Indigenous Resource Management & Natural Asset Management – Two-eyed Seeing for Climate Resilience
By Elyse Lindgren
Resilience is one of the most important characteristics a community can have now and in the future due to climate change. Climate resilience poses a critical approach to how we can locally address climate change for present and future generations. Climate resilience defines the ability of the environment to respond to, withstand, and bounce back from the negative impacts of climate change. It involves “resistance” and “recovery” from climate change disturbances that assist in both mitigation and adaption efforts (Bates, Duncan, Edgar, et al., 2019; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Mitigation efforts are essential to stop the further acceleration of climate change if we hope to have a safe and livable world for present and future generations. Furthermore, having reached 1.2 degrees warming already, adaption to future climate scenarios must be a part of our present and future community plans (UN, 2021). Natural Asset Management (NAM) is one climate resilience tool to make system-based governance and policy changes to the way we manage and value our natural resources and environments. NAM is the management of a community or region’s natural resources to enhance or restore the ecosystem services they provide.
NAM may be a relatively new practice to western governance, being first implemented by Gibsons BC in 2015 (David Suzuki Foundation, n.d.). However, Indigenous Nations across Turtle Island and many across the world have been sustainably stewarding their natural environments and resources since time immemorial. Although not a new concept, it provides a critical tool for local governments to build climate resilience to assist in a collective global impact against the impacts of climate change. Explored next are the benefits and impacts of natural asset management as a climate resilience strategy and how using “two-eyed seeing”, we can incorporate NAM into governance structures to create climate resilient communities.
Natural Asset Management: Benefits & Impacts
NAs are responsible for the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, shelters we call homes, and overall well-being. These services can also be referred to as ecosystem services, categorised into four types: provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural services, as described in the table below.
Figure 1 Ecosystem Services and Well-being (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005)
Each natural asset provides a variety of each ecosystem services. A study by the David Suzuki Foundation identified the ecosystem services found in natural assets within the Lower Mainland of BC’s various natural assets, as depicted in the table below. Here, the table explains the critical role natural assets like wetlands, lakes, and forests play in the foundational and supporting services for human and non-human life.
Figure 2 Natural Assets & Ecosystem Services (Wilson, 2010).
Specific to climate resilience, these natural assets provide climate regulation like cooling effects to combat extreme heatwaves, flood prevention, and carbon sequestration to adapt to, bounce back from, and mitigate climate change. For communities, these services further aid in lowering local operational costs such as costs for stormwater infrastructure, lowered energy services needed, and increased recreation and cultural opportunities (David Suzuki Foundation, n.d.).
Incorporating NAs into Governance Structures
Re-establishing resilient communities not only involves how we manage and govern our land but our relationship with the land (Wale, 2022). Indigenous knowledge and practices have been a testament to what resilience and adaptability can successfully look like. Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) is rooted in “knowledge, practice, and beliefs concerning the relationship of living beings to one another and to the physical environment” (Kimmerer, 2002). Today’s colonial political and governance structures have involved extracting from the land and managing the resources extracted, but not universally managing or stewarding the land itself. For example, common property resources like water bodies, forests, and the atmosphere are available to everyone and, with each use, are depleted (Acheson, 2006). This is a key gap NAM can fill by reducing the exploitability of natural assets. Which, when done appropriately, can include the knowledge of and guidance from both Indigenous and colonial governments. Letting Indigenous communities lead the way by incorporating TEK and its associated embedded values into colonial systems that include NAM, as a form of two-eyed seeing, should be pursued to achieve local climate resilience.
At the governance level, NAM can be incorporated as a new policy or as an addition to any current asset management policy. This may include firstly, managing and enhancing existing natural assets and secondly, adding additional green infrastructure to increase a community’s climate resilience. However, before policy development, it is essential to ensure the policy development team clearly understands the benefits and management practices of NAM to ensure the policy is developed to fit their community and land’s needs. This, in turn, can enhance political buy-in to ensure effective change. By incorporating natural assets into local governance and policy, we can establish an improved values framework for managing and valuing natural assets in our current political system.
Conclusion
Key Take Aways:
- Natural Assets provide the very foundations and services for human and non-human life
- Natural Asset Management is a powerful tool to protect and enhance our natural assets for climate resilience
- We need to re-establish our relationship with the land to improve governance and management of natural assets
- Implement the management of natural assets into a specific policy
- Ensure the managing team is on board and understands the benefits of natural asset management.
- Lead by Indigenous peoples and supported by colonial governments
Resources
Acheson, J. M. (2006). Institutional failure in resource management. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35(1), 117-134
Bates, C., Duncan, M. I., Edgar, G. J., Bruno, J. F., Benedetti-Cecchi, L., Côté, I. M., Lefcheck, J. S., Costello, M. J., Barrett, N., Bird, T. J., Fenberg, P. B., & Stuart-Smith, R. D. (2019). Climate resilience in marine protected areas and the ‘Protection Paradox’ Biological Conservation, 236, 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.05.005
David Suzuki Foundations. Nature-based Solutions. Retrieved on July 25th,2022 from Nature-based solutions - David Suzuki Foundation
Kimmerer, R. W. (2002). Weaving Traditional Ecological Knowledge into Biological Education: A Call to Action. BioScience, 52(5), 432-438.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Living Beyond Our Means: Natural Assets and Human Well-being. Retrieved on July 25th, 2022 from 3337 BoardSumFINAL.indd (millenniumassessment.org)
Union of Concerned Scientists. (2016). Toward Climate Resilience: A Framework and Principles for Science-based Adaption. Retrieved on July 15th from climate-resilience-framework-and-principles.pdf (ucsusa.org).
UN. (2021). 2020, one of three warmest years on record: World Meteorological Organization. Retrieved on July 25th, 2022 from 2020, one of three warmest years on record: World Meteorological Organization | | UN News
Wale, J. (2022). Gitxsan Rez-ilience: Understanding climate resilience as Naadahahlhakwhlinhl (interconnectedness). Retrieved on July 25th, 2022 from Gitxsan Rez-ilience - Canadian Climate Institute
Wilson, (2010). Natural Capital. Retrieved on July 25th, 2022 from natural-capital-bc-lower-mainland-valuing-benefits-nature.pdf (davidsuzuki.org)