1

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR INDIGENOUS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Final Report of the
Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects
of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country
November 16-17, 2010
Holiday Inn Denver East Stapleton
3333 Quebec Street, Denver, Colorado
A. INTRODUCTION

On November 16-17, 2010, the International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management
(Institute) with the support of the Department of Homeland Security through the Community
and Regional Resilience Institute at Oak Ridge National Laboratory; the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administrations National Integrated Drought Information System; and, the
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Community Building Program convened the
Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects of
Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country. The Roundtable, the
latest in a series of Institute climate fora, brought together high level tribal, NGO, industry, and
government educators, scientists, and decision-makers in a series of facilitated dialogues to
identify and examine climate mitigation and adaptation technologies; the potential impact of
these technologies on tribal interests; and, the science required to support approaches to
minimize these impacts and to otherwise build or enhance tribal systems and institutions needed
to promote tribal community resilience.

B. KEY INSIGHTS

Agencies, scientific and research institutions, and others involved in climate science or
the management of climate impacts must not ignore nor underestimate the centrality of
culture in the identification, assessment, management, and communication of climate
science and climate impacts in Indian country.
Research on climate mitigation and adaptation technologies and their possible impacts on
Indian tribes and Alaska Natives is less of a priority than research on resilient tribal
systems and institutions.
Similarly, research on effective communication of results and findings of research on
climate mitigation and adaptation technologies is more important than research on the
technologies.

C. BACKGROUND

The Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal Resilience to Effects
of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Activities in Indian Country was intended to
identify:

The climatic, political, legal and other circumstances that encourage the use of adaptation
technologies;
2
Different adaptation and mitigation technologies and processes and the energy,
environmental, legal, ethical, cultural, social, and other impacts these technologies and
processes will have on tribal interests and tribal resilience;
The institutional, human resource, scientific, technical, and other predicates to knowing
and informed tribal participation in decision-making on mitigation and adaptation
technologies, their deployment, siting, operation, and decommissioning;
The institutional, human resource, scientific, technical, and other predicates to the
protection of tribal interests and promotion of tribal resilience implicated by the
deployment of adaptation technologies and processes;

The Roundtable opened with a facilitated discussion on tribal perspectives and definitions of
resilience. Roundtable participants were invited to share their expertise and experience to suggest
ways of developing a deeper awareness and understanding of resilience and resilient tribal
systems and institutions and their role in managing climate impacts faced by tribes.

The Centrality of Culture: After some initial discussions on definitions of resilience and the
extension of the term into the political, economic, and social realms, it soon became evident, for
the Indian participants, whether they were educator, scientist, journalist, or program manager,
cultural resilience was the overriding concern. Culture was the touchstone to which the
Roundtable discussion returned time and time again in all definitions of resilience. The
environmental, legal, economic, or political implications of any climate adaptation or mitigation
technology were much less of a concern than the cultural implications. A Roundtable participant
cited an example.

Green design suggested the use of radiant floor heating in homes. But home for
the native elders was a hogan that was heated by a centrally located wood-burning
stove that people would huddle around in one room. People couldnt adapt to
radiant heating. They tore it out. We took their wood pile away from them and
gave them a hidden technology they couldnt control or relate to. We eventually
installed a high-efficiency wood-burning stove that was able to heat the entire
home. That it was high-efficiency and technologically superior to the old stove
was irrelevant. That it was wood-burning and centrally located was.

The report will likewise return to notions of culture and its role in specific issues.

Systems and Institutions Defined:

Systems: Evident also was the need to clarify what is meant by tribal systems and institutions.
Simply put, a system is an organized collection of parts (or subsystems) that are highly integrated
to accomplish an overall goal. The system has various inputs, which go through certain processes
to produce certain outputs, which together, accomplish the overall desired goal for the system.
So a system is usually made up of many smaller systems, or subsystems. For example, an Indian
tribe is made up of many administrative and management functions, products, services, groups
and individuals. If one part of the system is changed, the nature of the overall system is often
changed, as wellby definition then, the system is systemic, meaning relating to, or affecting,
the entire system. Those parts of the world that are not subject to a systems control, but that
3
influence the system, are called the environment. A sector of the environment can be integrated
into a system by bringing it under system control.

Institutions: Here again the centrality of culture is reinforced. Institutions are social
arrangements that channel behavior in prescribed ways in the important areas of social life. They
are interrelated sets of normative elements norms, values, and role expectationsthat the
people making up the society have devised and passed on to succeeding generations in order to
provide permanent solutions to societys perpetually unfinished business. Institutions are cultural
imperatives. They serve as regulatory agencies, channeling behavior in culturally prescribed
ways. Institutions provide procedures through which human conduct is patterned, compelled to
go, in manners deemed desirable by society. In generally, tribal institutions, although important,
exist external to tribal systems. An exception may be the Din Policy Institute which was
established to mesh Western research practices with traditional Navajo values, natural,
traditional, customary, and common laws and principles to advise Navajo Nation law and policy-
makers.

D. ISSUES

The Roundtable discussions suggest six overarching explanations for the failures of tribal climate
systems as they operate today. First, gross systemic imbalance impedes policy integration
because federally-funded autonomous tribal agencies are coupled with weak integration
mechanisms. Second, the various climate-related tribal agencies are not managed as a cohesive
system but are addressed as discrete components. Third, lower levels of tribal government also
lack strong integration tools, forcing coordination and integrative management responsibilities
onto an overburdened tribal council. Fourth, the current tribal climate apparatus suffers from the
absence of an effective system for developing strategies that connect available resources, desired
end states, and implementation procedures. Fifth, tribal institutions are generally neither charged
with climate-related responsibilities nor integrated within tribal climate systems. Sixth, systems
for communicating climate policies and programs between and among policymakers, department
heads and the wide range of stakeholders are poorly organized or nonexistent.

First Problem: The Effects of Non-Coordination or Non-Integration

The negative effects of non-coordination or non-integration on tribal climate policy and program
development are readily apparent. Bureaucratic decision-making mechanisms fail to produce
unified strategic guidance. Individual agencies typically lack the ability to compel action, while
interdepartmental authorities, if at all present, are often ambiguous. Information sharing is not
the norm. Communication flows follow vertical channels. Disorganized, nonexistent, or
otherwise flawed strategies result from these conditions.

Although climate impacts affect tribes as a whole, most tribal agencies conduct climate-related
activities as discrete functions of their own agendas very often failing to integrate tribal cultural
institutions such as associations of basket makers, weavers, and elders. On-reservation and off-
reservation impacts are treated separately notwithstanding that the impacts and management
thereof are closely related.

4
Second Problem: The Paucity and Poverty of Integrating Mechanisms

Tribal departments have vision, expertise, experience, and tools that could be brought to bear on
climate challenges, but more often than not, the mechanisms to integrate the various dimensions
of tribal climate policy and to translate that policy into integrated programs and actions are
extremely weak, if they exist at all. Components of the system are dispersed throughout the tribal
government. Tribal institutions, state and local entities, the private sector can also contribute.
Yet, no overarching strategy grounded in tribal culture connects these components. Without
unified strategic direction, the system lacks unity of purpose. Without the grounding in tribal
culture, the systems legitimacy is questioned. Furthermore, this lack of cohesiveness encourages
policymakers and department heads often bypass established decision-making mechanisms and
employ informal structures and processes that can lead to suboptimal choices. The widespread
use of informal structures comes at the expense of interdepartmental accountability and
integration. Without delineated policy processes, leadership is difficult.

Third Problem: Whos in Charge?

The paucity of effective climate policy integration processes forces the chief executive of the
tribe to manage many climate efforts. The tribal chairman or president does not have the time
to become intimately involved in the management of multiple agencies. Yet, he or she is
ultimately responsible for making decisions based on their findings. Efforts to delegate authority
have generally taken one of two ineffective methods to integrate policy development and
administration: appointing a lead agency or a lead individual. The lead agency approach
generally results in other agencies providing insufficient support for common efforts. Typically,
lead agency really means sole agency as no one will follow the lead if its directions substantially
affect their organizational personnel and financial resources. Likewise, a lead individual ends up
depending on his or her relationship with the tribal chairman or president. Neither of these
solutions has provides authority to compel action by tribal agencies or departments. The result
tends to be a breakdown in communication and a lack of concerted effort.

Problem Four: Underdeveloped Resource Allocation Mechanisms

The allocation of resources to support tribal climate policies is due in large measure to the nature
of the revenue streams that support tribal programs. Departmental budgets are supported by a
wide range of federal agency sources, most of which are categorical and require strict
compliance with the authorizing statutes purposes. The underdevelopment of tribal resource
allocation mechanisms mirrors that of the federal system. In general, the federal climate system
provides resources for national climate mitigation or adaptation functions, not national missions.
Nor are tribal cultural institutions looked at as resources. As a result, tribal resource allocation
processes do not provide the full range of required capabilities. They also do not permit the
system to surge in response to emergencies, or allow sufficient resource flexibility in response to
changing priorities. Resources cannot simply migrate between departments when needed.
Furthermore, the individual departments are rarely, if ever, offered incentives for funding
interagency activities, resulting in limited integrated efforts. A tribal department will frequently
respond to another departments request for a coordinated effort by asking what account will be
charged for the joint work.
5

Problem Five: Failure of Oversight

In general, tribal councils oversee each tribal agency and program individually, with committees
more or less corresponding to the structure of the executive branch agencies. No committee has
oversight jurisdiction over the entire tribal climate system, its core missions, or interagency
operations. Instead, the committees for natural resources management, economic development,
environmental protection, transportation, and other tribal executive departments strictly divide
the subject matter pie, leaving oversight of interdepartmental operations unaddressed. As a
Roundtable participant pointed out, the proposed development of the Crow Nations coal
resources results in conflicts between the Crow Nations need for economic development and
employment and its desire to be green. The organization of the Crow Nation includes
subsystems to oversee coal development, green construction, and economic development. The
integration and oversight of these subsystems as part of a cohesive green strategy is no
committees responsibility.

Problem Six: Failure to Communicate

In general, modern society, including Indian tribes and other indigenous peoples, is awash in
information. American society, especially, positively wallows in information. And, the flood of
information shows no sign of abating. For example, there is actually a great deal of information
regarding the effects of global climate change on Indian tribes and Pacific Islanders. Some
information is specifically identified as climate-related. For example, native peoples in the
Northwest and in the Pacific are already experiencing and observing some of those effects
including major economic and cultural impacts caused by rising sea levels and coastal erosion
due to storms.

However, many of these observations of climate-induced phenomena support international and
national emissions capping strategies and provide very little of the kind of information on
climate-induced impact to support localized decision-making on sustainable development
strategies or more importantly, to gain tribal community support for proposed adaptive responses
to local climate change impacts. The superabundance of information presents other problems.
Decision-making may be delayed by managers who are paralyzed by uncertainty. So, while
information is the lifeblood of strategies to manage adaptation to climate impacts, the problem
for tribal and other indigenous leaders and decision-makers, is that: there is too much
information; much of the available information is simply irrelevant to such adaptive management
strategies or operations; there are no tribal systems to integrate information into decision-making
processes; much of the available information is not scaled appropriately; needed information is
either not collected or unavailable tucked away in archives, depositories, and file cabinets; and,
needed information is filtered in ways that are culturally biased.

6
E. THE RESEARCH AGENDAS

First Research Agenda: Countering the Effects of Non-Coordination and Non-Integration

The facilitated discussions reinforced the notion that systemic non-coordination or non-
integration is the normnot only in Indian country, but everywhere. One participant suggested
the larger the region of interest, the more impossible it was develop coordinated or integrated
climate systems.

How do you approach regional coordination? Its not possible. In a region
comprising eight large western States there are a LOT of ad hoc groups working
on a range of climate issues. Some groups include federal, tribal, state, and local
government representatives, and private sector members have been looking at
needs, gaps and other issues. Theyve invested a lot of money and spent 1.5 years
on it. They even had two full-time graduate students committed to the process but
they finally threw their hands up because they couldnt get their arms around the
number of issues involved.

Another participant suggested that coordination and integration might be possible under
conditions that were more community-based and more focused.

The way to avoid the non-integration is to avoid having two climate conversations
going on at the same time. Instead of holding conversations about whats
interesting about climate, hold conversations grounded in whats changing and
what can we do about it? Start by identifying and examining consequences, the
connections between changes that are likely climate driven and other changes.
This moves people to look at changes in their community more systematically,
with better information, better data sets, and more community engagement in the
technologynot just scientists bringing in information, but people out there doing
it themselves. If the climate issue can be an opening wedge to systematize and
raise the level and the degree of public participation in the assessment of change,
whatever the cause, two things happen. One, people become better consumers of
scientific data generally and can visualize the connections between ongoing
climatic, demographic, economic and other processes that they hadnt thought of
before. Second, people see things they can do something about and those they
cant. They become conscious of scale of actionwhich is great.

The facilitated dialogues suggested a research agenda that first examines the coordination or
integration dynamics of discrete, community-based projects before embarking upon whole of
tribal government approaches to integrated climate strategies. Indian tribes are uniqueas
cultural, political, and social entities and in their relationships with the federal government.
A series of case studies to assess how these unique attributes affect the dynamics of
coordination or integration should be the first order of business.
Demonstrations of the integration of cultural institutions into project design,
management, and oversight should be conducted.
Tribal-specific assessments of impediments to up scaling these dynamics should follow.
7
Second Agenda: Building or Improving System Components and System Integration

The protection and advancement of tribal interests affected by climate mitigation and adaptation
technologies should be considered at two levels. The first is a more metaphysical examination of
mitigation and adaptation technologies. Some of these proposed technologies, e.g., plans to sow
the oceans with iron to trigger plankton blooms, which would absorb carbon dioxide, die, and
settle to the sea floor; plans to send a trillion mirrors into orbit to deflect incoming sunlight; a
plan to mimic the planet-cooling sulfur-dioxide miasmas of explosive volcanoes by an artillery
barrage of sulfur-dioxide aerosol rounds fired into the stratosphere, are unlikely to come to
fruition. However, for the purposes of this report, their likelihood is not the issue. Rather, these
proposals reveal modern societys persistent belief in the technological fix.

