Rachel Hirsch, FES, York University, Toronto

Gwen Healey, Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre, Iqaluit

Sharing research findings in the Canadian Arctic: Assessing the integration of Inuit

knowledge in policy communications about climate change related food insecurity

ArcticNet7th Annual Scientific Meeting (ASM2010)

Session: Human Health (Part II)Ottawa, ON, Dec 16, 2010

Qaujigiartiit: Looking For Knowledge

Sharing Research Findings in the Canadian Arctic

Objectives:

1. discuss ways of knowing about climate change and health (i.e., food (in)security)

2. propose a tool for assessing the use of this knowledge in policy/program development

State of the Arctic

CommunityHealth

and Well-being

Research Agenda: Climate Change Adaptation Policy Imperatives for

the Canadian Arctic

Policy Actions

Vulnerab ili tyR

esili

ency

(Gilligan et al., 2006)

– Scientific• Western/European approach; empirical analysis;

researching and recording observations – Local

• group and place specific; direct experience; short-term– Traditional

• “knowledge system based on tradition that is created, preserved and dispersed” (tradition = capacity for adjustment to environmental extremes)

• inter-generational, interconnectivity within and between human-natural systems

Multiple Ways of Knowing

CommunityHealth

and Well-being

Policy Actions

State of the Arctic

Knowledge S

cientif ic

I ndi

g eno

us

LocalOther…

Research Agenda: How to know about the state of the

Canadian Arctic?

Health CanadaClimate Change and Health Adaptation in Northern First Nations and Inuit Communities Program (Total Funded Communities 2008-2011 = 37)

2008-2009 Projects 2009-2010 Projects2010-2011 Projects

Canada’s Domestic Action: Northern Climate Change

Adaptation and Health

Knowledge Transfer Dilemmas: Community-Research-Policy

(Pearce et al., 2009; Jack et al., 2010)

Engagement • hiring research assistant or participatory action

research• treatment of traditional/local knowledgeEnactment • “In the adoption of evidence-informed decision-

making there is an interesting paradox in that different stakeholder groups have unique definitions of what constitutes evidence” (p. 652).

Who are the climate change and health policy stakeholders at different levels of government (e.g., regional, territorial, national) and with whom do they share information?

What value is attached to different types of knowledge (Inuit, local, scientific)?

How is information transformed through knowledge sharing?

Importance of Assessing Knowledge Integration in the

Policy Process

How are multiple ways of knowing about climate change related food insecurity in Nunavut translated from research to policy?

1. Develop a tool for tracking the exchange of different types of knowledge.

2. Collaborate with one community research group in Nunavut who would like to track findings from a study they have conducted on climate change and food security.

Research Question and Objectives

(Mertens et al., 2005; Janssen et al., 2006)

Proposed Methods: Social Network Mapping

• Purpose– connect micro (individual) to macro (institutional or

inter-institutional): nodes and links– relational data: communications and content

• Main Benefit: characterize system potential or communication resiliency– Connectivity (links): density; reachability– Centrality (nodes): hubs/brokers

Source: Crona & Bodin, 2006

Example: fishing village in Kenya- centrality (node size) by occupation- connectivity (link thickness) by exchange of

local ecological knowledge

(Roe, 1994)

Dynamic Communication: Narrative Policy Analysis

Narrative Policy Analysis• Identify the main story developed by each

opposing stakeholder group• Consider any alternative stories, alterations to

the current stories, or potential counter- narratives

• Consider how any alternatives may be coalesced into a larger meta-narrative

Proposed Methods: Mapping Interviews

Initial goal: develop protocol for mapping interviews– descriptive and participatory

• begin with disseminated findings (e.g., for sale ski-doo)• questionnaire: info reception/use, priorities, form of info,

form preference (output -> knowledge map)• parallel dialogue about the nature of knowledge sharing

(output -> narrative policy analysis)– bi-directional snowball sampling

• info sharing; saturation

"We’ll be seeing more of this... more machines for sale. We won’t be able to use them any more when it warms up”.

Case Example: Climate Change Related Food

Security in Nunavut

Concerns:- changed ways of hunting- inability to hunt at all

Source: Healey, Magner, Ritter, Kamookak, Aningmiuq, Issaluk, Mackenzie, Allardyce, Stockdale, & Moffit, 2010 (Accepted to Arctic).

Photographer: Rahabi Kamookak (Gjoa Haven)

LegendKnowledge Type

localscientific mixedtraditional

Priorityfood securityconservation

Iqaluit Municipal Council

Amaruq Hunters and Trappers Committee

GN: Department of Environment

GN: Department of Health and Social Services

Health CanadaInuit Tapiriit Kanatami

Indian and Northern Affairs

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

QHRN

LegendKnowledge Type

localscientific mixedtraditional

Priorityfood securityconservation

Iqaluit Municipal Council

Amaruq Hunters and Trappers Committee

GN: Department of Environment

GN: Department of Health and Social Services

Health Canada

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami

Indian and Northern Affairs

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

QHRN

Nunavut Research Institute

LegendKnowledge Type

localscientific mixedtraditional

Priorityfood securityconservation

Iqaluit Municipal Council

Amaruq Hunters and Trappers Committee

GN: Department of Environment

GN: Department of Health and Social Services

Health Canada

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami

Indian and Northern Affairs

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

QHRN

Nunavut Research Institute

LegendKnowledge Type

localscientific mixedtraditional

Priorityfood securityconservation

Iqaluit Municipal Council

Amaruq Hunters and Trappers Committee

GN: Department of Environment

GN: Department of Health and Social Services

Health Canada

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami

Indian and Northern Affairs

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

QHRN

Nunavut Research Institute

Potential ContributionsTheory: How are various types of information (e.g.,

traditional, local, scientific, etc.) integrated/transformed in policy communications; and, what does this mean for accountability in knowledge sharing?

Method: Is rigour enhanced by first mapping the structure of institutional communications across scales and then exploring the processes underlying this knowledge exchange?

Policy: What opportunities and obstacles for communicating about climate change adaptation policy development might the synthesis of these ‘policy stories’ uncover?

Acknowledgements

• My committee (York U): Bonnie Kettel, Martin Bunch, Karen Kraft Sloan, and Rick Bello

• Advisers: ITK (Scot Nickels, Eric Loring, Carrie Grable), FNIHB-HC (Erin Meyers, Diane McClymont Peace), NRI (Jamal Shirley, Mary Ellen Thomas), and Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Co-op (Michael Svoboda)

• ArcticNet Project Member: “Integrating and Translating ArcticNet Science for Sustainable Communities and National and Global Policy and Decision-Making” (Leaders: Chris Furgal, Trent and David Hik, U of A)

“I will say as an example that traditional food is, ofcourse, the best in terms of consumption of food in the north,because [we’re] used to it. And traditional food, there’s no badfood in that sense. But since the introduction of southern foods,there’s all kinds of choices now … just look at the stores, I cangive you an example of one store, a little store that has aislesand aisles of stuff. I can’t even say that they’re food. They’restuff. But you consume through your mouth, but they’re notreally healthy at all. They’re just all junk food.”

-- Participant #6 (Healey, 2006)

Case Example: Climate Change Related Food

Security in Nunavut

(Furgal, Fletcher and Dickson, 2006 for Environment Canada)

Adaptive Co-management

Parkes & Panelli, 2001