The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns
Representations, notions of risk, and the role of science
Ignacio Casielles 70840137 Sociology 360 Professor Tesluk November 28, 2013
The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 1
The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project has certainly attracted much public attention, with intense debates and confrontations that can be seen constantly on the media. This can be explained by the magnitude of the project, the risks it poses, or by the diversity of stakeholders involved. When looking at this last point, it is possible to identify the interests of oil companies, international buyers, environmental advocates, local communities and Aboriginal peoples, among others. In this paper I will focus on the interests of one of these stakeholders, namely, Aboriginal communities, how these interests have been portrayed and considered during the development of the project. In order to do this, I will first show the major characteristics of this project, including its economic impact and how it could affect the First Nations that dwell in this area. Then, I will observe the discourses that have been wielded by the most relevant voices in this particular debate, that is, Enbridge and First Nations people, as well as some of the most relevant topics that appear in media representations of the project and these parties. After that I will attempt to consider some key perspectives and topics that should be taken into account to understand the complete impact that the Enbridge Pipeline might have over Aboriginal communities. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline is a project that plans to build a 1,777 km twin pipeline running from Bruderheim, Northern Alberta, to the port of Kitimat, Northern British Columbia (Enbridge, n.d.[a]). Its purpose is to carry petroleum from the oil sands extraction place, near Edmonton, to the port, so it can be shipped to different countries including the United States and other destinations in the Pacific Rim; on the other hand, it would also carry condensate to Bruderheim, to be used on the production of oil products (Enbridge, n.d.[b]). The The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 2
pipelines would be mostly buried underground, although the water crossings would be constructed to go above the water level (CBC News, 2012). The $6,5 billion pipeline (Enbridge, n.d.[c]) would carry an estimate of 525,000 barrels of oil every day (Enbridge, n.d.[b]), which is roughly one third of the oil production of the entire Alberta province on 2010 (Alberta, n.d.). Also, the construction of the pipeline would require about 3,000 construction workers, and its operation would create 560 long-term jobs in British Columbia, that would insert $32 million annually as salaries (Enbridge, n.d.[d]) into the local economies. Also, during the 30 years of operation of the pipeline, it is estimated that about $1,2 billion would go as tax revenues for the provincial government (Enbridge, n.d.[e]). The planned pipeline route goes through the traditional territories of 64 First Nations communities, many of which still have not solved their land and sovereignty situation (Bocking, 2012). Among Aboriginal peoples this project has generated strong reactions of opposition. In response to this, Enbridge has launched a programme trying to engage with First Nations demands and interests. Discourses and representations Due to the magnitude of the impacts that the Northern Gateway Pipeline project may create, many groups have raised their voice to show their position on this issue. When observing the discussion focused on Aboriginal peoples, it is possible to identify two major social actors, namely, First Nations communities and the industry itself. In order to state their opinions about this issue, these actors use a variety of representations of nature and the involved stakeholders to understand the phenomenon, reproduce this understanding, and ultimately gather support for achieving their own objectives. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 3
Following this, it is useful to take Hannigans work on discourses, where he uses this concept as a set of concepts that are perpetuated through practices, giving meaning to reality (2006, p. 36). With different discourses of environment, therefore, come different ways of understanding how humans should relate with nature and which actions should be taken in this relationship. Also, for a better understanding of how these discourses and positions are transmitted, it is suitable to take the concept of frame, considered as a structure of meanings that puts symbols in relation to each other (Doyle, Elliott & Tindall, 1997, p.241). In particular it is important to observe how these different views are placed in public opinion, through media frames that organize how these meaning structures are shown (p.242). Environmental discourses Using the typology of environmental discourses proposed by Hannigan (2006, p. 39) on the information provided on Enbridges official website for the Northern Gateway project (Enbridge, n.d.[f]), it is easy to identify that their main form of representing nature is based on an Arcadian view. By treating the environment as a natural legacy, they are stating that nature is something external that should not be intervened, keeping human activity out of it, as in the idea of complementarity. In the same sense they propose work with conservation partners for planting and taking care of trees, avoiding that the activities of the project create any impacts. By observing Enbridges Neutral Footprint Program, it is possible to identify an Ecosystem discourse (Hannigan, 2006, p.42), based on the idea that there is a need to compensate for what has been done (Enbridge, n.d.[g]). Key terms such as stabilization and disturbed environment show that in this statement there is an underlying viewpoint that considers The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 4