Although Roundtable discussion on climate mitigation and adaptation technologies initially
focused on tribal perceptions of the role of science and engineering can play in mitigating the
effects of climate change it was increasingly evident that participants framed the issue somewhat
differently. Success in adaptively managing the impacts of climate change depends in part on
establishing a good tribal structure and processes that can weigh the benefits and costs of
technology deployment, but more than a few Roundtable participants suggested that having
superior human capital is even more important. One participant said, Weve invested a lot of
effort and time to encourage Din college students to undertake research in a culturally relevant
wayto look at the problem using the Navajo knowledge as a means to identify the problem,
frame the research questions, and identify data sources so that we have a Navajo understanding
of the research results.

A participant from Oneida similarly remarked:

I want to come back to Lisas comment about the small project being the big
projects and youth being an essential part of tribal resilience. There are two
important points to be made: first, youth are our future and second, prophecies tell
us those who are close to the land and know the land will survive. We carried out
some youth projects with water that tied in languagefrom an environmentalist
or water management perspective, but also from an Oneida perspective. When I
told them how to say water in Oneida they perked up because it gave them that
sense of belonging, that what they were doing was relevant and important to their
lands and their people. They understand thateven at a young age. Power is
with the youth, its still in them. Theyre what will create resilient tribes in the
future while addressing immediate concerns as well.

The question here is: How do tribes and tribal colleges use existing partnerships with federal
agencies, non-tribal colleges and universities, and NGOs as the foundation for developing a
comprehensive professional education and training program that focuses on nurturing
collaborative skills and creates a positive collaborative culture throughout tribal climate systems
and institutions?

The notion that small ideas are actually big ideas and that small projects are actually large ones
was reinforced by several Roundtable participants. This is a pragmatic and adaptive approach to
8
the acknowledged shortcomings of tribal systems and institutions in formulating and actualizing
cohesive climate strategies and the fiscal realities that make the necessary comprehensive
reforms highly improbable. An example shared by a doctoral student is illustrative.

We had elders come along as we were doing field work. In the beginning they
were quiet, merely observing. After a while they began sharing stories. They
complained that bitterroot cant be harvested now. Its gone. The flower is
gone. We then explained the effects of climate changethat plants and
medicines will come up later than usual. We talked about it, and she went along
not quite convinced looking for the flowering plant. The students took out their
GPS units, marked where it was. The woman elder noted it and said we could do
the ceremony now. She wanted to know more about climate change. She was
happy to see the evidence of the plant there, but was concerned because it was
two months later than it should have been. She brought her sisters to look at the
berries.they discussed that we used to have glaciers.then started looking and
thinking, talking. Elder wanted to know if she could use the GPS unit? Sure!
The big project ideas are local project ideas. The elder wanted to know how to
use the GPS unit she liked it she needed to own it.because she was going to
look for her berries, her plants, she wanted that knowledge to be hers, for the
information to be safe. She said sometimes I forget. If I use this, I can find it
again.

A participant from a scientific research laboratory cited another example.

I was talking to colleagues and tribal leaders about the decline in rock fish
population in our waters. It had been leaked that state of Washington was going to
respond to this by building rock fish hatcheries. It is a perfect example of
technological fixes. Its really important to start with question of whether a
particular technology addresses the real problem, in this instance; overexploitation
is the real problem vs. fixing what turns out to be a political problem. Limiting
takes is a politically unpopular stance; fish hatcheries less so. The state is making
an enormous investment in technology that is likely to further degrade natural
processes that will lead to further declines in the resource. The mistrust these
technology decisions engender is just part of a historical lesson that now stands
as a barrier to trying things out that might actually be very useful.

These examples reinforce the notion that for most end users, the technologies behind the devices
or technologies they use are irrelevant. In the first instance, the elder has no interest in the
databases, data centers, satellites, and sensors that make the GPS unit valuable to her. In the
second, for the end user whose only concern is maintaining a certain harvest level is likewise
unconcerned about the ramifications of the proposed technology. For other end users though, the
long-term consequences of the technology are a significant consideration. What this example
suggests is that we need to understand the end users needs before embarking on costly and time-
consuming data and systems integration efforts. But we also need to anticipate the needs of an
increasingly sophisticated end user such as the tribal elder as well. The hard work will be to
determine just how big big enough is. To the extent the work entails appropriate science and
9
appropriate technology, collaboration with federal and university science agencies and
institutions to identify the science and technology requirements is strongly recommended.

Third Agenda: Enhancing Command and Control Mechanisms

The paucity of effective tribal climate policy integration processes theoretically forces the chief
executive of the tribe to manage many climate efforts. But here too, pragmatism and adaptive
approaches are required since, as was stated earlier, tribes confront fiscal realities that make the
necessary comprehensive reform of tribal systems highly improbable.

The challenge can be stated thusly: How does tribal leadership exercise command and control
over climate programs in the absence of a comprehensive, integrative climate policy and without
viable command and control structure and processes? Stated another way: Can well-informed
tribal agency personnel organize and coordinate their climate activities from the bottom-up?

