No abstract

Abstract.The creation of an autonomous region of Nunavikwithinthe province of Quebec would constitute a new phase in the development of Canadian federalism. Although there is no existing domestic model for such a political arrangement, the system of nested federalism in the Russian Federation offers a useful comparative tool for examining the internal and external features of the emerging system of government in Nunavik, as well as the challenges of operationalizing and embedding such a system within the Canadian federal structure. This article outlines the basic principles of nested federalism and considers them in light of recent developments in the region of Nunavik, including the initialing of an “Agreement in Principle concerning the amalgamation of certain public institutions and the creation of the Nunavik Regional Government” between the regional, provincial and federal governments in August 2007. The article concludes that although the Agreement in Principle does not entrench the types of intergovernmental mechanisms and jurisdictional powers that were recommended by the 2001 Report of the Nunavik Commission and that are necessary to the proper functioning of a nested federal arrangement, the political amalgamation outlined in this document represents a significant step forward in terms of creating an institutional framework for an autonomous, nested region in Nunavik.Résumé.La création d'une région autonome du Nunavik à l'intérieur de la province du Québec constituerait une nouvelle phase dans le développement du fédéralisme canadien. Bien qu'il n'y ait aucun modèle domestique existant d'un tel arrangement politique le système de fédéralisme “encastré” dans la Fédération Russe offre un outil comparatif utile pour examiner les caractéristiques internes et externes du système de gouvernement émergeant au Nunavik. L'exemple russe démontre aussi les défis fonctionnels liés à l'établissement d'un tel système à l'intérieur de la structure fédérale existante au Canada. Cet article développe les principes de base d'un “fédéralisme encastré” et les considère en vue des développements récents dans la région du Nunavik, incluant les négociations pour un “Entente de principe sur la fusion de certaines institutions publiques et la création du gouvernement régional du Nunavik” entre les différents gouvernements régional, provincial et fédéral en août 2007. L'article conclut que bien que l'Accord de Principe n'inclut pas les types de mécanismes intergouvernementaux et les pouvoirs juridictionnels qui étaient recommandés dans le Rapport de 2001 de la Commission de Nunavik et qui sont nécessaires au bon fonctionnement d'un arrangement fédéral “encastré,” le fusionnement politique développé dans ce document représente un pas en avant significatif dans la construction institutionnelle d'un Nunavik autonome à l'intérieur du Québec.

No abstract

IntroductionSince the 1970s, Inuit peoples in the Canadian Arctic have gradually expanded their autonomy through the successful negotiation of comprehensive land claims agreements and other devolutionary arrangements. A critical, yet understudied, aspect of this expansion has been the role that Inuit economic development corporations~IEDCs! have played in preparing Inuit regions, economically and politically for eventual selfgovernment. As the organizations which are responsible for managing and investing the funds obtained from the modern treaties signed by the Inuit and non-Inuit governments, IEDCs provide a range of valuable programs, services and economic opportunities at the regional and local levels. In addition to this important capacity building function, IEDCs have also represented their respective regions in self-government negotiations with other levels of government. As a result, they have become powerful and influential organizations in the regions they serve.This corporate-led governance approach, which we call Inuit corporate governance, offers a new perspective on the development of Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive suggestions for improving this paper. They would also like to acknowledge the assistance of their research assistants, Chantal Carriere and Steven Kennedy, as well as David Chandonnet for his help in translating the abstract into French. Both authors did an equal amount of work on this article and share equal credit.

A specialist on Russian local and regional government examines relations among levels of political authority within Tyumen' Oblast'. Russian-language publications and on-site interviews constitute the base of evidence. Issues examined include challenges to the region posed by dissolution of the USSR, legal and political conflicts among levels of government, relations with federal authorities in Moscow, the role of oil companies in the region, and the impact of changes introduced under President Putin.A s many scholars have noted over the years, the federal model that existed during the Soviet period was a façade that veiled a highly centralized political and economic system. Under the Soviet system, the regional governments were largely subordinated to Moscow through such institutional mechanisms as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the centralized bureaucracy, and the centrally planned economy (CPE). With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the political situation of the regions, in terms of their relations both with Moscow and with each other, has undergone an enormous transformation. During the past decade, Russia has experienced a period of large-scale decentralization that has weakened the federal government and allowed the regions to amass considerable political and economic power.Arguably, this development has brought Russia closer to the Western, federal norm than its Soviet predecessor. After all, federalism is a system of government that is characterized by two levels of authority and a

No abstract

Over the last several decades, scholars working on Indigenous topics have faced increasing pressure to engage in research that promotes social justice and results in formal partnerships with Indigenous communities. In this article, we argue that non-community-based research, in which the researcher exercises academic autonomy over the project, still has a role to play in Indigenous-focused research, depending on the research question, topic, and situation at hand. We explore this argument from the perspective of political scientists who study Indigenous-settler political relations in Canada.

Indigenous peoples throughout the circumpolar north have made significant progress in terms of securing self-determination through greater political autonomy. Although such change is important, it must be accompanied by greater economic control aimed at reducing state dependencies. Using an analytical framework developed by Norwegian political scientist, Stein Rokkan, this article explores the interplay between economy, territory, and identity among the Inuit in Canada and the Sámi in Norway. It reveals that the economic destinies of both groups have been profoundly influenced by both domestic and international factors that determine the focus and type of economic development they undertake. While the Inuit have pursued a balance of modern and traditional forms of economic development that is grounded in a regionally based model of self-rule, the Sámi have opted for an economic development model that emphasises traditional economic activities and is supported by Norway’s international commitments to the rights of Indigenous peoples.