Summary of Workshop Results
"Effective Local Institutions for Collective Action in Arctic
Communities"
University of Alaska Anchorage
To view the workshop summary online, please go to:
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu
The workshop, Effective Local Institutions for Collective Action in
Arctic Communities, was an interdisciplinary inquiry into
community-based forms of collective action in the Arctic. The workshop
was organized in conjunction with the Public Administration Theory
Network Conference, Masks and Boundaries, held at the University of
Alaska Anchorage, 19-21 June 2003. Participants included twelve
researchers and eighteen practitioners and community leaders. Discussion
centered on three questions:
1. Why are some small communities more successful than others in
developing a sustainable mixed economy, with good public services, and
positive social outcomes for residents of all ages?
2. What are the factors that foster effective local institutions?
3. How can communities learn to more effectively address problems and
promote their own community goals?
Findings from the workshop are summarized in a 16 page report posted at
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu. A CD of the workshop is also available
on request.
Here are a few highlights from the workshop summary:
- Communities and state agencies often have different definitions of
effectiveness because they have different goals and values. For example,
in one community a principal goal for local programs was to disburse
employment opportunities among the greatest number of community members.
Government agencies, however, generally evaluate effectiveness in terms
of their own program objectives, including meeting project timelines,
budget demands, and fiscal accountability. When evaluated by these
criteria, communities often find themselves at odds with agency
representatives.
Native communities are not homogenous, but rather are represented by a
range of fundamentally different interests, attributable in part to
differences in age, gender, religion, kinship, worldview, education, and
economic differentiation. To be effective, communities need to develop
internal mechanisms to overcome divisions to create shared objectives.
Agency representatives and community leaders must also develop more
inclusive approaches to consultation and decision-making.While financial support is beneficial to local institutional
development, the quality of support given by government to local
initiatives is equally important. It is the decentralization of
authority, the reliability of support, and the flexibility of
institutional structures that will ultimately determine local-level
success. A demonstration of respect by government for the local
accomplishments, together with a public endorsement of local authority
will directly and indirectly encourage others to accept them as
legitimate institutions.Education is not only essential to economic growth and alleviating
many of the pathologies associated with poverty, but also integral to
community self-sufficiency and personal well-being. While causal factors
abound, several workshop participants attribute the limited success rate
of Native students with higher education to the transitional challenges
associated with relocation and the risks involved with altering or
cutting one's ties with a spouse, family, and friends. Students who have
strong support from family and friends in the beginning of their studies
may find support fading as more time is spent away from the community.
Some students report that they are looked on as outsiders when they
return. Many do not return. Some choose not to pursue higher education
at all because they see no opportunity to use a college education at
home.The institutional structure of local-state relations rests in a
western conception of organization and management and functions in the
language and ideology of the dominant culture. This one-sidedness
creates persistent conditions of estrangement and social distrust which,
although often subtle and unspoken, corrodes the relationship between
Native communities and government agencies. As a result, interaction
between community members and agency representatives remains infrequent
and in some cases highly charged. Social trust is a necessary condition
for institutions to function effectively. If conditions are to improve,
we must start by each recognizing our own institutional and cultural
baggage and acknowledge the cultural background of others. More Native
people in lead administrative roles in government agencies would also
help mitigate the cultural differences that challenge effective
collaboration.
To view the workshop summary online, please go to:
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu