty and sophist icat ion are superior; and that 3) communica t ion may be unders tood only th rough analysis. However , outs ide p lanners need to appreciate that " there are communica t ion va lues that most tr ibal people prefer to the lineal mindset they associate wi th bureaucracy" (1998:13) . Peek (1981:41 in Cooper 1998:13) states that people f rom literate societ ies have to be consc ious of the "limits of l i teracy," or that "seeing is bel ieving," is not a universal ly held not ion." Planners need to unders tand that oral societ ies such as First Nat ions, have "rel ied on spoken t ransact ions." These dist inct ions are signif icant because they underl ie the potent ial for the incompatibi l i ty of communica t ion be tween planners and First Nat ions. 29 To apply Cooper 's d iscussion to a planning context wou ld be to ask wha t the impl icat ions are for outs ide p lanners w h o enter a First Nat ions communi ty wi th an " inheri ted knowledge of imperial communica t ion" fo rms and methods? How do p lanners interact wi th cul tures w h o have not relied on wr i t ten language to commun ica te planning issues, va lues, needs and direct ions? Only recent ly have Abor ig inal cul tures been evolving and blending wr i t ten and digital fo rms of communica t ion . Cooper ' s response is for people to expand their knowledge and acceptance of var ious communica t ion fo rms. He states that people f rom literate societ ies must " learn to listen more deeply" and change one 's mindset away f rom the superior i ty of wr i t ten communica t ion . They need to cons ider the "sensory bias" be tween l i terature and oral cul ture. Forester 's (1989) planning context adds to Cooper 's perspect ive, explaining much more broadly how communica t ion be tween individuals becomes "distorted." However , his crit ical theory of p lanning is not appl ied specif ical ly to a First Nat ions context . A s noted earl ier in the thesis, Forester is interested in overcoming the unequal power relat ions m a d e possible by "attent ion shaping." The context and content of communica t ion is impacted: By wha t a planner talks abou t . . .when and in wha t si tuat ion and wi th w h o m the planner ta lks . . .what is said depends on more than the structural , legal-polit ical relat ions that const i tute the institutional and historical sett ings in wh ich p lanners and others ta lk . . .unders tand ing here depends on our reading of other 's intent ions, their express ions of self, their personal s tance" (1989:145-146) . Since attent ion shap ing has both practical and communica t ive aspects , p lanners need to know how communica t ion distort ions m a d e possible by language, vocabulary, poor l istening, power relat ions and gender imbalances can affect communica t ion and part ic ipat ion. These build on Cooper ' s concern of the bias be tween oral and wri t ten fo rms of communica t ion . However , Forester 's model provides insight into the impl icat ions these types of biases can have for p lanning, and wha t p lanners can do to ove rcome potential barr iers and enable more democrat ic p lanning. Based on the d iscussions of Cooper and Forester, outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to consider the cultural f o rm and structure of communica t ion if they are to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. Planners require an ability to apply relevant and authent ic fo rms of communica t ion in a "culturally appropr iate manner . " For example , Cooper cons idered the communica t ion sys tems of the Navajo people (Dine) of Ar izona and the S h u s w a p people of Brit ish Co lumb ia . He 30 explored the tradit ional fo rms of communica t ion and rules that governed the Shuswap 's cus tomary commun ica t i on . 6 The author does not state to wha t extent these communica t ion fo rms are appl icable for the S h u s w a p today, but it is likely that some of these tradit ions have evo lved. They wou ld also not be equal ly appl icable in every First Nat ion. Cooper ' s greatest message is that cus tomary communica t ion can serve to expand the scope of wes te rn communica t ion fo rms and provoke the need for p lanners to become pract iced in the relevant communica t ion fo rms and rituals of First Nat ions they work w i th . 3.4.5 Part icipat ion Several authors acknowledge that p lanning has been a long tradit ion for Abor ig ina l peoples (Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe and Lindley 1983; Wol fe 1988; Jojola 1998) and not "a concept imposed on indigenous peoples by Euro-Amer icans" (Jojola 1998:101) . Undoubtedly , First Nat ions have part ic ipated in the manag ing of their affairs based on their tradit ional values and cus toms as much as possible, but not wi thout external constra ints and condi t ions as noted previously. The pr imary m o d e of part ic ipat ion for First Nat ions is consensus dec is ion-making (Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1989; Ndubis i 1 9 9 1 ; Jojola 1998; Kew and Miller 1999)7 Other modes of part ic ipat ion include storytel l ing (S imon et al. 1984; Cooper 1998; Cru ickshank 1998) l istening (Boothroyd 1986, 1992; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999) ; te legraph moccas in (Wolfe 1989), ce remony and ritual (Jojola 1998; Cooper 1998; Kew and Miller 1999) and d ia logue (Ndubisi 1991). 6 Examples provided by Cooper illustrate the complexity of communication and are useful to evolve planners' understanding of First Nations' traditional forms of communication: 1) Paint: used as decoration for ritual and symbolic meaning in war and preparation, and honouring casualties; 2) Sign language: inter-tribal communication, value in greetings, negotiation, hunting and warnings; 3) Speech: important for storytelling, advising, discussing, prayer, chant; 4) Silence: practical and spiritual necessity, breaks "punctuated conversation", enables thinking, demonstrates respect, honours "tempos of nature;" 5) Communication networks: horseback runners and fire to transmit messages. 6) Transportation: learning "lands language;" 7) Speaking with Animals: explanatory and predictability qualities of animals; 8) Communion with life: direct communication with natural world and the Divine; and 9) Group Communication: forms to communicate with "Great Spirit" include the pipe ceremony, sweat lodge ceremony, powwow, special dances, potlatch ceremony, drum and language (1998: 115-128). 7 Ndubisi captures one meaning of consensual decision-making for the New Credit community: "It is characterized by the life of dialogue, where the capacity to talk out a problem continues until sufficient agreement is reached. Consensual decision-making also is process oriented and entails two-way communication between relevant actors. Formal agreements when made confirm informal arrangements that are well known and understood by all parties. Problems are examined in both a contextual and experiential manner, rather than rationally. Consensual decision-making suggests adopting a planning process that is open, continuous, and flexible, as well as the institutional arrangements that would support the life of the dialogue. As the consensual process demands patience and thoroughness, it is further necessary to extend the time required for deliberations on the phases of planning process, including goal setting and selecting alternatives to action (1991:60). 31 Storytel l ing is acknowledged under the previous knowledge t h e m e as a fo rm of communica t ion . It is also apparent f rom the l i terature that it is an integral mode of part ic ipat ion for First Nat ions. The signi f icance of storytel l ing is expressed by two authors as "foster ing unders tanding through revealed subject ive exper iences and sources of cultural mean ing and va lues" (Young 1990 in Kliger and Cosgrove 1999:56) , and how "paying attent ion to the spoken word - l istening - "gives voice to exper ience of those people w h o s e v iews are of ten over looked or d iscounted"" (Sl im and T h o m p s o n 1993 in Kliger and Cosgrove 1999: 56) . Forester (1999) makes a similar point, not ing that storytel l ing is a w a y to deal wi th " t raumat ic histories." Giv ing stor ies a voice is a w a y of "doing just ice to their exper iences." In this sense, Forester s tates, "structures of del iberat ion [storytell ing] can encourage or d isplace processes of acknowledg ing and work ing through collective suf fer ing" (Forester 1999:212) 8 They can b e c o m e the basis of a " t ransformat ive theory of social learning" (1999:130) . Forester acknowledges the chal lenges of work ing wi th stor ies. He suggests that there are no "all purpose techniques" to tell or listen to stor ies and notes that not all stor ies are created equal . He states that stor ies need a "shared sense of rules" to ensure safety and a sense of st ructure and process for stor ies to be to ld. They also require a "protocol of turn tak ing." As a result, p lanners have to set priorit ies every t ime they l isten, to search for facts that matter, have the ability to judge facts that matter, and to make ethical j udgments and "value al locat ions as they speak." The majori ty of l i terature on part icipation and planning wi th First Nat ions has cons idered issues and obstac les wi th in the context of co -managemen t relat ionships, mul t i -s takeholder processes and resource-based issues (Dale 1992; McDona ld 1993; Jacobs and Mulvihil l 1995; Lane 1997; Kew and Miller 1999; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999) . 9 Factors affect ing commun i ty part icipation include: the capaci ty and "readiness factor" of a commun i ty (Wolfe 1988), the lack of structural and sys tem suppor ts such as authori ty, control and h u m a n resources (Wolfe 1988), l imitations of internal personal communica t ion 8 However, Forester does note that we have to be careful that deliberative practice does not re-traumatize people. This is significant for First Nation settings and the challenge is to allow people to open to "unspeakable loss." This further points to the need to create safe and supportive deliberative practices to enable voices to speak. 9 For example, Dale considered why the Aboriginal Council in Queensland, Australia was unable to fully participate in regional planning processes and the reasons for the lack of participation (1992:12-17). Factors affecting participation included issues around the lack of community control; the incompatibility of "client-donor" perspectives; the emphasis on centralized planning to "maintain bureaucratic accountability" and satisfy policies aims; the need for external actors to maintain control to achieve "success;" how external "advisors" become "enforcers" of non-community development agendas; and the ability of Aboriginal communities to administer government policy. 32 networks due to fact ions, rel igious sch isms and va lue di f ferences (Hanson 1985; Wol fe and Lindley 1983; Wol fe 1989), the p lanning approach used by the planner (Wolfe 1988; Langin 1988; Boothroyd 1986; Boothroyd 1992; St. Denise 1992), p lanner qual i t ies and issues of power dominat ion (Wol fe 1988), and the lack of First Nat ion policy on part ic ipat ion and involvement (England 1971) . Wha t can outs ide p lanners do to enable effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning wi th First Nat ions? Authors st ressed the need to consider the mean ing of part icipation and the part icular approach to planning (England 1 9 7 1 ; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1989; Boothroyd 1992); to look for feedback mechan isms to assess the quali ty of part icipation (Ndubisi 1991); employ var ious pract ical guidel ines and tactics (McDona ld 1993; DeMel lo et a l . 1994; Lane 1997; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1999) ; encourage cit izen per fo rmance in safe rituals of part icipation (De Mello et a l . 1994; Forester 1999) ; p romote "suitable vehic les of involvement" (England 1971); and to consider the p lanning sett ing (McDona ld 1993; Forester 1999) . Boothroyd makes a critical link be tween part icipation and process and how part icular fo rms of p lanning may be more conduc ive to enabl ing both. He suggests that the "process by wh ich the planning consul tant under takes his/her works" impl icates the quali ty of part icipation and p lanning. T h e author si tuates a typology of p lanning fo rms within "the totality of communi ty act ion and dec is ion-mak ing" (1986:18) . His four fo rms of native commun i ty planning consist of: 1) deve lopmenta l p lanning; 2) placatory/wish-l ist p lanning; 3) autocrat ic p lanning; and 4) ritualistic p lanning. These fo rms of p lanning are either direct ional or per ipheral to commun i ty act ion, considered part ic ipatory or central ized p lanning. Boothroyd 's deve lopmenta l p lanning fo rm is preferred: Because this fo rm is truly commun i ty based (i.e., it is part ic ipatory) and is effect ively l inked to decis ions and act ions, it p romotes in its ou tcomes and processes the deve lopment of the who le communi ty . . .developmenta l fo rm of p lanning contr ibutes most to sel f-rel iance (1986:20) . To fol low Boothroyd, if deve lopmenta l p lanning is cons idered part icipatory, " then w e must see skill in manag ing the planning process as lying at its heart" (1986:21) . The net effect of process planning states Boothroyd, is to "make planning direct ional of act ion." Involvement fosters commi tmen t and re levance, fusing dec is ion-making and act ion. Several o ther authors descr ibe wha t planners, can do to facil i tate part ic ipat ion w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Ndubis i (1991) d raws f rom Faludi (1973) and suggests for example that p lanners can 33 look for var ious feedback mechan isms such as w i thdrawal , nonpart ic ipat ion, nonat tendance at p lanning meet ings, disinterest and nonvocal izat ion w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Observ ing these types of feedback mechan isms might assist p lanners to increase part ic ipat ion. He also suggests that p lanners may w a n t to al low more t ime and keep "channels of communica t ion o p e n " th roughout a p lanning processes, and to "adapt" the feedback back into process. More recent ly, severa l authors have identi f ied pract ical guidel ines and tact ics that could be helpful for p lanners to consider as they try to facil i tate more effect ive part ic ipatory involvement (McDona ld 1993; De Mello et a l . 1994; Lane 1997; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1999) . De Mello et al . (1994) for example , suggest the "Medic ine W h e e l " and the "Circle of Life and Learn ing" as models to gu ide learning and educat ion w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. The authors out l ine four t hemes that m a y be useful for p lanners to consider w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions: the need to create a mental ly engag ing process, an emot ional ly support ive env i ronment , an embrac ing spiri tual d imens ion , and to provide a physical ly aff i rming context . They also offer numerous practical suggest ions useful for p lanners to consider as they facil i tate part ic ipat ion: 1) Encourage a t ransformat ive approach to interact ion; 2 ) People need to feel comfor tab le and safe; 3) Create an env i ronment of mutual support ; 4) Use of tradit ional foods and feast ing to create emot ional and cultural connect ions; 5) Prepare for and expect emot ional responses; 6) Recognize and a c c o m m o d a t e the need for tradit ional heal ing ce remony ; 7) Provide humour and spontanei ty ; 8) Embrace a spiri tual d imens ion by offering prayers, d r u m m i n g , poems and wri t ings to p romote kinship and communi ty ; 9) The impor tance of the guiding role of the Creator in planning activit ies; 10) Cons ider the p lanning fo rum and venue to host p lanning sessions; 11) Promote posit ive af f i rmat ions wi th the Talk ing Stick or Eagle Feather ; 12) Provide Abor ig inal texts to recognize and val idate a First Nat ion perspect ive; and 13) Pay tr ibute to part ic ipants, family, communi ty though tradit ional feasts . There has been little d iscussion in te rms of part ic ipatory roles or character ist ics of part ic ipat ion wi th in First Nat ions, specif ical ly, d i f ferences be tween w o m e n , m e n and elders, and the impl icat ions for outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions. Brief except ions are noted by authors such as S imon et a l . (1984) w h o observed that m e n and w o m e n part ic ipated dif ferently dur ing an interview process in an Oj ibway communi ty . In this instance, m e n w e r e seen to be more "easily accessed" than w o m e n , and appeared more comfor tab le dur ing the interview process. In the case of Kere society in Ar izona, Al len (1988) says 34 that w o m e n tradit ional ly retained the pol icymaking power. Finally, Peters noted that a m o n g Abor ig inal w o m e n in urban C a n a d a , w o m e n ' s roles " focus on reestabl ishing healthy relat ionships based on culture, kinship and communi ty , " and that w o m e n "emphas ized the importance of regain ing, re-creat ing, or revaluing cultural tradit ions in a process of 'heal ing' f rom the damage of the colonial legacy" (1998:676, 678) . In addi t ion, McDona ld states that "communi ty deve lopment needs to involve and e m p o w e r w o m e n " and "consultat ion requires numerous work ing operat ives inc lud ing. . .unders tanding the importance of w o m e n in communi ty decis ion making and deve lopment work" (1993:202) . He observed that w o m e n of the Tangenty re Counci l a round Al ice Spr ings, Austral ia "most ly play a senior role in determining those env i ronmenta l prob lems wh ich require attent ion." Finally, he says, "it is clearly and somet imes not so clearly inappropr iate for a male to be seeking input f rom w o m e n cl ients" (1993:202) . St iegelbauer (1996) attests to the important role elders have for the Native Canad ian Cent re of Toronto: Elders are important for their symbol ic connect ion to the past, and for their knowledge of tradit ional ways , teachings, stories and ceremonies. It is very c o m m o n for respected elders to be cal led upon to help communi t ies with decis ions regarding everyth ing f rom health issues, to communi ty deve lopment , to governmenta l negot iat ions regard ing land use and sel f -government . (1996:39) . If p lanners are to develop part ic ipatory planning relat ionships with elders, they require certain abilit ies and skills in approaching elders. St iegelbauer descr ibes a relational approach w h e r e elders may encourage people to "seek their help" or people can engage in a ceremony to ask elders for their help. One elder in the study explained the process of approach ing an elder wi th tobacco. As St iegelbauer states, the "exchange is very important f rom the Elder 's perspect ive because it signif ies the individuals wi l l ingness to listen and take the help of the Elder ser iously"(1996:51) . 3.4.6 Capaci ty The capaci ty of First Nat ions communi t ies to design, control and m a n a g e their affairs is the result of a range of factors such as the l imited powers and authori ty largely imposed under the Indian Act (Boothroyd 1984); the range of authori ty structures within var ious se l f -government reg imes (Wol fe 1989); the number, availabil ity, skill level and leadership quali ty of people in a communi ty (Wol fe 1988; Wol fe 1989; Ndubisi 1991); f inancial resource capaci ty (Wolfe 1988); the approaches and condi t ions of p lanning 35 programs imposed by government agencies or p lanners (Wolfe 1989; Boothroyd 1992); the qual i ty of a communi ty 's data base (England 1971); and var ious spatial relat ionships such as the physical set t ing, geograph ic location and size of the communi ty (Wolfe 1982; Shki lnyk 1985; Boothroyd 1986; Wo l fe 1989; Rober tson 1999). Au thors wi th in the planning l i terature reference the need for p lanners to cons ider the inst i tut ional, organizat ional , author i ty and leadership structures of First Nat ions communi t ies , as wel l as the resource capaci ty to overcome capaci ty issues (England 1 9 7 1 ; Smi th 1985; Wol fe 1988) . Smi th (1985) argues that the institutional base should suit socio-cul tural condi t ions of the cul ture that p lanners work in (Smith 1985). This is important as England (1971) observed , s ince capaci ty issues were attr ibuted to the lack of organizat ional st ructure to coordinate and facil i tate planning and deve lopment within reserves and be tween reserves, including be tween communi t ies and non-Indian ne ighbours and other agenc ies. Wol fe (1989) notes how the smal l size of First Nat ions communi t ies can foster the shar ing of local knowledge, known as "moccas in te legraph." The smal l size of communi t ies can also make "the al l-communi ty meet ing a pract ical reality" (Boothroyd 1984:8 in Wol fe 1989:70) . However , Wo l fe (1989) does recognize that the smal l size of communi t ies can hamper the capaci ty of a commun i ty to part ic ipate in var ious planning and p rogramming activit ies. Drawing f rom Wickers (1979) " theory of u n d e r m a n n i n g , " Wol fe explains how First Nat ion individuals can serve in responsib le posi t ions, engage in act ions difficult for t hem, and engage in responses that are vitally important to the set t ing. First Nat ions individuals are also more likely to act in response to the important act ions of others, than do occupants of opt imal ly "manned" sett ings." Wol fe talks about the l imited h u m a n resource base in s o m e First Nat ions communi t ies , and how political leaders and commun i ty staff are expected to "deal wi th the vast array of issues and needs. " Vary ing degrees of formal educat ion and increased work loads and responsibi l i t ies m a d e possible th rough government devolut ion processes can aiso place an addit ional strain on the local capaci ty of First Nat ions. These factors are important for p lanners to know because they implicate the ability for communi t ies to respond to the t ime constraints and expectat ions of "external agendas , " notes Wol fe (1989) . Leaders of ten have to balance their t ime be tween local issues and the larger d e m a n d s of land c la ims. Finally, she states, that p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions should observe that decis ions within the communi ty can also take more t ime because of the emphas is p laced on consensua l dec is ion-mak ing. 36 Wol fe states that "present and potent ia l" capaci ty of First Nat ion communi t ies is "crit ical to effective process," as they under take p lanning, se l f -management or se l f -government (1989:70) . She argues that to increase communi ty capaci ty, involvement and control are needed in order to exerc ise greater choice and dec is ion-making. She suggests that First Nat ions need to de termine their " readiness factor" if they are to plan and part icipate more effectively. Effective commun i ty capaci ty, Wol fe (1988) explains, requires internal and external structural and sys tem suppor ts . These are needed within external government agenc ies, and nat ive organizat ions undertak ing planning activity. She def ines these sys tem supports as: the responsibi l i ty, right, author i ty and control to affect coordinat ion and p lanning; the power to s u m m o n cooperat ion; suff icient and avai lable h u m a n and f inancial resources; f lexible and decentra l ized fund ing, budget ing and p rog ramming ; and external professional capaci ty, including the leadership of the planner. 3.4.7 Planner Relat ionship The nature of the p lanning relat ionship be tween outside p lanners and First Nat ions has been partially cons idered by some authors (Lockhar t 1982; Boothroyd 1986, 1992; Langin 1988; Wol fe 1989; Kowalsky et a l .1996) . Several authors document numerous issues surrounding the capaci ty, credibi l i ty, role and involvement of p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions (Wolfe & Lindley 1983; S imon et al. 1984; Boothroyd 1986, 1992; Wol fe 1988, 1989; Copet 1992; McDona ld 1993, Ridley at a l . 1994; Jacobs and Mulvihil l 1995; Kowalsky et a l . 1996; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1999; Kew & Miller 1999; Rober tson 1999). Au thors such as Smi th (1985) , Boothroyd (1986) , Wol fe (1988, 1989) and Ndubis i (1991) for example , suggest that the background , va lue sys tem, educat ion, preparat ion, intel lectual or ientat ion, cognit ive di f ferences in p lanning, including the style, fo rms, funct ions, approaches and methods of p lanners are important factors that could shape the quali ty of p lanning relat ionships be tween planners and First Nat ions. Va lue di f ferences be tween planners and First Nat ions are part icularly signif icant as Ndubisi (1991) notes, because they represent bias p lanners bring to the p lanning relat ionship. Because of the long history of outs ide planning dependency endured by First Nat ions (Copet 1992), one important concern notes Wol fe (1988) , is whether p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions are perpetuat ing dominat ion and control and w h a t the implications are for commun i ty invo lvement and 37 part ic ipat ion. Ongo ing , is the debate of how planners can become more sensi t ized and pract ice more cultural ly relevant p lanning, or in Boothroyd 's (1992) te rms, how planners "establ ish product ive relat ions" w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. Lockhart (1982) considers the structure of the consult ing-cl ient relat ionship and involvement dur ing his work wi th the North Coast Tribal Counci l in British Co lumbia . The scope of work involved identifying "organizat ional processes" necessary to enable economic opportuni t ies for the communi ty . Lockhart explains that the purpose of the process and research w a s to "cast the commun i ty in the role of the planner," and to have meet ings establ ishing the basis of relat ions be tween the cl ient and consul tant . Effective relat ions emphas ized develop ing a process versus del iver ing a product , whereby the First Nat ion w a s involved in cont inuous learning, maintaining communi ty control th rough comple te part ic ipat ion. The commun i ty also had the ability to make ongo ing re ject ion/acceptance decis ions th roughout the relat ionship. In Lockhart 's exper ience, te rms of reference helped structure an effect ive insider-outsider relat ionship, an effect ive " insider-outsider dialectic," w h e r e the inside knowledge of the commun i ty and the outs ide knowledge of the p lanner are appl ied to commun i ty dec is ion-mak ing. The concern w a s how to place "outside consul tants and the inside cl ients on an equal foot ing" and how the knowledge exchange process wou ld "greatly enhance" the "probabi l i ty of achiev ing a viable distr ibut ion of solut ion responsibi l i ty . . . in the context of g rowing trust and mutual apprec iat ion" (1982:167-168) . In addit ion to the formal inst ruments used to structure p lanning relat ionships, such as te rms of reference, p lanners may wan t to consider the less formal , more personal aspects of their relat ionship as acknowledged by Wol fe and Lindley (1983) and S imon et a l . (1984:) w h o state: p lanners require "pat ience and wi l l ingness to part icipate in the local activit ies such as basebal l to dr inking considerable quant i t ies of tea wh ich are not normal ly part of the planners role." Other authors such as Wol fe and Lindley (1983) f 'Lang in (1988) and Kowalsky et a l . (1996) stress the impor tance of establ ishing trust w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. These informal aspects of develop ing relat ionships and trust require addit ional explorat ion to determine their s igni f icance in facil i tating effective part ic ipatory planning relat ionships be tween planners and First Nat ions. Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions may wan t to consider the process of entry and acceptance as out l ined by Kowalsky et al . (1996) . The authors explain a process of entry for researchers and propose a set of cultural ly sensit ive guidel ines to "establ ish a trust ing relat ionship" wi th First 38 Na t i ons . 1 0 They suggest that an effect ive work ing relat ionship wi th First Nat ions requires cul tural sensit ivity upon entry into a commun i ty (1996:270) . Whi le this is appl ied in a social heal th context , the process of entry may be useful for outs ide planners to consider in establ ishing p lanning relat ionships with First Na t ions . 1 1 It w a s noted for example , that the stopping stage is crit ical because it is w h e r e individuals f rom the communi ty perceive " intent ions and activit ies" of what the researcher is do ing . The authors seem to be saying that wi thout the assessment and approval at this s tage, the subsequen t three s tages of entry would not result in "genuine ref lect ions' of individuals f rom the commun i ty . However , if researchers do not move past the first s tage, the project terminates. Kowalsky and co l leagues descr ibe examp les of each stage to provide empir ical s u p p o r t . 1 2 Finally, numerous authors provide important practical insights, s t rategies, guidel ines and principles useful for p lanners to consider in establ ishing effective part ic ipatory re lat ionships wi th First Nations (Langin 1988; Boothroyd 1992; De Mello et al . 1994; Kowalsky et a l . 1996; McDona ld 1993; Aubrey 1999; Rober tson 1999; Murchie 1999). It is beyond the scope of this thesis to include the complex array of suggest ions but a few examples are useful to consider: 1) Abor ig inal people are in charge, know the boundary of roles; 2) Be aware of genera l et iquette expectat ions; 3) Find out w h a t people are exper iencing as needs, not just a s s u m e ; 4) Create mutual suppor t and encourage t ransformat ive approach to interact ion; 5) Be wil l ing to let go; be prepared for uncertainty and don' t try to control the process; 6) The re levance of an outs ider takes t ime and whether communi t ies va lue the act ions of the worker , and not the act ions themselves; The four stages of entry include stopping, waiting, transition and entry: 1) Stopping: stopping occurs when one is impeded in entering a community through formal or informal means; 2) Waiting: community members assess whether the researcher is worth trusting and worth the investment of their time; 3) Transition: it is not until the transition stage that the researcher becomes truly involved in some community activities; and 4) Entry: occurs only when trust is established and feelings and reflections are shared openly with the researcher. 1 1 The research was in response to an invitation from the Dene people to the Arctic Institute of Canada. The study looked at the concerns and beliefs of people in a Northwest Territories community about fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) and fetal alcohol effects (FAE). 1 2 They experienced the "stopping" stage when no permission was given to interview community members; the "waiting" stage was experienced over a two week period as the researchers lived on site and began to develop relationships of trust through informal activities such as casual conversations and crafts; permission granted by the chief and council to start the process of entry was viewed as the "transition" stage, as communication and dialogue opened; skill and cultural sensitivity enabled project usefulness but full acceptance was never fully realized. People can shift in and out of different stages and this may occur with different individuals or groups within the community and that the four stages may be experienced in a series of movements back and forth between stages (lbid:271) Finally, the process of entry is also dependent upon the community developing a relationship with the researcher. 39 7) The need to talk wi th people at their chosen t ime; 8) Be ready for suspic ion and cynic ism of the non-nat ive expert ; 9) P lanners need more inter-discipl inary, cross-cul tural and commun i ty e m p o w e r m e n t t ra in ing; 10) Respect the native context f rom the start. These types of practical suggest ions wou ld likely depend on the relat ionship p lanners have wi th each part icular First Nat ion they work wi th . Whi le the above authors offer var ious insights for outs ide p lanners to consider, greater insight is needed to determine how planners establ ish their re lat ionships. How is the relat ionship be tween p lanners and First Nat ions st ructured? How do planners gain entry and acceptance into First Nat ions communi t ies? W h a t types of issues and confl ict do planners confront , and wha t biases must they overcome, if they are to work more effectively wi th First Nat ions? H o w are effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships and processes evaluated? The planning l i terature has not explored such mat ters and concerns in detai l . 3.5 Chapter S u m m a r y This chapter analyzes insights of fered by the l i terature that can aid in bui lding a specif ic cultural I "planning l i teracy" for outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions. T h e l i terature w a s seen to identify seven themes of knowledge that might const i tute such a planning l iteracy. These themes f rame the empir ical research reported in the next chapter. The l i terature review suggests that more has been wr i t ten on value and knowledge systems, authority relations, and social organization than about communication, participation, capacity and the planner relationship. In genera l , the l i terature is organized into three main categor ies. The first ca tegory consists of several authors w h o emphas ize a direct p lanning context of work ing wi th First Nat ions. However , it is not clear whe ther all of these authors are pract icing p lanners w h o have worked wi th First Nat ions on an ongo ing basis, over the long te rm, versus academics w h o facil i tate short t e rm research projects. Dur ing the past three to four years , the l i terature has expanded to include more d iscussions f rom pract icing p lanners w h o are directly engaged in commun i ty deve lopment work . This documenta t ion tends to be practical ly useful and is more accessib le. 40 The second category of l i terature consists of a few authors w h o speak to more genera l or macro planning theory and pract ice. This theory seems relevant to p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions but it is not a lways g rounded empir ical ly in a First Nat ions context . The third category of l i terature includes numerous non-p lanning authors w h o s e knowledge and f indings s e e m useful for outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions to consider. Fur thermore, the majori ty of authors s e e m to be predominant ly non-Abor ig inal and there are very few Abor ig inal authors w h o are p lanners. In addi t ion, the l i terature general ly presents a more macro-perspect ive of knowledge and issues between native and non-nat ive society, rather than a micro-perspect ive of w h a t p lanners do and confront , or wha t si tuat ions arise w h e n outs ide p lanners and First Nat ions work together at the commun i t y level. Finally, it is not a lways clear whether the knowledge and insights documented in the l i terature are directly relevant to the context of part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships, as wel l . 41 4.0 Chapter Four: Insights and Stories From Planner Interviewees This chapter presents the results of interviews wi th nine p lanners w h o have worked primari ly wi th First Nat ions in wes te rn and northern C a n a d a , and communi t ies of A laska . The interv iewees consis ted of f ive w o m e n , three of w h o m w e r e of First Nat ions ancestry; and four m e n , one of w h o m w a s First Nat ions ancestry. Interv iewees are identif ied by a fictit ious n a m e in this thesis and the identity of specif ic First Nat ion communi t ies is not revea led. 4.1 Backgrounds of Interv iewed Planners Fol lowing is a brief descr ipt ion of each interv iewee's age, ancestry, years of exper ience, and the number of communi t ies and organizat ions they have worked wi th : Ken Ken is a 50 year-o ld non-Abor ig ina l . He has worked wi th First Nat ions s ince 1977. Dur ing his 25 years of p lanning exper ience, he has worked wi th approx imate ly 40 First Nat ions, tr ibal counci ls , and economic deve lopment organizat ions. Sue Sue is a 47 year-o ld non-Abor ig inal . She started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1984. She has ten years of exper ience and has w o r k e d wi th four First Nat ion communi t ies since 1992. Janet Janet is a 55 year-old Abor ig ina l . She began work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1978. Janet has approx imate ly 20 years of p lanning exper ience and has worked wi th over 40 First Nat ions and organizat ions. Dave Dave is a 58 year-old Abor ig ina l . He started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1977. He has over 25 years of exper ience and has worked wi th over 20 dif ferent First Nat ions and organizat ions. Evan Evan is a 39 year-o ld non-Abor ig ina l . Evan started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1995. He has 7 years of p lanning exper ience wi th 16 First Nat ions, and approx imate ly 10 addit ional communi t ies on smal ler projects. A n n e A n n e is a 33 year-old non-Abor ig inal . A n n e started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1990. She has approx imate ly 10 years of exper ience and has worked wi th approx imate ly 47 First Nat ions on var ious projects. 42 Nancy Nancy is a 48 year-old Abor ig inal . Nancy started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1988. She has over 14 years of p lanning exper ience and has worked wi th a total of 22 First Nat ions and organizat ions. Larry Larry is a 65 year-old non-Abor ig inal . Larry star ted work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1984. He has approx imate ly 16 years of p lanning exper ience and has worked wi th 10 First Nat ions and organizat ions. Carol Carol is a 42 year-old Abor ig inal . She started work ing wi th First Nat ions in 1987. She has 15 years of p lanning exper ience and has worked wi th approx imate ly 17 First Nat ions. 4.2 Explor ing Seven Knowledge T h e m e s Based on the Findings f rom Planner Interv iews The f indings f rom the planner in terv iewees are organized within the seven knowledge themes used in the previous chapter . These include: 1) First Nat ions' value and knowledge sys tems; 2) author i ty relat ions; 3) social organizat ion; 4) communica t ion ; 5) part ic ipat ion; 6) capaci ty; and 7) p lanner relat ionship. 4.2.1 Value and Knowledge Sys tems Eight of the interv iewed p lanners emphas ized that knowing the tradit ional va lues of First Nat ions is important to enable part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. However , not all in terv iewees indicated specif ic values and those w h o did had dif ferent interpretat ions of what tradit ional va lues included or how they impl icated part ic ipatory p lanning. Interv iewees acknowledged a broad range of tradit ional va lues. Planners ta lked about the importance and value of land and wildl i fe to First Nat ions (Dave, Larry, Nancy) , the respect for e lders and the emphas is on " long- term preservat ion" (Carol ) ; that First Nat ions were "tribal th inking," shared "communa l unders tandings of the wor ld " (Sue) and how they expressed a col lect ive va lue of " Indians work ing for the bet terment of Indian people" (Ken) . First Nat ions were v iewed as having a "what you see is wha t you get" att i tude (Sue) and were "not hung up on possess ion, nor s e e m e d concerned about tit les, posit ions and the status around t h e m " (Ken) . Planners also listed values such as shar ing and fami ly va lues (Carol) , rel igion and spirituality (Evan , Dave, Janet ) , clan sys tems (Ken) and cul ture and language (Dave) . 43 To e laborate, Larry indicated that First Nat ions have a di f ferent relat ionship to the land and how they we igh part icular va lues dur ing planning decis ions. This had been ref lected in one First Nat ion w h e r e the most important cul tural value was the car ibou herd (Carol ) . Car ibou w e r e seen as the "life blood of the culture." The cultural va lue placed on the car ibou herd impl icated deve lopment choices around oil and gas . People within the commun i ty could be pro-deve lopment in one region and ant i -development in another, depend ing on how sensit ive a region w a s to the calv ing grounds of car ibou. If oil and gas deve lopment w a s not seen to affect the car ibou's calv ing grounds, then deve lopment might be suppor ted within the communi ty . Caro l recognized that deve lopment decis ions w e r e m a d e in a w a y that wou ld result in the " least amount of ha rm" since the communi ty placed va lue on the impor tance of car ibou. However , this does not imply that everyone within the commun i ty suppor ted oil and gas deve lopment . Speak ing about the same First Nat ion as Caro l , Ken emphas ized how values wi th in the communi ty had dif fered wi th respect to oil and gas deve lopment . This w a s t rue for "elders f rom the s a m e generat ion, w h o shared dif ferent va lues of tradit ion and progress, including dif ferent v iewpoints on the impacts of deve lopment for tradit ional society." He noted that in some cases the impacts of deve lopment on tradit ional society are we ighed against the pressure to improve the condi t ions of a communi ty . Janet noted that the "connect ion to culture and tradit ions are very dif ferent across spect rums. " Planners need to know the "cultural and structural considerat ions," including the spec t rum of va lues in a communi ty . She referred to gener ic and specif ic types of knowledge planners require to enable part ic ipatory planning relat ionships. Knowledge specif ic to a commun i ty wou ld be to know the "accul turated or change-or ien ted" and "tradit ional or subsis tence" people of a communi ty . This is signif icant s ince each group represents a dif ferent va lue base and moral v iew Janet exp la ined, including di f ferences in work ethic and wor ld-v iews. These value di f ferences were seen to affect p lanning processes, methods and deve lopment choices. Janet expressed the signi f icance of va lue di f ferences within First Nat ions: I think wha t is really important and I can' t s t ress it enough is there is no longer a si tuat ion in our society that says this is First Nat ion and this is whi te . W h a t w e have is a range of va lues and moral v iews that over laps substant ial ly and what 's important is you al low s o m e b o d y to convey their value sys tem to you rather than mak ing assumpt ions about wel l if they 've got jeans and a plaid shirt on and if they t rap for a l iving, they are likely to be this or that. It is important to f ind ways of assess ing wha t that va lue sys tem is and not just assume that s o m e o n e w h o has a First Nat ion face that they necessar i ly hold First Nat ion values. 44 Effective planner relat ionships also impl ies that p lanners are able to obtain as much informat ion about the cultural and structural considerat ions of First Nat ions they work wi th to ensure representat ion of all g roups dur ing planning (Janet) . This wou ld help planners to enable "wholesale commun i t y consul tat ion," and al low communi t ies to gain greater "wholesale communi ty support" for p lanning decis ions. Janet emphas ized the need for p lanners to be aware of the structural d i f ferences wi th in communi t ies and for t h e m to "be able to make sure that each [group] va lued the other." Her concern for the internal balance of First Nat ions w a s s t ressed because of: The colonizat ion of punit ive measures now being employed by their own leaders and by their o w n professionals. One of the risks of se l f -government is colonized individuals become the colonizers. They are t rained to be colonizers and they are educated in the methods and the m e a n s of colonizat ion. You will see this all over the wor ld until it br ings power to those colonized and it of ten takes several generat ions before the remnants of colonizat ion work its w a y out of society. As a planner are you prepared to be there, to add your skill base to a g roup of colonizers that are putt ing in place wha t you clearly see to be power and control punit ive colonizer reg imes of var ious sor ts? Are you truly prepared to be a mercenary or do you have s o m e ethic that at s o m e point will become chal lenged and you have to stand up for wha t you bel ieve in? Janet suggested three methods that she had used to assess or access the cultural and structural considerat ions of a First Nat ion. The first method is to develop a relat ionship wi th a local sponsor or advisor to gain insight about the communi ty . Planners need to work wi th s o m e o n e : W h o is wil l ing to get to know you a little bit and break down some of the barr iers that as you can imagine, are in s o m e communi t ies . . . because they have had so m a n y ons laughts f rom R C M P , child wel fare and social assistance workers w h o have invaded privacy. In some cases, you have to f lush the people out through dif ferent methods and force. Planners may have a hard t ime to break into the tradit ional communi ty . However , Janet recognized that get t ing a "sponsor" to help gain access into the tradit ional commun i t y requires t ime. The second method to ensure a balance of part icipation and representat ion is to under take a mini workshop on 'dual realit ies and dual strategies ' and to say, "Listen, w e need to des ign a process here that makes sure that w e get the vo ices f rom all aspects of the communi ty . " The third method to assess cultural and structural considerat ions of the communi ty is by looking at how change-or ien ted versus subsistence-or iented people are c lustered in the physical layout of the communi ty , and by , determin ing "who lives where . " In s o m e instances, p lanners could study the distr ibut ion of dispari ty or benefi ts within a communi ty to de termine for example , "corrupt ion levels and where social p rob lems take place." 45 O n e interv iewee talked about the value di f ferences in cul ture, language and beliefs be tween cul tures in reference to a mult i -stakeholder land-use process. Dave expressed that d isagreement and va lue di f ferences "have a prominent play in how people part icipate and become mot ivated and act ive in the communi t ies right across the country," because of personal i ty confl icts, prejudices, di f ferent posi t ions, different va lues, l i festyles, beliefs and wor ld v iews, including d isagreement wi th agenda sett ing or reaching solut ions. He noted that apply ing academic principles f rom a European m o d e of th ink ing: Is like trying to put a new value generat ion of wor ldv iews a l ready g roomed onto First Nat ions peoples f rom their e lders and their ancestors , f r om their use and occupat ion of land and resources s ince t ime immemor ia l . Processes of negot iat ion, arbi trat ion and mediat ion were seen as ways to resolve d isagreement . Dave indicated that consensus dec is ion-making w a s an important process for this a rea . Seven interv iewees acknowledged that tradit ional knowledge w a s an important feature of part ic ipatory planning wi th First Nat ions, though its signi f icance and implicat ions for part ic ipatory p lanning var ied. Three p lanners made reference to wha t tradit ional knowledge impl ied. Nancy acknow ledged for example : How tradit ional knowledge is passed d o w n f rom their ancestors and that local knowledge is f rom the people w h o tradit ionally inhabit the a rea . Abor ig inal knowledge wou ld be all Indians that inhabit the area, and surrounding a rea . Dave also stated how tradit ional ecological knowledge " involves any phases in the w a y of life of First Nat ions f rom the scientif ic v iews of the e c o n o m y or the env i ronment and its relat ion to the land, and cl imate changes. " In a dif ferent context , Ken emphas ized the importance and va lue of local, "pract ical knowledge" and how this w a s dif ferent f r om a planner 's "book learning." A s he s ta ted: Planners must not sell a lot of First Nat ions people short, and whi le p lanners may have the book learning in a lot of cases , p lanners need to acknowledge and respect the practical exper ience of the communi ty and individuals. Four p lanners acknowledged the s igni f icance of tradit ional knowledge and elder part ic ipat ion dur ing planning and dec is ion-making. For example , A n n e noted that tradit ional knowledge had been an important input f rom elders to guide land c la im negot iat ions and that "to an extent," p lanners need to know how tradit ional knowledge is inc luded in the p lanning process. In one commun i ty project, t radit ional knowledge had been mapped and included in the planning report as a w a y of protect ing a sensi t ive a rea . 46 Elders had identified "environmentally sensitive areas of cultural significance, including outlining areas that are used for berry picking because an engineer might say that this [area] is perfect for a subdivision." Larry confirmed the significance traditional knowledge and why outside planners who are not from the community must work with local people: Because they are the people that know what is out there, what's on the land, what you can do, what you can't do, what they want, what you don't want protected; what they think is a safe development, where people lived over the years, where the burial sites are and special camps. Evan and Dave referred to the significance of traditional knowledge in terms of utilizing knowledge as a means to develop trust in the planning relationship. Evan provided an example where locals had more knowledge about the land and practical construction experience at building their own homes, and because of this, "it's not hard to get close to them on many fronts." Dave indicated that planners could develop trust when they entered a community, through the "courtesy of traditional values in relation to incorporating traditional ecological knowledge" into planning processes. Finally, two planners talked about issues of knowledge validity (Ken, Carol). Carol gave an example of where the white scientific community had not believed the elder's claim that caribou existed in one area until such time as the ice started to retreat (and there was caribou dung everywhere to validate what the elders had been saying all along. Carol mentioned that the elders had continued those kinds of stories until they were proven correct. Ken made a similar point in reference to an archeological discovery and only when archeologists had discovered "physical evidence" did the traditional knowledge of an area become validated and true. 4.2.2 Authority Relations Interviewed planners stated that it was important for outside planners to know various internal and external aspects of authority to enable effective participatory planning relationships. Ken and Dave for example had indicated that community planning and decision-making are structured under the Indian Act and how this authority forced First Nations to rely on outside planners (Dave). Dave suggested that land claim agreements were creating "new institutional bases from which to structure the conditions for participation and for individuals to develop their capacity, but that First Nations are just breaking trail with participatory planning." Both interviewees noted that the reliance on planners was changing because of 47 land c la ims and devolut ion processes and how these new structures of authori ty w e r e creat ing new part icipatory roles, including the number and qual i ty of part ic ipatory opportuni t ies for First Nat ions. New structures of author i ty w e r e impact ing dec is ion-making opportuni t ies for land use, housing and capi ta l . For example , Ken indicated that more ideas and recommendat ions for p rogram policy, including rules and regulat ions for new funding p rograms had been coming directly f rom First Nat ions. P rogram guidel ines for capital and housing were also being shif ted to "give First Nat ions control over their o w n dest iny, to establ ish their own priorit ies." However , whi le he had stated that he did not go into a First Nat ion communi ty wi th a pre-establ ished or pre-determined processes, he noted that priorit ies for housing and capital were assessed in terms of budget , t iming and practically. Evan talked about the impact of government policy towards planning and how limited funding had hampered the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion in one First Nat ion communi ty : Wel l perhaps, the reality is money. T h e fact is that Indian Affairs does not fund communi ty p lanning. It's stated right in their policy that they do not fund p lanning. It's s tupid. I use the word stupid because they [First Nat ions] really need it a lot and it will save Indian Affairs m o n e y by do ing p rog ramming . So the reality is that you don' t have t ime [for part ic ipatory p lanning] . Somet imes you try to fit it into the budget but somet imes you rely on several people w h o know the communi ty wel l . Four interv iewees cons idered the internal authori ty of First Nat ions and how the manda te for p lanning came f rom the chief and counci l of the communi ty (Larry, Dave, Evan, Caro l ) . Larry noted in his exper ience that the chief and counci l w e r e "very clear on gett ing mandates f rom the people." He had worked directly wi th one counci l where the f inal author i ty for dec is ion-making rested wi th the counci l . The role of the planner in Larry's v iew w a s to involve the communi ty by helping the counci l get direct ion f rom the communi ty . Evan also noted that the author i ty for p lanning had rested wi th the chief and counci l but added that it also included the administ rators (managemen t ) of the communi ty . He referred to both execut ive and legislative bodies within First Nat ions. Finally, Dave recognized the central author i ty of the counci l and s ta ted: How communi t ies have to recognize chief and counci l as an elected body and that they have to work wi th chief and counci l , and that chief and counci l has to be accountab le to the communi ty . He indicated that the role of the chief and counci l w a s to work wi th outside government agents as a means to develop part ic ipatory relat ionships. 48 Three w o m e n interv iewees referenced issues of power within First Nat ions, though its signi f icance for effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships was not clear to me . Nancy revealed the polit ical nature of First Nat ions and suggested that p lanners needed to know that there is "uneven power in the communi ty as wel l as the knowledge of communi ty interests, the boundar ies and al l iances made wi th other g roups, and the type of governance st ructures in place." Janet added that p lanners need to know "who is in power and the type of electoral sys tem, how long have people been in power, and whe ther the polit ical process w a s democrat ic or not." However , Anne said that power relat ionships wi th in First Nat ions "were communi ty specif ic." T w o w o m e n interv iewees emphas ized the need to unders tand the informal power within First Nat ions. Knowing the informal power w a s signif icant in terms of p lanners enabl ing representat ion and inclusion dur ing part ic ipatory p lanning. A s Janet states: It's really important to get a handle as quickly as possible, of who 's w h o in the 1 communi ty . It's important to know politically sort of w h o is w h o and not only the elected leaders but the informal leaders in the commun i ty as wel l . It's very impor tant to f ind out wh ich elders are invited into the var ious processes. It's a really good idea to get some sense of the fami ly structure in the communi ty and sort of w h o the movers and the shakers are. Not only wha t I wou ld call the accul turated part of the communi ty , the people w h o are most educated , usual ly high in emp loyment rate and of ten in leadership, both polit ical and administrat ive posit ions in the communi ty . It's also important to know w h o the informal leaders are of the lesser accul turated, more of tradit ional or subsis tence or iented groups' as wel l . In the second instance, informal power was seen to val idate or endorse the role of the planner, as part of the "means" to get people part ic ipat ing. Sue wen t on to say how she w a s "concerned wi th protocol all the t ime, and how she looks for w h o has the inf luence or informal power in the communi ty , and to have t h e m ok you because then the others will be more [talkative]." W h e n asked w h o might hold that informal power, she s ta ted: It's s o m e b o d y w h o is respected. They don't , it's not necessar i ly age, but they are hardly ever really y o u n g . They wou ld be if I were to d raw a profi le, be in there fort ies, m in imum. There has got to be s o m e gray hair that is showing up. W h e n they talk, people pay at tent ion in the g roup. W h e n they do talk wh ich won' t be as often as others, people are really silent. Even the kids know.. .people will say, "If you w a n t to know someth ing about that you should talk too"...if that n a m e turns up two, three, four t imes in the communi ty , it's letting you know w h o has informal power . There 's s o m e b o d y w h o knows. By power I m e a n respected knowledge . . . you have to know w h e r e the informal power bases are, w h o has moral author i ty in the communi ty , and w h o can create that bond . 49 T w o male interv iewees stated that p lanners needed to know that polit ics is a "big reality in many First Nat ions" (Evan) . Ken considered polit ics th rough the spec t rum of right - left ideology and how these shaped planning design and deve lopment cho ices. Planners need to be aware that they may encounter di f ferent political ideologies in First Nat ions communi t ies , and to "know the radicals and their ideas and their percept ions" and if these are "harnessed in an effect ive way , then it's a great benefit ." He sugges ted that p lanners have "to be aware of those in the commun i ty w h o wan t to progress versus those w h o do not w a n t change, and how these values should be ba lanced in a central v iew." Finally, it w a s acknowledged that symbo ls of authori ty and power "can provoke s o m e degree of fr ict ion f rom the past." Ken shared a story about how author i ty symbols had affected part ic ipatory planning relat ionships: I can think of an occasion w h e n I met one of the chiefs or one of the fo rmer chiefs the first t ime w h e n I got up to the [north] and that w a s several years back. It w a s m id -summer w h e n he w a s over at a f r iends place borrowing some horses. They were go ing hunt ing because there w a s a pot latch being held so they had to harvest a moose . The immediate react ion of this individual w h e n he saw the vehicle w a s that he not iced w e had the decals of Indian Affairs. I sensed right away that there w a s some degree of fr ict ion f rom the past and wha t sort of happened was that I w a s int roduced to the individual and just felt that it w a s t ime to sit and l is ten. . . . So the reference m a d e w a s that "hey there 's those guys in the parkas again" and similarly t ravel ing around wi th a gove rnmen t vehic le wi th the decals on the s ide. W e were sort of immediate ly ca tegor ized, as spies or whatever the case may be . . . I m e a n I couldn' t imagine in this day and age that if s o m e b o d y pulled into the communi ty wi th a Mercedes, a three piece suit, leather coat, a big fancy brief case and a lap top computer , and wen t in there wi th big high tech stuff . . . I just can' t see that person fitt ing in very many of the communi t ies around here. 4.4.3 Social Organizat ion Seven of nine interv iewees expla ined the impor tance of c lan and fami ly s t ructures and relat ionships and the implicat ions for p lanning relat ionships. They focused on the history of fami ly g roup relat ions in te rms of the impacts on part ic ipat ion, and implied the need for outside p lanners to know the effects of history and the implicat ions for p lanning wi th First Nat ions. Nancy and Caro l expla in the impor tance of c lan and fami ly st ructures: Clan sys tems are a way of relat ing to each other in society. It w a s dec ided that s o m e h o w groups wou ld fo rm under c lans based probably on fami ly t radi t ions. They wou ld abide by certain pr inciples or rules, and how they wou ld have relat ionships. They wou ld also c o m e together in the tradit ions over burials or marr iages. They have a discipl inary kind of reg ime. . . there is a survival instinct wh ich goes back to living in fami ly g roups within certain boundary areas and [that people] come together maybe once a year to t rade and socia l ize. . . [P lanners] have 50 to have int imate knowledge. You have to know the famil ies and the grouping of them and w h o is al igned wi th w h o m marr iage-wise (Nancy) . It w a s important to know that if you be longed to a certain c lan , then you were responsib le to that ent ire c lan. Knowing the Wol f and Crow loyalt ies w a s important because they ensure that b loodl ines remained c lean and not incestuous, and how if these loyalt ies were not fo l lowed in some cases today, if bad things happen , then b lame is at tr ibuted to broken loyalty (Carol) . However , in terv iewees noted that c lan loyalties vary in terms of their adherence to cus toms, and that elders somet imes placed more of an emphas is on clan sys tems than youth . P lanners need to recognize that dif ferent c lans may have dif ferent v iews, part icularly the elders of First Nat ions. Evan indicated that it w a s important to involve clan sys tems dur ing part ic ipatory p lanning because First Nat ions govern themselves based on c lan sys tems. In one First Nat ion, he noted that the communi ty had el iminated the chief and counci l sys tem imposed under the Indian Act. In this sense, p lanners need to know how clan sys tems work in the communi ty , whe ther or not they are act ive, and that the chief and counci l sys tem is not the tradit ional w a y of govern ing. Evan shared a p lanning exper ience w h e r e he had over looked one fami ly c lan: W e have been caught wi th our pants d o w n in one communi ty . O n e c lan w a s v iewed as kind of the outs iders. I just real ize now I felt kind of bad . I said "what do you m e a n there are four fami l ies, everyone told me there are three famil ies." So here a lot of p lanning had gone on wi thout knowing that. ' l t 's not that w e didn't...1 m e a n some of those elders in the commun i ty w e know very wel l , some of t h e m w e r e in that part icular commun i t y and a couple of the elders had worked wi th me clear ing line. So w h e n I was survey ing up there or looking at a job , some of them were using the chain saw, were running the chain saw for m e . . . n o b o d y ever told me about this four th fami ly that wasn ' t a l lowed to have housing yet. Three w o m e n interv iewees talked about how confl ict wi th in the communi ty , part icularly at the fami ly or l inguistic level, af fected their ability to enable part ic ipatory p lanning. Nancy for example indicated that people somet imes are d iv ided and end up breaking f rom their fami l ies for reasons of insecuri ty. She explained that these divis ions create insecuri ty in the communi ty and they can end up "dismant l ing corporat ions wh ich have taken years to bui ld." All communi ty part ic ipat ion that goes into commun i ty planning can easily be d is rupted. Carol stated that fami ly relat ions were an important cultural factor to enable part ic ipatory p lanning. Because everyone is related to everyone, p lanners have to "be very careful of w h a t you say 51 [and] who you are talking with." She noted the tensions between two linguistic groups in one community and how they had been based on events that happened in the past. As a result, there were going to be: Issues around not just acceptance for who you are, but that you come with that whole relationship behind you. The young people trying to work together in the community have everything that has ever happened to their families, or between their families, [become] a barrier for them. Janet added that family feuds were seen to disrupt participation and the implications were that some people don't want to be in the same room with certain people. In this sense, planners need to know that the history of families within a community can impact the ability for the planner to enable participatory planning (Carol). Planners can never know all of the issues, claimed Carol, but planners need to be aware that some people may never be seen to be talking with one another. Finally, Sue indicated that clan relationships are "critical" to know, but "not so much around what the orientation is around family, or around planning, but if there are tensions and old conflicts, [people are] going to participate very differently depending on what the dynamic is." Tensions and conflict had implicated participation in terms of how people sat together during one of Sue's workshops. She stressed that she allowed participants to organize themselves and how she could never know how to "configure" a room of participants based on the past history of conflict. As Sue stated: "the only thing I can do is always have a structure that has fluidity or choice in it." When asked how she acquired knowledge about family conflict or factions, she stated: I don't acquire the knowledge. I don't see it as possible for me to acquire the knowledge. What I can do is to be responsive to the indications...to pick up signals...! don't feel that I need to know all of the [family] histories unless we are going to work towards resolving those things. Janet acknowledged the importance of family structures, as well as the "social distance" between groups. She explained the implications for representation and participation and what was required of planners: ^ Involve or create a process that makes sure there is involvement from all aspects of the community and that you are not only hearing from one voice.. .you can have a lot of diversity [in the] social process. You have to ask how many families are being represented for example on health committees? Is it a health committee with fourteen individuals representing two of out eleven families? Obviously if you only did your planning work with that particular group you would really get a focused plan that only met the needs of a particular few. Those individuals will often portray their ability to articulate the needs of the 'other' people in the community and claim that they are representative of their entire community. I think that this has to be definitely 52 chal lenged and I f ind that to ask about the famil ies and representat ives of fami l ies in the commun i ty [provides] a plan structure. You could ask that quest ion on the basis of c lans and clan leaders. A n n e recognized a similar issue w h e r e she had noted that c lan sys tems w e r e seen to impl icate part icipation because under a clan sys tem you may only hear f rom a couple of people. In First Nat ion's culture it is assumed that these people are represent ing their c lan. However , she w a s concerned wi th issues of representat ion and whether all people in a communi ty w e r e being represented. A n n e stated she w a s "not a lways comfor tab le" wi th a commi t tee w h o had been selected by a chief and counci l in one First Nat ion. In addit ion to knowing the clan and family structures of a communi ty , Janet indicated that it w a s important for p lanners to unders tand groups within the communi ty in terms of "change-or iented people" and "tradit ional or subs is tence people." Her concern w a s the confl ict ing va lue base of these two cultural groups and how the change-or ien ted people could dominate over the subsis tence-or iented people. Janet shared a story outl ining the di f ferent social st ructure of a communi ty : The reason I bring that up is hopeful ly in these processes you are go ing to be wi th people operat ing right across that spec t rum and you need to unders tand that not only might you get f rustrated wi th dif ferent w a y s of p lanning a day, [but there are] dif ferent w a y s of mak ing a commi tment , around t ime, and dif ferent w a y s of turning up to meet ings. A lso , the change-or ien ted people tend to get really f rust rated wi th tradit ional people. I've actual ly been in a focus group w h e r e I had two change-or iented w o m e n w h o worked as First Nat ions managers for the government and one tradit ional m a n that worked in the shop, or whatever . W e were focus ing on the exper ience of First Nat ions people in the work force. It w a s a focus group for a couple of hours. These two First Nat ions w o m e n w e r e very very change or iented, very very st ructured A n d w e r e looking at their wa tches want ing to just get as much as I needed on the table. They had meet ings to go to and they had things to do. The other guy wan ted to tell stor ies and it w a s his w a y of shar ing his exper ience, in work ing for the federal government . He had worked for the federal government for 20 years and he couldn' t just say wel l you know here is your quest ion here are the five answers . . .boom b o o m b o o m . I'd ask the quest ion and he'd tell m e a story and so as the focus group facil i tator wha t I had to be able to do w a s to balance that energy be tween the dr iveness of the type A personal i ty, you know, "Let 's just get over this and get out of there," and the r ichness of the story in te rms of creat ing and unders tanding wi th m e as a researcher wha t that person's exper ience w a s . To be able to try and make sure that each va lued the other w a s a very difficult th ing, you could see. I'd be l istening in focusing on the m a n tell ing the story and the w o m e n wou ld be dril l ing holes in the side of my neck, [saying] "What are you do ing." 53 Finally, Larry observed that the history of fami ly knowledge w a s important because certain famil ies had dif ferent types of knowledge about a part icular a rea or subject matter in the communi ty . Interv iewees talked about the impor tance of knowing the broader history of a communi ty and its effects and implicat ions for part ic ipat ion. Janet s t ressed that outside planners require an unders tand ing of the social , polit ical and economic history of the communi ty , including the history of migrat ion in and out of a communi ty , and whether there have been any re- located groups or individuals within the communi ty . This knowledge also included "knowing the current t rends and issues around land c la ims and court cases." Nancy also revealed that p lanners need to unders tand the local history and to do so by "undertaking a reconnaissance." Learning the history of a communi ty and unders tanding its effects can explain the qual i ty of part icipation and planning in First Nat ion communi t ies . She st ressed the historical impacts of contact and how it has: Created all sorts of negat ive impacts and prob lems such the separat ion f rom parents and fami ly groups and how the disrupt ion of a w a y of life caused chronic alcohol dependency and wide spread dysfunct ion as a who le group. As a planner you will notice many symptoms f rom anger to s i lence and res is tance. . . fami ly hatred for one another, dependency on the band , the b laming of others, feel ings of mistrust on both sides in land c la ims and how residential school is the constant "why" they [ individuals] do not move beyond prob lems. Carol ta lked about the effects of history and how she hadn' t been prepared to deal wi th all of the a lcohol ism, drug and substance abuse dur ing one planning relat ionship. Janet acknowledged the need for outs iders p lanners to unders tand the role of a lcohol and addict ions in the communi ty , and how these effects have created behaviours such as "avo idance, denial and lying" in var ious First Nat ions she had worked in. The "effects of residential school w e r e important to know because they explain how fear is holding people back f rom engagement . " S h a m e w a s seen to affect part ic ipat ion because people w e r e sensit ive of being j udged . As a result, Janet indicated that p lanners have to be able to "relate at their level," and to el iminate any power obstac les be tween the planner and communi ty because of the long history of external inf luence and contro l . Ken also referred to history in te rms of unders tanding the effects of the "Indian school syndrome" and the length of Abor ig inal and non-Abor ig inal contact . He had noted how people w e r e at di f ferent s tages of heal ing and how this had signi f icance for the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion, including the degree of personal i ty confl icts and how they might be m a n a g e d be tween planners and First Nat ion individuals. He 54 explained that there is a lot of a lcohol and substance abuse in communi t ies today and that he had been to meet ings that w e r e "broken up because individuals were under the inf luence of wha tever it m a y be." He also indicated that it wou ld be much easier work ing wi th some First Nat ions w h o had exper ienced a shorter history of whi te contact . 4.2.4 Communica t ion Interv iewees provided var ious knowledge insights into oral and wr i t ten features of communica t ion , including var ious issues and obstac les surrounding communica t ion and w a y s to enable communica t ion . For example , eight interv iewees recognized the signi f icance of storytel l ing to enable part ic ipatory p lanning, though each va lued storytel l ing differently. Janet indicated that p lanners need to al low t ime, space and respect for storytel l ing because "often the nature of the quest ions you ask in focus groups and storytel l ing have to al low for storytel l ing." This is especial ly important wi th elders and more tradit ional people in relat ion to part ic ipat ion. Ken recognized the impor tance of giving elders a chance to speak and express their v iews, and "that if an elder w ishes to speak, w e could be mak ing a very big error if w e didn't al low t h e m an opportuni ty." Carol indicated that it is important to listen to elders and that p lanners may ask elders for their advice and tradit ional knowledge. However , p lanners might feel that their: Response is total ly off topic. But if you spend enough t ime thinking about wha t w a s told to y o u , you wou ld probably f ind the appl icat ion to the quest ion you a s k e d . . . . But if you just sort of shaft that knowledge and go "that w a s a was te of two hours," you haven' t s h o w n any respect for wha t w a s important or how it's told to you in terms of tradit ional knowledge. Larry and Caro l both acknowledged the ambigui ty and chal lenge of interpret ing stories:, I think you have to kind of get used to it before you can pick it up. I m e a n at first it just sounds like they are tell ing a story and you don' t realize they are mak ing a point but the story has a point usual ly and so you wan t to l isten careful ly to wha t they are saying and then to try and decide w h a t the point is. You don' t just g loss over it if they tell a story that doesn' t s e e m like it fits in a f low. Really it did fit in a f low and you just didn't know it (Larry) . I m e a n I worked right across f rom two elders, w h o used to c o m e in and sit and talk and I wou ld a lways think, "Wel l , what 's this about?" But you know at some point in t ime, there wou ld be re levance and that someth ing they have said wou ld twig wi th wha t I w a s doing in the communi ty . It's taking the t ime to l isten.. . to an elder because in actual fact there is someth ing being told to you then that you might not realize it at the t ime. It will become clear if you are open enough (Carol ) . 55 Sue indicated that the ambigui ty of storytel l ing had not been an issue for her but how she could "certainly see how it wou ld be a source of f rustrat ion. . . for others." As she descr ibed: I did c o m e away confused and I va lue confus ion. Confus ion m e a n s someth ing is say ing I need to look at this again to stabi l ize the unders tanding to now it's not so stable. I al low myself the process t ime to walk myself th rough to see what , to revisit the assumpt ions, revisit unders tand ing. So I don' t mind the confus ion. She explained fur ther that p lanners w e r e not under the t ime pressure to know the mean ing of the story and how "people wan t to see the product and [that] you can' t produce the product wi th a col lect ion of stor ies. You need to know wha t stor ies mean . " Sue w a s asked if she had ever wen t back to an individual to get an interpretat ion of a story: That it depends on w h o it is. If it w e r e an elder I wouldn ' t go back. They don' t like quest ions, they don' t want to interpret for you , they don' t wan t you to have their interpretation... [ I would ] wi th s o m e o n e w h o is 'driving the border, ' s o m e o n e w h o has been in both cul tures. There are lots of people, the who le land c la ims chi ldren, I can ask t h e m . But they wou ld usual ly tell you anyway. Even if they are tell ing the story they will make up some connect ion about wha t w e are talking about and you will see it. But wi th the elders, I'd see it as a lmost invasive and rude [asking t h e m to interpret the story] . Storytel l ing w a s seen to have several purposes and va lue for p lanning. For Janet, storytel l ing w a s seen as a test, a w a y of asking the planner; Are you prepared to hear about our commun i t y? "Do they [planners] really wan t to know w h o w e are before w e are prepared to answer that quest ion." I encountered that big t ime. Stor ies also revealed that First Nat ions somet imes don' t know wha t the planning prob lem is and that "storytel l ing w a s a w a y to reveal wha t is on a person 's mind, a w a y to identify what the prob lem is." They were also v iewed as a w a y "to begin to talk and establ ish a f r iendship of communicat ions, " as Dave noted. In another instance, Sue referred to the use of storytel l ing and how it had been used as a subt le fo rm of cr i t ic ism. Planners need to be aware of " indirect cr i t ic ism" since m a n y First Nat ions " individuals will not directly crit icize a planner." Sue, dur ing her exper ience as a teacher, shared a story about a s tudent evaluat ion one night in a remote commun i ty : So anyway, w e start laughing and talking about this thing and the other, and I have my notes in f ront of me and I'm not impat ient part icularly but I'm confused. This is supposed to be parent 's night like w h y isn't he interested in how his son is do ing and doesn' t he wan t to know his marks? H o w the boy is do ing? It's not on topic and w e are just not go ing there and I set my papers aside and say [to myself ] "Well it's not w h e r e 56 w e are go ing but it's ok," and he starts talking about raising dog teams. . . tha t 's t raining young pups isn't it? There you go. If you ' re not wi th the p rogram then you are go ing to think you are hear ing a d isconnected story f rom s o m e o n e w h o really probably doesn' t care very much about his g randson . Clear ly, I m e a n he's coming into school and he doesn' t wan t to know how. So he starts to tell how he raised a t e a m of dogs . He doesn' t tell me wha t he did w r o n g , but he did someth ing wrong and the dogs weren ' t useful and they had to be all shot. So he learned f rom that but he doesn' t tell wha t the lesson is, wh ich is very instructive too because there's no . . . you ' re go ing have t rouble f inding crit icism here and then he talks about how he raised a second dog t e a m and he took care of th ings wh ich he hadn' t taken care of be forehand. He had just the best t e a m . It saved his life whi le being off in the bush at - 4 0 C . He laughs some more about whatever . And then he left. That w a s my interview. So I got h o m e and I w a s left wi th that and I can think about it in any w a y I wan t and if I'm at a certain point in t ime, about my o w n processing about teach ing, about relat ionship and about t ra in ing, then maybe it's going to catalyze s o m e kind of th inking. I still don' t know wha t his concern was . He had a concern wi th me, there is no quest ion about i t . . .some concern about my relat ionship wi th his son in this class. I don' t specif ical ly know wha t it is and I don' t know wha t his va lues are except that he va lues that you have to take care. This is tel l ing me to be reflective if I wou ld , and maybe think abou t . . . you have to be careful w h e n you are t raining and w h e n you do it in a certain w a y you might ruin the team. Now, I'm going to put you in a whi te c lassroom wi th a parent coming in that is upset about someth ing . It's go ing to be very very very dif ferent as I'm sure you can imagine wha t wou ld then happen . They have a document in front of t h e m , to begin wi th , the paper wou ld go d o w n , the tapping of the desk you know, their expectat ions of wha t you should be doing and how you are not doing it correct ly, very specif ical ly. It wou ld be most inelegant, and at the end of it there wou ld be a sense o f being at tacked. W h e n the old grandfather wen t away he left me wi th really the goal , to just reflect on how you do this and how you can do it better." That is wha t I call e legance. Interv iewees raised var ious issues and obstacles around wr i t ten communica t ion as wel l as not ing factors that impacted the abil ity for outs ide p lanners to enable effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. In part icular, several in terv iewees noted obstac les around wr i t ten language, including technical ja rgon and the use of p lanning documents (Larry, Evan, Ken , Sue, A n n e , Caro l ) . For example , Ken acknowledged the reality fac ing m a n y First Nat ions today: There is a fairly large degree that books and wri t ing and planning studies and all this historical informat ion that is referred to is just fore ign. No doubt it's changing wi th compute rs being avai lable at First Nat ion off ices. They are certainly closing that gap very quickly but in reality, until recent t imes, their stor ies w e r e passed on verbal ly and so recording f ive, ten or twenty year studies is a fore ign concept . Anne identif ied several obstac les around the use of wri t ten language and technical ja rgon , including how a number of people in First Nat ions communi t ies do not speak Engl ish. She expla ins: 57 W h e n you are in a meet ing and you are ta lk ing, there 's someth ing they wan t to talk amongs t themselves, they start to speak in their o w n language. It's a di f ferent exper ience. It helps me to realize how they feel w h e n they are in a meet ing and everyone else is speaking Engl ish. A n n e indicated that p lanners have to keep the d ia logue short enough dur ing presentat ions so that your planning material can be t ranslated. In some First Nat ion projects she had been involved wi th , plans and mappings were t rans lated: Because you don' t want to exc lude people by reason of language. The only reason that it's [ the plan] been wri t ten in Engl ish is because it's the language that the government uses. But it has to be both . I think that that 's another w a y that w e try to make things accessible. However , in Carol 's exper ience she had quest ioned the va lue of t ranslat ion in terms of how s o m e people make these: Motherhood s ta tements about providing language translat ion [when] the reality is about 9 5 % of the people w h o speak their language can' t read or wr i te it, because it's [Aboriginal language] not a wr i t ten language. Sue acknowledged issues of l i teracy and language and in part icular the obstacle of her a t tachment to wr i t ten informat ion and the impl icat ions for inclusion and part ic ipat ion: I have to get rid of wri t ten stuff. It works for some people and it int imidates others. If they f igure they can' t read this th ing [writ ten piece] that 's in f ront of t hem, they are not going to be interested in this th ing in f ront of t h e m . They might think they don' t have whatever it is to contr ibute and feel that other people should be talking and not them because they are not really [understanding] wha t this thing is about . Larry further acknowledged that as p lanners: You 've got to be able to explain th ings in a w a y that people can unders tand and try to do it wi thout cutt ing an issue or someth ing . You have to try to get them to unders tand that because that goes back to the educat ion level wi th the older people. Finally, Evan conf i rmed that there had been an obstacle around language and the size of p lanning documents , part icularly "a lot of long-winded s tu f f " wh ich had been attr ibuted to federal government ' s ( INAC) d e m a n d s stated in their te rms of re ference for communi ty and physical deve lopment p lans. Ken descr ibed a situation w h e r e a co-worker had been at a workshop and people w e r e asked to break out into smal ler groups. One male w a s asked to be a role player and the m a n w a s g iven a sheet of instruct ions. W h e n he c a m e back to the main group he hadn' t fo l lowed the script. It turned out that the m a n w a s il l iterate. The co-worker descr ibed how the m a n "appeared to be really sharp" and w a s initially 58 able to overcome his il l iteracy by ask ing "very fo rward quest ions." In this sense, it w a s assumed he w a s l i terate. W h e n the group had real ized that he couldn' t read, Ken acknowledged that anyone else in his posit ion might have "been scared and run out the door" but rather, the man said someth ing to the effect, "I can' t read, this sounds interest ing, how can I learn?" How you present the p lanning documen t is an issue, "because oral or v isual people w h o haven' t had wri t ten informat ion are go ing to still think in those ways [oral or v isual] ." Carol emphas ized : Jargon is the big obstacle. Jargon is just an excuse for people w h o don' t unders tand their in format ion. If you can' t explain it in layman's te rms you obviously don' t know it we l l . Apar t f rom the need to consider the l i teracy and educat ion levels of the commun i ty and how you 've got to do everyth ing at a grade six level. The issue around ja rgon w a s portraying yoursel f as some expert in anyth ing. [Planners should] just be a person, you have s o m e knowledge and they [First Nat ions] have some knowledge too. A n n e stressed that language had to be clear in planning reports and to use a lot of graphics to documen t planning decis ions and ou tcomes . In s o m e cases, she had wr i t ten reports in two fo rmats : There are certain th ings that have to be there [ included] for INAC [Indian and Northern Affairs Canada ] . It's also a document for the communi ty . W e ' v e actual ly had some cases w h e r e one report has gone to INAC, and another that the communi ty uses, because somet imes the communi ty survey br ings up a lot of sensit ive issues that INAC doesn ' t need to know, nor should they. W e will actual ly include that stuff [sensit ive material ] in the back or the f ront [in the plan].That stuff doesn' t go to INAC. Instead of say ing, "this can' t go in because it's not in the te rms of reference," wel l , of course it can , it just doesn ' t need to go to INAC. For Dave, he pointed out that p lanners could play a role in breaking d o w n communica t ion barr iers and to facil i tate the best of people 's involvement. Throughout his interview, Dave st ressed issues of confl ict and the need and abil ity for p lanners to break through impasses in regard to a land use planning process. He s t ressed that you "have to be humble , review posit ions and to be wil l ing to take another approach. " People including p lanners have to d iscuss and constant ly explore w a y s and means of resolving prob lems th rough processes of negot iat ion, mediat ion and arbi t rat ion. He referred to the te rm "cooperat ive negot iat ions" as a w a y to get th rough impasses. To c lose, Nancy c o m m e n t e d that cross-cul tural communica t ion w a s an issue for part ic ipatory planning and that "we have a long w a y to go" to improve communica t ion be tween cul tures. A n n e acknowledged that First Nat ions have a dif ferent w a y of communica t ing , including di f ferent decis ion 59 making structures based on consensus that p lanners need to know. W h e n asked w h a t mot ivated Sue to work wi th First Nat ions, she expressed that: The rules are all dif ferent for conversat ion and social intercourse and. . .where debate is the not the w a y w e talk to each other. W h e r e there are belly laughs, lots of t h e m , and w h e r e inclusiveness is not someth ing that is wr i t ten in a const i tut ion. It's how people are per iod. 4.2.5 Part icipat ion Four interv iewees indicated that it is important to know the dec is ion-making structure of First Nat ions to enable part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships (Dave, A n n e , Larry, Nancy) . Dave and A n n e emphas ized that First Nat ions pract iced consensus dec is ion-making and how First Nat ions dec is ion-making structures w e r e much "flatter." Larry noted that First Nat ions make decis ions dif ferently, more on a communi ty basis and that p lanners "can expect s lower dec is ion-making processes as wel l as a di f ferent va lue sys tem w h e n mak ing decis ions." For Dave , consensus dec is ion-making w a s an important cultural factor in planning because: It's a tradit ional process of dec is ion-making throughout North Amer i ca , p rominent in First Nat ions communi t ies . It's cons idered a win-win si tuat ion because the majori ty of dec is ion-makers reach consensus and nobody d isagrees. A n n e also stated the signif icance of knowing the dec is ion-making structure of First Nat ions: I think it's important to look at the c o m m u n i t y . . . a n d get some insight into dec is ion-making and the kind of st ructure in the communi ty . S o m e smal l communi t ies are basical ly consensual wi th the entire communi ty . Wi th other communi t ies , everything goes to chief and counci l . A n d [then] there 's kind of everyth ing in be tween those two . I think it's important to know wha t the dec is ion-making structure is and to get a sense if chief and counci l , being the client, are actively interested in f inding out w h a t the communi t ies wan t and how much is lip service. However , she m a d e a dist inct ion be tween two dec is ion-making processes: "consensus wi th al l" versus "decisions by chief and counci l . " This w a s signif icant noted A n n e , because it had impl icated the qual i ty of communi ty part icipation and consul tat ion. She also stated that the: Ul t imate decis ion maker is not a lways chief and counci l and how for example in the north coast communi t ies everyth ing is referred to an elder 's counci l and you m a y only have one meet ing wi th t h e m to present it to them. They are ult imately the decis ion makers , a l though you may never see t h e m . 