Co-management- : An attainable partnership? Two cases from James Bay, Northern Quebec and Torres Strait, Northern Queensland

IntroductionThis paper examines the potential for co-management arrangements to assist in preserving the rights and interests in land and sea resources of indigenous1 hunting/fishing peoples, and to mediate conflicts over resources between these peoples and state central governments,2 in two cases: the Cree of subarctic James Bay, northern Quebec (Canada) and the indigenous Melanesians of the tropical islands and reefs of Torres Strait, northern Queensland (Australia). It is motivated by questions that we believe to be of crucial importance not just for comanagement arrangements per se, but for the character of relations between indigenous peoples and the "settler states" more broadly, of which these arrangements are expressions. These questions include the following. To what extent, and under what circumstances, can indigenous relations with state management systems be built on principles of consent, as opposed to coercion? What manner of institutional design might assist in overcoming-in practice if not in legal-constitutional theory-the state's dogmatic insistence on its own jurisdictional monopoly? And what factors enable indigenous actors to reduce asymmetries of power in contexts of conflicting resource development goals? We do not pretend to fully answer these questions, but the brief histories and analysis of disappointment and improvement that we present for Crees and Islanders do provide some direction.These two groups have features in common with many indigenous peoples occupying peripheral areas in settler state contexts (Havemann 1999; Perry 1996): a significant measure of reliance on wildlife resources for subsistence and commercial purposes, some of which are thought to be in "crisis" in regard to declining stocks; the continued importance of customary land and sea tenure, indigenous knowledge, and local management systems; multiple industrial pressures on traditional land and sea resources; the majority status of their populations within their traditional territories; and some of the available legal and policy manoeuvres by which they attempt to maintain or regain control of resources. Both have been leaders, in their respective countries, in establishing self-governing structures and gaining recognition of Native title rights.A significant contemporary movement in global political and environmental relations is the development of structures and processes aimed at increased co-operation between indigenous peoples and state systems in the management of natural resources (Abel and Friesen 1991; Berkes 1989; Pinkerton 1989; Usher 1997). This is occurring not only because of the growing international prominence of ideologies of indigenous along with other human rights (Niezen 2000), but also because it is increasingly evident that the knowledge and participation of indigenous communities is fundamental in devising strategies for environmentally sustainable resource use, and for coping with environmental changes that are both local and global in scope and consequence (UNCED 1993; WCED 1987). This movement is testing the limits of state systems to achieve genuine decentralization, sharing of powers, and the accommodation of indigenous ethnonational aspirations.Co-management carries a particular burden in developed "settler" states such as Australia and Canada, where immigrant majorities pose significant impediments to the agenda of indigenous people to regain sovereign control of their homeland and sea resources. The power-sharing implicit in the idea of co-management seems to assist the project of decolonization, and notwithstanding the small size of indigenous populations in these states, they have signalled their determination to bring about such reform. Declarations by the James Bay Cree that they will exercise their right to determine their own political affiliation in the event of the separation of Quebec from the rest of Canada (Grand Council of the Crees of Quebec 1998), or by Torres Strait Islanders that they reserve the option of secession from Australia (Lui 1994), are not without impact in arenas of national and international opinion. …