The questions below follow;
How does tribal leadership establish a common operating framework with shared culture,
doctrine, processes, procedures and understanding of the leaderships intent?
How does tribal leadership establish shared situational awareness throughout the whole
of tribal government?
How does tribal leadership establish trust throughout the whole of tribal government?
How does tribal leadership empower subordinates to organize and coordinate their
climate activities?
A network-centric, information/knowledge rich approach seems to be part of the response
to the challenge. But how does tribal leadership marry the required information
technologies and information systems with the common operating framework, shared
culture, doctrine and training?

Fourth Agenda: Improving Resource Allocation Mechanisms

Here again fiscal realities require pragmatism and adaptive approaches. It may appear
counterintuitive, but tribal leadership may actually have more success integrating non-
departmental resources into the tribal climate system than departmental ones. As mentioned
earlier, departmental revenue streams generally flow from federal categorical grants, contracts or
cooperative agreements. Also tribal leadership generally does not consider tribal cultural
institutions, tribal and non-tribal NGOs, colleges and universities, federal, state and local
government agencies, and the private sector as resources that can be directed toward tribal ends.

The challenge is to identify means by which these resources can be most efficiently leveraged,
managed, and overseen. Here too consultations with tribal cultural institutions, tribal and non-
tribal NGOs, colleges and universities, federal, state and local government agencies, and the
private sector is strongly recommended.

10
Fifth Agenda: Improving System Oversight Mechanisms

Once more fiscal realities require pragmatism and adaptive approaches. The challenge here is
similar to that of the Third Research Agenda: How does tribal leadership exercise oversight in
the absence of a comprehensive, integrative climate policy and without oversight structure and
processes? Here too, the solution may lie beyond the reservation borders.

Oversight is not a continuous operation. Done well, it requires periodic, intensive reviews. The
question here is how can tribes use tribal organizations such as the Council of Energy Resource
Tribes, National Tribal Environmental Council, or Native American Finance Officers
Association to perform system oversight?

Sixth Agenda: Improving Communications Mechanisms

Communications strategies today are generally about transferring information (as opposed to
knowledge) to the consumers of information. The Roundtable discussions suggested that there is
a key difference between knowledge and information and suggests that a communications
strategy must encompass both knowledge, especially traditional knowledge and information.

A tribal college administrator reflected on his recent experience with media.

The American Indian/Alaska Native Climate Change Working Group pulled
together funding from NASA to do videos on climate change. The Menominee
used that funding to develop the concept of community-based journalism and
mentorship. The approach is not about reporters reporting and leaving, its about
Menominee making movies of Menominee. Students pulled together information
to understand climate change; they interviewed elders to get their historical and
cultural knowledge. The community saw the video. They saw their kid on screen,
or saw themselves sharing their knowledge about climate change. The result is
the creation of expectations, of wanting to get things done, not everywhere, not in
some abstract academic exercise, but in their watershed, in their place.

An indigenous filmmaker made the following observations:

Kids today are surrounded by media. Ive been learning how powerful messages
are to students. If you can turn that around and help them to see themselves as
experts; to emphasize that they come from oral cultures; and help them acquire
the tools and skills to tell their stories the way they want. Branding and key
messages are essential. I started this work seven years ago and it was just last
year, that I realized that I needed to look at this as a business and that Im being
looked to as having expertise in this arena. We need to understand the power of
making and delivering our messages. Branding and key messages are important
not commodifying our people, but to give our people the tools to communicate
messages and subjects of issue.

11
A native architect stated:

Climate change is very abstract to most people. To stir people to action we need a
starting point. For example, people will talk about accident rates, increased traffic
flows and pedestrian safety but getting a traffic signal installed on a busy
neighborhood street has an immediate affect on their lives which is important with
poor people who have a lot going on immediate concerns. Its only the wealthy
elite that can sit around and worry about climate change in the abstract. For
Indian tribes, we have to contextualize the issueput the issue in a context where
they can see the change. Like in the movie, Once There Was an Island, people
wouldnt act until they saw the rising tide wash through their houses. At that
point, the scientists and scientific advice were valued. The people wanted an
explanation. Some thought the island was sinkingnot that the water was rising.
Its a difficult notion to get their mind around. If were approaching tribes, we
have to get it into a context that is meaningful to the tribe and has immediate
value to them, to their own tribe.

The facilitated dialogues suggested a research agenda that identifies and examines issues related
to communication of climate impact information and knowledge including:
Who are the tribal end users of climate and adaptation information and knowledge?
For what purposes are climate and adaptation information and knowledge used, for
example, legislation, program design, natural resources management and development?
How do these uses shape communications strategies and influence communication media
and dissemination technology choices?
How are the climate-related experiences, observations, and knowledge of tribal elders
best communicated? And relatedly, what general and tribal-specific protocols govern
the gathering of information, knowledge, and other intellectual property from elders?
How can the tribal experience be communicated and not exploited?
How do tribes assess the efficacy of their communication strategy?