60 Five interviewees answered that prayer was an important ceremony to facilitate participatory planning and that traditional prayers were used to open and close planning sessions (Larry, Evan, Ken, Carol, Sue). Larry noted how people may pray in English or their own language and how planners are to respect whatever First Nations want to do. Ken and Carol both indicated that elders had provided prayers but that sometimes the planner would be asked to give a prayer: Yes, actually it was almost humorous and it happened many years ago. I was doing the closing prayer and I happen to be bilingual so I said the closing prayer in French and I got several looks and after the meeting was over they said "What did you say" and I translated it and they said "Oh why did you do that" and I said "Well, fortunately when there is an opening or closing prayer in your area it is in Cree," and I said, "I don't understand your language. I thought I would do two things: one, I said the closing prayer to respect your spiritual ways and two, let you experience that I don't understand what you say. So are kind of on even footing." So yes, I have been asked and I think it's quite an honour to be asked. Others viewed feasting and social dinners as important ceremonies to include as a way of establishing relationships (Sue) or to increase participation (Evan, Anne). Two interviewees suggested that social dinners were important enough to budget directly into the planning process (Evan, Anne). Sue acknowledged the significance of ceremony and symbols: Symbols are more powerful than anything else in creating a sense of community and connection, and reaffirming the power of relationship. Wherever there can be ceremony of any kind can be of tremendous support and it makes any work that I might do many many times more useful and powerful. Ceremony includes eating together. I always plan on eating together. At some point we are going to eat together, and that's conflict resolution. It's a big part of it. A lot of it is around....we think of conflict resolution a s we got the problem it's on the floor and now we are going to come up with mechanisms for dealing with it. The whole thing around ceremony and rules, around how we talk with each other particularly in First Nations communities, is around 'sustaining relationship.' That's what you got to do, keep the bond, the threads thick and strong, so when we come to bumps in the road you can just sort of bounce through. The big work is the pre-emptive strikes if you will, of having that strengthened and the ceremonies and all sense of family wars and unresolved stuff is completely gone when there is ceremony. If it's not in the room, it vanishes miraculously and people are connected. When I was in one community last spring, it wasn't my work, it wasn't related to me, but at the end of council in the evening we had a big feast and then the dancers came, sort of a s an outside group. People got up from their tables because they are the dancers. They go in the foyer very informally and change into some magnificent regalia and they do a blanket dance so they can collect some money for the cultural center. And every clan was called individually to come, the drum is going and they dance together as a clan and they included white man's children, so I had to dance too. 61 In other words it's completely, absolutely inclusive, with the recognition of your individual obligations to the clan. The power was in the room and you could see the children, and some drunks who came in off the street were in awe. You could see their eyes. They had a sense of connection in the community. These are very disconnected people, people who are lost souls and when they see ceremony there is moisture in their eyes. They cannot stay away. It's the only time they feel they fit in that room. Everybody fits in that room during ceremony, it doesn't matter. So...I don't know how you can arrange that. Finally, Carol pointed out that ceremony was valued differently in each First Nation and that planners should not assume common acceptance. Planners also have to be careful around the "cultural theft" of customs and ceremonies (Sue) or the "abuse of practice" when "change-oriented people who choose to take on the trappings of culture and tradition as a lifestyle choice (Janet)." As Janet states: It's important to know what churches are operating and how powerful and influencing they are in a community...often nobody will tell you because in many communities, its very much underground. Planners should not assume wholesale acceptance of traditional values or ceremony in a community and that it's important to know what ceremony is being practiced. Participation Roles of Men and Women Interviewees were asked how men and women participated differently during participatory planning relationships. They identified numerous roles for men and women, including participation characteristics and various factors (issues and obstacles) that were important for outside planners to know. In terms of participatory roles, Janet indicated that meh'tended to fill senior level positions in the community and that they rely on women to be the band managers. Women were viewed as "having the power and analysis and their role is to provide advice to men." When asked about the matrilineal society and its importance for participatory planning, Carol commented on the interaction of men and women in her experience: It's [matrilineal society] not front and centre, even though most First Nation societies are matrilineal. But if you look at today's society and you look at the chiefs sitting around the table, they are mostly men. Coming in without knowing any of that background, you would [assume] women don't play a dominant role. Half the time, the male elders or chiefs don't make the decision until they go and talk to their wife. So even though it is not front and centre for you to see, it's an operational matrilineal society still there at play. That's something I guess to be aware of. You would never get a direct answer if you ask a chief "So do you take advice from your wife before a decision?" Look around, you'll see at general assemblies and stuff, a woman sitting behind her husband and you go, "Oh this is a bit backward, she doesn't play a prominent role." But you'll see before he votes him turning to his wife and asking [her for advice]. Those are things that you just have to be observant about I guess. 62 Anne agreed that planners need to be aware of the matrilineal impacts on participatory planning, stating "in many of the communities that I work in, the women are very involved in the kind of running the community and the day-to-day activities of the communities, but they are not elected." As she described in one First Nation: There are over fourteen people on the council and I asked why there were no women. They said it was because they were too busy. They're so involved. Basically the acknowledgment was that there was a lot of power held by the women but they were just so busy with the day-to-day functioning of the community that they didn't have time for politics. Sue indicated that men tend to take on leadership roles by way of formal power through a chief and council role, and that they tend to go out of the community to do the negotiations, whereas women stay in the community. Men and women were both seen to understand the needs of the community. Women on the other hand were seen to run the organizations of the community, considered the doers arid were viewed as having informal power. When asked how men and women differed in their roles for participatory planning, Nancy indicated that: Men grin and women talk...men usually sit back and do not involve themselves maybe because of the clan system which evolves around women, or because of the sexual abuse from residential school. I She also stated women were seen to "protect children's needs," where "men are the patriarchs." Ken added that women were "better at enforcing rules" and how the role of men and women were changing. He noted that in some communities young males had been employed in secretarial-administrative positions. Women were viewed as knowing more about the financial area, had an equal say in management areas, and it was noted by Ken that women who take on the "tough" jobs such as rent collection, were more successful than men. Like Ken, Dave did not talk directly about the role of men but he indicated that: Women are quite outspoken. It's a known fact that women are the keepers of tradition, culture and language in the communities. They play a prominent role in the authoritative, governing body of First Nation communities. Larry described how in one First Nation the general structure of the community was that men were seen to be the councilors and politicians, and women tended to be the administrators. He noted how "men tended to handle the capital projects, where the women tended to lean more towards the social 63 things, but not totally." He stressed that each community is different in this regard and wondered if women participated more because they are generally more educated. Women know more of the details, how programs are run, and may be more sensitive. Larry thought that men might take a broader view of programs and projects. Finally, Evan indicated that generally men take on the role of the politician and had tended to drop out of school, where women were the ones who went to school. Women were seen to have more education, were much better at understanding money and financial management issues, considered more practical, and the "ones who are doing all of the work." Participation Characteristics of Men and Women Interviewees listed several factors that implicated whether and how men and women participated. Carol acknowledged in her experience that "you're not going to get the women really participating a lot...they will be deferring to the men and letting them speak." However, Janet suggested how men and women participate "depends on the information you want," and the quality of participation is impacted by who attends a planning session. She indicated that in general women were seen to be less participatory if men who are present at a meeting, were felt to dominate. Planners should know that: Women do not speak directly to men they are not related to. Women who want to talk to other men speak though an intermediary...and it is best to have a man interview a man, and vise versa. A man will tell another man something that he would not tell a woman. Carol made a similar point: There are different roles for men and women, different questions that you should ask a woman or man in a community, or things that you would ask. It would be ok to ask a man but not ok to ask a woman...if there was something Mary and I were doing that Ed knew shouldn't be done, he would say something to us but I don't know that you would know that if you as a woman, went to a men's meeting. Janet described that in one First Nation she had worked in, participants were asked whether they wanted a male or female interviewer, and how sometimes people may want a "white" interviewer. This was based on the assumption that an "outsider" was considered neutral. As she states: You are going to get different people who will not say anything and I would expect there are men who would not say anything in front of men either, that they may say to a male planner in an all male group. I know that's been my experience with women in an all women's group. 64 Similarly, Carol acknowledged that the gender of the facilitator affected the quality of participation. For example if a woman were facilitating a mixed session, more women would participate and men would be seen to take on a quieter role. Another distinction observed by Sue that when men and women were involved in a planning session, women tended not to challenge men, but stated that women are listened too when they speak. She indicated that she had to make a point of including women when there is a mixed group of participants but that both men and women tended to participate effectively amongst themselves. For another interviewee, the participation preferences of men and women were identified as follows: Women tend to prefer to have a dialogue to discuss things rather than a kind of question and answer format that guys tend to be more comfortable with, because it's very concrete...men tend to focus on things that are concrete (the community hall is falling apart or we need more houses) where I think women tend to personalize it more (my house needs a new roof) ...men go from question to solution to explore the problem a bit before they get to the solution....! know this in my personal life, when you are working with a group of women, it can ! be so process- oriented, you never get anything done. It's the best process in the world but at the end of six months you haven't achieved anything. So that's why I think there is value in the synthesis of both, that you actually get different ways of communicating...(Anne). Furthermore, it was observed by Anne that men and women enter a planning session differently. Evan referred to "big belt buckle" persons who were'males, and how they had brought with them a "raw monkey instinct" when introducing themselves. Evan depicted men as "beating their chest and yelling in your face," and suggested that males react in a different way than women, that they play different roles. He said that he looks for the "biggest belt buckle," as well as how males wear their clothes, as way to predict how males were going to react in a planning session. In one planning session, he had pointed out who had the biggest belt buckle, as a way to get people laughing and to "break down the crowd [ease people talking]." Finally, Anne commented that it had been easier for her to work with women: I've worked in communities where their power structure is women, the chief and council and everyone in the administration building. I think it's important to be aware of that... Sometimes it's easier for me to work in communities like that because women communicate differently than men and sometimes there is a kind of rapport you establish. I find sometimes when I am in a completely male chief and council, it almost gets to this flirtatious stage where I feel very uncomfortable to work. There's a different kind of dynamic there... There are communities where there's been few women, maybe one or two, and you just don't know...you can't say, "where are all the women?" because they are at home taking care of the kids. They are not interested because it is not acceptable for them to speak. I think it is also influenced by what the political 65 structure is. In the communi t ies w h e r e w o m e n are in power, there are more w o m e n part ic ipat ing. That is my percept ion. I wou ldn ' t say I have any empir ical ev idence to back it up but you know in a lot of respects, wi th any w o m e n in any kind of p lanning project, you have to have dif ferent opportuni t ies. Elder Roles Elders were v iewed as having signif icant roles dur ing planning sessions. At one level, e lders w e r e seen to be a signif icant link to unders tand and gain access into the commun i ty (Nancy, Sue, Janet ) because of their knowledge about the commun i t y (Nancy) . As Nancy s ta ted, p lanners shou ld : Hook themselves up wi th s o m e o n e w h o knows the who le communi ty , specif ical ly the just ice depar tment because they are usually pretty neutra l . Elders know wha t is happen ing . They provide knowledge assurance and support for wha t you are do ing in the commun i t y . . .and they give their b lessing for p lanning. Elders are usually the fami ly heads in the communi ty , provide direct ion for p lanning and are included in many dispute and confl ict resolut ion roles. Nancy noted that e lders are also " involved in all aspects of governance and that they fo rm part of the commi t tee and rotate part ic ipat ion wi th the chief and counci l " (Nancy) . In Carol 's exper ience, she had c o m m e n t e d how people in the communi ty will l isten to elders in te rms of elect ing the communi ty chief. Elders can also take on a symbol ic role, but they m a y inf luence their representat ives or under take a moni tor ing role dur ing planning sessions. A s Caro l sugges ted : Having elders involved in a w o r k s h o p w a s seen to be symbol ic , if there w a s not much direct part icipation f rom t h e m . But on the other hand you don' t know wha t w a s done before coming [to the workshop ] . You don' t know wha t kind of chains they have put around their fami ly representat ives in that meet ing. You don' t know if they are there to moni tor the per fo rmance of their family representat ive and to see if in fact that their instruct ions are being carr ied fo rward . So, I think that it is much more in the symbol ic role but I think that it's a lways important to include t h e m just put of respect for w h o they are and what they can br ing even though it may not be commun ica ted at the t ime of the meet ing. In Sue 's v iew, the role of the elders w a s not necessar i ly to be present dur ing the planning sess ion but that their p resence might be requested. She had recognized w h e n elders did start to show up, it usual ly indicated that someth ing important w a s being talked about and that this w a s v iewed as a posit ive indicator. 66 Part ic ipat ion Character is t ics of Elders Larry indicated in one First Nat ion communi ty that elders may directly part icipate th rough an elder 's counci l or they may sit on the genera l counci l . If p lanners are to obtain direct ion and c o m m e n t s f rom elders, in some cases they can ask for their input, they can ar range for their part ic ipat ion, or e lders can have their own meet ings (Larry, Evan) . Larry indicated that elders ' part icipation wou ld depend on w h a t the communi ty w a s p lanning. Elders had been consul ted on matters relating to tradit ional va lues (Larry) and matters relating to tradit ional knowledge and land (Anne, Dave) . It w a s observed that e lders "somet imes make a point th rough storytel l ing." Sue suggested that it w a s important to go visit ing the elders as a w a y of involving them in p lanning: Other people see it as a respectful th ing to do. Just go visit and they [elders] will sit and talk about all di f ferent k inds of stuff and at some point they'l l say: "What are you doing here, how c o m e ? " A n d they will say: "Wel l you know what , did you hear anyth ing ! about that p lanning meet ing going on?" A n d I'll say: "Yea, I'm involved now and I'm just trying to help people talk about s o m e things." And they will say "Oh yea?" A n d if you wan t some input then you are go ing to wai t a whi le, and say someth ing about you know, "It's hard somet imes people feel one w a y about it and other people feel another w a y about because those th ings kind of matter to t h e m I guess." So you are just talking about your ref lect ions and they might say someth ing . It m a y be of no interest to t h e m at al l , zero , in wh ich case they won' t say anything but it's ok that you d id , but they won ' t pick it up. On involving elders, Sue adv ised: You don' t give t h e m papers and stuff. I learned that the hard way , as s o m e o n e yel led out "Don' t give elders paper ok". . . they will sit w h e r e they wan t and they will c o m e and go w h e n they wan t and they are just l istening...and if you wan t someth ing f rom t h e m , you wan t them to speak or you wan t to seek their advice, you wou ld make that request maybe known through s o m e b o d y else if you don' t know t h e m very wel l yourself . If you do, there are s o m e people I know will say "Hey you know, if you felt like it, maybe say someth ing to the young people, whatever . " Tell t h e m wha t it is, say someth ing that comes to your mind to tell the young people, say "it's good to see you here," shake hands warmly , say that you are happy to see t h e m . Carol suggested numerous w a y s that she had involved elders wi th the youth of one communi ty . She suggested how youth sponsored an elder 's tea once a week , and how craft activit ies faci l i tated elder involvement. Start ing a meal wi th a tradit ional prayer had been another w a y to involve the e lders. These w e r e considered ways to "reinforce respect for e lders" and to "reinforce elder knowledge. " Their involvement w a s seen as va luable and p lanners have to make sure that everyone 's contr ibut ion is va lued. Evan indicated that e lders had been va lued for their tradit ional knowledge into by law deve lopment . 67 Finally, Carol noted that the demographics of First Nations were changing and that many people becoming elders were "products of residential school." She stated that "very different things are changing rapidly in Indian country in terms of that." Obstacles & Issues Attitudes towards participation within the community were viewed as one factor that influenced the quality of participation during planning relationships. Anne identified the issue of complacency within some First Nations and how some chief and councils had felt that they "don't need to talk to anybody else," or they "don't want any consultation." This was also the case for Evan who noted that specific groups within the community might be "excluded from the franchise." In the case of one First Nation, the council and administration had difficulty connecting with its people. Evan acknowledged the implications for the lack of involvement: Council could come up with the greatest plan in the world right and it could be totally suited to their community, but if the community hasn't taken part in it, or doesn't feel they own it, it's not going to work. Larry confirmed that councils who had completed plans without the involvement of the community would not obtain the community support necessary to approve and implement the plan. They stressed the importance for planners to "offer people an opportunity to participate and have a say in the planning process... despite knowing that planners could never satisfy everyone in the community." Anne expressed difficulty in accepting this attitude towards participation. As a way to try and resist these attitudes, she had suggested to the chief and council of one First Nation that they create community newsletters as a way to keep people informed. She believed an obligation existed for the client [chief and council] who had been elected, to consult with individuals of their community. Her strategy had been to make suggestions to chief and council for them to include people, and to reveal the implications for the lack of community participation. She convinced the council that an upcoming election in one community was an opportunity for chief and council to communicate what they had been doing in the community. While this was viewed as a passive form of involvement, Anne believed that it was a way to consult with the community and that it was better than no consultation at all. 68 In another instance, A n n e talked about how there "just seems to be a total lack of interest. It doesn ' t matter how you present it [the need for planning] because there just isn't any interest. It's " look, w e need this for INAC, just get it done. " As she exp la ined: Because they [First Nat ions] have been planning for so long, people coming in f rom outs ide and present ing someth ing there 's a lmost an al ienat ion f rom the p lan. I think that you have to get people act ively involved in wha t they are do ing. There are, I'm sad to say, s o m e consul tants w h o don' t do any consul ta t ion. . . As far as I a m concerned , Indian and Northern Affairs should not be accept ing things like that [reports wi thout consul tat ion] . Larry made a similar point, not ing that some people in one First Nat ions communi ty felt they had been surveyed too much and that nothing ever came out of their input, " they haven' t seen a lot of concrete results come out of the plan." Ken indicated that whi le "everyone has an equal opportuni ty" to interact, and how "folks equal ly represent the First Nat ion group," there had been the odd instance "where you' l l notice maybe s o m e b o d y is trying to gain someth ing for their personal use: but wha t I think it amounts to is that they are there to sort of represent the communi ty . " Ken descr ibes a story: You have all First Nat ions represented and there is a group, a mix of male and females. W h a t I sensed is that there is one individual and this happened to be a younger female that sort of in hindsight appeared to be seeking informat ion that they could use for the benefi t their First Nat ion. But the workshop w a s not intended for them [one First Nat ion] . It w a s an informat ion exchange be tween First Nat ions and the depar tment , for all to benefi t f r om. But this one individual certainly appeared to be trying to gain sort of inside informat ion so that their First Nat ion could benefi t versus the others. Three interv iewees raised an important issue affect ing the qual i ty or integrity of part ic ipat ion in te rms of people publicly agree ing, but individually or privately d isagreeing, and how First Nat ions people do not directly crit icize (Ken, Janet , Sue) . Ken ment ioned whi le everyone in the communi ty has an equal opportuni ty to speak dur ing planning sess ions, how: Typical ly you will get an agreement at the table to get someth ing resolved, but on their w a y h o m e there is a lot of p lanning and scheming [about] "we did agree to th is?" I think that there is a lot more of that out there than wha t people will admit . Janet w a s much more direct about the impl icat ions for w h y First Nat ions individuals resist public agreement in the fol lowing example : 69 Old dynamics between these people caused people to not want to be forthcoming in a particular setting. So they can resist because they don't want to speak those particular words in front of somebody else. There is a whole sense of what somebody else is thinking when I make a statement that is really really big and what psychologists call sort of an external point of reference. People are constantly looking for external validation because of the background or legacy. And that need for external validation means that people are less likely to take an opposing point of view, less likely to take what can be seen as an opposing point of view. You tend to get sort of milk toast sort of views on things when you know that there's probably more of a substantive opinion. It's also cultural. Generally that asks for confrontation or looks for conflict and so people tend to publicly agree with somebody they wouldn't necessarily agree with in private. That need for validation and need to fit in is part of the social circle. It is part of the legacy of all these influences...basically if you want radical views you have to go to the individual interview and they have to believe that you will be able to mask their identity and in a small community, it's not only disclosing my name, it is individual disclosure...the whole notion of having to be able to describe views in a way that doesn't in some way implicate the source of those views. The process has to be trusted and it's where only an outsider is trusted. That's a real strong argument for having an outside researcher if you're trying to get at controversial views or opposing views because they won't trust one of their own. Sue also noted the implications of private and public engagement versus agreement: What I think is probably a huge issue and to begin to grapple with it is almost frightening. It's people wanting to talk privately about how they feel about others. They are not going to do it in a public format but it's actually what is preventing them from really engaging in the discussion about a decision or a process, or something substantive and they will disagree with somebody...when you speak to them privately...they speak differently. They will say what they feel about others, individuals who have been hurt or have the wrong values, or you know "she's mean," and what does mean, mean? I know it's impacting on how well we are going to be able to as a group, come to conclusions... because they are not going to be able to listen to each other points of view. What complicates a planner's ability to enable participatory planning is how First Nations individuals don't directly criticize, or confront planners when they disapprove of something during a planning process. Sue stressed that planners "have to be awake about picking up criticisms," and "how people aren't going to stand up and criticize you, they are not going to say anything. They are just going to walk with their feet. They just won't come back the next day." Two interviewees noted the issue of posing questions to get people to participate (Anne, Larry). Often there would be "no response at all and yet clearly there are people who are interested, noted Anne." She indicated that this issue is complicated because in some communities there is "more of an emphasis on clan representation, so you may only hear from a couple of people but they are each representing their own clan." The assumption is that there had been consultation prior to the workshop. 70 Nancy indicated that what had prevented people from talking was "being truthful." People resist participating "simply by choosing not to participate and it's having to do with survival." She explained how "if you got chewed up by mosquitoes every time, you're going to do something to try and help yourself. People exist more on needs than wants. You can want forever and its never going to change." She referred to the impacts of history and how "First Nation people were not controlled to sit long enough to be able to understand anything, and how if it was their choice they wouldn't be there [at the planning workshop]." People also resist participation by not showing up, or not saying anything particularly "if you ask questions at a public meeting you get no answers." Larry expressed four reasons why people don't speak: "because they are not interested; they just don't feel the plan is going anywhere; some people don't like to talk in public [and] and some people don't think they are going to be listened too...they just don't see much point in it." Dave also indicated how people refused to talk because of their "opposition to a given subject or position, or there may be an unwavering solid stubborn position where personalities may be involved." Planners should also "never presume. Nobody ever volunteers information. It's a generation thing and people protect each other" (Nancy). First Nations people also resist participation because of the mistrust they have for outsiders and government, as well as the mistrust they have for governments within their own community. Evan referred to one First Nation where the council and administration had lacked the ability to "connect" with its own people and how this implicated participation. In addition, the formal power and role of the chief in one First Nation had influenced whether others participated during a planning workshop. Sue said that she worked at trying to build in speaking equality and how she may purposely ask the chief to refrain from talking, to enable others to speak. She gave an example of how she had asked a chief to 'postpone' his voice, as a means to get others in the group speaking: It's really important for us in this planning to get an idea of what people think, so I hope that you didn't mind because I know we will be able to talk and that all of your wonderful ideas are going to be [included]. But it's so hard to get everybody together and now that we have them together it's really important [that we allow them to speak]. If I think that the chief has those qualities, then I will prep them and say "You know what, I hope you don't mind, but what I would really like to do with this group is...so I may ask you to help me hear by listening with me, maybe take notes and then we can talk about it afterwards, me and you," in other words, shut up. 71 As well, the seating arrangement of a workshop and the body language of participants had affected whether others participated. Evan explained in his workshops, that individuals who "sit in their chairs lean back with their hands and arms crossed, having the ability to do that, can thwart your participation. First Nations are a little more sensitive to their bodies of other people and their personal space." Other obstacles seen to disrupt participatory planning included deaths in the community and the weather. Janet indicated that in one community there were three deaths and an issue developed about whether or when to hold the training session on First Nations culture and teaching protocol sensitivity with native and non-native people. In the end, Janet had decided to cancel the workshop for protocol reasons but the cost of that decision was that she lost the client and "received a nasty letter in the mail." In another community, Janet was driving down for a workshop and a family member was killed in a car accident. Within one hour after consulting with family members the workshop was cancelled. As Janet stated, There's a whole protocol in terms of recognizing the grieving and mourning and attendance to the family and the mourners is the priority in the community... you can't do your thing, you can't hold a meeting, you can't meet with individuals or anybody in power. Enabling Participation Interviewees suggested numerous approaches, methods and techniques to facilitate participation when they work with First Nations. However, Carol suggested planners need to respect that people may not want to say something, or for planners to not encourage people to the "point of alienating them." Interviewees talked about the need to consider the appropriate form of participation to include and involve people. Anne indicated that she did not "get stuck on any one method" but that in a typical planning relationship she undertakes three to four meetings, two to three workshops, two to three newsletters and community surveys. The active "post-it note" system of participation was preferred to the passive "flipchart" system of participation, and the survey method was considered an effective way to get people involved. She stated how delivering surveys had been: Incredibly time consuming but we found that we often get a lot more insight because we might get over ninety percent of the people to fill out a survey like that. It's a passive form of participation but these are people who we would never hear from at all. 72 In terv iewees indicated that they use a combinat ion of interviews and focus groups, including a themat ic analysis (Janet) ; communi ty meet ings, band genera ls , mail outs , phone contact ing and newslet ters, and a "table of commun i ty p rograms" method ( E v a n ) . 1 3 Others of fered incent ives as a m e a n s to encourage part ic ipat ion (Anne, Nancy, Sue, Janet ) . These had included such things as providing d inners or feasts, pr izes for bingo and a d raw for a barrel of winter fue l . In Nancy 's v iew, p lanning sessions had to include " social , a gather ing that a l lows an in terchange so w e can learn f rom each other and understand dif ferent points of v iew." A n n e v iewed host ing a feast as a fo rm of consul tat ion. It was important enough to be budgeted directly into the p lanning process, as did Evan. In several of her p lanning projects, bingo or d raw prizes had been of fered as a w a y to encourage involvement . In one First Nat ion she worked in, this had resul ted "in four t imes more people that had ever c o m e out before." However , she did note once in another communi ty how she had been chal lenged on the ethics of providing such incent ives because they w e r e seen as a method of "br ibing people." Incent ives were a w a y to recognize and thank people for their part icipation and "why shouldn' t people get someth ing for part ic ipat ing." Anne states: There 's sort of this idea that people should self lessly give up four hours of their evening to listen to you and I just don' t agree wi th that because people are busy. If you feed people supper wel l then that is one less th ing they have to worry about to. . . i t 's not really a tool , it's a techn ique in a w a y to try and increase part ic ipat ion and it's been really successfu l . She also indicated that public meet ings and large group meet ings were ineffective fo rums for part icipation because " people don' t like coming to meet ings often and there are only one or two people that have the conf idence to s tand up and speak." However , tradit ional consul tat ion of large group meet ings "is effect ive for shar ing informat ion, not in terms of gett ing informat ion back." Effective fo rms of part icipation included del iver ing smal ler g roup meet ings and workshops "because people w h o c o m e to those are self-select ive and you are usual ly only hear ing one voice." Larry added that you could plan at genera l assembl ies , at campsi tes or areas that suppor t smal ler g roups and less formal sett ings. This might al low more diversif ied part ic ipat ion, "gett ing away f rom the 1 3 Evan described this facilitation method of program development starting with programming principles. The substantive planning would involve "portfolio heads" and chief and council to plan an intensive planning process to cross-link all program portfolios in the community, including education and justice. Accomplishments, goals, mission statements were outputs of the process. 73 formal council meetings, and service type people or interest type meetings." For another interviewee this had included presenting at a bingo game: Because that is where most people go. My feeling is that you have to be very flexible. If there is a break during bingo and it's the only time you get to talk with the people, if it's a five-minute break, then that is what you do (Anne). Nancy described a workshop setting where everyone had gathered around in a circle to discuss things. This was "important for intellectual instruction in the community, and to give some foundation. It's also important for people to socialize, to talk about it; then they can come back and discuss it." Two others stressed the importance of starting workshops and ensuring proper workshop closure (Sue, Janet). It was suggested that planning sessions start and end with a prayer and how oral and written forms of evaluation were part of the closure process to ensure participation from the group (Sue). Planners also have to recognize the value of participation and "to proactively promote inclusion" in1 the community, spreading it out over time and providing on-site workshops," as Evan suggested. When speaking about elder involvement, he expressed that he "makes sure everyone's contribution is valuable and how individuals: Just need to feel valuable. It's just a human thing. You need to know your contribution is worthwhile... the same is true in the meeting. Once people realize their contribution is wanted and worthwhile, they are more than happy to give it. The importance in recognizing people's contribution during workshop closure was also suggested by Sue, and Anne pointed out that the value of people's contribution should be expressed through direct employment (Anne). Anne indicated that she tries to create many "opportunities to speak," although ,she stated that on two occasions "direct questioning was not effective and that there is little response to questions." She indicated that creating opportunities to participate did not "involve them [people] standing up in front of a big group." She felt that public meetings were not the "best form of consultation anywhere," but that's certainly still a traditional tool." Others advised not to ask questions and to not interrupt as well, especially with the elders of a community (Janet, Sue, Larry). Interviewees talked about maintaining unstructured time (Sue), and that it was necessary for planners to consider the timing and pace of planning (Anne). Along with being practical, planners require: 74 A n ability to change courses quickly because of sudden c i rcumstances. . .when to turn the corner at the appropr ia te t ime and to be able to adapt new perspect ives. . . p lanners need to adapt to the part icular context and they can' t pre-wri te everyth ing. They have to have the ability to react and recognize the si tuat ion and to be able to change course quickly, if need be.. . the p lanner has to know how to facil i tate and handle c rowds and know w h e n and how to act w h e n they hit an impasse, w h e n you suddenly have to turn left (Ken) . Finally, Larry noted that p lanners could use examples of other communi ty projects to explain how they might work in the communi ty . This w a s seen as "a w a y to involve people, keep their interests" and how this process of educat ion: Kind of d raws in their thinking so they can start to unders tand wha t you are talking about and that they start to feel that they are part of it [and that p lanners] really need to be back and forth [as they explain how deve lopment opt ions affect the commun i ty ] . . . Tell t hem wha t kind of good or bad effects you are trying to deal wi th and wha t you are try ing to fix or not fix wi th your p lan, wha t their roles might be, and if they could see a direct benefit . T o the extent you [the planner] are able to do that . . . you are not a lways able to do that. P lanners can help by showing the impacts [of deve lopment ] at the commun i ty level. 4.2.6 Commun i t y Capaci ty Four male interv iewees made reference to the posit ive capaci ty First Nat ions w e r e gain ing to under take their o w n planning and yet there were numerous instances w h e r e communi t ies lacked the capaci ty to carry out p lanning. Capaci ty w a s general ly cons idered at an individual level and there were no references made to organizat ional or insti tut ional capaci ty. Planners have to be honest about the local capaci ty of First Nat ions. In Carol 's v iew "it's all about learning the rhy thms of the communi ty , " such as " Indian t ime' and work ing wi th elders in tradit ional w a y s . She emphas ized a helping role for p lanners and how they had to be honest in wha t they were able to help achieve, adding that p lanners need to explain w h y they may not be able to satisfy the expectat ions of the communi ty . Evan st ressed that the size of the commun i ty t ranslated into communi ty individuals having to know a great deal and that some people w e r e " forced to be a jack-of-al l - t rades or a renaissance administrator." He c o m m e n t e d that commun i t y individuals "actual ly have to have the same level of expert ise as an expert f rom a city wou ld but in so many more areas." These same people also have dif ferent educat ion levels. It w a s observed that more individuals w e r e gain ing formal educat ion and 75 becoming professionals in their o w n communi ty . Larry responded to the context of capaci ty w h e n asked w h a t outside p lanners needed to know w h e n they worked wi th First Nat ions: I guess outs iders need to recognize w h a t their genera l background , exper ience and educat ion has been and the fact that a lot of t h e m , most of t h e m that I have deal t w i th , haven' t l ived in the s a m e kind of society non-nat ive people have lived in -in terms of their exper ience wi th the land, residential school , wi th the who le th ing, even wi th alcohol and drug prob lems. So w h e n you start work ing wi th t h e m you pretty wel l have to start at a little bit di f ferent level. I don' t say that to m e a n the people aren' t intell igent, it's just that they don' t have the same background and exper ience and they v iew th ings and do th ings dif ferently. Obstac les and Issues Three interv iewees targeted leadership and staff turnover as signif icant obstac les to enabl ing part ic ipatory planning relat ionships (Janet, A n n e , Ken) . Janet provided an example w h e r e she had to rebuild the planning and suppor t t eam "twice or three t imes in an eight or nine month process and how w h e n you add a new m e m b e r you just can' t just keep ploughing ahead . You 've got to rebui ld the t e a m and if you ignore that, big t rouble." Leadership turnover for A n n e impl icated part ic ipatory planning because leaders can ignore previous p lanning, or leadership can change plans. Ken observed the prob lem of leadership change and the "constant turnover of capital [managers ] . " He noted that dur ing the past year there had been a "wholesale change in project managers " of non-sel f govern ing First Nat ions he worked w i th . The lack capaci ty w a s attr ibuted to the fact that First Nat ions were negot iat ing their f inal land c la im agreements and how this focus takes t ime "away f rom people do ing their regular jobs and it affects the day to day operat ions in a communi ty . " The implicat ions for staff turnover had been that communi t ies w e r e not part icipat ing in their p rogram al locat ions and over thirty-f ive percent of the regional budget had not been al located. In addi t ion, wi th "wholesale changes in the leadership, typical ly one of the downfal ls w e f ind is that w h e n a new chief and counci l are e lected, they tend to take an about turn on a study or planning process that has been entered into." Ken suggested that "one of the key chal lenges" is for p lanners to keep this factor in mind , "and give everyone the opportuni ty to have their say [so] they can contr ibute." However , "the plan has to be deve loped on the basis to al low for change. " Finally, he had observed that w h e n there is a turnover of posi t ions, there "se ldom seems to be any t ra in ing." 76 Like Ken, Anne acknowledged that in some First Nations communities there are so many things going on that there simply wasn't the availability of people to participate. When this happens, participatory planning is regulated to simply sending out a couple of newsletters. She talked about how in one instance a community that was involved in a political blockade would not leave it to meet with the consultant. In some cases: Projects have taken six months to three years and you have to accept that as you go. I mean I just go with the pace of the community I am working with even though it can be maddeningly slow. Ultimately if you push that with the document it isn't going to be as useful. As far as I am concerned if it sits on the shelf and gathers dust. It's not a plan; its just some papers. Carol felt that the whole issue of volunteerism was an obstacle to enable participatory planning. She noted how "the intrinsic value of volunteering for volunteering sake was a big thing when I was in school and how it was not a concept at all when I worked in this one community." Her error had been in assuming the value of volunteerism, and the "fact that the wage economy is relatively new and the value of work is based on how much you get paid to do that. So if you are not getting paid it can't be a very important job." The implication for participation was that in assuming there was value "in volunteering for the sake volunteering," as a planner, she couldn't "take and impart that [value] on a community and expect change overnight." Education and literacy levels were also viewed as obstacles to enable participatory planning relationships (Nancy, Janet, Evan, Ken). Nancy stressed the significance of capacity and participation: How can they [individuals] ask about something when they do not know enough about a new system, what type of thinking [and how] people were not controlled to sit long enough to be able to understand anything and if it was their choice, they would not be there [participating at the workshop]. Evan mentioned the issue of different levels of education and how sometimes planners can work with a person who has an expansive knowledge base about the issues and programs in the community and how "sometimes you are dealing with people who are not that educated." Evan elaborated on the obstacle of education: Dealing with all levels of education is a big obstacle because when you think you have satisfied your client and everyone, it feels like the best plan. But when you start uncovering things, maybe its not such a great plan, you don't own it. It's an obstacle for the consultant and the administration of the community. 77 Ken c o m m e n t e d that individuals had lacked unders tanding to utilize large binder documents : There is this who le percept ion that this [binder] is too big. It's overwhe lming and "I could never be able to learn that" . . . the individual feel ing that it is just too overwhe lming and they won ' t be able to do that work at that level, to deal wi th this big massive document . Further, that "historical documents that w e put together are not being used and w e know that for a fact." For example , in one communi ty Ken expla ined how the First Nat ion's report ing guide had not been used "because of the types of quest ions being asked. " First Nat ions have a di f ferent relat ionship to p lanning documents , Ken noted, stat ing that " judging by the feedback w e get, d o c u m e n t s . . . s e e m to be t reated on the basis that once [util izing plans] is enough . " Enabl ing Capaci ty Several in terv iewees v iewed capaci ty bui lding as an important componen t to enable effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. In most cases, in terv iewees emphas ized individual capaci ty bui lding by work ing wi th an individual or smal l g roup more directly th roughout the planning process. This relat ionship implied shar ing more direct responsibi l i ty in the p lanning process. Ken c o m m e n t e d on how planners need to "develop a product that is useful and that can be appl ied and used by the communi ty . " Evan d iscussed how he classif ied his cl ients in te rms of capaci ty and how the level of capaci ty impacted his work ing relat ionships. He descr ibed two types of cl ients: " those you have establ ished a relat ionship wi th , and those w h o are new cl ients." The relat ionships he had wi th his cl ients consis ted of three categor ies of capaci ty: 1) middle cl ient, 2) over ly capab le and 3) ove rworked . He c o m m e n t e d that typical ly it is two or three persons w h o are educated in the communi ty that get " s w a m p e d " and it's not an issue of capaci ty or capabi l i ty regarding the planning task. The signi f icance of knowing the capaci ty of the commun i ty before you start p lanning wou ld be to determine whe ther a training componen t wou ld be structured into the planning relat ionship. Evan indicated that those communi t ies and individuals w h o w e r e new cl ients, or less capable , w e r e presented wi th p lanning tools in a w a y that they could adapt the tools themselves . Planners could also help "appropr iate individuals," mainly those individuals w h o have "hands-on exper ience ' (Ken) . Planners can provide training capaci ty to the communi ty in an effort to help deve lop and work wi th change. In Ken's v iew, p lanners w e r e seen as giving communi t ies the opportuni ty to 78 control and own their destiny. Planners have to recognize the positive planning experiences of First Nations they work with, and to help promote these in the community. Janet tries to work with a "steering group or committee or reference group that is representative of the major interests in the community." She also indicated that it is necessary to work with one individual in the community, and to act as a team. In her experience, she is "delivering and leaving capacity behind by training an individual in the process." When I asked Janet what she did to allow a community to have control, she commented: I don't see them as having the control. I see it as a co-creation project. There are times when the community will dominate and there are times when you will sort of take the reigns for some creative time to get the process out of the ditch and back on the road. So to me, I'm not sure that you are taking your full responsibility if you basically hand those reigns over to the community and say I'm in the back of the truck, call me if you need me. Because to me you need to be in the front seat of the wagon and the horse, you know, that you are on the front seat in the community. You've got the reigns, they've got the reigns. You are not sitting in the back unable to see what is coming down the road. To me it is a passing back and forth of control because you have the responsibility to keep the process on track. They can help design the process but once the contract is in place, is saying "Ok this is the program that we are going to follow." Then you have to have the responsibility to deliver that process and so there are Times that you choose to dominate the process, sort of take control of it for brief periods in order to make sure that it's on track. It's just like when you teach somebody how to drive. There is a point of which you put your foot over the hump and on the brake or you grab the steering wheel. But it's usually in a situation with no other options. So what you need, part of the experience that comes with this, is the trust of the community's capacity. A trust that the community is seeing things that you are not seeing, that the community is experiencing the process differently than you are. You need to have really open and active communication and the community also needs to know what your role is. It's really really important to clarify that right from the word go and it's a really good idea to have it documented so that half way down the road you say, "Wait a minute. It's now my responsibility to take the reigns. I'm driving for the next mile" because this is what we have to deliver on, whether it's a report or hauling in the data that needs to done. Anne helped to enable communities to have control over their own planning by hiring at least one person in the community and for them to structure their own involvement, however they wish. As she describes: We had some people who have been incredibly involved. In one community, I came in with a draft survey and we sat down for four hours with this person and redid the whole thing. It [the survey] was so much better than what we had before. So I think that's one way, a constant kind of linkage, and it's someone who is well known in the community. There's one qualification. 79 They have to be well known in the community. In a number of cases, the person has been taken on as a planner. So I think we had some success there. Other sorts of things we do...in some cases we have set up a steering committee. Basically it would include a few people from staff and certainly from the community, although it is generally the chief and council who pick the people to sit on the committee. A training component was also important for every project: I would not want to do a project where we didn't have someone involved throughout [the project]...I have found that where there's a local planner who's really involved in the process, it gives the community a lot more understanding and grounding in the planning process. She added that people who are involved in the community should be compensated for their work and not be asked to participate on a voluntary basis. She insisted that Indian Affairs should compensate individuals for their involvement. Viewed from a different perspective, Evan talked about the challenge for one First Nation's administration connecting with its people. In this instance, he helped the individual, chief and council and administration to "work on ways to enable them to get more out of their people." In one example, Evan talked about how he had encouraged the community to become more involved in various planning tasks and how a membership director of one community helped with the population study, the housing officer helped with the housing needs analysis and the capital works manager helped with the capital assessment. In a different instance, one community had completed all of its planning and Evan provided an editing role for the whole project, checking for "completeness." Dave indicated one way to enable communities to have control over their planning: Delivery of concepts, ideals and values would have to be cross-communicated and you can do that by paper exchange, brainstorming sessions and by leading questions like "What do you think about this idea? What do you think if we did it this way, your way versus another way?" To prompt discussion, to prompt ideas, to brainstorm, to figure out the best way to blaze a trail, the best way to start a journey... "How are you going to get there? When you are going to get there? How successful it will be?" These are all dependent upon all the planning that goes into place, and how all of the individuals who are involved have to be involved because without that, you can't have a successful journey. Throughout her interview, Janet referenced the need for there to "be a real balance between the task and process, and there are times when you have to put the task literally aside, and at some point to get back to process." She stressed the issue of ensuring and "creating tracks of good quality process and the 80 precedence of creating good quality process is building capacity along the way." If people are "pissed off at the process" then someone in the community will "ambush the product and it will end up on the shelf, end up lost, or it will end up somewhere where you don't want it to be." In one community, they had come back and asked for the same report four times because it "always gets lost." To allow communities to maintain control and develop capacity, Sue had provided choices and options for process. She had to "pay attention to what people say about process: what I want to hear is about is process stuff. It's none of my business about substantive stuff...substance belongs to them, process belongs to me." The significance of her concern for process relates to her role as a planner. She looks for signs that the process is not enabling participation. Sue wanted to know whether people feel uncomfortable, so that "we can have a conversation about process or structure." Sue encouraged communication and participation among people by "creating safety" and "options to participate." This included how people might form groups, who might work together, including who and how people present their findings in a workshop setting. She also strategically structured the placement of people in a workshop because of varying literacy levels. And further, that she always attached dialogue to paper to facilitate understanding and participation. A large part of Sue's planning practice was to constantly ask individuals for their verification on what she is interpreting throughout a participatory process. Much of what she is told, or reads, is through awareness and signals, including active listening where she explains what she hears and understands back to the individual or group for confirmation. This helped to ensure peoples' participation. However, in order to get that feedback and know that her process was working, she noted the importance of building comfort in the planning relationship. As long as a personal relationship and trust were established, it was much easier to develop a structure for participation. Nancy was able to get people to act and develop capacity: By setting the stage for them by talking about the overall goal, expectation and why they are there and what they can expect at the end of the process. I walk them through the whole process and tell them what we are going to do throughout this course. You give them a brief kind of plan for whatever the duration is of the planning process. 81 Nancy states that people should have a say in whatever effects people and wha t there concerns may be. She also emphas ized using a part ic ipatory approach , and to "provide a structure to involve and encourage people to be a part of the solut ion or decis ion." She c o m m e n t e d that " ideas must come f rom the communi ty " and how "steering commi t tee part ic ipants are very critical to the planning process." Further, that, " language w a s an important aspect because people are go ing into a new sys tem and this means new words and concepts . " As Nancy s t a t e d : " a decis ion will c o m e in its own way and in its own t ime and somet imes very unexpectedly." Larry acknowledged that the best w a y to al low a First Nat ion to exerc ise control over the p lanning process w a s to give communi t ies : As many opt ions as possible, more than just the normal ones and as much detail as they can handle or they think they need to make their j udgmen ts , so they are the ones that are saying wha t direct ion it goes . He suggested two approaches to planning but wi th dif ferent part ic ipatory ou tcomes . O n e approach is that the planner might go out into the communi ty and f ind out wha t individuals are interested in and then put together combinat ions of possibil i t ies. The second w a y w a s to "put together a plan and about wha t my best j udgmen t w a s on how to spend m o n e y to meet all of the dif ferent needs." He wou ld then take the plan back to the commun i ty for feedback and approva l . P lanners can also just put together wha t the communi t ies wan t but Larry s t ressed that " they can' t have everyth ing." He referenced the role of the outside p lanner by stat ing that: The main planners that live in the communi ty are the chief and counci l . They live there and they can see wha t they think needs done . They need planners "to tell us how can w e get f rom here to there, w h a t s teps do I take. Talk to me about how I do this, so I will know wha t to do." Maybe that 's a good part of that. I haven' t thought of that but a lot of the p lanning is not right, not right, a lways out in one way . But talking to the counci l enough that they unders tand the steps in the p lan, because they are the ones that are going to put it in place probably or the staff, whoever it is. And so the best thing you can do if you are do ing that is to get them into whatever the steps are, smal l enough , smal l enough that they can see ach ievement . Maybe not day to day but, in three months , or six months or w h e n they can feel th ings happen , feel a part of it and w h e n things are work ing and they are gett ing toward whatever goal it w a s because they are the p lanners that live in the communi ty . I think it's very hard for s o m e b o d y to c o m e in f rom Vancouver that hasn' t been up here all the t ime and go talk to these people. 82 4.2.7 Planner Relat ionship All in terv iewees strongly emphas ized the impor tance of trust and how they w e n t about establ ishing planning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. They indicated numerous obstac les and pract ices that affected their ability to establ ish part ic ipatory relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. A n n e emphas ized the impor tance of trust in developing effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions and states that trust is deve loped over the long- term. She shared an example of w h e n she had worked wi th one First Nat ion to comple te a per formance-moni tor ing f ramework . She indicated that "there was a really s t rong relat ionship, a really good work ing relat ionship and a lot of trust," and how that "ult imately made it really successfu l . " A n n e had worked directly wi th the First Nat ion for over six years and the c o m p a n y she w o r k e d for had worked wi th the same communi ty for f i f teen years. She acknowledged the signif icance of develop ing personal relat ionships to create trust and enable greater part ic ipat ion. Dave also acknowledged the s igni f icance of develop ing trust and that this w a s part of the va lue of part ic ipat ion. He indicated that gaining and establ ishing the trust of First Nat ions is an important activity of the planner and how this is accompl ished based on developing f r iendships. Planners w h o work wi th First Nat ions: Have to portray a degree of respect for the people you are deal ing wi th and convey that to the local people including the chief and counci l , the people you will be work ing directly wi th and the elders w h o are prominent in the communi ty . You have to explain your miss ion or your involvement wi th the communi ty or any deve lopment ideals perhaps, goals or object ives in the planning sphere of apply ing planning principles. Janet v iews trust and evaluat ion integral to bui lding effective part ic ipatory relat ionships, not ing that "developing trust at the front end of the process lasts forever." She e laborates on the impor tance of bui lding trust and how the planner relat ionship is deve loped : Let them [the communi ty ] examine y o u , and it's not only in terms of your credent ia ls , your work and history. You will need to al low t h e m to examine you personal ly in terms of your character and va lues. They wan t to know if you 've got kids or not, They wan t to know whether or not you 've got a wi fe. They wan t to know w h o you are as a h u m a n being, not just a p lanner or as a professional and [if you] try and maintain wha t in the mains t ream society wou ld be considered an appropr iate professional d is tance. . . In a tradit ional si tuat ion you need to go in more open and give them t ime. You need to be wil l ing to talk about the weather , the quali ty of f ish, your kids, whatever , before they are wil l ing to go into the subjects that you are there to talk about . 83 And wha t they are going to be do ing is sort of check ing you out in the process and part of that is your degree of pat ience, your degree of wi l l ingness to just sit and be present wi th them, you' re wi l l ingness to sit at the tab le . . . There is a degree of trust that cannot be deve loped if you try and stick all the t ime to those bunkers of professional ism and that does not m e a n to say that you are not respectable or accountable, that you are not everyth ing that a professional is. But it's also important that you are w a r m and that you are h u m a n and you are approachab le . A s much as that suppor t is important on the accul turated side of the communi ty , it's more important on the tradit ional s ide of the communi ty . . . On the tradit ional s ide of the communi ty , w h o you are as a h u m a n being is w a y more important than the professional skills you br ing, because if they f igure if you are a good person and you are there for a good reason, you are there wi th good intent and a good heart , you will do wha t is best for the commun i ty and not over step your skills. You won' t say that you can go and cl imb a mounta in if you can't c l imb a mounta in . Because you are a good person and you wouldn ' t do that. W h e r e a s on the accul turated side because people are more trained and more accul turated into the whi te w a y of th inking, they are more wil l ing to engage in w h a t I call an instrumental relat ionship. Other in terv iewees noted the signi f icance of w h e n planners first enter a communi ty . In speak ing i on the impor tance of establ ishing trust, Ken states: W h e n you first visit a communi ty that is the t ime f rom the First Nat ion perspect ive, they begin to do an assessment and evaluat ion of y o u . If you enter the communi ty wear ing a three piece suit and carry ing a brief case, and you begin a meet ing and stand up and say that you w e r e go ing to do this and you were go ing to do that, then you have probably dug yoursel f about two feet into the g round . Individuals may also wan t to know your att i tude and sensit ivi ty towards nat ives said Larry, and they w a n t to know if: You have all the answers to the prob lem off the top of your head . Are you going to listen to wha t they say? How you are go ing to get the informat ion? Wha t you are go ing to do and are you going to leave t h e m with the assurance that they , are in control of the project? (Larry) . For Sue, develop ing a "genuine relat ionship" wi th First Nat ions had been signif icant for part ic ipat ion and how " this is critical to mov ing the planning prob lem or address ing the issues." She s t ressed her planning relat ionships had to "have s o m e thread to connect us before w e can start to talk about things." Permiss ion w a s also crit ical: I cannot come in wi thout the communi t ies permiss ion, like ser ious permiss ion and I have to sustain that permiss ion on a knife's edge all the t ime. I a m the easiest person to get rid of, like that. In fact, if I have thirty people w h o think I walk on water and one person says "en [your out ] , " I'm gone . It is the most vulnerable 84 place on the planet. It's a knife's edge. I know that with every breath I take, thirty elders have to agree that it's ok. Throughout the planning relationship, Sue spends time "sustaining the relationship." This is accomplished by connecting with people at informal and personal levels. Establishing an "atmosphere of trust" allows the planner and First Nation to plan together in a "relationship preserving way." She elaborates on the importance of personal relationships and how she develops trust: I spend a whole lot of time with the people who are going to be there. Establishing a relationship is the single most important task. If that doesn't happen you won't have genuine entry, even if you have been invited. The classic things as to how consultants are hired are of course looked at by First Nations. The most important thing is that they know you: who you are and how you operate, what's important to you in the work that you do. The level of informality and spending time talking about for example someone who you know, how the kids are doing, where somebody is at, or who went up river and got a moose. I will talk about this for quite awhile actually. You are not focused the same way. It's getting you to the whole fabric of the community as opposed to I am there for this purpose: "I want to meet you, we are only going to talk about the project. That's all that matters. I am going to be very efficient with my time and come away with the three things that are your goals period." It doesn't work like that. It's about my whole entry, what I call "walking down the road," just meeting people on the street. That's how people get a sense of your face, who you are, how you think before you move into what you say your purpose is. People want to know what you do and who you are...you need to spend the time hanging around. They want to have a sense of who you are before they want to start speaking or participating with you...you are disclosing all the time...they are assessing you...you have to be prepared to be visible in all different types of ways... I never refrain for instance saying that I have three kids, or that I like to build things. These have nothing to do with my qualifications. They want to know what my values are, how I live, how close it is to them. The more that I create distance, the less opportunity you will have for entry and for doing the work. She also shared a story to emphasize building personal association with an elder while developing a traditional justice system in one First Nation: An elder I met with twice, I was very careful, I really needed this language from him because I can't begin my work until I get some idea about the language. His people have prepped him, the people who have asked him to do it, and so we had a couple of meetings. They have been good. I've come away with some good stuff and I know that I am just beginning.... the first meeting I went too I just talked about what I wanted. I wanted him to just see my face, to see each other, hear each other talk and I would stay too long. But last Friday he had these instruments on the floor. So I asked him about the instruments and he started talking about how much he loves to fiddle, and he says "Oh that's a sweet sound from that fiddle" I said: "My kid, my son, he really likes playing that fiddle," and he says, "Oh yea?" So we talk a little bit more and last Friday we had the wildest fiddle session over there and my son was there all night playing fiddle with this elder and he got two others to come up from the village, a guy on a drum and a guitar and anyway the place 85 w a s lit up. . . I phoned to pick him up and his wi fe answers the phone and she says, "Oh , we ' re having fun over here". Then I c a m e over and I brought h im a moose steak. He says, " O h , you 've been hunt ing," I said "Yea, and it's a nice one , a young one, "and he says, "Oh , I'm going to like that." It's all over now. It has to do wi th seeing me as a fami ly person, as a musical person, as a hunter, as a caregiver, all of that. More than that . . . So how can I say to s o m e o n e if you are going to go in and do some planning sess ion, I wan t you to have a kid that plays f idd le . . . . how do you do this? But I knew. That wasn ' t strategic. I just love that stuff and my son w a s just thri l led to have an opportuni ty to learn f rom [the elder] . They learned each other 's songs and they are having a great t ime and to m e that is the biggest reward and that 's it, I've arr ived. It's wonder fu l . I don' t even care about the contract. I know that he [the elder] going to be able to talk to me more direct ly [now] . Other interv iewees st ressed the personal e lement of establ ishing trust wi th First Nat ions. Evan suggested that "you got to go in on a personal level all the t ime," and found w a y s to personal ly relate to people, whe ther they include shar ing a similar life exper ience, being aware of commun i ty issues, talking about hockey or hunt ing (even though he did not hunt) . Personal ly relat ing to people w a s seen as a "way of breaking the ice" and connect ing wi th First Nat ions. Dave shared a story about develop ing a "fr iendship of communica t ions : " I will g ive you an example of approach ing an elder wi th a cup of tea . I said to this person that I wou ld sure like to sit d o w n wi th you and c o m e to your house and maybe you can tell me some early day stor ies about your exper ience on the river be tween the Porcupine River to Old Crow and the Yukon River to D a w s o n City, and some of your early exper iences in relat ion to that because t ransportat ion w a s l imited in those days to the river. W e begin to talk and establ ish a f r iendship of communica t ions and a shar ing of ideas and stor ies that are relevant to p lanning and [which] may account for animals on the land and maybe you get a v iew of his chi ldhood and travels wi th his dog team and living off the land. Living off the land and how important the skills as a hunter and gatherer we re , to the skills he learned f rom his father and mother and people in the immediate family. How they picked berr ies and how they t rapped and how they know the land, wh ich way to travel safely f rom Fort McPherson to Tombs tone , to the Twelve Mile, to Dawson City. , Carol felt that it w a s important for p lanners to "make sure you don' t set yoursel f apart" and that by "going in on their level, it really helped to gain trust" w h e n she worked in one communi ty . As p lanners you have to "unders tand your place as an outsider" and to not "cross boundar ies. " In part icular p lanners have to "show respect for the local cus toms and laws, even if they don' t agree wi th them, and to reinforce respect for elders." Carol emphas ized the impor tance of establ ishing a personal relat ionship and gave an example of w h e n she had an open house and invited the who le commun i ty in for cookies: I w a s introducing myself, talk ing about my family. I w a s learning about their fami l ies. I w a s learning about wha t their hopes w e r e in terms of recreat ion. 86 Nancy placed less emphas is on establ ishing personal relat ionships as a means to enable part ic ipatory relat ionships but ment ioned that p lanners: Better under take a reconnaissance and at least meet the players, have tea wi th t h e m or an informal barbecue and talk about w h o and wha t the cl ient wants . Is it wi th counci lors or the depar tments? It's really important to talk about the goal of the project. However , she did indicate that p lanners have to have an "ability to connect wi th the commun i ty and to develop trust in the communi ty . " It w a s important to "stay neutral" and to use a non- judgmenta l approach and to identify a role in the communi ty . Ken v iewed the process of relat ionship bui lding as "a gradual process of knowing. " Get t ing to know people had involved sitt ing and l istening to stor ies and history. It also involved asking elders quest ions "on the basis that I a m trying to learn f rom your knowledge and exper ience." However , he w e n t on to say that "there's a limit to how m a n y quest ions you can ask, but that if you ask the odd quest ion and let t hem explain on the basis that they opera te under, it's a hell of a good learning process." For Larry, effective part ic ipatory planning relat ionships include: S o m e kind of trust relat ionship wi th the chief and counci l . You 've got to have a sense of wha t they wan t and that you are not work ing your agenda , you are work ing their agenda and that you are not just there for dol lars. Obviously you are, but you do wan t to get t h e m to wherever they w a n t to be. You are l istening to wha t they are tell ing you and you are do ing that, and that 's probably hard to do w h e n you c o m e in f rom the outs ide. You probably won' t do it the first t ime. You can if you spend t ime. Most of the p lanners that come in f rom outs ide c o m e in for two or three days at a t ime and they are gone for a month and then back for two or three days. That really doesn' t work very wel l . Of course it's go ing to cost more to stay but you really have to spend more t ime if you are coming in f rom outs ide. You have to put in enough t ime to get the contact . Planner Access & Entry Interv iewees w e r e asked how they first entered a First Nat ions communi ty and whether they fo l lowed a formal process of entry. Severa l indicated that it w a s important to have an individual contact in the communi ty (Janet, Caro l , Evan , Anne ) and two interv iewees indicated that they m a d e contact wi th as many people as possible (Janet, Sue) . Janet v iewed the purpose of the contact w a s to act as a personal advisor or sponsor , serv ing as a vehicle for p lanners to gain access into the First Nat ion. Janet ment ioned 87 that p lanners "need to create some support" because of the difficulty p lanners may have in accessing the tradit ional communi ty . Janet e laborates on several points: You need to have s o m e b o d y that is wil l ing to get to know you a little bit and to break d o w n some of the barriers that you can imagine in some communi t ies , is an a rmoured commun i ty . . . [Sitt ing] d o w n wi th s o m e o n e w h o will of ten be s o m e o n e w h o will turn up in the process and is wil l ing to be your advisor. W h a t I usual ly do is sit d o w n wi th that person and privately and sort of say "Wel l , tell me about the fami l ies, the number of famil ies in the commun i ty and w h o are the heads of these fami l ies" . . .someone] you hope is at hand wi th their ear to the g round in the commun i ty and w h o will w a r n you w h e n things start to go sour or are not go ing wel l , you know, compla in ing or political concerns in the communi ty . You have to work wi th people w h o unders tand the commun i ty and you also have to have a wi l l ingness to ask people to tell you the t ruth. That for me is a big risk. It's not only the truth about what 's go ing on in the communi ty but it's the truth about how the commun i ty is perceiving me, and that to me is the scar iest part. You say "So wha t are they saying about me? W h a t a m I do ing that is pissing t h e m off? Wha t a m I do ing that they f ind sort of difficult to deal wi th? Can I change m y approach? C a n I change my techn ique to be kind of more acceptab le?" Carol also agreed on the impor tance of establ ishing contact : It's important to try and f ind one person that 's sort of your ear on the communi ty and to build a real good trust relat ionship wi th that person as best as you can . It doesn ' t matter where they are in the power structure of that communi ty . Just s o m e o n e that is going to know a lot more about the work ings of the communi ty . Evan indicated that he had liked having "one contact person because there is a lot of paper f lowing back and forth and it's very important to have comple te informat ion." Larry on the other hand, indicated that p lanners wou ld need to meet wi th w h o m e v e r is do ing the contract . P lanners need to make sure that they unders tand wha t the counci l wan ts and to determine how they are go ing to work wi th the counci l . Part of the process of entry involves assur ing the counci l "that you w e r e not going to run off and do someth ing independent and that you w e r e go ing to work under their direct ion." It w a s suggested that p lanners could determine the level of appropr iate contact required and then begin to talk wi th individuals f rom the communi ty . Larry said that it w a s important to have a counci l person or depar tment head introduce you to the communi ty , "to set up a meet ing and introduce you , to say wha t you w e r e do ing there, w h y you w e r e there and w h o you are, and to not just wander around. " Other interv iewees suggested that establ ishing a main contact in the communi ty w a s not an indicator that p lanners w e r e to limit their contact or procedures for entry. For example , W h e n Carol f irst 88 entered one communi ty , she had talked wi th the chief, counci lors, commi t tee members , R C M P , the nurse, and teachers, stat ing, "I just sort of ta lked to people I met and made my w a y around to everybody." For Sue, she wou ld speak wi th as m a n y people as possible, including formal and informal leaders, directors, and management . The s igni f icance of this first meet ing w a s : To get a real sense of wha t people are hoping to know wha t the prob lem is they are ident i fy ing, wha t the [planning session] is hoping to address, because it may not. There has to be a dovetai l be tween w h a t I do and wha t they want . In Anne 's exper ience, she gains entry into a First Nat ions communi ty in basical ly four s tages: initial contact , phone conversat ion, deve lop ing rapport and the first meet ing. She typical ly makes first contact wi th the band manager "but not a lways." She expla ined that she starts to deve lop a relat ionship over the phone, "to start to develop a good sense of how the relat ionship is going to develop." This g ives her a sense of the rapport and how much w o r k is needed to develop rapport . The initial meet ing could be wi th chief and counci l . Anne also indicated how planners enter and exit a communi ty is important to consider. For example , it matters w h e n people fly into the communi ty , w h e n they are expec ted to dr ive: Because t ime is money. Somet imes it's much less expens ive to fly than to dr ive, but there is the percept ion w h e n you fly [it is more expensive] , because everyone dr ives that [you should ] . . .you set a really poor tone [if you f ly] . But if you 've suf fered the w a y everybody else suffers wi th a seven-hour dr ive, then that actual ly gives you some credibil i ty. So your physical entry and exit are important. The tone that is set at the first meet ing is crit ical. Dave referred to how in some cases there is "definitely a set protocol , a set procedure" under var ious land use agreements . He descr ibed f ive types of protocols as: 1) the process of consul ta t ion; 2) the recognit ion of all s takeholders; 3) to w o r k closely wi th representat ives; 4) to fol low speak ing protocols and formal i t ies of communica t ion ; and 5) to mainta in s teady communica t ion . Further, he stated how "planners have to develop a hit list in te rms of people contacts: w h o you talk too, w h e r e you go , how you convey the message or ideals you wish to in t roduce into the communi ty and in relat ion to wha tever the subject may be." He also talked about w h e n he goes into a part icular l inguistic or tribal a rea , there m a y be a part icular protocol to that region. Enter ing a commun i ty also includes providing informat ion in advance , cal l ing meet ings wi th chief and counci l , key resource staff or d i rectors. He added : How people coming into the commun i t y can honour elders by giv ing gifts, maybe some special tea , b lueberr ies, cranberr ies or someth ing smal l . To show a shar ing of t radit ion, a respect and recogni t ion of cul ture and to signify the impor tance of elder informat ion and involvement in commun i t y deve lopment and land use p lanning. He descr ibed an entry protocol in the early days: 89 I've seen in the early days w h e n once a meet ing is cal led in the communi ty it is usually qui te expressive and somet imes over ly fr iendly in inviting new guests into their communi ty . You have a little feast, maybe put up s o m e stew and bannock. I remember one meet ing I a t tended years ago, I w a s a young radical leader then and w e c a m e into the communi ty and w e were talking about some political issues and one of the protocols w a s for one of the elders to get up and make an offer. So she [one elder] c a m e up to the table