nature as something external that is interfered by human activities and that, therefore, needs to be repaired scientifically, as can be seen on the use of figures for the calculation of this reparation. On the other hand, Aboriginal opposition to the pipeline rely on a different vision of environmental activity to justify its views. As can be seen on the Save the Fraser Declaration (Save the Fraser, 2013), First Nations wield an argument based mainly on the rights and responsibilities they are entitled to, and stating that the project would be violating their values and laws. Also, there are clear references to the cleanliness of water and its health effects, and to issues about governance and sovereignty. By doing so, they are engaging in an environmental justice discourse (Hannigan, 2006, p.47), showing that their rights are threatened, rather than nature itself. In addition to that, the same document (Save the Fraser, 2013) shows traces of an Arcadian discourse (Hannigan, 2006, p.38), with references to the risk that the pipeline would pose for animals and plants. Besides this idea of complementarity there is also present the concept of iconisation, referred to the stereotyped images that rest on cultural memory. By making reference to the ancient and profound relationship with the environment, First Nations are wielding a discourse marked by the Arcadian mode. Public representations of the project and stakeholders Since the Northern Gateway Pipeline project has generated a strong debate, the involved stakeholders had had to engage in a discussion that not only requires a vision about nature, but also representations of the project itself, its consequences, and even the other participants. By doing so, each one of the stakeholders is attempting to create an image of itself and its opposition that benefits its own interests. In order to do so, they have to engage in practices of media The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 5
representation that can be analyzed and understood using the framing approach proposed by Doyle, Elliott and Tindall (1997). Taking this into account, I will first engage in an analysis of Enbridges public representation of its project and Aboriginal communities. Considering the video Working Together with First Nations (Enbridge, 2013), there are many features that have to be mentioned. In this video the Chief of the Birdtail Sioux First Nation talks about previous pipelines as if they had no effect whatsoever. By doing so, the company is trying to state that Aboriginal communities would not be really affected by the project. Also, Enbridge is portrayed as a friend of the community, because of the support it provides and the agreements that have been reached. It is also important to notice that the project is depicted as the only option for First Nations, that whose future would be doomed if they were to reject the project. This is reinforced to many references to employment, money, economic development, opportunities for children, and Aboriginal education, while the camera focuses a classroom chalkboard with the word future on it. It is also interesting that, while speaking, Chief Ken Chalmers is driving a big truck, with a subtle reference to the everyday importance of oil products and, therefore, the relevance of the project. Cultural worries are also assessed by highlighting the support that Enbridge has granted to Aboriginal education, and the fact that an ancient site was found. For addressing political concerns, it is stated many times that rights will not be given up, and that land titles would not be touched. In general terms, the project is represented as something that First Nations not only want, but also need. By looking at Enbridges website on Aboriginal concerns (n.d.[h]), and the video that can be found here, it is also possible to find what Doyle, Elliott and Tindall (1997, p. 251) call identity-framing, where an image of the other party is constructed and reproduced so that the The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 6
personal image can be kept in a better relative position. By characterizing First Nations as communities that suffer alcoholism, high school dropout rates, hopelessness and elevated suicide proportions, the company is trying to dismantle what Nadasdy (2005) portrayed as the image of the Ecologically Noble Indian, a stereotype of Aboriginal peoples as living connected to the environment, in harmony with nature. Based on this archetype many claims have assumed that First Nations possess a particular wisdom over environmental topics that can be used as an asset on different claims over the use of resources. By trying to depict Aboriginal life as a chaotic catastrophe Enbridge is attempting to destroy this illusion of wisdom, and stating that they know better what to do to improve their life conditions. Also, this can be seen as an attempt to prove that the environment has lost its Native cultural component, becoming an empty space that can be analyzed through a resources logic, as Willems-Braun proposes (1996, p. 15). It is also possible to find numerous forms of Aboriginal public statements, as the coverage of the Drums of the Great Bear gathering. In this short documentary (Gillis, 2012) the idea of the pipeline as the only future for Aboriginal communities is challenged when a child speaks opposing it the project. Even more, the fact that this girl recognized how ridiculous the project is a way of showing that there is no need of science to understand that the project should not be done. Also, with manifestations of traditional culture, like the chants and the use of Aboriginal costumes, First Nations are trying to state that this opposition is not something ephemeral, but that it is part of an ancient relationship with land and nature, appealing to the image of the Ecologically Noble Indian (Nadasdy, 2005). In addition to that, showing the support of politicians, as well as references to being heard all around the world is an attempt to frame the Aboriginal position in this conflict as one that has a broader support, with parties that go beyond First Nations and those near the pipeline. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 7