CONCLUSION

Although many of the Roundtable participants agree with the problem analysis and
recommendation research agendas set forth in this report, the question as to whether such
comprehensive reforms that are contemplated in the analysis are possible. Climate and its
impacts on the wide range of tribal interests are a litmus test of tribal governance for the 21
st

century. We have tried to avoid suggesting incremental, ad hoc adjustments to tribal systems that
are fundamentally unsuited to the development and actualization of comprehensive, integrated
climate policies. But we similarly have eschewed unrealistic and therefore, improbable
recommendations. In a real sense we have applied the you take your victim as you find him rule
of the common law. We recognize that the flaws of tribal systems designed for a world that no
longer exists and we hope that our analyses and recommendations go beyond tinkering at the
edges. In a world of heightened uncertainty brought about by a changing climate the challenge
for tribes and their allies is come up with innovative and creative approaches that can mesh with,
enhance, but not overburden an anachronistic tribal system.

1
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR INDIGENOUS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
with the support of the
Department of Homeland Security
through the
Community and Regional Resilience Institute at Oak Ridge National Laboratory
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Integrated Drought Information System
and
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Community Building Program
presents

A ROUNDTABLE TO IDENTIFY THE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AGENDA TO BUILD TRIBAL RESILIENCE
TO EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION ACTIVITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY
November 16-17, 2010
Holiday Inn Denver East Stapleton
3333 Quebec Street, Denver, Colorado

Climate change is one of the most important global environmental problems facing Indian country today. Policy
decisions are already being made to limit or adapt to climate change and its impacts, but many of these decisions
are being made without the science support that could help shape better outcomes. This is especially true in
Indian country. . The Roundtable will be held in Denver and will bring together high level tribal, NGO,
industry, and government educators, scientists, and decision-makers in a series of facilitated dialogues to
identify and examine climate mitigation and adaptation technologies; the potential impact of these technologies
on tribal interests; and, the science required to support approaches to minimize these impacts and to otherwise
promote tribal community resilience.
Roundtable participants will identify and examine issues related to the scientific bases of adaptation to climate
impacts such as: What are the key local, regional and global climactic and weather-related uncertainties that
influence adaptation planning by Indian tribes? What opportunities for, and impediments to, collaborative
research on adaptation and mitigation exist? What is required to exploit these opportunities or overcome these
impediments? What is required to integrate research results into the tribal adaptation planning process? How
can research results and traditional knowledge be integrated? What are the risks that the planning and conduct
of research for adaptation planning might cause or exacerbate distributional inequities? How can such risks be
minimized?
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 16, 2010

8:00 a.m. Registration, Coffee and Continental Breakfast

8:30 a.m. Welcome and Introductions

9:00 a.m. First Discussion: Resilience: Tribal Perspectives and Definitions
One definition of resilience is the ability to recover from or adjust to misfortune, damage or a
destabilizing perturbation in the environment. As we discuss the impacts of climate change on
Indian tribes, how should resilience be defined? What is political resilience? Cultural
resilience? Economic resilience including, for example, resilient agriculture, forestry, and
energy? What other tribal systems and institutions should be resilient?

2
10:20 a.m. Break

10:40 a.m. Second Discussion: Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Technologies
There are generally three broad classes of climate mitigation technologies. The first envisions
carbon capture and storage technologies that will permit continued use of fossil fuels. The
second assumes the expansion of renewable and nuclear energy sources. Geoengineering,
options that would involve large-scale engineering of the environment in order to combat or
counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric chemistry comprises the third class of
technologies. These include proposals to manage solar radiation or to increase the carbon
uptake of oceans. Adaptation, adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or
expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial
opportunities, includes a multitude of technologies or activities including migration,
developing drought resistant or salt tolerant food crops, and hardening infrastructure. What
other climate mitigation or adaptation technologies or activities can affect tribal political,
cultural, economic and other interests? Who are the proponents of these technologies and
activities? In what fora or venues are these technologies and activities examined and discussed?
How should tribal interests be represented? Who should represent tribal interests? What needs
to be done to open these fora or venues to tribal representation? How do we prepare tribal
representatives to participate in such fora or venues?