and she put a package of c igarettes on the table for all the leadership to enjoy. I used to be a smoker then. It wasn' t the idea of smok ing tobacco then, it w a s the idea of providing a gift and showing respect. It's like a tradit ion. It's a gift for people coming to the communi ty . It's a shar ing and a showing of respect and that w a s conveyed by a spiritual of fer ing. Issues and Obstac les Interviewees shared numerous issues and obstacles relevant for effective part ic ipatory relat ionships between planners and First Nat ions. These included issues and factors such planner al ignment, p lanner history, planner bias and att i tudes, planner conflict, and planner credibil i ty. Interv iewees also shared insights into how they evaluated effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. Planner A l ignment Carol suggests that if "outsiders tend to congregate" wi th other outs iders, it could affect the planning relat ionship with the communi ty . She said for example that in one communi ty she had worked , how teachers, nurses, doctors, and R C M P off icers tended to social ize together to feel w e l c o m e d . In doing so, said Carol , "you are immediate ly removing yoursel f f rom the rest of the communi ty . " She pointed out that "whom you are seen with can ult imately be a barrier." P lanners should not risk being al igned wi th any one individual, and be v iewed more "as everybody 's f r iend, nobody 's special f r iend." Janet explains the impl icat ions for p lanner al ignment: The risk of having s o m e o n e work c lose with you is that you s e e m to be al igned with that part icular part of the communi ty and so if this individual is part of the elite of the communi ty and you' re seen to be l istening a lways to that advice, then people can see that you have been al igned with that party and not necessar i ly interested in other aspects of the communi ty . It's helpful if you 've got an advisor on this side and you can recruit a couple of elders on the other side, so you can s e e m to be seen sort of touching base. It's really important in the formal process. Also important is w h o you have coffee wi th , w h o you have supper wi th, where you stay in the communi ty , and where there is a hotel. If you are a lways staying with people w h o are seen to be sort of the e l i te . . .you never stay in somebody 's [house] w h o has a foot in both wor lds. You ' re seen to be part of that family, not this family and the same thing with relat ionships. General ly it's been that you go, "Great 90 I'm getting into this community, somebody is taking me fishing" and the question is "Who is taking me fishing, why are they taking you fishing and what's the message that is being delivered to the community by them seeing you go out in a boat with that person?" Planner History Five interviewees had made reference to various aspects relating to planner history that could affect the ability for them to enable participatory planning relationships (Janet, Carol, Nancy, Larry, Evan). Janet suggested that the history of consultants in a community "can create a huge obstacle." In some cases, communities: Have seen processes that were open and willing and honourable at the front end turn into disaster at the back end...Sometimes you are not only living down your own history, you are living down the history of every other consultant that has been there in the last ten years. Carol explained in one community she had worked in that people "had this really bad view of consultants or outsiders who come in and take from their community and don't leave them with anything." Nancy talked about how it was important for planners to know the "truth" of the community, yet questioned how planners could ever know it because they have not lived in the community. She states: Planners better live there [in the community] and know that it's humiliating. Humiliating in the standards you set for your yourself...because we have evolved differently and separating us from the land and our children affected generations because they had no coping mechanisms to identify with anyone...and a lot of us had to try and hang on to our traditions." Larry also indicated that it would be difficult for planners to enable participatory planning relationships if they didn't know the community or they had not lived in the community. Evan said that it would be difficult to bring anyone into a First Nation who was not a planner because "tricks and techniques" are needed and that a "professional planner would catch on o.k., but it would be extremely difficult to have an engineer wrap their head around this." Planner Conflict Evan and Carol indicated that planners have to be "a little careful not to tread in the wrong areas." They did not elaborate specifically on what a wrong area implied but Evan referred to having to wait for a situation to "blow over." As he explains: 91 They are fairly stable so we have to be from a business sense, a little careful not to tread in the wrong areas. I mean we have the contractual realities, you know the plan has to be done and their are times I mean maybe you shouldn't be...you know we are intentionally going to have to wait a bit and hope that something will just blow over or that the person giving us our directions which can be the chief or the capital works manager or whatever, but that person does kind of open up and let other people in. Because I know sometimes people are simply cut out and its not for a nefarious or any mean reason right. It's just that they are not talking to that group right now and that group could well be without franchising in the planning. Four female interviewees and one male talked about how they had experienced situations of where individuals in the community had targeted the planner or "ambushed" the planning process in some way. Janet provided one example where one person who wanted her contract had waited a year and a half into the planning process before hijacking the planning process. She mentioned that the "only agenda at play was to make the micro-contractor look bad and do what they could to blow the contract out of the water." She indicated that she had tried to resolve the conflict but the person "was powerful enough and had enough supporters and was able to take out two or three others who were sort of supporting the process and we just basically had no hope." She explained two options she had, to either keep making changes to the document, or to abandon the process: "I knew that we had gone past already a place that was sensible legally or morally and I wasn't prepared to have my name on that document because we crossed a real line." Janet mentioned the problem of when planning becomes a "cooked process:" You know it's a cooked process and basically you come down to the crunch where the process is clearly hijacked by several individuals. If you have no support from the political leaders in terms of calling that, at some point, I've only had to do that once, you bow your way out [terminate the contract]. You get out as soon as you can because you know it's going to end up in a political crisis. In this sense, Janet indicates that planners: Have to be responsive to community interests, by the community interests driving it and they can drive you past your bottom line....You really need to understand what your bottom line is and how far you are prepared to go before you say this may well be in the community's interest but as a professional, as a moral and ethical individual, I can't be associated with that kind of situation. She acknowledged that planners have to think about themselves and to recognize that "planners screw up, and in the case of native planners, there is less leeway for screwing up." 92 Planners can get drawn into the politics also, "which can actually sabotage what you are actually trying to do" (Anne). Anne made reference to one struggle with an individual during one project who had challenged why she was hired and believed the community could undertake its own planning. This was a common theme. She had responded by stating: "all I have been hired to do is to pull it all together for you," and in saying this, how "it takes the pressure off." She noted that her clients had tested her on a couple of occasions but said in general "that they will make a lot of strong worded statements to see how you react and as soon as you respond, they start laughing and say, "I was only joking." Anne offers a story: Sometimes people will come [to a meeting] and they have one issue that has literally nothing to do with what you are talking about. They will dominate the entire meeting and while I am fairly skilled at trying to redirect that sort of energy, sometimes it's not possible. I don't think they are really trying to negate the planning process. It's just that this is typically in communities where there are not a lot of opportunities to have your voice heard and they think "Ah ha, I've got the chief and council here, I'm just going to hammer away at my point..." Maybe one or two cases in one hundred surveys where people have just been really destructive about it and they just decided that the whole thing is a big joke and you know I don't care because it's their choice. What I find the most disheartening is sometimes, for example, when we are doing a presentation for the final document and someone will stand up and say, "Blah, blah, blah. Well, I'll say, "Did you fill in a survey?" "No." "Did you come to any of the meetings?" "No." And I sort of feel like saying, "Well, it's unfortunate that you didn't have a chance...because then we would have known sooner." In this instance, Anne had consulted with the chief and council and asked: "what do you want to do?" She states: If it's just one person who does this all the time, they will basically say, "just ignore him." But sometimes people will bring up a really good point that no one thought of and that will mean we go back and incorporate that [into the planning report]. So presenting the final, it's not the final until we've completed that last process. I think that most people who don't participate just don't show up and it's their way of not obstructing it I guess. I actually like it when the really negative people come because they usually have a lot of good things to say if you can kind of get past that initial snarliness. I think that they have a valuable perspective. It's just that the way they communicate is sometimes difficult. Sue also indicated that planners are "vulnerable to attack" when they work with First Nations. Planners have "to be of really strong mind" when issues of conflict arise around the planner's involvement in the community. She describes a story about whether conflict had been directed towards her personally: 93 It's really important to decide. The hard part is knowing when you are going to call it. We are always hopeful that it is just a bump in the road and we can wait and wait, and it will pass and this person just got something that triggered them and you can be curious and say, "Gee, I wonder what that's about" but not to take it on personally. I'd like to think that it's really important to be of strong mind. You have to be able to just "be" with it. However, if its chronic to the point where there's disturbances in addition to yourself, even if it's just yourself, but it's chronic, somehow it has to come to a conclusion. Otherwise it's going to impact on your capacity to do the job. So it's finding that place, then trying to be clear on whether it is an issue, interpersonal, or is it an issue around how we made the decision to select the facilitator. You could just represent an ongoing, unresolved issue amongst the people around the hiring of consultants. If it has nothing to do with you, then it becomes an unresolved issue that's impacting the capacity for us to do our work now. Carol talked about a situation once when she had been criticized for not including some information from an individual in one community. She had made several attempts to contact and get information from an individual but she did not receive it on time before the report was closed. She explained how she had been accused with "I wasn't contacted stuff" and how the report lacked certain community information. She felt that their reaction was in some instances, expressed as a need for individuals "to cover up their inadequacies" rather than the "planners' inadequacies." Her point was for planners to "not destroy yourself with your own analysis of what you are doing, what you are doing right and what you are doing wrong and realize that you are not perfect and to not take the responsibility for the other side." In Carol's opinion, planners in some cases have to take a stand: You've got to have your own core values that are unshakeable and as a planner, you have to have confidence in yourself and your own abilities. Not in the sense that you are belligerent or overbearing when you come to a community. Don't let yourself get drawn [into thinking] you have done something terribly wrong if nobody shows up to a meeting or something like that. There might be, and that's fair to, but usually that's not the case. Usually it's something [else] and people are going to be rough and hard on you and that's to be baptism by fire coming , I think. Personality conflicts between individuals and the interviewed planners were viewed as an obstacle to build participatory relationships. Ken acknowledged that "in some cases, individuals can become sort of the biggest obstacles" in his experience. He shared a story of when he helped facilitate a presentation in one community and a First Nations individual came in and challenged him, stating "you highly paid bureaucrats should give all this money to us so we can hire our own [planners]. He challenged this person's "theory about I wouldn't be here" and let the person answer the questions himself. In the 94 end what had been planned as a one hour planning session, turned into a four-hour session. Ken went on to say: There are some individuals who tend to be able to sway or lead or pull a planning group apart and that is one of the biggest things that can happen. A local someone is respected by some group can sort of pull away from the planner or consultant. That is one of the things that occasionally happens, so being aware of the colorful five percent out there. Planner Bias and Attitude Six interviewees made reference to planner biases and how they affect their ability to enable effective participatory planning relationships. Anne said that her education allowed her to: Look at those biases and to be honest...as long as you acknowledge the fact that you have biases and your insights are going to be limited by your experiences, I think that that's ok. Dave talked about trying to maintain neutrality and that planners have to leave their biases aside. He expressed the possibility that he could be biased or prejudiced because of the government bureaucrat who has all of these biases, procedures and set policies and how "he's not accommodating the other parties interests." He expressed how biases and prejudices had resulted in human rights violations and emphasized that biases and prejudices are "quite common" because of land claim agreements. Carol indicated that you probably wouldn't get participation from a community if you went into a community with "preconceived ideas about what would work with that community." The lack of flexibility was viewed as an obstacle to enable participatory planning relationships and it was "more incumbent on you [the planner] to be flexible than to expect them [the community] to demonstrate that type of flexibility." Carol went on to say that "planners have to know their place" and to not be disrespectful or judgmental. Sue admitted that "it's my own way of doing things that's the obstacle." Later in the interview, she mentioned the learning bias of print and how she had asked people to "learn from produced written manuals." She acknowledged how First Nations people "have never engaged when they learn," and that this was attributed to "print and shame around literacy." Sue elaborates on the implications of her bias during one experience: People congratu lated me for the t raining I did in one communi ty . A col lege course and it w a s not part icularly des igned for First Nat ion's use. There w e r e a couple of male individuals w h o were at a lower educat ion level than others. They were laborers for a government off ice. T h e s e two w e r e First Nat ions, not a hybr id, or anyth ing, the real th ing. They are sitt ing in c lassroom and what people were most impressed wi th w a s the degree to wh ich they w e r e engaged . The big piece w a s them and m e talk ing, [it] w a s the very first th ing. It came in the morning about 10:00 a m . "This is how I t rain," and I lay out everything that I a m going to do. I have all the days laid out, wha t w e are going to do. It has a f low, it is l inked, about how w e are go ing to distr ibute the t ime, the who le th ing. It's all o rgan ized, my books and everyth ing are laid ou t . . .we are going to take breaks, lunch at this t ime. . . . Then these two guys , they felt safe wi th me , and this is wha t I w a s congratu lated for. They felt safe enough for one of t h e m to say to me . . . he starts to tell me that he went to resident ial school and how everyth ing w a s s t ructured. He felt ordered around and that he had no f reedom in that s t ructure. He said that even a year ago, "I never wou ld have said that" . . . that he w a s able to say "I don ' t wan t structure." I was trying to ask if this [workshop structure] w a s ok and to get endorsement and I w a s trying to be genuine, because I a m and he said, "You don' t have it, I don' t like the structure." So here is analyt ical me w h o doesn ' t know how to take the next step wi thout knowing where she is go ing and having laid out all of my manuals . He w a s say ing, "I don' t like st ructure, a c c o m m o d a t e me." W h a t a m I going to do now? So I summar ize w h e n all else fai ls. I summar ize to make sure that I a m understanding h im. So he thinks because w e have all these papers and t imes laid out that it seems really s t ructured, restrict ive, to the point w h e r e you are gett ing uncomfor tab le . It reminds you of other occas ions w h e n you haven' t had very much control over th ings. In fact how you learned th ings because residential school w a s about how you learned things. So w e are get t ing these tr iggers all over the place and wha t are w e going to do is not the quest ion . T h e n I decided to disclose and I said that someth ing that is really important to me in t ra in ing. . . ! need to feel that I have really worked hard for the people, that I have thought th ings through, providing t h e m with someth ing that they didn't have before; that they are able to choose , whe ther they are to be a part of someth ing or not. That 's part of the reason w h y I lay th ings out. "My intent is not to limit you , my intent is to give you more m o v e m e n t in te rms of choice and understanding of wha t I think is important and I o w n it. It's w h a t I think is important g iven the mandate that I have." And then I wen t on to say that "competence is really important to me in doing my job" and how "stunned I was right now." I really wan ted to accommoda te him and that I wasn ' t sure how. I admi t ted that I d idn' t know wha t to do to the who le group. A n d I said that "I am also concerned that other people don' t exper ience structure this way , in fact they get scared w h e n there isn't s t ructure and they think that w e are wast ing our t ime." I went on to say that the stuff you bring up is important and right on and I wan t to thank you for that but I don ' t know wha t to do. So I open it to the floor. Big si lence. There w e r e no responses so I said: "This is wha t I am thinking at the moment , and I'm wonder ing if this is go ing to be ok wi th you . " I'm going to make up his n a m e as A l f red . . . " I 'm thinking that wha t I like to do is to try on this stuff that I have laid out, unders tand ing that at any point in t ime, for you or for anybody, w h o feels that they are not get t ing wha t they need or they ' re restr icted by it and they don' t feel that they have a right to choose. . . "I wan t you to know that you have the right to choose and to part icipate in an activity. I'd like to try this stuff on and I'm going to ask you to trust me . I have thought th ings through and that I care about your learning and I think that this is go ing to get us maybe to wha t you are hoping to unders tand. I a m going to be asking you this every day for feedback." I wen t on to say that "I w a s absolutely thri l led that w e had this level of openness al ready because it m e a n s that I wou ld be gett ing feedback and w e wou ld be able to move things around to a c c o m m o d a t e you" . . .and I wan ted to ask them if they were prepared to go ahead wi thout object ion, wi th those principles, those understandings and they said, "yes," and w e rocked and rol led. Evan said that he st ruggled wi th want ing : To do things in a certain way. Somet imes I wou ld extend that into a p lan. I'm pretty cognizant that I do tha t . . .we try to be personal ly aware of our w e a k n e s s e s . . . m y habit of t ry ing to impose or set th ings up in a structure that suits me, or that I think is right. So I of ten try to quest ion that: "Is this their w a y or m y w a y ? " The other aspect wh ich really c o m p o u n d s that p rob lem, is that there are often decis ion v a c u u m s . This isn't just in commun i ty p lanning but in other projects and 1 if there is a decis ion v a c u u m , an engineer is b ra inwashed to rush in and make a decis ion. It's how eng ineers are t rained and they are of ten paid to do that. This of ten gets t h e m into t rouble wi th First Nat ions. If s o m e o n e is not go ing to make a decis ion an engineer will do it for y o u , right. They have to be really carefu l , part icularly wi th First Nat ions because somet imes they take a little longer [to make decis ions] . It's not that they are d u m b . They actual ly have polit ical th ings they have to deal wi th so you a lways have to remember these guys are poli t icians. They are do ing s o m e of these th ings to get votes and it's not bad , it's a reality. So you have to be careful that w e don' t rush to do th ings [and whether ] a) I do that personal ly and b) I know I've been bra inwashed to do that. So, that 's probably the biggest thing I br ing. Larry expressed his observat ion: I don' t know. I'm sure I have my opin ions on the w a y it should go. It isn't the w a y it a lways happens . I try to keep that out if I can , wel l , the best I'm able. I'll tell t hem, like I've a lways told the counci l w h e n they ask m e if I thought this w a s the best w a y to go and somet imes they haven' t agreed wi th me. . . I a lways tell t h e m wha t I think, wha t my opin ion is, but in the long run, it's their dec is ion. And Evan acknowledged his: Wel l , obviously I'm not f rom the communi ty , I'm whi te . To get over that, I'd just tell t h e m . I'd start by saying "I 'm whi te and not f rom your communi ty , " and I don' t even pretend to be native or f rom the commun i ty so let's get that over w i th , and two , I don' t work for Indian Affairs. Now that breaks the ice you know for eighty percent of the people. There is twenty percent that don' t t rust y o u . They just have to be. . . i t just takes t h e m a whi le to w a r m up to you , usual ly by the t ime w e are in the w o r k s h o p sett ing and we 've gone through the process of proposal wr i t ing, w inn ing the contract or helping t h e m get the money to do the study. 97 Finally, Anne noted the danger of complacency and planners who have developed long-term working relationships with communities. She observed that some planners believe: That "we" don't need to ask and we know this is what they [community] want...or you are talking from the position that "don't bug us [planners] with this, we know what we need. I'm not comfortable with that [attitude] because it may be fine today, it may be fine tomorrow but at a certain point in time you are going to make a decision that isn't going to be fine... I think the benefit of a long-term relationship far outweighs the risks but I think there is always the danger of that kind of complacency. And I don't mean the band manager and chief: "We" don't need to talk to anybody else. I think it's easy to fall into that because it's again time...It's complicated but as I say I think it's the benefit of a long-term relationship. The trust and communication far outweigh the kind of negative, the downside. Planner Credibility Janet noted planner obstacles such as the personal and professional development of the planner, the lack of patience, the willingness to listen, and the inability to understand the true reality. There is also the fear in letting go of the process and allowing time for the community to "take the reigns." It's having the trust that you will know that it's time to intervene." Finally, she states planners must not do anything that contributes to the "legacy of dependency." Janet speaks about the sensitivity and issue around planner credibility: When you are in a community and are seen to be working with a community, you're being sponsored by the people who invited you into that community. So, no longer is it just your credibility that you have on the line, it's their credibility as well; so your credibility is affected by their credibility and their credibility is affected by your credibility. Finally, Carol noted that an effective relationship also implied not setting yourself apart with a huge wage differential or not living in a fancy community home. These relate to issues of symbols and power differences. Evaluating Participatory Relationships and Outcomes Interviewees were asked how they evaluated effective participatory relationships. They identified several indicators they used to evaluate planning outcomes: Carol: 98 • Community follows through with the plan. • The community realizes tangible results. • The document doesn't sit on a shelf. • Planning results in a process that brings people together. • Planning establishes a way of working together and to continue on. • Planning relationships and interaction might not be what you expected. • You helped the community to understand what is required of them to implement their dreams and desires. • You acknowledged their dreams and desires and helped them on a path to get there. Anne: • Community goes on to actively implement the plan. • Whether plans [e.g. land use] were being monitored (used). • When people in the community take on some kind of involvement, when planning takes on some kind of status. • When you get asked to do follow up work. • How you keep in touch by phone. • The connection with people on human and personal levels. • When First Nations respect the planner's opinion. • Maintaining long-term relationships with communities. Janet: • When community accepts plan ownership. • Community is promoting the planning document. • Plan is actually being used for something. • Sense that relationships are solid at the end of the relationship- better at the end rather than at the beginning of the relationship. • Feeling that the planner's credibility and role are strengthened rather than weakened. • That you are actually sad to say good-bye, rather than saying, "My god, I'm out of here." • Whether relationships survived the process. • Process results in a planning document that was expected by the community. • When the planning product is inspected, understood and used by the community. Evan: • If we went through the table of community program process and everybody was involved. • If heads were nodding and everyone was laughing and joking and whether they said thanks at the end. , • By how much people are talking. • If someone was saying something and someone wanted to butt in you know that is good. • If people were getting excited. • There has to be enough people to make it a good community plan. • If it were over a 1000 person community, there better be 10 people (portfolio heads), if two or three persons show up, its not enough. • A community that is using their plan. Larry: • If I get good direction from the community. • ' Depends on the level of dissension or the lack of clear consensus. • Enough community input to feel comfortable and move ahead. • Knowing if things were really kind of on the edge. • By reading the body language of planning participants. Nancy: 99 • Do they unders tand wha t I a m talking about? • Do part ic ipants show through act ion and response that they unders tand? • Test understanding through g a m e s related to tasks. • Whe ther you achieved the goal you started wi th . • By sett ing mi lestones and ach ievements over a t ime f rame that can be measured . Ken : • Whe ther at the end of the meet ing , they put their hat and coat on and walk out the door . • If people don' t wan t to go home and if they s tand and talk and ask you more quest ions. • Maybe w h e n they quiz you on w h a t you think about this or that. • That you know if you succeeded or fa i led. • Recogni t ion th rough a gift or invi tat ion. Dave: • Enabl ing involvement and generat ing opportuni t ies for people to have a say. • Being able to plan for di f ferent t ime f rames such as now, tomor row and the future. • The success of a relat ionship by the smi les on people 's faces. • Measured by the comfor tab leness of the c los ing. • If they feel like they made progress, that decis ions were m a d e on each agenda i tem. • That you accompl ished the ends of the p lanning purpose. Sue: • Planner acknowledgement by the commun i ty . • Recogni t ion through receiving gif ts. • Planning work had been integrated and communi t ies were actual ly doing it. 4.3 Chapter S u m m a r y This chapter documents and descr ibes var ious insights, factors and stories f rom the nine pract icing p lanners w h o have worked wi th First Nat ions primari ly throughout wes te rn and nor thern C a n a d a , and communi t ies of A laska. The in terv iewed planners contr ibuted most signif icantly to the knowledge themes of communication, participation, and knowledge about the planner relationship. In genera l , contr ibut ions w e r e made in te rms of identi fying key actors, factors, issues and obstac les that inf luence a planner 's ability to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships, including approaches , methods , strategies and tactics planners util ize to build more effect ive planning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. The results of this chapter are interpreted and ana lyzed in the next chapter. 100 5.0 Chapter Five: Analysis and Conclusions of Findings This chapter compares the interv iewee's perspect ives wi th those of the author 's d iscussed in chapter three. Emphas is is placed on identi fying interv iewee perspect ives that d iverge, extend or enrich those of the authors. Occasional ly , I include insights and observat ions f rom my own planning exper ience to expand the d iscuss ion. For each knowledge theme, conc lus ions are d rawn about areas of agreement and d isagreement , and the impl icat ions for p lanning pract ice. D iagrams are provided at the end of each knowledge theme discussion to help conceptual ize my research f indings. 5.1 First Nat ions' Va lue and Knowledge Sys tems Va lue Sys tems Perspect ives on "value and knowledge sys tems" w e r e by far the most abstract and difficult to explore. Most interv iewees agreed that having an unders tanding of the tradit ional va lues of First Nat ions they worked wi th w a s important to facil i tate part ic ipatory planning relat ionships. S o m e interv iewees had difficulty conceptual iz ing the mean ing of va lues and dif ferent in terv iewees emphas ized dif ferent types of va lues (e.g. substant ive versus process) . Not all in terv iewees expl icated how values affect p lanning. Interv iewees identif ied several va lues appl icable to Ndubisi 's (1991) f ive c a t e g o r i e s 1 4 and De Mello et al. 's list (1994) . These included tr ibal, c o m m u n a l or fami ly va lues related to how people structure dec is ion-making and work together, including values of consensus ; the impor tance placed on the long-te rm preservat ion of land and wildl i fe; the respect for e lders; the s igni f icance of language and cul ture; the "what you see is wha t you get" at t i tude, and the "lack of concern for tit les, posi t ions, possess ions and status." Whi le va lue di f ferences be tween planners and First Nat ion m e m b e r s , or be tween First Nat ions and non-nat ive society have been wel l documented in the l i terature, much less attent ion has been paid in the l i terature to va lue di f ferences wi th in First Nat ions, part icularly their re levance to p lanning. Ndubisi's (1991) five categories include: 1) innate nature of humans; 2) people's relationship to nature; 3) people's conception of time; 4) the modality of human actions; and 5) people's social relations to one another. However, these value categories represented "recurrent problem areas." 101 Two interviewees pointed out that planners need to know that value differences exist within First Nations. For example, Ken observed in one community that there were value differences within the same generation over oil and gas development, and in another instance, he acknowledged that within the community, there are ideological differences of individuals. Similarly, Janet indicated that there were value differences within communities she had worked, in terms of differences between change-oriented versus traditional-subsistence groups and how each group represents a different value base and moral point of view. She elaborates: I think what is really important and I can't stress it enough is there is no longer a situation in our society that says this is First Nation and this is white. What we have is a range of values and moral views that overlaps substantially and what's important is you allow somebody to convey their value system to you rather than making assumptions about well if they've got jeans and a plaid shirt on and if they trap for a living, they are likely to be this or that. It is important to find ways of assessing what that value system is and not just assume that someone who has a First Nation face that they necessarily hold First Nation values. As Janet suggests, planners who realize they are ignorant of the socio-cultural structure of the community could choose to develop a relationship with a local sponsor or advisor to gain insight into the value system of the community. They could also undertake a workshop to identify all community groups and their value systems; or they could study the community's physical and social layout to identify the socio-economic groups of the community. In Janet's view, identifying these groups may help to ensure that their values are included, as much as possible, into planning and decision-making processes. Janet indicated that planners have to be sensitive to the possibility that some groups within the community might dominate over others, and she seemed to suggest that if groups are fairly represented, one system of values would not prevail unfairly over another, in the case of more acculturated groups versus traditional-subsistence groups. Conclusions and Implications for Planning Practice Given the range of values suggested by the interviewees, including the range of values depicted in the literature, it is not possible to determine a particular set of values relevant to each First Nation. However, planners might distinguish substantive values (e.g. preserve caribou) from process values (e.g. consensus decision-making) to ensure that First Nation values and traditions are facilitated throughout the planning relationship. 102 Stated in genera l te rms, va lue di f ferences within First Nat ions reflect the tens ion over quest ions of modern izat ion and the possibil i t ies for al leviating poverty, whi le maintain ing and nurtur ing tradit ional sys tems and cul ture. The examples provided by the interv iewees suppor t Hanson 's (1985) concept of socio-cul tural strat i f ication but more insight wou ld be helpful to unders tand the effects of value di f ferences wi th in First Nat ions. The existence of va lue di f ferences within First Nat ions m e a n s that p lanners must determine how they relate to the va lue base of First Nat ions they work wi th . The l i terature did not cons ider the role of the outs ide planner wi th respect to va lue di f ferences wi th in the communi ty . Knowing the va lue di f ferences within First Nat ions can keep planners honest about ensur ing effect ive inclusion and part icipation w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Whe ther p lanners take the pain to address va lue di f ferences directly or not, they will inevitably face those di f ferences in p lanning si tuat ions. Authors cited in the l i terature review indicate the impl icat ions of va lue di f ferences be tween planners and First Nat ion individuals. Value di f ferences w e r e seen to explain di f ferences be tween cul tures; they inf luence prob lem definit ion and solut ion, mold interact ion be tween planners and First Nat ions, create the potential for misunders tand ing and they could limit the ef fect iveness of p lanning. But wou ld these same effects apply to va lue di f ferences w i th in First Nat ions? Figure 2 summar izes wha t p lanners need to know regarding the knowledge theme of value systems w h e n they w o r k wi th First Nat ions. In addit ion to knowing that va lues di f ferences exist in three rea lms (First Nat ions va lues, p lanner va lues and values external to First Nat ions) , p lanners need to consider p lanning-relevant value issues such as di f ferences in process and substant ive values, and levels of agreement and confl ict of these values be tween groups within First Nat ions communi t ies . Planners might confront such chal lenges as how to identify and relate to the va lue base of communi t ies they work in, and how they ensure that va lues are faci l i tated into planning and dec is ion-making processes. Planners need to recognize the planning impl icat ions of va lue sys tems. These include the need to identify the socio-cul tural g roups of communi t ies they work in to ensure their representat ion, to structure part icipation in ways that access a communi ty ' s value base and to work wi th First Nat ions to identify an appropr iate role for p lanners to help utilize the communi ty 's va lue base. 103 Planners should : Consider Value Realms of First Nations Consider Planning-Relevant Value Issues Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Planning Implications of Value Systems Values external to First Nations Planner values Values within First Nations 1. Value differences: process & substantive. 2. Agreement and conflict of values between groups within communities. 1. How to identify First Nations values. 2. How planners relate to the value base. 3. How to incorporate values into planning. 1. Identify socio-cultural groups of the community. 2. Ensure group representation. 3. Structure appropriate forms of participation. 4. Consider how values impact decision outcomes. 5. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 2: Knowledge About Value Sys tems for Planning wi th First Nat ions. Knowledge Sys tems In te rms of "knowledge systems," the interv iewed planners indicated that tradit ional knowledge is an important factor in enabl ing part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships, though its signi f icance and appl icat ion var ied in their minds. Interviewees provided a range of responses to support some of the knowledge character ist ics depicted by Sherry and the Vuntu t Gwi tch in First Nat ion (1999) (see Table 1). For example , Nancy noted that tradit ional knowledge is passed d o w n f rom previous generat ions, and severa l in terv iewees s e e m e d to acknowledge the s igni f icance of storytel l ing as a w a y to t ransmit knowledge. Dave stated that tradit ional ecological knowledge " involves any phases of the way of life of First Nat ions," and noted the emphas is placed on land. Finally, Ken noted the di f ference of First Nat ions' knowledge f rom the knowledge held by most outs ide p lanners: 104 Planners must not sell a lot of First Nat ions people short , and whi le p lanners may have the book learning in a lot of cases, p lanners need to acknowledge and respect the practical exper ience of the commun i ty and individuals. Interv iewees expanded the unders tanding regarding the funct ions of tradit ional knowledge. For example , Dave noted the need to incorporate tradit ional knowledge into dec is ion-making dur ing land use planning processes. A n n e and Carol indicated that util izing tradit ional knowledge w a s a w a y to involve elders dur ing land c la im negot iat ions and Dave and Evan indicated the signi f icance of util izing tradit ional knowledge to develop good p lanner -communi ty relat ionships and trust. Larry conf i rmed the signi f icance of tradit ional knowledge and w h y outs ide p lanners w h o are not f r om the commun i ty must work wi th local people: Because they are the people that know wha t is out there, what 's on the land, w h a t you can do, wha t you can' t do, wha t they want , wha t you don' t wan t protected, wha t they think is a safe deve lopment , w h e r e people lived over the years , w h e r e the burial sites are, and special camps . Conclus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice These insights suggest that tradit ional knowledge has both a substant ive role in p lanning (e.g. knowledge for land claims) and a process role (e.g. as a m e a n s to involve elders and deve lop planner-communi ty t rust) . This unders tanding might enable p lanners to integrate knowledge more effectively, in ways that "aff i rm cul ture rather than negate native cultural identity" (Lockhar t 1982) . Whi le it is important to acknowledge and utilize the tradit ional knowledge sys tems of First Nat ions, two p lanners observed that the outside scientif ic commun i ty chal lenged the tradit ional knowledge of two First Nat ions. This raises numerous quest ions pertaining to w h a t is valid knowledge, w h o should decide wh ich knowledge is used dur ing dec is ion-making and how is knowledge shared? , More research will not help to answer such fundamenta l phi losophical quest ions. The answer will come f rom one 's o w n perspect ive on part ic ipat ion r ights in p lanning, if one bel ieves that. First Nat ions must have the first oppor tuni ty to apply their o w n knowledge in def in ing and solv ing planning prob lems. This is critical to val idate communi ty knowledge, increase capaci ty and e m p o w e r people. The issue is . w h e n and how planners offer and integrate their knowledge dur ing processes, not w h o s e knowledge is val id. This means if p lanners are to enable First Nat ion communi t ies to access their o w n value and knowledge base, they must devise appropr iate part ic ipat ion and communica t ion structures and methods . 105 A s Janet c o m m e n t e d , planners have to al low the commun i ty to "convey their value sys tem to you rather than mak ing assumpt ions. " At the very least, p lanners might suggest to First Nat ions they work wi th , w h y and how the value and knowledge base of a commun i ty mat ters and impacts communi ty dec is ion-making and planning ou tcomes . 