Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/11375/24333
Title: | Review of 'Dérivation Eastmain-Opinaca-La Grande. Premier rapport d'environnement sur les parties aval des rivières détournées,' Cultural, Social and Economic Aspects |
Authors: | Feit, Harvey A. |
Department: | Anthropology |
Keywords: | Environmental Impact Regimes;Politics of Impact Assessment;Negotiating Social Impact Regimes;Local Expertise;Negotiating Recognition of Aboriginal Rights;James Bay Cree;James Bay Hydro-electric Project;James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
Publication Date: | 1974 |
Citation: | Feit, Harvey A. 1974. "Review of 'Dérivation Eastmain-Opinaca-La Grande. Premier rapport d'environnement sur les parties aval des rivières détournées,' Cultural, Social and Economic Aspects." Montreal: Grand Council of the Crees (of Quebec). Pp. 19. |
Abstract: | This review examines the James Bay Energy Corporation's report "Derivation Eastmain-Opinaca-La Grande. Premier rapport d'environnement sur les parties aval des rivieres detournees." The JBEC is the Crown corporation responsible for planning and building the James Bay hydro-electric project. This review evaluates the methodological and factual foundations of the 'aspect humain' section of the JBEC report, and it questions the logical and analytical relationship between environmental assessments and human impacts which the report authors use. Numerous methodological and factual errors are found in the ‘aspect humain’ section of the report, and each error or omission is found to be neutral or in the direction of lowering the estimate and relative importance of Cree people’s use of and dependence on the land and the living resources of the area. This gives the appearance that the author(s) have written the report from the position of defending an evaluation that there is little, or declining, use of subsistence resources. The errors and omissions are so serious that the report does not give a satisfactory analysis of the actual extent of present Cree use of and dependence on the land. Analytically there is a confusion in the report between statements of environmental changes and statements of human and social impacts. The authors write as if the human implications are apparent once the environmental changes are predicted. Without an assessment of relations of environmental conditions to social needs, interests and values it is obviously not possible to know the significance of any change in a given environment for specific people. In other settings the James Bay Energy Corporation does make such connections readily and of necessity. For example, in its assessments for developing the hydroelectric project it argues how the technological innovativeness, knowledge, manpower, economic needs, values and way of life of southern Quebecois are affected in specific ways by the project and its positive transformation of the natural environment and social milieu. The absence of such socially specific considerations when writing of Cree people is therefore especially notable. It would appear to follow from the failure of the JBDC to conduct social research with Cree. This would require it to establish working relationships with Cree, and to involve them in planning processes. Without such relationships, and the access to information they could provide, this review indicates that no credible assessments or planning have or can be done. |
Description: | This report was prepared at a time when impact assessment legislation, procedures and bureaucracies were just being developed and initiated by the governments of Canada and Québec. The negotiations initiated by the James Bay Cree with governments in response to the hydro-electric project on their lands included, at their insistence, creating an assessment process for development projects that was specifically designed for the region, and that Cree had jointly designed and would jointly operate. It would be part of what became the James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement. During the negotiations the Cree undertook critical reviews of government assessments, such as this review, as well as initiating assessments of the hydro-electric project. See for an example of an assessment: Alan F. Penn and Harvey A. Feit. 1974. “The Northward Diversion of the Eastmain and Opinaca Rivers as Proposed: An Assessment of Impacts on the Native Community at Eastmain Village.” Montreal: Grand Council of the Crees. Pp. 70. These were intended both to contribute to the negotiation of an effective assessment regime, and also to indicate how if negotiations faltered the developers’ impact assessments, which were used to justify the project, could be challenged in public and in court actions by Cree experts and consultants. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these studies contributed to that outcome. |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/11375/24333 |
Appears in Collections: | Anthropology Publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
FEIT_Review_Eastmain-La Grande_JBEC_Report-GCCQ_1974.pdf | 708.25 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.