Another important notion that appears systematically through First Nations representations of the conflict is that of risk. As can be seen in different videos (Gillis, 2012; ForestEthics, 2010), Aboriginal communities show their concern for the unexpected consequences of the Enbridge pipeline. Due to its particularities, this issue will be analyzed by itself. Notions of risk and uncertainty The speech of those who oppose the Enbridge pipelines from an Aboriginal point of view is usually marked with references to the risk of the terrible consequences this project might unleash if something went wrong (Gillis, 2012; ForestEthics, 2010; Save the Fraser, 2013). This discourse needs to be addressed particularly, because its background has other implications on this debate. For understanding the concept of risk, it is useful to use the approach drawn by Beck (1992), who explains that modern science and technology has led to a suspension to its early- modern industrial logics. Nowadays, Beck claims, it is no longer possible to calculate the magnitude of a possible disaster, making the process of assessing the benefit-risk ratio, as well as quantifying the eventual compensations, more difficult and complex, if not impossible. When faced with the Worst Imaginable Accident, there is no company, governmental organization, or social movement that can be held responsible or accountable for the consequences (p. 101-102). When risk is calculated through a function considering the odds of a disaster happening and the impacts of it (Service et al., 2012, p. 368), an accident of this kind goes out of range. Still, every project that is to be developed has to go through an environmental assessment that includes risk analysis on different levels. In order to deal with the uncertainty and possibilities of future events, risk assessments become relevant as an input for making decisions The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 8
(Service et al., 2012, p. 368). However, this calculation is not trustworthy, because human disturbances start to accumulate (Service et al., 2012, p.372) and the environment becomes embedded in a network of artificial activities. Considering the complexity of these systems, science loses some degree of certainty and the statements made based on its authority have to be contested (Yearley, 1992, p. 519). The limits of science on a context of cultural diversity In addition to the uncertainty that covers these calculations, it is important to look at how the scientific system is used as a decision making tool to decide on the construction of projects such as the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. Usually these decisions are based on economic calculations that work as a function of the potential benefits of the project, and the costs that it would pose, including, in both categories, both social and private figures. This scientific attempts, however, are based on a particular epistemology, that is, a certain way of understanding the world. When these calculations are applied to a different culture, based on unshared values, it is no longer possible to base decisions without giving it a second thought. This is a key issue on the discussion of the Enbridge pipelines. Putting apart the considerations about the potential damages that the pipeline may pose, what generates conflict is that the company has only looked at the economic value of the project, without taking into account Aboriginal values. It is clear that Enbridge did not consider First Nations relationship with the environment, nor land claims (Save the Fraser, 2013) in its project calculations. Even though it tries to engage in Aboriginal interests, Enbridges management system cannot operate regarding the same inputs as First Nations culture. As Hernandez (2013, p. 19) puts it, the meaning of being indigenous is constructed in a struggle that has an economic counterpart, and while big The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 9
corporations are a manifestation of domination, other forms of organization, such as community economic development, might work as an advance on self-determination. Conclusions Considering what has been explained above, it is clear that the discussion of Aboriginal communities issues of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project is a complex and intricate matter. Not only the interests of the parties involved are diverse, but the ways that the company and First Nations understand the project is diametrically different. This mismatched understanding of the project, based on unshared values, leads to a situation where conflict cannot be avoided. In addition to that, the superiority granted to the scientific system due to its objectivity is starting to become contested, making it less reliable as a source of authority and as an input for decision making. The discussion of the role of science certainly needs to be addressed in order to build the capabilities that will allow us to organize development priorities, as well as the criteria for deciding on whose should be affected by economic activities. Finally, it is important to highlight the relevance of cultural values and differences in the discussion about science, since the effects of decisions that are made based on its criteria do not only concern scientists, but all of us. As Beck (1992) clearly states it: Where the monopoly of technology becomes a monopoly on concealed social change, it must be called into question and cancelled by the principle of division of powers []. In all central social issues and committees relative to technological development, systematic alternatives, dissenting voices, dissenting experts and an interdisciplinary diversity would have to be combined. (p. 109).