5.2 Author i ty Relat ions Much of the l iterature says that 'p lanners work ing wi th First Nat ions require an unders tanding of the history and structure of external authori ty, and its impacts on planning and part icipation for First Nat ions. In part icular, how instruments such as the Indian Act and government p rogramming have af fected First Nat ions ' individual and col lect ive qual i ty of life. For example , external authori ty has regulated and al tered part icipat ion, imposed planning approaches and programs, produced cul ture bound w a y s of communica t ion , created funding dependenc ies and raised issues of representat ion (Wol fe 1982; Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1988; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Cars tens 1 9 9 1 ; Ndubis i 1 9 9 1 ; Lane 1997; Zafera tos 1998; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999) . Dave, Ken and Evan conf i rm that outs ide p lanners need to know that communi ty p lanning and dec is ion-making have been control led and st ructured under the Indian Act, including government policy and p rog ramming . However , Ken and Dave observed that s o m e First Nat ions are exper iencing new structures of authori ty, noting that land c la im agreements are creat ing "new institutional bases f rom wh ich to structure the condi t ions for part icipation and for individuals to develop their capacity." These observat ions support wha t authors said about var ious land c la im agreements , devolut ion processes and legal decis ions and how they are producing new relat ionships and opportuni t ies for First Nat ions to part ic ipate in the direct control and m a n a g e m e n t of their o w n affairs (Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe and St rachan 1987; Wol fe 1988; Wol fe 1989; Copet 1992; Jacobs and Mulvihil l 1995; Sandercock 1998a; Kew and Miller 1999; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999; Aubrey 1 9 9 9 ) . 1 5 New authori ty structures and devolut ion processes w e r e seen to be impact ing dec is ion-making opportuni t ies for land use, capital and hous ing. Ken exp la ined, for example , that the First Nat ions he 1 5 It should be pointed out that not all First Nations have signed a comprehensive land claim agreement, nor are all First Nations entitled to a land claim or treaty negotiation. Some First Nations across Canada have signed treaties decades ago, while others continue to negotiate and assert their rights and claims in legal processes. As a result, not all First Nations will equally satisfy their emancipatory objectives. In reality, there will likely be First Nations who will never escape the control of the Indian Act, or may never overcome the historical dependency on the type of planner Dave referred to. 106 works wi th are gain ing greater opportuni t ies in "establ ishing priorit ies" and gain ing "control over their o w n dest iny." However , in Ken's example , gain ing control does not imply that First Nat ions have final dec is ion-making authori ty. In this instance, f inal author i ty for dec is ion-making w a s determined by the program manager and regulated by three factors: budget , t iming and practicali ty. In this example , it becomes important for outside p lanners to have the capaci ty to identify the external author i ty structure of First Nat ions they work wi th and to apprec iate its effects on part ic ipat ion and contro l . Whi le the emphas is in the l i terature is placed on the regulat ion of control more in terms of larger issues such as p rogramming and part ic ipat ion, interv iewees noted the impl icat ions for effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships and how these impact the role of the planner. For example , Dave noted that the external authori ty structure imposed on First Nat ions has historically created a dependency on outside p lanners in the past. He s e e m e d to indicate that wi th the new authori ty s t ructures m a d e possible under land c la im agreements , First Nat ions wou ld no longer be dependent on outside p lanners. I wou ld argue dif ferently. In my exper ience, those First Nat ions w h o are sel f -governing, the obl igat ions under land c la ims agreements are in many w a y s increasing the dependency on outs ide p lanners, at least initially in planning for the transit ion to se l f -government . Similarly, it is likely that outs ide planning dependency will cont inue dur ing the implementat ion of commun i ty se l f -government for a period of t ime. In addit ion to the external v iew of author i ty relat ions noted by interv iewees, they added knowledge about the internal, more micro-aspects of author i ty relat ions. In genera l , in terv iewees referred to the chief and counci l , the elder 's counci l , and clan and fami ly sys tems as the main political and decis ion-making structures of First Nat ions that p lanners have to be aware of. These f indings support the f indings of other authors (Wol fe 1989; Jojola 1998; Kew and Miller 1999) . T w o interv iewees conf i rmed the need for outs ide p lanners to dist inguish be tween two types of authori ty: legal author i ty (Indian Act) and tradit ional authori ty, as Wol fe (1989) and Ndubisi (1991) descr ibed, part icularly because of the confl ict be tween these fo rms of author i ty and the debi l i tat ing effects of legal authori ty. A s Evan noted, some First Nat ions adhere to govern ing structures under the Indian Act, whi le others are trying to revive and maintain more tradit ional c lan and fami ly sys tems of governance and dec is ion-mak ing. Four interv iewees noted that outs ide p lanners need to know w h e r e the authori ty for planning or ig inates w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. The author i ty for p lanning w a s general ly seen to exist wi th the chief and counci l , though Evan said that in one communi ty he w o r k e d wi th , informal author i ty rested 107 with the administ rat ion. Larry noted in another commun i ty that whi le the chief and counci l w e r e clear on gett ing mandates f rom the people, it mainta ined the f inal dec is ion-making authori ty. In my exper ience, how the chief and counci l exercises its p lanning author i ty var ies. Dur ing a housing project I once worked on , the chief and counci l used its authori ty to author ize the planning process and def ine my relat ionship. However , it w a s the larger communi ty that had final dec is ion-making author i ty in terms of approv ing the housing p lan. Three w o m e n pointed to the need for p lanners to unders tand issues of power. These inc luded: uneven power , dif fering interests, and the boundar ies and al l iances of dif ferent g roups within the communi ty . Janet said that it is necessary to know w h o is in power , how long they have been in power , how democrat ic political processes are, as wel l as the formal and informal leadership of the communi ty . In my exper ience, such knowledge can help to reveal the state of relat ions within the commun i ty or the condi t ions under wh ich a planner must work . This knowledge in turn may help outside p lanners to structure their role and involvement in develop ing effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships wi th First Nat ions they work wi th . Janet said that knowing the formal and informal leaders of the commun i ty such as elders, as wel l as leaders f rom the accul turated and t radi t ional-subsistence segments of the communi ty is an important knowledge considerat ion. As she states: It's really important to get a handle as quickly as possible, of who 's w h o in the communi ty . It's important to know polit ically sort of w h o is w h o and not only the elected leaders but the informal leaders in the commun i ty as wel l . It's very important to f ind out wh ich elders are invited into the var ious processes. It's a really good idea to get some sense of the family structure in the commun i ty and sort of w h o the movers and the shakers are. Not only wha t I wou ld call the accul turated part of the communi ty , the people w h o are most educa ted , usual ly high in emp loyment rate, and of ten in leadership or both polit ical and administrat ive posit ions in the communi ty . . . i t ' s also important to know w h o the informal leaders are of the lesser accul turated, more tradit ional or subs is tence or iented g roups as wel l . This seems to be important f rom the point of ensur ing inclusion and representat ion dur ing planning processes, much in the same way noted previously under the theme of value and knowledge systems. Informal power w a s noted by Sue to play an important role in endors ing the involvement of p lanners. This w a s seen to be one factor that inf luenced the ability for outs ide p lanners to facil i tate effective part ic ipatory relat ionships because it could determine whe ther individuals f rom the communi ty part ic ipated in p lanning activit ies. 108 Other interv iewees noted that outs ide p lanners have to be sensit ive to First Nat ions polit ics, ideological d i f ferences wi th in the commun i ty and how symbols of power such as government vehic les or c lothing might affect the quali ty of interact ion be tween planners and First Nat ions. For example , Ken considered politics th rough the spec t rum of right-left ideology and how they shaped planning design and deve lopment choices in terms of progress, versus those w h o wan ted to mainta in a more tradit ional l i festyle. He indicated these values should be ba lanced in a "central v iew." Whi le it wou ld be important for p lanners to facil i tate processes to al low a range of ideological perspect ives to emerge , I wou ld argue that it is not up to the planner to ensure that the spec t rum of deve lopment va lues are ba lanced. Rather, p lanners might help explain the impl icat ions for ideological va lues and deve lopment choices as a way to inform communi ty dec is ion-making. Conc lus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice 1 Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to unders tand how var ious external authori ty structures imposed on First Nat ions have regulated and af fected First Nat ion's ability to part icipate and control their quali ty of life. Comprehens ive land c la im agreements have the potential to radical ly e m p o w e r First Nat ions and begin the long process of d ismant l ing and overcoming the forces and effects of history and control on part ic ipat ion. However , not all First Nat ions are equal ly undergo ing new structural relat ionships. Nor are shift ing powers in themse lves a guarantee for more effect ive planning relat ionships. At a m in imum, outs ide p lanners need to consider the current and future status of jur isdict ion in communi t ies they work . Planners need to know that First Nat ions operate a long a spec t rum of external author i ty relat ions, f r om "bands" w h o are regulated under the Indian Act to First Nat ions w h o are fully self-govern ing . Identi fying the "state" of external jur isdict ion and control , including the degree to wh ich legal and tradit ional sys tems of author i ty operate in each g iven First Nat ion is important because it determines w h o plans, w h e n planning occurs , wha t the process is for dec id ing, wha t is being dec ided, and w h o has the f inal say. O n e dist inct ion for the role of outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th sel f -governing First Nat ions is that communi t ies wou ld have direct say in w h o they hire and how they structure the relat ionship wi th p lanners. Most important ly, the external power and program constra ints that have p lagued First Nat ions wou ld start to be d ismant led. C o m b i n e d , these effects might not change wha t p lanners do (e.g. facil i tate process, or 109 under take land-use plans, organizat ional deve lopment , commun i ty economic deve lopment strategies, etc.) , but rather, change more w h o planners work wi th , and how First Nat ions structure the involvement of the outs ide planner. Whi le new structures of authori ty m a y be chang ing the condi t ions of First Nat ion's capaci ty to part ic ipate, p lanners need to ask themselves wha t their role is in relat ion to the type of author i ty structure that operates in a g iven communi ty . Whe ther and how planners work wi th First Nat ions to utilize appropr iate polit ical and decis ion-making sys tems is an important considerat ion given the history of condi t ions and constraints imposed on First Nat ions. Knowledge about First Nat ions' tradit ional polit ical st ructures and sys tems, for example, can help outs ide p lanners to structure part icipation and dec is ion-making in w a y s that foster part icipation and invo lvement (see under participation), as wel l as revive First Nat ions ' t radi t ions that have been si lenced by decades of external contro l . The consis tency and adherence to tradit ional political sys tems and st ructures such as c lan, family, tr ibal or confederat ion (regional and nat ional) levels would likely have vary ing degrees of re levance depend ing on the planning issue and communi ty . Figure 3 summar izes wha t outside p lanners need to consider in te rms of authori ty relat ions w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Planners can help faci l i tate effect ive part ic ipatory planning relat ionships by unders tanding wha t First Nat ions stand to gain in te rms of part ic ipat ion and capaci ty within the context of author i ty relat ions. They might practice planning in w a y s that chal lenge external author i ty st ructures. This is crucial g iven the history of external relat ions noted above . Planners also need to consider such p lanning-re levant issues such as the confl ict be tween two types of authori ty, chang ing author i ty s t ructures, formal and informal leadership, issues of power and dif fering interests and w h e r e the author i ty for p lanning or iginates. Planners may confront numerous chal lenges such as how they determine wh ich fo rm of author i ty opera tes , w h o has the final say for p lanning decis ions, wha t the process is for decid ing and in genera l how planners structure part ic ipat ion g iven these reali t ies. Finally, outs ide planners need to cons ider the planning implications of the First Nat ions ' author i ty structures they work wi th . 110 Planners shou ld : Understand the Authority Structure of First Nations Consider Planning -Relevant Authority Issues Forms of Authority: 1. External Regulation: Legal Authority • Indian Act; Reserve System; Program Policy; Chief & Council. 2. Internal Regulation: Traditional Authority • Clan and Family System; Consensus Decision-Making. 1. Conflict between forms of authority. 2. Changing authority structures (land claims, devolution, legal decisions). 3. Formal and informal leadership. 4. Issues of power, differing interests. 5. Where authority for planning originates. Recognize Planning Challenges 1. Which forms of authority operate. 2. Who has the final say. 3. What is the process for deciding. 4. How to structure participation. Identify Planning Implications of Authority Relations 3. 4. Consider impacts on First Nation's capacity to participate. Anticipate possible behaviourial effects of history on participation. Ensure group representation. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 3: Knowledge Abou t Author i ty Relat ions for Planning wi th First Nat ions. 5.3 Social Organizat ion Interv iewees' c o m m e n t s suppor ted the v iew of several authors (Wolfe and Lindley 1983; S imon et a l . 1984; Shki lnyk 1985; Wol fe 1989; Lane 1997; Jojola 1998; Kew and Miller 1999) that p lanners need to know var ious fo rms of social organizat ion of First Nat ions they work wi th . This includes individual, family, g roup, c lan, tr ibal, and confederat ion levels. The interv iewees acknowledged primari ly individual, fami ly and clan levels of organizat ion and in genera l s e e m e d to suppor t Jojola 's c la im that the c lanship in Nat ive Amer i can society is the "superstructure on wh ich m a n y tribal societ ies base their most wel l - founded plans" (1998:105) . 111 However , Carol noted that outside p lanners should consider the relevant forms of social organizat ion for the part icular First Nat ion they work wi th , s ince the loyalty to clan or family sys tems and cus toms var ies a m o n g First Nat ions. It w a s noted by one interv iewee, and conf i rmed by authors, that tradit ional c lan sys tems of First Nat ions have been replaced by the chief and counci l sys tem imposed under the Indian Act. However , this is not to say that tradit ional fo rms of social organizat ion remain static. As noted by Kew and Miller (1999:56) , the social and polit ical t radit ions of the Sto: lo First Nat ion evolve into "neo-tradi t ional" structures over t ime. Fur thermore , in several communi t ies I have worked wi th , First Nat ions are returning to tradit ional systems.of social and polit ical organizat ion. Janet and Evan further st ressed the need for p lanners to know whether all fami ly g roups, c lans and soc io-economic groups (change-or iented versus t radi t ional-subsistence individuals) are being represented dur ing planning processes and relat ionships. Janet explains the impl icat ions for representat ion and part icipation and wha t is requi red of p lanners: Involve or create a process that makes sure there is invo lvement f rom all aspects of the commun i ty and that you are not only hear ing f rom one vo ice . . .you can have a lot of diversity [in the] social process. You have to ask how m a n y famil ies are being represented for example on health commi t tees? Is it a health commi t tee wi th four teen individuals represent ing two of out e leven fami l ies? Obvious ly if you only did your p lanning work wi th that part icular g roup you wou ld really get a focused plan that only met the needs of a part icular few. Those individuals will of ten portray their ability to art iculate the needs of the 'other' people in the commun i ty and c la im that they are representat ive of their entire communi ty . I think that this has to be definitely chal lenged and I f ind that to ask about the fami l ies and representat ives of famil ies in the communi ty [provides] a plan structure. You could ask that quest ion on the basis of c lans and clan leaders. As noted in Evan 's example , he might have prevented the exclus ion of one fami ly g roup had he inquired into the fami ly b reakdown of the communi ty . This is d iscussed in greater depth under the knowledge t h e m e of participation. Based on my exper ience, p lanners in part icular need to identify whether the tradit ional c lan or fami ly systems of dec is ion-making are act ive, whe ther they operate formal ly or informally, and how many famil ies are in a given commun i ty . Th ree interv iewees identif ied the need to cons ider the roles and funct ions of var ious fo rms of social organizat ion, if they are to enable effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. Interviewees said that First Nat ions use clan and family systems to govern themse lves and that they def ine "a w a y of relating to each other in society." Nancy helps to explain the impor tance of c lan and fami ly st ructures: C lan sys tems are a way of relat ing to each other in society. It w a s dec ided that s o m e h o w 112 groups wou ld fo rm under c lans based probably on fami ly t radi t ions. They wou ld abide by certain principles or rules, and how they wou ld have relat ionships. They wou ld also come together in the tradit ions over burials or marr iages. They have a discipl inary kind of reg ime. . . there is a survival instinct wh ich goes back to living in fami ly g roups within certain boundary areas and [that people] c o m e together maybe once a year to t rade and socia l ize. . . [P lanners] have to have int imate knowledge. You have to know the famil ies and the grouping of them and w h o is al igned wi th w h o m marr iage-wise. In addi t ion, it w a s noted that they shape the "principles and rules that govern responsibi l i t ies and relat ionships of people to one another, as wel l as def ine responsibi l i t ies to the c lan." These funct ions general ly s e e m e d to acknowledge wha t other authors reported (S imon et al. 1984; Lane 1997; Jojola 1998; Kew & Miller 1999) . Four w o m e n interv iewees st ressed the impor tance of knowing that the long history of fami ly relat ions in First Nat ion communi t ies has produced var ious issues of confl ict. In terv iewees recognized that confl ict wi thin First Nat ion communi t ies could be over rel igious sch isms and value di f ferences, as noted in the l i terature (England 1 9 7 1 ; Wol fe and Lindley 1983; Hanson 1985; Wol fe and St rachan 1987) , but Carol and Nancy added that confl ict could be over breaking clan loyalt ies or fami ly b reakups. In addi t ion, confl ict might be a result over a matter that happened a very long t ime ago. Carol stated that fami ly relat ions were an important cultural factor to enable part ic ipatory p lanning, and because everyone is related to everyone, p lanners have to "be very careful of wha t you say [and] w h o you are talking wi th. " She noted the tensions be tween two linguistic g roups in one commun i ty and how they had been based on events that happened in the past. As a result, there w e r e going to be: Issues around not just acceptance for w h o you are, but that you c o m e wi th that who le relat ionship behind you . The young people try ing to work together in the communi ty have everything that has ever happened to their fami l ies or be tween their famil ies [become] a barrier for t h e m . Finally, Nancy talked about the impor tance of knowing the broader history of a communi ty and its ef fects and implicat ions for part ic ipat ion. T w o w o m e n interv iewees observed var ious behaviour ial effects of history such as "avo idance, denial and lying," or "anger, s i lence, resistance" in their exper ience. It w a s recognized that fear w a s holding people back f rom engag ing and that s h a m e m a d e people sensit ive to judgment . To exper ience these types emot ions or si tuat ions dur ing a p lanning session or relat ionship can be distressing and confus ing in my exper ience. There have been several instances dur ing my planning pract ice w h e r e workshops and processes have been d isrupted, de layed or in one instance cancel led 113 because of levels of emot ion and confl ict. A s Ken noted, it is important for p lanners to acknowledge that individuals and communi t ies are at dif ferent s tages of heal ing, and how this may impact exper iences of part ic ipat ion. Conc lus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to inquire into the social-polit ical organizat ion of the part icular commun i ty w h e n they first enter a communi ty , s ince the consis tency and adherence to tradit ional fo rms of organizat ion may vary. Tradi t ional fo rms of social organizat ion appear to vary mainly because of the effects of history. Addi t ional research wou ld be helpful to know w h y tradit ional sys tems vary in First Nat ions because it might inform p lanners of how they can assist First Nat ions to revive and work wi th their tradit ional cus toms and pract ices. In addit ion to identifying the relevant fo rms of social organizat ion for the part icular First Nat ion outs ide p lanners work wi th , p lanners require an unders tand ing of the roles and funct ions of social organizat ion. This understanding includes identi fying the number of c lans or fami ly g roups, and the state of relat ions be tween groups. However , knowledge of a First Nat ion's tradit ional social structure does not equate to the ability for p lanners to work wi th tradit ional s t ructures. For example , whi le the speak ing protocol of a communi ty may be based on fami ly representat ion, how does a planner know whether the des ignated fami ly spokesperson in is fact represent ing the entire fami ly? W h a t happens if there are fact ions wi th in the main family grouping? As noted previously, p lanners may never know how ' representat ive ' the des ignated speaker may be. The chal lenge here s e e m s to be for p lanners to learn the operat ing dynamics of First Nat ions' tradit ional fami ly sys tems. The main planning-relevant issues outs ide p lanners should cons ider under social organizat ion include: that the fo rms of social organizat ion vary within communi t ies ; issues pertaining to the long history of fami ly relat ions and conflict; and how these may impl icate representat ion and inclusion of var ious groups dur ing planning sessions. Given the long history of relat ions and living together as a single cultural unit, including the federal reserve sys tem of conta inment and decades of inappropr iate external policy and p rogramming , p lanners should expect confl ict s i tuat ions w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. In fact for the Sto:lo Nat ion, confl icts are v iewed as "rout ine polit ical act ions. . .a l lowing for changing conf igurat ions of public opin ion" (Kew and Miller 1999:58) . 114 The chal lenge for outs ide p lanners is accept ing that they may not be able to identify all of the confl ict. As one interv iewee stated, she could never know, or acquire all of the history of confl ict in a g iven communi ty and further, is it the planner 's role to do so? This is a signif icant quest ion. Perhaps the answer might be considered in terms of whe ther the confl ict had process or substant ive impl icat ions. It wou ld matter for example , whe ther confl ict w a s over a process decis ion to develop a mining operat ion, versus confl ict of a personal nature be tween two individuals that prevented their d ia logue and involvement . Based on my exper ience, one of the advantages of develop ing long- term planning relat ionships is that a p lanner can get to know the confl icts, issues and relat ions of a commun i ty s imply over t ime. For p lanners w h o enter a communi ty for a l imited durat ion, this wou ld not be possible. I have also found part icularly in one commun i ty that I have worked in that people are very open and wil l ing to talk about confl icts and issues in the communi ty . T h e issue for me is less about identifying confl ict, as it is having the capaci ty to manage or resolve confl ict. For those communi t ies w h e r e p lanners are unable to identify the i confl ict, they could try to be " responsive to the indicat ions" of confl ict, as one interv iewee noted. Finally, outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ion individuals might exper ience var ious behaviour ial effects of history as they try to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. As a result, p lanners require an emot ional s t rength and skill set to work wi th unexpected si tuat ions at t imes. Planners also need to create safe and protect ive env i ronments and to show pat ience and unders tanding for individuals w h o are still work ing through their pain and confl ict. As one interv iewee noted, it is important that p lanners recognize that individuals and communi t ies are at di f ferent s tages of heal ing. All of these observat ions are important because of the impl icat ions they have on a planner 's ability to facil i tate effective part ic ipatory relat ionships. Issues relat ing to the social organizat ion of First Nat ions may impact whether , w h y and how people part icipate dur ing planning processes. In considerat ion of the history of fami ly relat ions and confl ict, p lanners need to consider how they structure appropr iate fo rms of part icipation to m a n a g e the tensions and confl ict of a communi ty , if they are to facil i tate effect ive p lanning relat ionships wi th in First Nat ions. Figure 4 summar izes the main knowledge componen ts of social organizat ion for p lanners to know w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. 11 Planners shou ld : Consider the Social Organization of First Nations Individual, Family, Clan, Tribal, Confederation; Change-Oriented versus Traditional-Subsistence Understand Roles & Functions of Social Organization Consider Planning-Relevant Social Organization Issues Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Planning Implications of Social Organization and History Examples: clan and family systems structure participation and decision-making, define responsibilities to clan, and govern responsibilities and relations to one another. 1. Forms of social organization vary within each First Nation. 2. History of family relations and conflict. 3. Representation and inclusion of groups and individuals. 1. How to structure forms of participation. 2. How active traditional systems are. 3. How planners work with traditional systems. 4. How planners identify conflict. 5. How to work with behaviourial effects of history. 1. 3. 4. 5. Acknowledge how social organization structures participation. Consider impacts of conflict on the quality of participation. Ensure participatory options and choice. Encourage use of traditional structures. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 4 : Knowledge Abou t Social Organizat ion for P lanning wi th First Nat ions. 5.4 Communica t ion Eight interv iews conf i rmed the signi f icance of storytel l ing and three noted the impor tance of l istening, as acknowledged by var ious authors (Boothroyd 1986, 1992; Langin 1988; Sandercock 1998a; Cru ickshank 1998; Cooper 1998; Aubrey 1999; Forester 1986, 1999) . Interv iewees also indicated that 116 First Nat ions they worked wi th commun ica te th rough si lence, laughter and body language, conf i rming the tradit ions noted in the l i terature. Interv iewees expanded knowledge and unders tanding on the funct ions of storytel l ing and l istening in a First Nat ions context . Four in terv iewees in combinat ion noted that storytel l ing w a s v iewed as a method for involving elders, a w a y to obtain knowledge and insight about a commun i ty or individual, and a "subtle fo rm of cr i t ic ism." For Janet , storytel l ing w a s seen as a w a y to test, a w a y of asking the planner: "Are you prepared to hear about our commun i ty? Do they [the planners] really wan t to know w h o w e are before w e are prepared to answer that quest ion?" Evan indicated that storytel l ing is useful to help reveal the planning prob lem of the communi ty and Dave cons iders storytel l ing important to begin a " fr iendship of communica t ions . " These funct ions conf i rm the signi f icance of storytel l ing as a vehicle to t ransmit certain types of knowledge for p lanning. Fur thermore, three female interv iewees suggested that l istening is a w a y to build planner credibi l i ty as they gain entry into a communi ty , a means to establ ish relat ions wi th First Nat ions, a w a y to enable a commun i ty to gain control over its o w n planning, and necessary to unders tand the mean ing and va lue of stor ies. Several in terv iewees acknowledged the difficulty and chal lenge of work ing wi th stor ies, as wel l as w a y s p lanners can work more effectively wi th t h e m . Larry c o m m e n t s on his exper ience wi th storytel l ing: I think you have to kind of get used to it before you can pick it up. I m e a n at first it just sounds like they are tell ing a story and you don' t real ize they are making a point but the story has a point usually and so you wan t to l isten careful ly to wha t they are saying and then to try and dec ide wha t the point is. You don' t just gloss over it if they tell a story that doesn' t s e e m like it fits in a f low. Really it did fit in a f low and you just didn't know it. The issue f rom my exper ience is not so much that p lanners may not unders tand stories at t imes, that it is to be expected, but more how planners react to stor ies at the t ime they are to ld. W h e n I first began to work wi th First Nat ions, I w a s both fascinated and dist ressed w h e n elders wou ld so eloquent ly share their stor ies of t ime, p lace, va lues and cus tom. My anxiety was over w h a t to do in the m o m e n t just after a story is to ld, part icularly w h e n the mean ing w a s not immedia te . I have c o m e to bel ieve that it m a y not a lways be appropr iate or necessary to interpret a story in the immedia te momen t . However , I agree wi th Sue 's point about how "confusion" is a way for p lanners "to revisit the assumpt ions , revisit unders tanding" w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. 117 W h a t m a y be more critical perhaps is for p lanners to first acknowledge and thank elders or individuals for shar ing a story, as a w a y to encourage, respect and val idate the tradit ional use of storytel l ing. Further, I somet imes use stor ies as a w a y to establ ish comfor t and connect ion wi th the elders of a communi ty , as a w a y to help consider p lanning prob lems and solut ions, or to teach a part icular concept or idea. I try to create stories based on themes of resource harvest ing, social gather ing, and c o m m u n a l va lues of shar ing and car ing. Janet added that one way for p lanners to facil i tate stor ies w a s to "al low t ime, space and respect" for stor ies. Stor ies can result s imply by "what gets asked. " Other in terv iewees indicated that posing direct quest ions or solicit ing part icipation th rough storytel l ing w a s not a lways possible. Fur thermore, it is not a lways clear w h e n storytel l ing takes place dur ing a p lanning process. It w a s advised by Ken that p lanners need to al low elders to speak w h e n they choose , and by Janet , that p lanners should not interrupt e lders w h e n they are speak ing . These insights begin to acknowledge the pract ical realit ies of communica t ion biases noted by Cooper (1998) . Sue , Larry and Carol all expressed the ambigui ty , confus ion and difficulty of interpret ing stor ies. Janet , Ken and Carol acknowledged how they encourage or inhibit the tell ing of stor ies, and Sue noted the diff iculty of incorporat ing stories into p lanning documen ts . These are critical factors that affect the ability for outs ide p lanners to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. However , it should be noted that not all First Nat ions people convey knowledge and unders tanding entirely by stor ies. Several in terv iewees noted other communica t ion issues and obstac les, e laborat ing on wha t communica t ion biases and distort ions they exper ienced in a First Nat ion 's p lanning context . These observat ions build on the discussions of Forester (1989) and Cooper (1998) . Interv iewees observed that they block communica t ion and unders tanding through the use of Engl ish language, the emphas is or rel iance on wr i t ten communica t ion , including technical ja rgon and the use of text in planning documents . Caro l c o m m e n t s on the use of ja rgon : Jargon is the big obstacle. Jargon is just an excuse for people w h o don' t unders tand their in format ion. If you can't explain it in layman's te rms you obviously don' t know it wel l . Apar t f rom the need to consider the l i teracy and educat ion levels of the communi ty and how you 've got to do everyth ing at a g rade six level. The issue around ja rgon w a s portraying yoursel f as some expert in anyth ing. [P lanners should] just be a person, you have some knowledge and they [First Nat ions] have s o m e knowledge too; 118 and Ken acknowledges the reality fac ing m a n y First Nat ions today: There is a fairly large degree that books and wri t ing and planning studies and all this historical informat ion that is referred to is just fore ign. No doubt it's chang ing wi th computers being avai lable at First Nat ion off ices. They are certainly c losing that gap very quickly but in reality, until recent t imes, their stor ies were passed on verbal ly and so recording f ive, ten or twenty year studies is a fore ign concept . Outs ide p lanners must a lways be th ink ing, wha t can I do to break d o w n communica t ion barr iers, or how can I enhance the qual i ty of communica t ion? As Dave noted, p lanners "could play a role to help break d o w n the communica t ion barr iers and to get the best of people 's involvement." It is important that p lanners not int imidate or exc lude people by imposing their communica t ion biases on the communi ty , as Caro l states, "because oral or visual people w h o haven' t had wr i t ten informat ion are going to still think in those ways . " In Sue 's example of depend ing on wr i t ten mater ia l , she acknowledged that some First Nat ion individuals might feel inferior because "they don' t have wha tever it is to contr ibute." This suppor ts the need , as A n n e states, for p lanners to keep d ia logues short enough dur ing presentat ions so that p lanning mater ial can be t rans lated, if needed . In addi t ion, she suggests the need to keep language s imple in reports and to use a lot of graphics to document p lanning decis ions and ou tcomes . Conclus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice Outs ide planners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to acknowledge communica t ion di f ferences be tween cul tures and to expand their knowledge and use of di f ferent fo rms of communica t ion g iven the oral tradit ion of First Nat ions. Based on the f indings f rom the interv iewees, p lanners need to unders tand the mult iple roles and funct ions of storytel l ing, including l istening, if they are to help facil i tate effective part ic ipatory relat ionships. It is ev ident that storytel l ing has both substant ive (e.g. knowledge about where car ibou migrate, or where the best berry picking is) and process (e.g. a w a y to include people, t ransmit knowledge) roles. Planners also need to identify and acknowledge var ious p lanning-re levant communica t ion issues and obstac les, including the impl icat ions for the lack of effect ive communica t ion . Commun ica t ion biases such as ja rgon , technical language, large planning documents and the emphas is on wr i t ten language are perhaps important to dist inguish in terms of whe ther they can be contro l led. I m e a n in the sense that if p lanners had an awareness of these types obstac les, they should be able to act in more appropr iate w a y s and to omit these f rom their pract ice. Planners may not be able to control the l i teracy, educat ion or 119 language levels in First Nat ions communi t ies but they can choose to use more d iagrams, speak more slowly, keep d ia logues short and limit j a rgon , to improve the qual i ty of communica t ion and unders tanding. Whi le this sounds like a s imple task, in pract ice, it is much more chal lenging. As Larry explains: You 've got to be able to explain th ings in a w a y that people can unders tand and try to do it wi thout cutt ing an issue or someth ing . You have to try to get t h e m to unders tand that because that goes back to the educat ion level wi th the older people. Planners also need to c o n s i d e r t h e impl icat ions of ineffective communica t ion for p lanning relat ionships. P lanners w h o are unaware of the power imbalances m a d e possible by the lack of appropr ia te fo rms of communica t ion wou ld easily inhibit effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships be tween cul tures. Interv iewees did not e laborate on the impl icat ions of their observat ions, but two interv iewees noted that a lack of communicat ion and unders tanding wou ld impl icate dec is ion-making ou tcomes . As a result, knowledge t ransmission and part icipation wou ld be af fected. These types of obstac les reveal potential issues of power and control over knowledge and dec is ion-making in w a y s suggested by Forester (1989) . Planners need to utilize appropr iate fo rms of communica t ion in ways that promote knowledge t ransmiss ion and understanding be tween cul tures. This is not to suggest that First Nat ions rely exclusively on oral tradit ions of communica t ion . In reality, there will be a mix of both wr i t ten and oral communica t ion fo rms and the emphas is wou ld likely depend on the part icular First Nat ion and w h o the planning aud ience is. The chal lenge for p lanners is to know w h e n and w h a t fo rms of communica t ion are most appropr ia te. Planners may also face var ious chal lenges sur rounding communica t ion such as gaining exper ience and capaci ty to utilize cultural ly appropr iate fo rms of communica t ion such as storytel l ing and si lence, recogniz ing w h e n planners are obstruct ing communica t ion and how planners might determine the educat ion and l i teracy levels of individuals they work wi th . As Nancy states, "society has a long w a y to go to improve communica t ion" between cul tures. So wha t can p lanners do to help facil i tate effect ive 120 Planners should : Consider First Nations' Traditional Forms of Communication Consider Planning-Relevant Communication Issues Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Planning Implications for Communication Understand Communication Differences: Oral versus Written Cultures. 1. Expanding knowledge of forms of communication. 2. Identifying communication issues and obstacles. 3. Utilizing appropriate forms of communication. ~ 4. Understanding role and function of storytelling. 1. What mix of communication forms are appropriate. 2. How to use and incorporate stories into planning. 3. If planners recognize they obstruct participation. 4. How to assess education and literacy levels. 1. Facilitate the transmission of knowledge. 2. Confirm levels of understanding. 3. Understand implications of communication bias and obstacles on participation and decision-making. 4. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Examples: technical jargon; volume of text; size of planning documents; language barriers; planners may not understand stories; using stories; incorporating stories into text; the emphasis on written language; participants may not speak English; people who have not used written information still think in oral ways. Examples: use simply text; use visual diagrams; keep dialogue short for translation; simplify planning documents; prepare multiple versions of planning documents to target specific audiences; facilitate stories; don't ask questions; listen; allow time, space and respect for stories; consider education and literacy levels of individuals within the community. Figure 5: Knowledge About Communica t ion for Planning wi th First Nat ions. communica t ion w h e n they work with First Nat ions? Figure 5 above conceptual izes the knowledge componen ts of communica t ion that are relevant for p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions. 121 5.5 Part ic ipat ion Several in terv iewees conf i rmed the signi f icance of knowing the tradit ional fo rms of First Nat ions' part icipation such as consensus dec is ion-making, ce remony and symbols , storytel l ing, l istening and si lence (see as communication) noted by var ious authors (Boothroyd 1986; Wol fe 1989; Ndubisi 1 9 9 1 ; Jojo la 1998; S imon et al . , 1984; Cooper 1998; Cru ickshank 1998; Kew & Miller 1999). Whi le several in terv iewees listed var ious tradit ions of part ic ipat ion, they shared greater insight into the practical aspects of work ing wi th t h e m . For example , A n n e acknowledged how consensus dec is ion-making is a much "flatter' sys tem of part ic ipat ion, implying broad-based commun i ty involvement and a non-hierarchical sys tem of dec is ion-making. Larry conf i rmed that decis ions are made more on a commun i ty basis and that p lanners "can expect s lower dec is ion-making processes." As a result, Nancy indicated that p lanners need to al low enough t ime for dec is ion-making processes to proceed and that decis ions will evolve on their own t ime w h e n planning wi th First Nat ions. This is a signif icant point s ince p lanners are of ten under t ime pressures to reach decis ions dur ing planning sess ions. Evan had admit ted how engineers w h o work wi th First Nat ions are t ra ined to make decis ions and that they are inclined to "fill decis ion vacuums, " because First Nat ions are somet imes s low in reaching decis ions. Four interv iewees stated that ce remony w a s important to enable effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships but noted dif ferent fo rms and uses. C e r e m o n y w a s emphas ized in terms of using tradit ional prayer as w a y to open and close a planning sess ion. First Nat ion individuals might pray in their tradit ional language or in Engl ish, and Larry suggests that p lanners should respect whatever First Nat ions wan t to do. In s o m e cases p lanners might be asked to give a prayer or they could vo lunteer a prayer, as in Ken's example . Planners need to consider how the role of ce remony is va lued dif ferently in each First Nat ion, as Carol noted, stat ing that p lanners should not "assume c o m m o n acceptance. " She observed that a mixture of both wes te rn and tradit ional pract ices can openly o f secret ly opera te in First Nat ions communi t ies , and that rel igious sch isms m a y be a source of confl ict. This suggests that p lanners should not impose a ceremonia l structure on First Nat ions and to al low the ceremonia l protocol of the communi ty to emerge . Interv iewees indicated that the signi f icance of using prayer dur ing planning processes is v iewed as a w a y to include elders and to br ing proper open ing and c losure to p lanning sessions. In First Nat ions I 1 2 2 have worked in, having an elder begin a p lanning sess ion wi th an open ing prayer is an important tradit ional protocol for spir i tual, leadership and polit ical reasons. Prayers are used to acknowledge and respect peoples ' contr ibut ion, of ten represent a process of seek ing a n d acknowledg ing spir i tual gu idance, and they play a signif icant role in solidifying the relat ionship and bonding of part ic ipants. Sue emphas ized a much larger perspect ive on the va lue of ce remony and symbols . As descr ibed in her story of tradit ional dancers , symbols were a w a y of "creat ing a sense of communi ty and connect ion, reaff i rming the power of relat ionship." Interv iewees also recognized the impor tance of util izing ce remony in terms of including tradit ional feasts and eat ing together dur ing planning sessions. As Sue explains: Symbols are more powerful than anyth ing else in creat ing a sense of communi ty and connect ion, and reaff i rming the power of relat ionship. Wherever there can be ce remony of any kind can be of t remendous support and it makes any work that I might do many many t imes more useful and power fu l . C e r e m o n y includes eat ing together. I a lways plan on eat ing together . At some point w e are go ing to eat together, and that 's conf l ict resolut ion. It's a big part o f it. A lot of it is a round . . .we think of confl ict resolut ion as w e got the prob lem it's on the f loor and now w e are go ing to c o m e up wi th mechan isms for deal ing wi th it. The who le thing around ceremony and rules, a round how w e talk wi th each other part icularly in First Nat ions communi t ies , is a round sustaining relat ionship. For two others, providing d inners was v iewed as a w a y to involve people and increase part ic ipat ion levels. Part ic ipatory Roles Interv iewees added important insights into the part ic ipatory roles of men and w o m e n , including character ist ics and factors that affect the quali ty of part ic ipat ion be tween w o m e n and m e n . Tab les 2 and 3 fo l lowing, summar ize what the interv iewees said regard ing part ic ipat ion roles and character ist ics. In genera l , p lanners w e r e able to reveal more about the role and part ic ipat ion character ist ics of w o m e n . Perhaps p lanners had more exper ience work ing wi th w o m e n , or that the involvement of m e n w a s not wel l unders tood . In very genera l te rms, interv iewees noted that m e n w e r e engaged more in political posi t ions, occupy ing m o r e fo rmal power , whereas w o m e n occup ied less fo rma l power and w e r e engaged more in m a n a g e m e n t activit ies. W o m e n also appeared to be more involved in a broader range of commun i ty affairs, including such roles as the "keepers of language, cul ture and t radi t ion" and the "protector of chi ldren's needs." Peters also notes that w o m e n "emphas ized the impor tance of regain ing, re-creat ing, or 123 revaluing cultural t radit ions in a process of 'heal ing ' f r om the d a m a g e of the colonial legacy" (1998:678) . Nancy suggests that wha t may account for the di f ferent roles be tween m e n and w o m e n in the commun i ty is the matr i l ineal emphas is of society, and how clan sys tems evolve around w o m e n . Caro l talks about how male elders consul t wi th their w ives before they make decis ions, and explains her understanding of First Nat ion's matri l ineal society: It's [matri l ineal society] not f ront and centre, even though most First Nat ion societ ies are matr i l ineal. But if you look at today 's society and you look at the chiefs sitt ing around the table, they are most ly m e n . Coming in wi thout knowing any of that background, you wou ld [assume] w o m e n don' t play a dominant role. Half the t ime, the male elders or chiefs don' t make the decis ion until they go and talk to their wi fe. So even though it is not f ront and centre for you to see, it's an operat ional matri l ineal society still there at play. That 's someth ing I guess to be aware of. You wou ld never get a direct answer if you ask a chief "So do you take advice f rom your wife before a decis ion?" Look around, you' l l see at genera l assembl ies and stuff, a w o m a n sitt ing behind her husband and you go, "Oh this is a bit backward , she doesn ' t play a prominent role." But you'l l see before he votes him turning to his wi fe and asking [her for advice] . Those are th ings that you just have to be observant about I guess. Perhaps more signif icant is how interv iewees revealed certa in character ist ics of part ic ipat ion. For example , how m e n take a broader v iew, that m e n react dif ferently than w o m e n , "how m e n gr in, sit back and don' t involve themselves; " that men prefer a quest ion and answer format , speak about th ings that are concrete, and are seen to be more act ion-or iented. ^ Interv iewees noted that w o m e n , on the other hand , are seen to part icipate more because of educat ion levels, are cons idered more sensit ive, are seen to have an equal say in m a n a g e m e n t and are thought to be more aggress ive. As wel l , w o m e n are seen to part ic ipate less, defer decis ions to m e n and tend not to chal lenge m e n . It was noted that w o m e n are l istened to w h e n they speak, are cons idered more ou tspoken , prefer a d ia logue format, are process-or iented, and speak on a more personal ized level. In s o m e First Nat ions, it w a s noted that it may not be accepted for w o m e n to speak. 124 Table 2: Part ic ipatory Roles and Character is t ics of First Nat ions W o m e n Identif ied by Interv iewees Participatory Roles - Women Participatory Characteristics - Women Act as administrators Occupy Band manager positions Enforcers of rules Better at enforcing rules Keepers of tradition, language and culture Have an equal say in management roles Provide a prominent role in the authoritative, governing body of First Nations Provide advice to men Run day to day activities Busy with the day to day functioning of community Better at rent collection Prepare day to day organization Considered the doers Women are the matriarchs Protect children's needs Perceived as not playing a dominant role Understand community needs Participate more because of education levels Are considered more sensitive Are the indirect decision-makers Are more aggressive Women are seen to participate less Defer decisions to men Tend not to challenge men Are more outspoken Talk more Prefer dialogue format Speak at a more personalized level Considered more process-oriented Viewed as having power and analysis Women are generally un-elected Seen to have a lot of power Have informal power Table 3: Part ic ipatory Roles and Character is t ics of First Nat ions M e n Identif ied by Interv iewees Participatory Roles - Men Participatory Characteristics - Men Act as councilors Fill senior level positions Men are the patriarchs Play leadership roles Occupy formal power Men go outside of the community Act as negotiators Young males occupy secretarial/administrative roles Understand community needs Take a broader view They don't do the work Men react differently than women Men are action-oriented Speak about things that are concrete Elders consult with wives before decision-making Prefer question and answer format Men grin, sit back and don't involve themselves Men have lower education levels A n n e talks about the part icipation preferences of men and w o m e n in her exper ience, and that: W o m e n tend to prefer to have a d ia logue to d iscuss th ings rather than a kind of quest ion and answer format that guys tend to be more comfor tab le w i th , because it's very concre te . . .men tend to focus on things that are concrete (the communi ty hall is fal l ing apart or w e need more houses) w h e r e I think w o m e n tend to personal ize it more (my house needs a new roof) . . .men go f rom quest ion to solut ion to explore the prob lem a bit before they get to the so lu t ion. . . . ! know this in my personal life, w h e n you are work ing wi th a g roup of w o m e n , it can be so process- or iented, you never get anyth ing done. It's the best process in the wor ld but at the end of six months you haven' t ach ieved anyth ing. So that 's w h y I think there is value in the synthesis of both , that you actual ly get di f ferent w a y s of commun ica t ing . . . In addit ion to understanding the role and character ist ics of part ic ipat ion, interv iewees provided insight into the factors that inf luence the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion be tween w o m e n and m e n . The qual i ty of part ic ipat ion is inf luenced by the fo l lowing: whe ther w o m e n and m e n part ic ipate in the same sess ion, by 125 the type of informat ion requi red; how dominant m e n are in mixed sess ions; whether men and w o m e n know each other; the polit ical and power structure of the communi ty ; and by the age structure of w o m e n part ic ipants. The qual i ty of part icipation w a s also seen to be af fected by wh ich gender interviews a m a n or a w o m e n , as wel l as the gender of the facil i tator. Interv iewees var ied on the part ic ipatory roles and character ist ics of e lders as depic ted in Table 4 . It w a s noted that e lders play a d iverse and complex range of poli t ical, leadership, symbol ic and ceremonia l roles, including formal and informal roles. As noted under w o m e n and men 's Table 4 : Part ic ipatory Roles and Character is t ics of First Nat ions Elders Identif ied by Interv iewees Participatory Roles - Elders Participatory Characteristics - Elders Provide knowledge about the community Provide leadership roles - Elder's council Provide traditional knowledge - for land use, bylaw, land claim negotiations Provide assurance and support for planners Act as teachers of traditions Monitor family performance Act as family heads Involved in formal and informal activities Provide direction for planning activities Difficult to be clear on the role of the elders Play important roles behind the scenes Elder's role may be to not be present Elders are used in conflict and mediation roles Provide advising role during chief elections May provide formal governance role Provide symbolic role Provide ceremonial role - prayer Elders may facilitate understanding/access into community May place controls on family representatives May participate simply by not being present Generally participate and communicate through storytelling Elders may or may not attend planning sessions May participate formally through an elder's council I roles, elder 's roles vary within First Nat ions. Fur thermore as one interv iewee noted, it is difficult to be clear on the role of e lders because "they often play important roles behind the scenes." iCarol had acknowledged that whi le elders may at tend a p lanning sess ion, their invo lvement appears to be more symbol ic because they do not directly part icipate. However , w h a t p lanners are unable to know is whe ther elders w e r e involved behind the scenes, prior to the planning sess ion. Carol expla ined that e lders may request that fami ly representat ives carry out certain instruct ions, and that e lders may attend planning sess ions to moni tor whether their instruct ions are being carr ied out. It is evident f rom the f indings that p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions have to be consc ious of how to respect and work wi th elders. It w a s noted by three w o m e n interv iewees that e lders are v iewed as a signif icant link to unders tand and gain access into the communi ty , and they can offer assurance or 126 suppor t for the planner 's involvement in the communi ty . In some cases, e lders ' involvement may be requested by the p lanner directly or indirectly, or ar ranged by the chief and counci l . They may dec ide to c o m e on their o w n or p lanners may go and visit e lders as a w a y of involving t h e m . Finally, several in terv iewees noted that elders part icipate and commun ica te th rough storytel l ing. The signi f icance of knowing the var ious roles and character ist ics of part icipation for m e n , w o m e n and elders, including factors that affect part icipation be tween m e n and w o m e n , can inform planners on how to structure part icipation in more appropr iate ways . For example , if w o m e n are more effect ive at practical m a n a g e m e n t funct ions, perhaps w o m e n may play a greater role dur ing the implementat ion s tages of p lanning. In addi t ion, elders w h o help p lanners gain access into the communi ty wou ld play a more signif icant role dur ing the preplanning s tage, and elders w h o play more formal leadership roles th rough an elder 's counci l might have a more signif icant role dur ing the approva l s tages of p lanning. Unders tanding the diverse roles of m e n , w o m e n and elders can also inform outside p lanners to expect qual i tat ive di f ferences in part ic ipat ion. It wou ld mat ter for example whether p lanners work wi th an all male counci l versus an all w o m e n counci l , or whether they work wi th a mix of m e n and w o m e n . If w o m e n are cons idered more personal and ou tspoken, this might result in a dif ferent knowledge base f rom wh ich to base decis ions upon. The mix of part ic ipants might also affect how planners involve m e n and w o m e n . For example , A n n e notes that m e n prefer a quest ion and answer format , whereas w o m e n prefer a d ia logue format . Lastly, knowing the factors that affect the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion be tween men and w o m e n wou ld al low planners to intervene and ensure an equal i ty of voice. For example , if w o m e n tend not to chal lenge m e n in public, perhaps p lanners could chal lenge m e n indirectly, on behal f of w o m e n . Also, if w o m e n are l istened to more , perhaps planners need to val idate the male voice, to elevate the speak ing equal i ty and contr ibut ion of m e n . Issues and Obstac les In addit ion to the above knowledge considerat ions, in terv iewees identif ied var ious factors relevant for p lanners at tempt ing to facil itate effective part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. Factors seen to affect the qual i ty and integrity of part icipation include: 1) First Nat ion's at t i tudes towards part ic ipat ion; 2) individuals publicly agreeing versus privately d isagree ing; 3) the lack of direct cr i t icism by individuals; and 127 4) how First Nat ion individuals resist part ic ipat ion. These internal factors build on the issues and obstac les noted by other authors (Dale 1992; McDona ld 1993; Jacobs and Mulvihil l 1995; Lane 1997; Kew and Miller 1999; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999). The first factor for p lanners to be aware of is the att i tude of individuals towards part ic ipat ion. At t i tudes were identif ied by several in terv iewees in te rms of the comp lacency of the chief and counci l to involve the larger commun i ty dur ing one planning process in Anne ' s example ; w h e n one fami ly w a s knowingly exc luded f rom the planning process in Evan's example ; and whe ther two of e leven fami l ies could represent the health needs of the who le communi ty , in Janet 's example . At t i tudes were also ref lected in te rms of the apathy and cynic ism individuals had towards part ic ipat ion. These examples have important impl icat ions for the quali ty and integrity of part ic ipat ion. A n n e observed that p lanners have to real ize that in s o m e cases a chief and counci l m a y feel that they "don' t want " or "don' t need" to involve people. In smal l communi t ies she had worked in, she noted that whi le dec is ion-making w a s based on the va lue of "consensus wi th all ," in some cases, decis ions are m a d e by the chief and counci l , wi thout the full part ic ipat ion and consul tat ion of the larger communi ty . It w a s not known whether the chief and counci l itself had reached consensus , but her concern w a s over whe ther the chief and counci l "were actively" including people and w h a t the obl igat ion w a s for t h e m to do so. The second and third factors affect ing the quali ty and integrity of part icipation are issues of public ag reement versus private d isagreement , and the lack of direct cr i t ic ism. The quali ty and integrity of part ic ipat ion may be compromised in terms of whether people actual ly reach agreement at the table to resolve someth ing . In one instance, Ken quest ioned whe ther ag reement had actual ly been reached as people depar ted the formal process and talked privately. It w a s uncerta in whe ther the context of ag reement (or d isagreement ) w a s between him and the communi ty , or be tween individuals within the communi ty . Janet raised a similar concern not ing that the group sett ing for part ic ipat ion could jeopard ize the qual i ty and integrity of part ic ipat ion. Individuals may not w a n t to be as for thcoming due to "old dynamics" be tween certain individuals or take oppos ing points of v iew because they seek val idat ion wi th in the group. Because people tend to avoid confrontat ion or confl ict for cultural reasons, individuals "tend to publicly agree wi th s o m e b o d y they wouldn ' t necessary agree wi th in pr ivate." Th ree interv iewees acknowledged 128 fur ther that First Nat ions people do not openly crit icize, and one noted the fact that people wan t to talk privately about how they feel about others in the communi ty . These observat ions all have important impl icat ions for effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. In part icular, they affect the quali ty of knowledge and informat ion used for dec is ion-making, and as Sue noted, they prevent people f rom engaging and whe ther g roups reach "conclusive decis ions." They could also result in planning ou tcomes that are not des i red, implying possibly that certain individuals or g roups may dominate the planning process. As a result, p lanners have to consider how they structure appropr iate fo rms and methods of part ic ipat ion to facil i tate effect ive p lanning relat ionships. O n e of the more prevalent suggest ions f rom A n n e and Janet w a s that large group formats are not a lways a suitable part ic ipatory structure for First Nat ions. This is relevant g iven the history of fami ly relat ions and confl ict, including issues of public ag reement and private d isagreement , and the behaviour ia l effects of history noted earl ier. Janet suggests that if p lanners wan t "radical v iews" they should use a personal interview method to talk wi th people and to ensure that they "mask people 's identity," if people are to speak about "controversial or oppos ing v iews." Lastly, Sue indicates that p lanners also have to learn to pick up signals of confl ict and d isapproval and realize that people may "walk wi th their feet," or not show up if they d isapprove of someth ing . Planners could learn to identify addit ional feedback mechan isms such as w i thdrawal , nonpart ic ipat ion, nonat tendance, disinterest and non-vocal izat ion noted by Ndubis i (1991) . These types of feedback mechan isms are only useful to a certain extent because they do not reveal "why" people are not part ic ipat ing. The four th and final factor affect ing the qual i ty and integrity of part ic ipat ion are the ways in wh ich First Nat ions individuals resist part ic ipat ion. Interv iewees suggested the fol lowing factors: • People may not part icipate because of the presence of part icular individuals in the room. • People may choose not to part icipate for survival reasons and past history. • You may only hear f rom a few people because of the clan sys tem - there may be des ignated people w h o speak on behalf of the family. • First Nat ions people are not control led long enough to unders tand. • Being truthful prevents people f rom talk ing. • People resist part icipation by not showing up to a w o r k s h o p or by not saying anyth ing. • People refuse to talk because of their opposi t ion to a subject or posi t ion. • The mistrust individuals have within and outs ide of the communi ty . 129 The list can go on . However , in recogniz ing these types of issues and obstac les, outside p lanners require the capaci ty and flexibil ity to m a n a g e these types of issues if they are to encourage more meaningfu l part ic ipatory relat ionships. Enabl ing Part icipat ion Interv iewees were asked wha t they did (approaches, methods , st rategies, techniques) to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. Suggest ions w e r e identif ied in the s a m e w a y as other authors have (England 1 9 7 1 ; McDona ld 1993; De Mello et al . 1994; Lane 1997; Kliger and Cosgrove 1999 ; Aubrey 1999, Forester 1989, 1999) . Tab le 4 summar izes several of the in terv iewees' responses. Symbols are used to cluster the responses instead of concise headings s ince the t h e m e s w e r e not entirely clear. Severa l of the responses have been identif ied previously wi th in specif ic knowledge themes throughout the thesis. 1 In terv iewees provided a diverse range of responses and suggest ions for outs ide p lanners to cons ider w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. In genera l , w o m e n interv iewees provided more suggest ions and insights than male interv iewees. W o m e n placed a greater emphas is on develop ing process to facil i tate effect ive p lanning relat ionships than m e n , including the need to ensure opt ions and choices for individual part ic ipat ion. The male interv iewees w e r e more specif ic in te rms of suggest ing strategies and techniques they used dur ing planning workshops . In terv iewees emphas ized the impor tance of process in te rms of generat ing part ic ipat ion, suppor t ing Boothroyd 's (1986) observat ions. Janet explains the impor tance of process in planning wi th First Nat ions: The only th ing that is go ing to work to del iver a good qual i ty project or product is s o m e sort of organic process w h e r e you des ign it and redes ign it and if you forget someth ing then you go back and pick up and move it forward. . . i t ' s a lmost got to be a spiral process and you' l l go two s teps fo rward , and two s teps back, pick up the pieces and two steps fo rward , back, pick up the p ieces. It's because each of those rounds in the communi ty will help to build trust and will al low them to br ing more people to hear about the fact that you are wi l l ing to l isten to everybody, that you aren' t in somebody 's pocket and it isn't a cooked process and that it is real and there is trust in it. Table 5: P lanning Methods, Strategies and Techn iques to Facil i tate Effect ive Part icipatory Planning Identif ied by Interv iewees. J a n e t S u e A n n e N a n c y C a r 0 1 L a r r y E V a n K e n D a V e • Take the appropr iate t ime to plan • • • Commun i t y sets agenda • • Create safe speak ing env i ronments and opt ions to part icipate • • • • Explain p lanning process/help people unders tand requi rements • • • • Structure processes wi th fluidity of choice • • Create processes to involve all g roups • • • Create quali ty and organic processes • • Pay attent ion to wha t people say about process • • Watch for s igns and body language that process is work ing • • • Facil i tate p lanning process versus do ing planning • • Be f lexible, mainta in unstructured t ime • • o Ensure proper workshop opening and c losure • o Provide substant ive opt ions to d iscuss • o Verify wha t people say • 0 Ask part ic ipants for feedback and conf i rmat ion • • Resolve confl ict and break through impasses • • Ensure representat ion of groups by do ing homework • • Be responsive to communi ty interests • • Ensure commun i ty groups value one another • Explain mission and involvement of p lanner • • • Having the ability to react and change courses quickly • • Different First Nat ions will require dif ferent part ic ipatory approaches • • Consider p lanning methods appropr iate to accul turat ion levels • • Diversify planning methods • • Individual interviews • Smal l g roups workshops • • • • • Large group meet ings • • • Workshops • Newslet ters • • • Commun i t y surveys • • Phone contact • • Mail outs • o Consider the p lanning sett ing • • • o Informal sett ings are more effect ive than formal sett ings • • o Structure workshops in circle format • 131 o Emphas ize visual fo rms of communica t ion • 0 Spread workshops out over t ime • o Create practical p lanning tools/strategies • • o Use humour wisely • 0 Utilize commun i ty maps to include people • o Portray respect to tradit ional cus toms • 0 Introduce people • • Include part icipation incent ives ( food, pr izes) • • • • Al low people to social ize • • • • Promote and prompt part ic ipat ion, d iscussion and inclusion • • • • Recognize contr ibut ions of individual part ic ipat ion • • • Recognize and promote planning accompl ishments • • Provide opportuni t ies to speak • • • Use tradit ional activit ies to involve people • • • Ask quest ions based on learning f rom First Nat ions • • Directly hire individuals to assist wi th planning • • Focus on people wi th hands-on exper ience • o Be comfor tab le wi th si lence • o Don' t interrupt elders • • • o Asking direct quest ions may not be effect ive for part ic ipat ion • o Pract ice act ive l istening • • o Pract ice to lerance t • o Veri fy wha t people say • • Under take a themat ic analysis • • Under take f ive-day search conference • • Use an act ive post-it note sys tem versus passive flip chart sys tem • • • Under take two levels of analysis • • Under take dual reali t ies, dual methods workshop • • Under take table of communi ty p rograms • In terv iewees noted that based on their exper ience, p lanners should faci l i tate choices of part icipation and ensure comfor tab le and safe env i ronments so part ic ipants f rom the commun i ty will speak openly. They also said that p lanners need to operate wi th an att i tude of flexibil ity, to use unstructured t ime, and to al low communi t ies to make decis ions on their o w n t ime. As Ken expla ins, p lanners require: 132 A n ability to change courses quickly because of sudden c i rcumstances . . .when to turn the corner at the appropr iate t ime and to be able to adapt new perspect ives. . .p lanners need to adapt to the part icular context and they can' t pre-wri te everyth ing. They have to have the ability to react and recognize the si tuat ion and to be able to change course quickly, if need be... the planner has to know how to facil i tate and handle c rowds and know w h e n and how to act w h e n they hit an impasse, w h e n you suddenly have to turn left. They also suggest a diverse range of p lanning methods such as interviews, smal l and large group meet ings and workshops , including newslet ters, surveys, phone contact and mai l -outs. S o m e planners I in terv iewed, speci f ied types of cus tom w o r k s h o p processes or methods they use. The degree and qual i ty of part icipation w a s not determined wi th in each of the var ious approaches , methods , strategies or techniques of fered by the interv iewees, a l though it is obv ious that some fo rms of part ic ipat ion are more act ive or inclusive than others. For example , A n n e said that in her facil i tation exper ience, the f l ip-char t -system w a s v iewed as a more passive fo rm of part icipation than the post-it note sys tem. I assume wha t she impl ied is that in the fl ip char t -sys tem, the p lanner captures part ic ipants ' c o m m e n t s by listing them on flip chart sheets general ly at the f ront of a room. Whereas , in a post-it note sys tem, part ic ipants actual ly bec om e involved in wri t ing their o w n c o m m e n t s on individual post-it notes (or index cards) , may be involved in the physical sort ing of t h e m , and actual ly make decis ions in naming categor ies. There are many variat ions to this example , but the point is that p lanners could structure a higher qual i ty of part ic ipat ion s imply by the part ic ipat ion methods they choose. The qual i ty of part ic ipat ion wou ld be inf luenced by the facil i tation skills of p lanners. Gran ted , as Carol points out, p lanners have to respect that some First Nat ion individuals may s imply not wan t to part ic ipate. Interv iewees identif ied the need as wel l for p lanners to encourage and promote part icipation in the communi ty . It w a s suggested for example that incent ives could be provided as ways to acknowledge the contr ibut ion of people. Evan notes that First Nat ion individuals: Just need to feel valuable. It's just a h u m a n th ing. You need to know your contr ibut ion is wor thwhi le . . . the same is true in the meet ing. Once people real ize their contr ibut ion is wanted and wor thwhi le , they are more than happy to give it. In s o m e cases this includes emphasiz ing a more social and cultural c o m p o n e n t to include having commun i t y feasts and consider ing less formal locat ions for p lanning activit ies. In some cases, I have faci l i tated workshop outdoors , a long the r iverbank on tradit ional terr i tory. These natural sett ings are much 133 more conduc ive in my exper ience in creat ing comfor table speak ing env i ronments . In addit ion to the social or ceremonia l benefit , s o m e interv iewees valued d inners and pr izes as incent ives to part ic ipat ion. A n n e explains: There 's sort of this idea that people should self lessly give up four hours of their evening to listen to you and I just don' t agree wi th that because people are busy. If you feed people supper wel l then that is one less th ing they have to wor ry about too. It's not really a tool , it's a technique in a w a y to try and increase part ic ipat ion and it's been really successfu l . Conc lus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice Planners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to know and unders tand the tradit ional fo rms of part ic ipat ion they use, such as consensus dec is ion-making, ce remony and symbols , storytel l ing, and l istening. T h e y also need to know about the roles and part icipation character ist ics of m e n , w o m e n and elders. However , def in ing c o m m o n part icipatory roles and character ist ics of m e n , w o m e n and elders w a s not possible f rom the interv iewees' examples . Roles and character ist ics of part ic ipat ion wou ld be specif ic to the part icular First Nat ions planners work wi th , and the impl icat ions for these var ious roles and character ist ics might depend on the context of wha t is being p lanned. The f indings do suggest that there are qual i tat ive di f ferences in how m e n , w o m e n and elders part icipate dur ing a g iven planning relat ionship, and that the part ic ipat ion roles of m e n , w o m e n and elders appear to be more relevant at dif ferent s tages of p lanning. More insight wou ld be helpful to identify the relevant roles of m e n , w o m e n and elders dur ing specif ic s tages of p lanning and factors that account for d i f ferences. This type of p lanner knowledge is useful and necessary for p lanners to structure the fo rms and methods of part ic ipat ion they use w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. Planners should ensure that part ic ipat ion processes, g roup size, part icipation methods , the locat ion of the part ic ipatory sett ing, and how they get people part ic ipat ing, are inclusive of all individuals and famil ies in a g iven communi ty . In part icular, they need to consider how they structure part ic ipat ion given the history of fami ly relat ions within communi t ies . The insights and c o m m e n t s f rom the in terv iewees suggest that p lanners may encounter interpersonal confl ict at individual and fami ly levels w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. A s a result, p lanners need to consider the fo rms and methods of part ic ipat ion they use to ensure that individuals are part ic ipat ing throughout the p lanning relat ionship. A l lowing part ic ipants to fo rm their o w n 134 smal l g roups dur ing a g roup workshop w a s v iewed as one w a y to structure part icipation given the fami ly confl ict in s o m e communi t ies . The difficulty p lanners face in at tempt ing to faci l i tate effective part ic ipatory relat ionships are mat ters pertaining to wha t is an acceptable level or qual i ty of part ic ipat ion, w h o can represent or speak for w h o m , wha t the part icipation process is to make decis ions and w h o dec ides this and how, and in part icular, consensus by w h o m and how many? Planners should consider that First Nat ions might differ on their definit ion and interpretat ion of consensus dec is ion-mak ing. W h a t may be a relevant definit ion of consensus for the New Credi t communi ty , as Ndubis i (1991) def ines, may not be for another First Nat ion. Planners should inquire into the dec is ion-making protocol of the First Nat ion they work wi th , and to clarify decis ion rules prior to beginning a planning relat ionship. They might also think about whe ther and how consensus dec is ion-making is used at dif ferent levels of decis ion contexts. Consensus by the counci l versus consensus by the communi ty may matter depend ing on wha t is being dec ided or p lanned for. P lanners may confront numerous p lanning-re levant issues pertaining to First Nat ions ' part ic ipat ion. These include factors in te rms of whether and how individuals resist part ic ipat ion such as individual att i tudes towards part ic ipat ion, individuals agree ing publicly versus privately d isagree ing, or the fact that First Nat ion individuals do not openly crit icize. All of these factors impl icate how p lanners might structure part ic ipat ion. Planners should also be sensit ive to active and passive fo rms of part ic ipat ion they use w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. For example , an individual w h o comple tes an interview or survey could be cons idered a passive fo rm of part icipation in the sense that informat ion is not shared or exchanged in an interact ive env i ronment , wi thin the larger communi ty . T h e method might also be passive since it is a one -way f low of in format ion. However , the interview method could be cons idered an active fo rm of part ic ipat ion if that same individual wou ld not o therwise speak openly in a larger part ic ipatory set t ing. Smal l or large group meet ings where informat ion is presented is much less act ive than a smal l or large group w o r k s h o p where individuals are more engaged in d iscussion and dec is ion-mak ing. Fur thermore, the large number of individuals w h o attend a workshop or large meet ing does not imply active or equal part ic ipat ion by all individuals. Planners should acknowledge that they might not be able to control individual att i tudes towards part ic ipat ion. Gran ted , p lanners may have success at inf luencing or mot ivat ing att i tudes such as in 135 Anne 's example w h e r e she w a s able to convince counci l at a m in imum to send out newslet ters, as a w a y to ' include' people. If p lanners are unsuccessfu l at inf luencing individual at t i tudes towards part ic ipat ion, they could explain the impl icat ions of l imited involvement for commun i ty p lanning. As Evan and Larry note, the lack of part ic ipat ion and involvement dur ing a p lanning process might impl icate whether plans are approved at a later s tage of p lanning. In chal lenging the counci l 's att i tude towards part ic ipat ion, A n n e raises another issue regarding the role of the planner and wha t his or her obl igat ion is to ensure wider commun i ty part ic ipat ion. Despi te the intent ions or part icipation values of p lanners, they may not be able to access all individuals f rom a given communi ty , or facil i tate their part ic ipat ion. A n d further, First Nat ions s imply may not wan t to exercise their part ic ipatory r ights, especial ly in ways that are expected or evident by the planner. Planners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to reflect on their o w n part ic ipat ion and process values to help promote act ive inclusion, and realize that some individuals within First Nat ions m a y not share the same set of va lues. It is not possible to identify a c o m m o n list of part ic ipatory approaches or methods based on the f indings of this research, nor should outside p lanners assume that approaches and methods of part icipation work the s a m e in every communi ty . Interv iewees did not reveal the process they used to determine the type or mix of part ic ipatory approaches or methods but it is ev ident that p lanners require an ability to d raw f rom a comprehens ive range of part ic ipatory approaches and methods to actively involve people. Planners might consider using dif ferent fo rms of part ic ipat ion at di f ferent s tages of p lanning. For example , a survey may be useful to gather initial base informat ion f rom wh ich to guide discussion and dec is ion-making at a larger scale of part ic ipat ion such as a large workshop format . P lanners face numerous chal lenges such as wha t is an appropr ia te mix of part icipation approaches and methods to use in a g iven communi ty , how planners diversify these approaches and methods , w h o determines the part icipation mix, and wha t the decis ion process is for doing so. The chal lenge wou ld be in knowing wh ich mix of part icipation approaches and methods is most appropr iate, and w h e n . Fur thermore, outs ide p lanners in d iscussion wi th First Nat ions, need to consider the impl icat ions for the fo rms of part icipation they util ize, and the desi red level of interact ion they wish to ach ieve. In part icular, how the quali ty of part icipation and interact ion impl icates the qual i ty of knowledge and informat ion for dec is ion-making in terms of prevent ing conclus ive decis ions, possibly result ing in 136 undesirable p lanning ou tcomes. This is especial ly relevant g iven that First Nat ions have been den ied direct part icipation and "meaningfu l involvement" for reasons noted under authority relations. To summar ize the d iscuss ion, Figure 6 identif ies wha t outs ide p lanners should consider under the knowledge t h e m e of part icipation w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions. Planners should : Consider Traditional Forms of First Nations' Participation Understand Various Participatory Roles and Characteristics of Men, Women and Elders Consider Planning-Relevant Participation Issues Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Planning Implications of Participation Consensus Decision-Making, symbols and Ceremony, Storytelling, Listening and Silence. Consider the Planning Implications of Roles: 1. How roles might depend on context. 2. Expect qualitative differences in participation. 3. Need to structure appropriate participation. 4. Roles might be applicable at different stages of planning. 5. It matters who planners work with. 1. Different attitudes towards participation. 2. Public agreement versus private disagreement. 3. Lack of open and direct criticism by individuals. 4. What forms of participation are appropriate. 5. Active versus passive participation. 2. Knowing what mix of participation forms is appropriate. How to diversify the mix of participatory approaches, methods, strategies and techniques. Who determines which approaches and methods to use. How to measure the quality of participation. What planners do to promote participation. 1. Consider effects on the quality of knowledge and information for decision-making control. 2. Realize that a lack of participation might prevent conclusive decisions. 3. Need to promote increased capacity of First Nations to participate. 4. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 6: Knowledge About Part icipat ion for Planning wi th First Nat ions. 137 5.6 Capaci ty In genera l , the p lanners I interv iewed indicated the need to know the institutional capaci ty of First Nat ions they work wi th . The social and polit ical fo rms of First Nat ions' tradit ional institutions include: c lan and fami ly sys tems, chief and counci l , m a n a g e m e n t and administrat ive bodies, including elder 's counci ls , and the use of p lanning commi t tees . Interv iewees did not identify a comple te institutional base for one part icular First Nat ion. Four male interv iewees referenced the posit ive capaci ty First Nat ions are gain ing to under take their o w n p lanning. This includes increases in individual and insti tut ional capaci ty. Evan observed that First Nat ions individuals he worked wi th are gaining more formal educat ion and "becoming professionals in their o w n communi ty , " and interv iewees noted that some First Nat ions are increasing capaci ty th rough gains m a d e by comprehens ive land c la im agreements . 