12:30 p.m. Working Lunch: Screening and Discussion of the Film, There Once Was an Island

2:15 p.m. Third Discussion: The Impacts of Mitigation and Adaptation Technologies on Tribal
Systems and Institutions and Overall Resilience
Indigenous peoples have long adapted to the effects of a changing climate by, among other
things, adopting pastoralism, nomadism, migration, agriculture and irrigation. These
adaptations led to the gradual development of unique cultural, political and economic systems
and social structuressystems and structures that were resilient. The adaptation approaches
today are quite different. These days we have introduced technologies instead of indigenous
approaches. Adaptation approaches today are characterized by immediate adoption instead of
evolutionary development. And, the authors of todays mitigation technologies are often
scientific and engineering experts in the employ of corporations, universities, and government
research laboratories far removed from the tribal milieu. Thus, the secondary effects of climate
changethe adoption of modern mitigation and adaptation technologieshave the potential to
weaken tribal cultural, political, economic, social and other systems and institutions to the
detriment of the overall resilience of the tribe. What are the possible impacts of mitigation and
adaptation technologies on tribal systems and institutions and the overall resilience of the tribe?

5:00 p.m. Adjourn

NOVEMBER 17, 2010

8:00 a.m. Coffee and Continental Breakfast

8:30 a.m. Fourth Discussion: Protecting and Advancing Tribal Interests Affected by Mitigation and
Adaptation Technologies
We think the protection and advancement of tribal interests affected by climate mitigation and
adaptation technologies should be considered at two levels. The first is a more metaphysical
examination of mitigation and adaptation technologies. Some of these proposed technologies,
e.g., plans to sow the oceans with iron to trigger plankton blooms, which would absorb carbon
dioxide, die, and settle to the sea floor; plans to send a trillion mirrors into orbit to deflect
incoming sunlight; a plan to mimic the planet-cooling sulfur-dioxide miasmas of explosive
volcanoes by an artillery barrage of sulfur-dioxide aerosol rounds fired into the stratosphere, are
unlikely to come to fruition. However, for the purposes of this discussion, their likelihood is
3
not the issue. Rather, these proposals reveal modern societys persistent belief in the
technological fix. Is this the attitude of Indian tribes? If not, how do tribes see the role of
science and engineering in mitigating the effects of climate change? Do tribal traditions inform
the integration of science and technology with notions of personal and societal responsibility?
How do tribes incorporate tradition and philosophy as they weigh in on science and technology
policy issues? How do we create opportunities for tribes to weigh in on these issues?

Second, we think resilience is a much better concept to frame climate issues. At the tribal
level, whether the underlying phenomenon is climate change, globalization, peak oil, or a
world-wide economic depression, the tribes ability to recover from or adjust to misfortune,
damage, or a destabilizing perturbation in the environment ultimately rests on tribal
institutions, systems and people. Accordingly, how do we build the tribal systems and
institutions that will protect and advance tribal interests affected by mitigation and adaptation
technologies? What relationships or partnerships will be required? How do we train the
workforce required? Are there more appropriate ways of framing climate issues for tribes?

10:15 a.m. Break

10:35 a.m. Fifth Discussion: Defining the Knowledge Base Required to Protect and Advance Tribal
Interests and Build Resilient Systems and Institutions (What Do We Need to Know?)

Noon Working Lunch (Brainstorming Research Projects and Other Collaborative Efforts)

1:15 p.m. Sixth Discussion: Developing the Knowledge Base Required to Protect and Advance
Tribal Interests and Build Resilient Systems and Institutions (How Do We Produce What
We Need to Know?)
In general, modern society, including Indian tribes and Alaskan Native Villagers, is awash in
information. American society, especially, positively wallows in information. However, much
of the available information is simply irrelevant to tribal decision making; much of the available
information is not scaled appropriately; needed information is either not collected or unavailable
tucked away in archives, depositories, and file cabinets; and needed information is filtered in
ways that are culturally biased. Tribal decision makers will require much more information to
protect and advance tribal interests than can be produced by tribal colleges, tribal organizations,
and other tribal institutions. How do tribes influence research priorities? How do they
influence how research findings are communicated? What partnerships of tribes and non-tribal
universities are required to develop tribally relevant research strategies? How does the erosion
of NASA and other federal agencies geospatial monitoring capabilities affect tribal interests?
How do tribes weigh in on this issue?

2:30 p.m. Break

2:50 p.m. Seventh Discussion: Communicating Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Information to
Promote Resilience and Support Tribal Policy and Programmatic Decision Making
For tribes, the communications issue is not just about communicating climate information.
Economic development projects, especially those involving energy and other natural resources
have climate implications which in turn have political and social consequences. What
information will tribal decision makers have to communicate? To whom? How? What
relationships or partnerships will be required? Do tribes need something like a Ministry of
Information as a way of dealing with the complexities of structuring and communicating
purpose-built messages to the wide range of tribal publics and stakeholders?

4:30 p.m. Roundtable concludes

1
International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management
with the support of the
Department of Homeland Security
through the Community and Regional Resilience Institute
at Oak Ridge National Laboratory
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Integrated Drought Information System
National Center for Atmospheric Research
presents
Roundtable to Identify the Scientific Research Agenda to Build Tribal
Resilience to Effects of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
Activities in Indian Country
November 16-17, 2010

Final Participant List

Christina Alvord
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Integrated Drought Information
System
325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80305-3328
christina.alvord@noaa.gov
303-497-7427; FAX: 303-497-6449

Russel Barsh
Director
Kwiaht Center for the Historical Ecology
of the Salish Sea
2108-G Fisherman Bay Road, P.O. Box 415
Lopez, WA 98261
rlbarsh@gmail.com
360-468-2808

T.M. Bull Bennett, Ph.D.
Kiksapa Consulting LLC
214 Lake Street
Mandan, ND 58554
bbennett@kiksapa.com
701-663-9099

Mary K. Bowannie, MA
Lecturer II, Native American Studies
University of New Mexico
1 University of New Mexico
Mesa Vista Hall, Room 3080
Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
mkbow@unm.edu
505-277-9271; FAX: 505-277-181

DeWayne Cecil, Ph.D.
Director
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Regional Climate Services
DeWayne.Cecil@noaa.gov
801-524-5128

Diana Dalbotten
Director of Diversity Programs
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Campus
National Center for Earth-Surface Dynamics
St. Anthony Falls Laboratory
College of Science and Engineering
2 Third Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414
dalbo001@umn.edu
612-624-4608; FAX: 612-624-0066
2

Dana Eldridge
Din4 Policy Research Assistant
Dine Policy Institute
Dine College
PO Box 96
Tsaile, AZ 86556
deldridge@dinecollege.edu
928-724-6942; FAX: 928-724-6837

Daniel Glenn
Executive Director
Environmental Works-Community Design
Center
402 15th Avenue East
Seattle, WA 98112
dglenn@eworks.org
206-787-1379; FAX: 206-329-5494;

Nicole Herman-Mercer
Social Scientist
U.S. Geological Survey
3215 Marine Street
Boulder, CO 80303
nhmercer@gmail.com
303-541-3012

Donna House
Botanical Consultant
Ohkay Owingeh
P.O. Box 19
Ohkay Owingeh, NM 87566
datura31@cybermesa.com
505-852-1000; FAX: 505-852-2358

Jerilyn Jourdain
P.O. Box 502
Redby, MN 56670
nikkijourdain@hotmail.com
218-679-3412

Lesley Kabotie
Lesley Kabotie Consulting
7966 W 17
th
Ave
Lakewood, CO 80214
303-275-0563
ljkabotie@gmail.com

Lou Karsen
Educator/Producer
Longhouse Media/Native Lens
117 E. Louisa St. #131
Seattle, WA 98102
206-240-5172; FAX: 206-329-3448
loukarsen@gmail.com

Lisa Lone Fight
1627 West Main Street, Suite 194
Bozeman, MT 59715
lisalonefight@gmail.com
701-484-1809; 406-624-6790

William D. McCabe
Native American Liaison
Southern California Edison
2244 Walnut Grove Avenue
Rosemead, CA 91770
William.McCabe@sce.com
626-302-2009; FAX: 626-302-9821

Beau Mitchell
Sustainability Coordinator
College of Menominee Nation
Sustainable Development Institute
P.O. Box 1179
N172 State Highway 47-55
Keshena, WI 54135
bmitchell@menominee.edu
715-799-6226 ext 3145; FAX: 715-799-
5951

Madrona Murphy
Kwiaht Center for the Historical Ecology of
the Salish Sea
2108-G Fisherman Bay Road
P.O. Box 415
Lopez, WA 98261
MadronaBlue@gmail.com
360-468-2808

Tracy Rector
Executive Director, Co-founder
Longhouse Media/Native Lens
117 E. Louisa St. #131
Seattle, WA 98102
tracyrector@mac.com
206-387-2468

3
Jeanne M. Rubin
General Counsel
International Institute for Indigenous
Resource Management
444 South Emerson Street
Denver, CO 80209-2216
jeannerubin@iiirm.org
303-744-9686; FAX: 303-744-9808

Paul F. Schuster
Hydrologist
U.S. Geological Survey
3215 Marine Street, Suite E-127
Boulder, CO 80303-1066
pschuste@usgs.gov
303-541-3052, FAX: 303-541-3084

Margaret Stevens
Research Associate
American Indian/Alaskan Native Climate
Change Working Group
4204 West Mason Street
Oneida, WI 54155
margaret.rose44@gmail.com
785-764-6283

Mervyn L. Tano
President
International Institute for Indigenous
Resource Management
444 South Emerson Street
Denver, CO 80209-2216
mervtano@iiirm.org
303-733-0481; FAX: 303-744-9808

Roger Taylor
Manager
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Tribal Energy Programs
1617 Cole Blvd., Building 17
Golden, CO 80401
roger_taylor@nrel.gov
303-384-7389; FAX: 303-384-7419;

Robert Yazzie
Director
Dine Policy Institute
Dine College
PO Box 96
Tsaile, AZ 86556
robertyazzie@dinecollege.edu
928-724-6946; FAX: 928-724-6837