The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 10
References Alberta. (n.d.). Economic Benefits. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/economicinvestment.html. Beck, U. (1992). From Industrial Society to the Risk Society: Questions of survival, social structure and ecological enlightenment. Theory, Culture & Society 9, 97-123. Bocking, E. (2012). Enbridge too far. Alternatives Journal, 38(3), 5. CBC News. (2012, January 10). Northern Gateway pipeline: benefits vs. concerns. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/northern-gateway-pipeline- benefits-vs-concerns-1.1135312. Doyle, A., Elliott, B., & Tindall, D. (1997). Framing the Forests: Corporations, the B.C. Forest Alliance, and the Media. In Carroll, K. (Ed.), Organizing Dissent: Contemporary Social Movements in Theory and Practice (2nd ed.) (pp.240-268). Toronto, ON: Garamond Press. Enbridge. (n.d.[a]). Route video. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.northerngateway.ca/project-details/route-video/. Enbridge. (n.d.[b]). Project at a glance. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from https://www.northerngateway.ca/project-details/project-at-a-glance/. Enbridge. (n.d.[c]). Project overview. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.gatewayfacts.ca/about-the-project/project-overview/. Enbridge. (n.d.[d]). Jobs and training. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.gatewayfacts.ca/benefits/jobs-and-training/. Enbridge. (n.d.[e]). Economic FAQs. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from https://www.northerngateway.ca/economic-opportunity/economic-faqs/. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 11
Enbridge. (n.d.[f]). Natural legacy program. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.northerngateway.ca/environmental-responsibility/natural-legacy-program/. Enbridge. (n.d.[g]). Neutral footprint program. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.northerngateway.ca/environmental-responsibility/neutral-footprint-program/. Enbridge. (n.d.[h]). Birdtail Sioux: Inspirational First Nation. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.northerngateway.ca/aboriginal-engagement/birdtail-sioux-inspirational- first-nation/. Enbridge. (2013, November 7). Working together with First Nations. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptPRIbewSJs. ForestEthics. (2010, August 5). First Nations opposition to Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fHAtCHgzyY&list=PLB2DEF20C29C09D73. Gillis, D. (2012, February 20). Drums of the Great Bear: Exclusive video of historic gathering against Enbridge. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from http://commonsensecanadian.ca/VIDEO-detail/video-drums-of-the-great-bear-historic- gathering-against-enbridge-damien-gillis/. Hannigan, J. (2006). Environmental sociology. New York: Routledge. Hernandez, G. (2013). Indigenous perspectives on Community Economic Development: A North-South conversation. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economic Research 4(1), 6-24. Nadasdy, P. (2005). Transcending the debate over the Ecologically Noble Indian: Indigenous peoples and environmentalism. Etnohistory 52(2), 291-331. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Aboriginal Concerns 12
Save the Fraser. (May, 2013). Save the Fraser Declaration. Retrieved November 21, 2013, from http://savethefraser.ca/Fraser-Declaration-May2013.pdf. Service, C., Nelson, T., Paquet, P., McInnes, W. & Darimont, C. (2012). Pipelines and Parks: Evaluating external risks to protected areas from the proposed Northern Gateway oil transport project. Natural Areas Journal 32(4), 367-376. Willems-Braun, B. (1996). Colonial Vestiges: Representing Forest Landscapes on Canadas West Coast. BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly, 112, 5-39. Yearley, S. (1992). Green ambivalence about science: Legal-rational authority and the scientific legitimation of a social movement. The British Journal of Sociology 43(4), 511-532.