1 In terv iewees noted var ious obstac les and issues of capaci ty mainly at an individual level. Three interv iewees exper ienced Wol fe 's (1989) c la ims regarding Wicker 's (1979) " theory of undermann ing . " They noted that the d e m a n d s of land c la im negot iat ions limit the abil ity of individuals to part ic ipate, and that the smal l size of First Nat ions communi t ies requires that individuals have to know a great deal . Evan spoke about the " renaissance administrator," and how individuals f rom communi t ies he worked wi th , had to be skil led in so many areas, to be "a jack-of-al l - t rades." In terv iewees also noted that some First Nat ions s imply might not have the availabil i ty of people to part icipate g iven the vo lume of p lanning requi rements . These c o m m e n t s general ly acknowledge Wol fe 's (1989) observat ions. Four of the p lanners I interv iewed said that the educat ion and l i teracy levels of individuals within communi t ies af fected their ability to facil i tate effective part ic ipatory re lat ionships. Three interv iewees pointed out that they work wi th a spec t rum of individual capaci t ies. In my exper ience, p lanners have to be sensit ive to these condi t ions and have an ability to work wi th mult iple skil l, knowledge, l i teracy, and health levels of individuals. As Janet indicates, p lanners will work wi th a range of people a long a socio-cultural spec t rum, referred to as change-or iented or accul turated people, and the tradi t ional, more subsis tence-or iented people of a communi ty : The reason I br ing that up is hopeful ly in these processes you are go ing to be wi th people operat ing right across that spec t rum and you need to unders tand that not only might you get f rustrated wi th dif ferent ways of p lanning a day, [but there 138 are] di f ferent ways of making a commi tment , a round t ime, and dif ferent ways of turning up to meet ings. A lso, the change-or iented people tend to get really f rustrated wi th tradit ional people. I've actual ly been in a focus group w h e r e I had two change-or ien ted w o m e n w h o worked as First Nat ions managers for the government and one tradit ional m a n that worked in the shop, or whatever . W e w e r e focus ing on the exper ience of First Nat ions people in the work force. It w a s a focus group for a couple of hours. These two First Nat ions w o m e n w e r e very very change or iented, very very structured and were looking at their wa tches want ing to just get as much as I needed on the table. They had meet ings to go to and they had things to do. The other guy wan ted to tell stor ies and it w a s his w a y of shar ing his exper ience, in work ing for the federal government . He had w o r k e d for the federal government for 20 years and he couldn' t just say wel l you know here is your quest ion here are the f ive answers . . .boom b o o m b o o m . Anne and Evan indicated that the lack of f inancial capaci ty impl icates part ic ipat ion. In one example , A n n e noted the lack of avai lable fund ing to compensa te First Nat ion individuals w h o vo lunteered their t ime had affected the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion. In Evan's example , l imited fund ing forced h im to limit part ic ipat ion by relying on a smal ler g roup of people to speak on behalf of the larger communi ty . Fur thermore, Ken acknowledged that leadership and m a n a g e m e n t turnover affects a First Nat ion 's capaci ty to part icipate. The l imitations of local leadership were noted by Wol fe (1988) to affect the ability of First Nat ions to respond to part ic ipat ion d e m a n d s . Enabl ing Capaci ty Evan expla ined that he classif ies the capaci ty of First Nat ions he works wi th in te rms of three categor ies of capaci ty: middle client, overly capable , and overworked . These categor ies w e r e not clearly d ist inguished but the signif icance in assessing capaci ty is that p lanners can structure their involvement and def ine the training componen t to be incorporated into the planning relat ionship. This is an important dist inct ion that bui lds on the need to assess the " readiness factor" of First Nat ions communi t ies identif ied by Wol fe (1988) . W h e n assessing the capacity of First Nat ions, Caro l s t ressed, p lanners need to be honest w h e n they do so. This is important in my exper ience, because of the urgency First Nat ions have in improving their qual i ty of life. In s o m e communi t ies I have w o r k e d in, the desi re to al leviate condi t ions can ove rshadow the current capacity of some communi t ies to carry out their p lanning and deve lopment needs . This is not to say that p lanners control wha t communi t ies can or cannot do, but in assess ing the 139 capaci ty of First Nat ions to achieve some desi red state of change, direct ly and openly wi th First Nat ions, perhaps communi t ies can more successful ly realize smal ler accompl ishments incremental ly over t ime. First Nat ion individuals are very sensit ive in making decis ions that m a y result in "fai lure." I worked on several projects such as hous ing and tour ism where because smal ler targets w e r e real ized successful ly, it genera ted increased conf idence for two communi t ies to commi t to increased responsibi l i t ies and targets in subsequent planning and act ion phases. Interv iewees also identif ied the need for p lanners to faci l i tate capaci ty or to " leave capaci ty behind." Severa l in terv iewees identif ied how they structure capaci ty deve lopment directly into the work ing relat ionship. It w a s not clear to me whether capaci ty bui lding w a s someth ing interv iewees vo lunteered or whe ther it w a s formal ly st ructured into the planning relat ionship. They responded by saying that p lanners have to provide choices and opt ions for First Nat ions to part icipate and as Anne states, it is important to al low " them [First Nat ion individuals] to structure their o w n involvement." Others i such as Janet stated the impor tance of "ensur ing good qual i ty process and the precedence of creat ing good qual i ty process, is bui lding capaci ty a long the way." A n n e suppor ts Janet 's idea: I wou ld not wan t to do a project where w e didn't have s o m e o n e involved throughout [the project ] . . . I have found that where there 's a local p lanner who 's really involved in the process, it g ives the commun i ty a lot more unders tand ing and ground ing in the planning process. In Janet 's exper ience, she explains that p lanners and First Nat ions share capaci ty and control at t imes throughout their relat ionship: I don' t see t h e m as having the control . I see it as a co-creat ion project. There are t imes w h e n the commun i ty will dominate and there are t imes w h e n you will sort of take the reigns for some creat ive t ime to get the process out of the ditch and back on the road. So to me, I'm not sure that you are taking your full responsibi l i ty if you basical ly hand those reigns over to the commun i ty and say I'm in the back of the truck, call me if you need me. In summary , in terv iewees said they facil i tate individual and commun i ty capaci ty w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions in the fo l lowing w a y s : • Work ing wi th local p lanning commi t tees. • Work ing wi th individuals. • A l lowing people to structure their own involvement . • Having s o m e o n e more directly involved in every p lanning project. • Balancing task and process. • Creat ing individual opportuni t ies to gain exper ience in p lanning. • Increasing planning tasks and responsibi l i t ies. 140 • Co-manag ing the planning process and involvement . • Incorporat ing training componen ts directly into the work ing relat ionship. • Providing choices and opt ions for commun i ty process. • Creat ing safety and opt ions to part ic ipate. • Constant ly asking individuals to veri fy w h a t p lanners interpret. • Walk ing the communi ty th rough the who le process. • Providing a part icipatory approach to involve people. • Encourag ing people to be part of the solut ion or dec is ion. • Giv ing communi t ies as many opt ions as possible. • Communi t ies deciding the direct ion it goes . • Acknowledg ing that the main p lanners are the chief and counci ls . Conc lus ions and Implicat ions for Planning Pract ice Commun i t y and individual capaci ty is an important knowledge considerat ion if outs ide planners are to faci l i tate effect ive planning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions. Findings f rom the l i terature and planner interviews in combinat ion suggest four types of capaci ty that p lanners might cons ider w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. These include: 1) author i ty and power; 2) inst i tut ional; 3) organizat ional ; and 4) and h u m a n resource. The responses by interv iewees and authors suggest the need for p lanners to first identify the tradit ional base of institutions that funct ion in a given communi ty . A s Carol notes, "It's all about learning the rhy thms of the communi ty" and to learn how to work wi th t h e m , even though the qual i ty of these tradit ional institutions var ies. A s noted under the knowledge theme of authority relations, in terv iewees pointed out the need to unders tand how external authori ty has regulated and af fected the capaci ty of First Nat ions to part ic ipate. Planners need to consider the status of external jur isdict ion under wh ich a First Nat ion ••' opera tes , and to work in ways that promote the capaci ty s o m e First Nat ions are gaining through land c la ims. Work ing wi th the tradit ional st ructures of First Nat ions wou ld help p lanners to facil i tate more cultural ly appropr ia te p lanning, in w a y s that "revital ize and s t rengthen wha t is an indigenous capaci ty to plan for their o w n communi t ies (Jojola 1998:117) . It is important that p lanners determine whe ther and w h y First Nat ions lack capaci ty because it could impact how planners structure work ing relat ionships. A person w h o has the capaci ty (combined ability, exper ience, technical skill or educat ion to unders tand and be involved) to plan but is unable to part icipate because s/he is overworked or over -commi t ted , is a much dif ferent si tuat ion than an individual w h o lacks capaci ty for technical reasons to part ic ipate in complet ing a planning task, as Evan s e e m e d to indicate. The difficulty may be in dist inguishing whe ther and w h y First Nat ions lack capaci ty, however . 141 Assessing the capacity of the community would assist planners to not only be more effective in facilitating more culturally appropriate planning outcomes, but it would also help to empower individuals to directly participate in planning activities. Planners who incorrectly understate the capacity of a community could be viewed as removing capacity from First Nations they work with. If planners are unable to fully assess the capacity of First Nations they work with, they could at least explain the implications for understating or overstating capacity with the community. This is important since the quality of capacity impacts how participation is structured, who participates, when planning takes place, how timelines are projected, what is effectively accomplished and possibly why processes or projects become disrupted or fail to meet the expectations of the community. Furthermore, planners could easily remove capacity from individuals or the community by ignoring traditional values, knowledge and decision-making systems of the community, as well as literacy and education levels. As stated previously, the jargon planners use, the emphasis on written i language, or where planning takes place can, all implicate understanding, participation and involvement. Planners should: Consider First Nations' Capacity Consider Planning-Relevant Capacity Issues Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Planning Implications of Capacity Authority and Power Institutional Organizational Human Resource 1. External Authority has regulated participation. 2. Changing status of authority and implications for participation. 3. Whether and why First Nations lack capacity. 1. How to assess the capacity of First Nations. 2. How to measure capacity. 3. How to work with the spectrum of capacities. 1. Consider whether planners are removing capacity versus building capacity. 2. Incorporate training into the planner's role. 3. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 7: Knowledge About Capacity for Planning with First Nations. 142 To summar ize in Figure 7, outside p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions need to consider the var ious types of capaci ty and var ious planning-relevant capaci ty issues. Planners might confront var ious chal lenges such as assessing the capaci ty of First Nat ions, and how to work wi th the spec t rum of capaci t ies in communi t ies they work. Ideally, all p lanning relat ionships wi th outs ide planners wou ld create capaci ty, as opposed to removing it f rom the communi ty . First Nat ions and p lanners could structure specif ic capaci ty bui lding tasks directly in the p lanning contract or terms of re ference. This might help to identify an appropr iate role for p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions. 5.7 Planner Relat ionship All of the interv iewees contr ibuted signif icantly to this knowledge theme and it w a s by far the most interest ing to explore. Interviewees contr ibuted primari ly to four knowledge areas: 1) how planners establ ish and structure planning relat ionships wi th First Nat ions; 2) how planners access and gain entry into the communi ty ; 3) wha t obstacles and issues they exper ienced work ing wi th First Nat ions; and 4) wha t indicators p lanners use to evaluate part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionship wi th First Nat ions. Three interv iewees acknowledged that " terms of re ference" or the "contract" were used to formal ly structure the planning relat ionship. C o m b i n e d , the interv iewees indicated that terms of re ference and contract documen ts serve several funct ions. They help to : Clari fy the planner 's unders tanding of w h a t the counci l wan ts ; Identify the goal of the planning exerc ise; Clari fy w h a t is expected of the planner; Def ine the role of the planner; Determine how the planner is go ing to work wi th the counci l ; Ensure p lanners complete the required work in case of d iscrepancies or d isputes; Act as a tool to fall back on if the planner 's role requires negot iat ion; and Gu ide the planning relat ionship as a principles document . These more formal inst ruments were secondary to the emphas is in terv iewees placed on establ ishing relat ionships of trust, and the importance of informal levels of personal associat ion. Their insights and knowledge indicate that developing trust and personal associat ion are essent ia l if p lanners expect to gain the acceptance of First Nation individuals they work w i th . Sue , Dave, Janet , Anne and Evan all s t ressed the impor tance of bui lding "strong relat ionships," or "genuine relat ionships," and the need for p lanners to gain and establ ish an "a tmosphere of trust" wi th First Nat ions they work wi th . In Janet 's opin ion, "developing trust at the f ront end of the process" w a s important 143 for p lanners to consider because it "lasts forever." For Sue, part of the process of establ ishing trust w a s gain ing permiss ion: I cannot c o m e in wi thout the communi t ies permiss ion, like ser ious permiss ion and I have to sustain that permiss ion on a knife's edge all the t ime. I a m the easiest person to get rid of, like that. In fact, if I have thirty people w h o think I wa lk on water and one person says "en [your out ] , " I'm gone. It is the most vu lnerable place on the planet. It's a knife's edge. I know that wi th every breath I take, thirty e lders have to agree that it's ok. Several in terv iewees provided insights and stories concern ing the impor tance of establ ishing personal levels of associat ion w h e n they worked wi th First Nat ions. Janet emphas izes the impor tance of bui lding trust wi th more t radi t ional-subsistence individuals: On the tradit ional s ide of the communi ty , w h o you are as a h u m a n being is w a y more important than the professional skills you br ing, because if they f igure you are a good person and you are there for a good reason, you are there wi th good intent and a good heart, you will do wha t is best for the commun i t y and not over step your skil ls. You won' t say that you can go and c l imb a mounta in if you can' t c l imb a mounta in . Because you are a good person and you wouldn ' t do that. Much of the process of establ ishing trust s e e m e d to be associated wi th a personal e lement , as descr ibed in Sue 's story of connect ing wi th an elder th rough an evening of f iddl ing whi le deve lop ing a tradit ional just ice sys tem, and Dave 's story of establ ishing a " fr iendship of communica t ions , " w h e r e he provided an elder wi th a cup of tea . Others establ ished some level of personal associat ion th rough an informal barbecue, shar ing cook ies and invit ing people to an open house; and th rough a "gradual process of knowing, " including sitt ing and l istening to stor ies. The signi f icance of these types of interact ions is perhaps captured by Janet w h o explains that individuals f rom the communi ty : W a n t to know w h o you are as a h u m a n being, not just a p lanner or as a professional and [if you] try and maintain wha t in the mains t ream society wou ld be cons idered an appropr ia te professional d is tance. Sue revealed how she deve loped relat ionships of personal associat ion by spend ing t ime wi th people and speak ing on a more informal level. In her v iew, "establ ishing a relat ionship is the single most important task. If that doesn ' t happen you won ' t have genu ine entry, even if you have been invited." Sue did not e laborate on the impl icat ions for the lack of genu ine entry but one might assume that it wou ld affect the abil ity for p lanners to facil i tate interact ion and part ic ipat ion. T h e emphas is on personal associat ion is not surpr is ing g iven the history and long associat ion of external control and outs ider involvement noted earlier. Outs ide p lanners should initially expect to 144 encounter feel ings of mistrust. These examples of personal associat ion signify the impor tance for outs ide p lanners to "not set themselves apart" f rom First Nat ions, as Caro l s ta ted. This begins to address the need for p lanners to be highly sensit ive to issues of power and control g iven the historical associat ion of outs ider invo lvement and power imbalances. This observat ion may be part icularly sensit ive wi th the t radi t ional-subsistence individuals of the communi ty , as Janet previously descr ibed. T h e signif icance of establ ishing trust, Janet states, is that " they wan t to have a sense of w h o you are before they wan t to start speaking or part icipat ing wi th you . " A n evaluat ion process might establ ish the "sense" of w h o planners are w h e n they first enter First Nat ion communi t ies . As Janet states: Let them [the communi ty ] examine y o u , and it's not only in terms of your credent ia ls, your work and history. You will need to al low t h e m to examine you personal ly in te rms of your character and values. They wan t to know if you 've got kids or not .They wan t to know whether or not you 've got a wi fe. Ken , Janet , Sue all s t ressed that outs iders are evaluated and moni tored w h e n they first enter the communi ty . This evaluat ion or assessment process could reflect the second stage of Kowalsky et al. 's (1996) four-s tage entry process, where commun i ty individuals de termine if the researcher [planner] is "wor th t rust ing." Not all interv iewees revealed wha t w a s being eva luated, but for Larry, he observed that First Nat ions w a n t to know for example , if p lanners: Have all the answers to the prob lem off the top of your head . Are you going to l isten to wha t they say? How you are go ing to get the informat ion? W h a t you are go ing to do and are you going to leave t h e m with the assurance that they are in control of the project? Other in terv iewees s e e m e d to suggest that the p lanner 's att i tude, style and approach were possible cri teria used by First Nat ions to evaluate p lanners. Interv iewees also considered how they gain physical entry into the communi ty . A s part of the process of gain ing entry and access into a communi ty , four in terv iewees suggested establ ishing direct contact wi th one individual. However , they var ied on the role and funct ion of the contact . Establ ishing contact w a s helpful to: 1) create support and sponsorsh ip as a w a y to gain access and break down barr iers of entry; 2) establ ish a trust relat ionship for p lanners to access informat ion about what w a s going on in the communi ty ; and 3) to help planners mainta in the paper f low be tween the planner and communi ty . Other interv iewees were less st ructured and indicated that they try to speak wi th as many 145 people as possible. Finally, Larry and Dave suggested the need to determine the appropr iate level of contact , and the need to create a "hit list" of w h o m you need to contact . Interv iewees var ied in terms of whe ther they fo l lowed a formal process of entry and w h o m they talked wi th w h e n they first enter a First Nat ion communi ty . Dave descr ibes a story about tradit ional entry: I've seen in the early days w h e n once a meet ing is cal led in the communi ty it is usual ly quite expressive and somet imes over ly fr iendly in invit ing new guests into their communi ty . You have a little feast, maybe put up some stew and bannock. I r emember one meet ing I a t tended years ago, I w a s a young radical leader then and w e c a m e into the communi ty and w e were talking about s o m e polit ical issues and one of the protocols w a s for one of the elders to get up and make an offer. So she [one elder] c a m e up to the table and she put a package of c igaret tes on the table for all the leadership to enjoy. I used to be a smoker then. It wasn ' t the idea of smok ing tobacco then , it w a s the idea of providing a gift and showing respect. It's like a tradi t ion. It's a gift for people coming to the communi ty . It's a shar ing and a showing of respect and that w a s conveyed by a spiritual of fer ing. Evan and A n n e indicated a series of s teps they general ly fo l low, and Dave indicated that he fo l lows a strict protocol wi thin a mult i -stakeholder land use process. Others responded general ly that they talk wi th the chief, w h o m e v e r adminis tered the contract , the counci l , counci lors, band manager , project manager of the contract , informal leaders, d i rectors, management , non-Abor ig inal people such as nurses, R C M P , teachers , and "as many people as possible." These var iat ions suggest that there is no set entry protocol for the p lanners I in terv iewed. Issues and Obstac les Severa l in terv iewees expanded var ious issues and obstac les such as planner a l ignment, p lanner history, p lanner bias and att i tude, including p lanner confl ict and credibil i ty. For example , Caro l and Sue sugges ted that p lanners need to be aware of whe ther and w h o they are seen to be al igned wi th in the commun i ty . Caro l referred to "external a l ignment" in te rms of being seen to associate wi th R C M P and nurses in one communi ty she had w o r k e d ; w h e r e a s Janet referred to ' internal a l ignment ' based on two major group ings within the communi ty , in terms of fami ly c lans and change-or ien ted versus t radi t ional-subs is tence groups. Both interv iewees s t ressed the impor tance of mainta in ing neutral i ty but it is not c lear to me how planner a l ignment affects part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships. G iven the history of fami ly relat ions and confl ict, and the political of nature of First Nat ions, perhaps the a l ignment, perceived or real , is about an individual or group gaining some advantage over another g roup. Janet e laborates on the sensit ivi ty of p lanner a l ignment: 146 Also important is w h o you have coffee wi th , w h o you have supper w i th , where you stay in the communi ty , and w h e r e there is a hotel . If you are a lways staying wi th people w h o are seen to be sort of the e l i te . . .you never stay in somebody 's [house] w h o has a foot in both wor lds . You' re seen to be part of that family, not this fami ly and the same thing wi th relat ionships. Genera l ly it's been that you go, "Great I'm gett ing into this communi ty , s o m e b o d y is taking me f ishing" and the quest ion is, "Who is taking me f ishing, w h y are they taking you f ishing and what 's the message that is being del ivered to the commun i ty by t h e m seeing you go out in a boat wi th that person?" Planners might consider how they may ostracize people s imply by w h o they are "seen" to be al igned wi th and in do ing so, Janet states: "you are immediate ly remov ing yoursel f f rom the rest of the communi ty . " T w o interv iewees stated that outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions might confront issues relating to the 'p lanner history' of a communi ty . A s Janet suggests , "somet imes you are not only living d o w n your o w n history, you are living d o w n the history of every other consul tant w h o has been there in the last ten years." The planner history of the communi ty m a y help to explain w h y p lanners are evaluated and "constant ly being assessed" w h e n they first enter the communi ty . This wou ld explain w h y the process of establ ishing trust, and gaining entry and acceptance are critical if outs ide planners are to facil i tate effect ive part ic ipatory relat ionships. Five interv iewees had also acknowledged issues of p lanner confl ict in te rms of p lanners not overs tepping cultural boundar ies, and how planners or the p lanning process could become targeted or "ambushed . " Planner confl ict w a s attr ibuted in several instances to: a commun i ty m e m b e r want ing the planner 's contract , over w h y the planner w a s hired, a personal i ty confl ict be tween the p lanner and an individual, and over a planner 's teaching method . Finally, Ken pointed out that symbols of authori ty such as depar tmenta l vehic les or clothing "can provoke s o m e degree of fr ict ion f rom the p a s t . " Symbo ls of author i ty noted by others also extend beyond mater ial i tems and include being 'white, ' the w a g e differential that consul tants make, where p lanners c o m e f rom, and how planners relate and social ize wi th people. These confl icts pose all sorts of impl icat ions for the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion and involvement across cul tures. They affect issues of trust, unders tand ing, power and control noted by Forester (1989) . In genera l , they represent the complex nature and struggle outs ide p lanners exper ience w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Based on the f indings, p lanners might exper ience four types of confl ict. These include: 1) substant ive; 2) process; 3) planner; and 4) interpersonal confl ict. This typology is based on Anne 's 1 4 7 example w h e n one individual chal lenged the f inal plan review and wan ted changes ; w h e n Sue w a s chal lenged by one individual over her method of teach ing; wi th Ken's acknow ledgement of a personal i ty confl ict; and over the interpersonal confl ict be tween famil ies as noted under social organization. T h e signi f icance of knowing the var ious types of confl ict is whe ther p lanners can contro l , m a n a g e or ove rcome the confl ict. Sue recognized the importance of needing to know whether the confl ict is directed towards her personal ly, or whether it is over an interpersonal issue wi th in the communi ty . This wou ld be important to dist inguish in te rms of how to handle confl ict s i tuat ions. Regard less of knowing wha t the confl ict is over (especial ly internal confl ict) outs ide p lanners m a y not be able to m a n a g e or overcome confl ict, let a lone identify it, as Janet exper ienced. In one instance she descr ibed a process w h e r e one individual had targeted the process and "hi jacked" it. The level of confl ict reached a point to where Janet dec ided to cancel her contract. Janet indicates that p lanners: Have to be responsive to commun i ty interests, by the commun i ty interests dr iv ing it and they can drive you past your bot tom l ine. . . . You really need to unders tand wha t your bot tom line is and how far you are prepared to go before you say this may wel l be in the communi ty 's interest but as a professional , as a moral and ethical individual, I can' t be associated wi th that kind of s i tuat ion. In Sue 's exper ience, the diff iculty is in identifying confl ict and wha t p lanners do about it: It's really important to dec ide. The hard par^ knows w h e n you are go ing to call it [confl ict]. W e are a lways hopeful that it is just a b u m p in the road and w e can wait and wait , and it will pass and this person just got someth ing that t r iggered t h e m and you can be cur ious and say, "Gee I wonder wha t that 's about" but not to take it on personal ly. I'd like to think that it's really important to be of s t rong mind . You have to be able to just "be" wi th it. However , if its chronic to the point w h e r e there are d is turbances in addit ion to you , even if it's just yourself , but it's chronic , s o m e h o w it has to come to a conc lus ion. Otherwise it's go ing to impact on your capaci ty to do the job . In another instance, Sue descr ibed the story of work ing wi th two First Nat ions m e n w h o chal lenged the structure of her approach . She openly admi t ted the confl ict s i tuat ion to the group, as a w a y for part ic ipants to co -manage and solve the confl ict. It is important to note that whi le the interv iewees acknowledged severa l confl ict issues be tween the p lanner and communi ty , there may be si tuat ions w h e n planners may have to take a s tance as Carol admi ts , whe re : You 've got to have your o w n core va lues that a re unshakeab le a n d as a p lanner, you have to have conf idence in yoursel f and your own abil i t ies. Not in the sense that you are bel l igerent or overbear ing w h e n you c o m e to a communi ty . Don' t let yoursel f get d rawn [into thinking] you have done someth ing terr ibly w r o n g if 148 nobody shows up to a meet ing or someth ing like that. There might be, and that 's fair to, but usually that 's not the case. Usual ly it's someth ing [else] and people are going to be rough and hard on you and that 's to be bapt ism by fire coming I think. I have encountered numerous instances in my o w n exper ience that have chal lenged my sel f -conf idence, including the mean ing and purpose of my involvement at t imes. I agree with Sue that work ing with First Nat ions can feel like "the most vulnerable place on the planet," at t imes. It is very easy for p lanners to wan t to take on the responsibi l i ty for everything that does not go 'according to plan, ' but there will be si tuat ions, as Carol notes, where "you've got to have your o w n core values that are unshakeable." This is not to say that p lanners do not care, share understanding or exper ience empathy . But planners w h o work over a pro longed period with First Nat ions must ensure that they maintain safe boundar ies of personal health and to not assume the complete burden for unexpected events and si tuat ions that arise w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions. Another important knowledge considerat ion for outs ide planners to consider is what biases they bring to the planning relat ionship. Interviewees var ied in how for thcoming they were in admit t ing specif ic b iases but two interv iewees recognized the fact that they were non-nat ive and f rom outs ide of the communi ty . Dave admit ted that he "could be biased or prejudiced" against government bureaucrats because of "their bias, procedures or set policies towards First Nat ions." Sue, Evan and Larry all acknowledged biases in terms of want ing to do th ings their o w n w a y or having their o w n opinion about the w a y things should go. These included asking people to learn in a certain w a y dur ing a training example , the habit of one planner want ing to set things up in a structure that sui ted h im, and the threat of one planner want ing to fill decision vacuums. As Evan states, he struggles with want ing : To do things in a certain way. Somet imes I wou ld extend that into a plan. I'm pretty cognizant that I do tha t . . .we try to be personal ly aware of our weaknesses . . . my habit of trying to impose or set things up in a structure that suits me, or that I think is right. So I often try to quest ion that: "Is this their w a y or my way?" The fact that planners were able to acknowledge and suggest var ious biases is an important real izat ion. More important is the need for p lanners to be honest about their biases. A n n e recognized how her educat ion had al lowed her to "look at b iases and to be h o n e s t " in acknowledg ing them. It w a s not clear whether this implied se l f -acknowledgement or public acknowledgement . However , Evan indicated that he tr ies to overcome his non-nat ive bias by openly admit t ing to the communi ty : 149 Wel l , obviously I'm not f rom the communi ty , I'm whi te . To get over that, I'd just tell t hem. I'd start by saying "I 'm whi te and not f rom your communi ty , " and I don' t even pretend to be native or f rom the commun i ty so let's get that over w i th , and two, I don ' t work for Indian Affairs. Now that breaks the ice you know for eighty percent of the people. There is twenty percent that don' t t rust you . They just have to be . . . it just takes t h e m a whi le to w a r m up to y o u , usual ly by the t ime w e are in the w o r k s h o p sett ing and we 've gone th rough the process of proposal wr i t ing, w inn ing the contract or helping t h e m get the m o n e y to do the study. Confront ing his non-nat ive bias he v iewed w a s a way to "break the ice" and to start the process of bui lding trust. Another knowledge considerat ion for p lanners to reflect on is how biases impl icate part ic ipatory relat ionships. A n n e suggested that she br ings a "different perspect ive, di f ferent baggage" to the p lanning relat ionship and how "your insights are go ing to be l imited by your exper iences. " The potential impl icat ions for p lanner b iases raise critical issues surrounding power and contro l . They could affect everyth ing f rom the w a y prob lems and solut ions are def ined, to matters affect ing the qual i ty of part ic ipat ion, the level of involvement , empowermen t , trust arid mutual unders tand ing. T h e y also raise numerous issues pertaining to planning ethics. Evaluat ing Effective Part ic ipatory Relat ionships As a w a y to bring c losure to the interview, interv iewees w e r e asked how they measured effective part ic ipatory relat ionships. They identif ied four types of indicators that relate to : 1) plan output ; 2) quali ty of part ic ipat ion; 3) increased capaci ty; and 4) planner involvement. Under plan output , in terv iewees recognized success not just in te rms of producing a planning document , but that the p lanning process del ivered what was expected (the goals of p lanning) , and that the plan w a s inspected and unders tood by the communi ty . Success also impl ied that the plan w a s actual ly being imp lemented , that the plan received "status" in the communi ty , and whe the r it w a s promoted and moni to red. Plans that identif ied clear d i rect ion, set out goals over di f ferent t ime f rames, created goals that could be measured , and those that provided a plan structure, w e r e considered posit ive indicators. Effective part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionships and ou tcomes w e r e also evaluated by the level and 150 quali ty of part ic ipat ion and engagement . Interv iewees did not identify specif ic scales of m e a s u r e m e n t , 1 6 except to say that one descr ibed success in te rms of whe ther he felt he received "good direct ion," or there w a s "enough commun i ty input to feel comfor tab le to move ahead . " Several in terv iewees identif ied the success of p lanning relat ionships in terms of the smi les on people 's faces, the level of comfor t at the closing of the workshop , the degree of d issension or consensus , and whe ther people were laughing and jok ing. T h e third set of indicators relate to bui lding individual capaci ty. A n effect ive part ic ipatory p lanning relat ionship w a s evaluated based on the fact that p lanners helped people to unders tand, assisted people on their way , and helped people to acknowledge their "d reams and desi res." Further, one interv iewee evaluated capaci ty more in terms of test ing the unders tand ing of people th rough their act ions and responses. Finally, the four th set of indicators identif ies mat ters relat ing to the planner 's per formance and relat ionship. These are evaluated in terms of the length of the relat ionship and whether the relat ionship w a s ongo ing and long- term, whether p lanners were asked to c o m e back and do fol low up work , and if First Nat ions respected the opinion of the planner. Interv iewees also stated that p lanners were evaluated in terms of whe ther the relat ionship surv ived, if there w a s a sense that the relat ionship w a s stronger at the end of the relat ionship than at the beginning, and whe ther the planner 's credibil i ty had been s t rengthened at the conclusion of the relat ionship. Success w a s somet imes measured through acknow ledgemen t and recognit ion in the w a y of gifts. This w a s a signif icant quest ion to end my interviews because it a l lowed interv iewees to reflect and start the process of c losure. It also a l lowed t h e m to reflect on the hour and a half of talking about w h a t they do , wha t mat ters, what they struggle wi th , and more . Interest ingly, in terv iewees did not ment ion any indicators ref lect ing the first three more substant ive knowledge themes of First Nat ions ' values and knowledge systems, authority relations and social organization. 1 6 One planner had commented that in a community of 1,000 people, he had suggested that at least 10 people had to be present (the portfolio heads) for him to go ahead. Quantifying participation in terms of individual turnout is very difficult in my experience. The average population of the First Nation communities I have worked has ranged from approximately 175 to 1100 members, with the average being 250-350 individuals. Rarely have my planning workshops included more that 30-40 people at any one given time. 151 Conclus ions and Impl icat ions for Planning Pract ice The f indings f rom the interv iewees expanded the knowledge and unders tand ing on the use of formal instruments to structure p lanning relat ionships be tween planners and First Nat ions such as terms of reference and contract documents . Interv iewees added how these inst ruments are relevant th roughout all s tages of the planning relat ionship. These types of documents might help to ove rcome the concern of two authors that First Nat ions need to increase their ability and capaci ty to m a n a g e the role of the outs ide planner (Boothroyd 1986; Boothroyd 1992; Wol fe 1989). Addi t ional research wou ld be helpful to consider the process of prepar ing these documents , including the role of First Nat ions in prepar ing t h e m , the degree to wh ich these documents are used and moni tored, how they regulate the role of the planner, the advantages and d isadvantages of using t h e m , including how they implicate the p lanner -communi ty relat ionship. Fur thermore , whi le these types of documents might be a valuable tool for First Nat ions to structure and m a n a g e the p lanner 's relat ionship, it i would be valuable to know the criteria or policy First Nat ions use to hire and evaluate outs ide p lanners (England 1 9 7 1 ; Wol fe 1989) th roughout all s tages of the p lanner -communi ty relat ionship. Interv iewees revealed several important insights concern ing mat ters of trust and personal associat ion. Outs ide p lanners w h o work wi th First Nat ions not only need to cons ider how they gain access and entry into the communi ty , but that they are being assessed and evaluated w h e n they first enter a communi ty . Factors might include issues relating to the power of the planner, the att i tude and sensit ivi ty of the planner, including their approach to p lanning, as wel l as the level of trust and whether p lanners reveal aspects of their personal life wi th individuals to establ ish an associat ion. Based on the f indings f rom the in terv iewees, p lanners need to acknowledge that their professional capaci ty m a y have more signi f icance once their personal capaci ty has establ ished the necessary comfor t level or trust. Outs ide p lanners w h o become more aware of the var ious issues and obstac les they confront w h e n work ing wi th First Nat ions might enable t h e m to work in more cultural ly appropr ia te ways . These issues and obstac les include how planners establ ish and maintain trust, perceived planner a l ignment, the history of communi ty p lanners, the types of confl ict p lanners encounter , including the biases they br ing to the relat ionship, and issues pertaining to credibil i ty. Further, outs ide p lanners not only have to recognize the biases they bring to cross-cul tural p lanning contexts but how they might ove rcome t h e m . The fact that one interv iewee publicly acknowledged his bias to the communi ty does not guaran tee that p lanners can 152 avoid "filling decis ion vacuums, " as he noted. Fur thermore, it is fair to say that p lanners could never ove rcome their b iases complete ly, all they can do is to str ive to reduce t h e m . The chal lenges noted under this knowledge theme include whe ther p lanners can identify, control and o v e r c o m e confl ict, how they maintain trust and credibi l i ty, and how relat ionships are eva luated. Given the external history of First Nat ions, and part icularly the cultural d i f ferences of non-nat ive p lanners, outs ide p lanners have to chal lenge their ef fect iveness. As Janet s tates, she constant ly chal lenges herself by ask ing: "What a m I do ing that is pissing t h e m off? W h a t a m I do ing that they f ind sort of difficult to deal w i th . C a n I change my approach? Can I change my techn ique to be kind of more acceptable?" A n effect ive outside planner might approach the commun i t y at the start of their relat ionship to openly d iscuss the communi ty 's history of p lanners, cit ing w h a t worked wel l and how the planning relat ionship might have been improved. The mutual learning and unders tand ing gained f rom this exchange wou ld increase the capaci ty of First Nat ions to m a n a g e subsequent planning relat ionships, as wel l as enhance the qual i ty of cross-cul tural p lanning interact ion and ou tcomes . Planners might have the best of intent ions w h e n they work wi th First Nat ions but inevitably they will be resisted, chal lenged and tested th roughout their p lanning relat ionship at t imes. To summar i ze the discussion about knowledge regarding the planner relationship, Figure 8 highl ights the important contr ibut ions of fered by the p lanners I in terv iewed. 153 Planners shou ld : Consider How They Establish Relationships with First Nations Identify How They Gain Access & Entry Into the Community Formal Instruments Informal Instruments Terms of Reference. Planner Contract. Establishing Trust. Revealing Personal Association. Establishing a Friendship of Communications. Spending Time and Deliberating. Practicing Respect. Using Non-Judgmental Attitude. 1. Formal and Informal Processes. 2. Contact/Sponsor. 3. Determine Appropriate Level of Contact. Realize They Are Being Assessed by First Nations Consider Planning-Relevant Relationship Issues 1. Power Differentiation. 2. Attitude and Sensitivity. 3. Planner's Approach. 4. Trust Level. 5. Reveal on a Personal Level. 1. Establishing and maintaining trust. 2. Perceived planner alignment. 2. History of planner involvement in the community. 3. Types of conflict planners encounter. 4. Biases planners bring to the relationship. 5. Maintaining planner credibility. Recognize Planning Challenges Identify Implications for Planner Relationships 1. Whether planners can identify, control or overcome conflict. 2. How to maintain trust and planner credibility. 3. How are relationships evaluated. 1. Facilitate First Nations' control. 2. Evaluate quality of participatory relationships. 3. Ensure trust is established. 4. Consider planning ethics and values. 5. Identify an appropriate role for the planner. Figure 8: Knowledge Abou t the Planner Relat ionship for Planning wi th First Nat ions. 154 5.8 The Relevance of Forester 's Progressive Planner Model for Planning Wi th First Nat ions. Whi le Forester 's (1989) research is based on his exper ience in an env i ronmenta l review off ice (metropol i tan city p lanning depar tment ) , and on the communica t ive act ion of p lanners dur ing land use confl icts and strategies for health p lanning, his exhortat ions are of ten general ly prescr ibed in planning schools . Accord ing ly , it is useful to appraise his model in light of the f indings f rom my research on wha t p lanners say p lanners need to know w h e n work ing wi th in the specif ic context of First Nat ions. In genera l , the research f indings suggest that Forester 's progressive p lanner model is appl icable in s o m e w a y to all seven knowledge themes identif ied in this thesis. However , his practical levels of communica t i ve act ion def ined as " face-to-face" (matters pertaining to the interpersonal level of individuals and p lanners) , "organizat ion" (matters pertaining to First Nat ion's cul ture and communi ty ) and "polit ical-economic structure" (matters pertaining to the external author i ty of First Nat ions) var ied under each of the seven knowledge themes. Interviewees provided numerous examples of communica t ive act ions both in te rms of communica t ive distort ions and correct ive act ions they used th roughout their p lanning pract ice wi th First Nat ions. Forester 's practical criteria of comprehensib i l i ty (unders tanding) , sincerity (trust), legi t imacy (consent ) , and accuracy (truth) necessary to achieve states of 'mutual unders tand ing ' w e r e not equal ly appl icable under each knowledge theme, g iven wha t p lanners said and the fact that the four practical cri teria w e r e hot explicitly imposed. Knowledge about First Nat ions' value and knowledge systems ref lects Forester 's "face to fa