Indigenous Engagement Guidelines for Flood Mapping

Version 1.0, 2024

Natural Resources Canada, General Information Product 156e.

Natural Resources Canada.

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources, 2024.

Permanent link: https://doi.org/10.4095/pz2y3nucny.

For information regarding reproduction rights, contact Natural Resources Canada at copyright-droitdauteur@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca.

Table of contents

• 1.0 Context and purpose
  • 1.1. Canada’s Flood Hazard Identification and Mapping Program
• 2.0 Defining “indigenous engagement”
• 3.0 Guiding principles
• 4.0 Objectives of indigenous engagement
• 5.0 Roles and responsibilities
  • 5.1. Coordinating with government organizations
  • 5.2. Intercultural considerations
• 6.0 Engagement process
  • 6.1. Planning
  • 6.2. Identifying indigenous communities to engage
  • 6.3. Information sharing at the planning stage
• 7.0 Project initiation
  • 7.1. Contacting a community
  • 7.2. Information sharing during engagement
• 8.0 Maintaining the relationship: following up
  • 8.1. Information sharing following project completion
• Annex A: History of the relationship

List of abbreviations and acronyms

CIRNAC: Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada

ECCC: Environment and Climate Change Canada

FHIMP: Flood Hazard Identification and Mapping Program

FPIC: Free, prior, and informed consent

ISC: Indigenous Services Canada

NRCan: Natural Resources Canada

OCAP^®: Ownership, Control, Access Possession

PS: Public Safety Canada

UNDRIP: United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

1.0 Context and purpose

This document provides flood mapping practitioners with guidelines, and information about engagement activities to help support their work in Indigenous engagement. These guidelines provide a practical approach to initiating engagement with Indigenous communities, initiating dialogue regarding flooding and mapping-related activities in their area.

1.1. Canada’s Flood Hazard Identification and Mapping Program

The Government of Canada is addressing the rising frequency and costs of flood disasters though the Flood Hazard Identification and Mapping Program (FHIMP).

Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), in partnership with provincial and territorial governments, aims to complete flood hazard maps of higher-risk areas in Canada and make this flood hazard information accessible. These maps will inform decision-making in support of flood mitigation, adaptation to a changing climate, resilience building, and protection of Canadian lives and properties.

These efforts compliment other federal flood mapping activities, such as Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC)’s First Nations Adapt and Climate Change Preparedness in the North programs^{Footnote 1}. FHIMP supports initiatives such as:

• Updating Federal Flood Mapping Guidelines and Standards
• Production of regulatory-quality engineered flood maps for highest-risk areas
• Scoping and prioritization studies
• Dissemination of flood hazard information
• Advancing work on regional flood hazard modelling
• Integration of Indigenous Traditional Knowledge in flood mapping processes
• Development of Canada’s first National Adaptation Strategy
• Implementation of the Emergency Management Strategy for Canada

Due to the unique environmental landscape of the North^{Footnote 2}, and CIRNAC’s request to lead on engagement with Inuit, FHIMP mainly engages with First Nations. As a result, these guidelines are written in the context of their protocols. However, many of the best practices highlighted in this guideline can be used by other professionals as a case study in how the FHIMP is incorporating Indigenous engagement.

2.0 Defining “indigenous engagement”

Canada’s commitment to truth and reconciliation requires that all levels of government recognize the legacy of harm from the past and build towards a future based on equitable partnerships and respectful relations with Indigenous peoples. Simply put, the process of reconciliation rests on a renewed approach to building relationships. Conducting Indigenous Engagement is therefore an exercise in starting relationships, maintaining them, and empowering one another towards shared success.

Indigenous Engagement can be defined as:

“The inclusive practice of intercultural communication and relationship building based on trust. Engagement activities seek to understand one another’s needs and objectives. It is identifying how to improve program and project efficacy by better serving the stated needs of communities and projects. It is the opportunity to cooperate with and support Indigenous and Provincial/Territorial partners based on our shared histories and futures.”

The Indigenous engagement process enables sharing pertinent information with Indigenous communities and bring about greater Indigenous inclusion in flood mapping. For example, Indigenous engagement can lead to project footprints being expanded to include Indigenous community values and areas of significance. Indigenous engagement can help identify policy gaps where Indigenous priorities need to be highlighted.

While information sharing is an important first step to legitimate participation, a one-way flow of information with little or no means of feedback does not satisfy the definition of “engagement”, which requires reciprocity and cooperation to meet mutual needs and objectives.

Moving through engagement, the process becomes more in depth than just passing along information. Engagement is all about listening to feedback, understanding the feedback, and acting on it. Engagement is building trust.

3.0 Guiding principles

• Integrity and Good Faith: Practitioners will engage with an open mind, act with integrity during engagement, and deal in good faith with Indigenous communities. Practitioners will listen and respond to concerns respecting any potential impact on constitutionally protected rights.
• Respect: The process of engagement will be undertaken in a spirit of mutual respect and trust. Cultural practices will be respected, and traditional knowledge will only be utilized in a manner that demonstrates respect to their lawful owners and their consent.
• Flexibility, Transparency and Accountability: The diversity of Indigenous peoples necessitates a tailored and flexible approach to engagement based on the customs and traditions of Indigenous communities. Consequently, engagement will be flexible, transparent, accountable, and timely. Detailed notes and records of notifications, engagement, consultation, and accommodation activities are crucial for transparency.
• Communication: Communications between practitioners and Indigenous communities will be clear, open, and honest.
• Outcomes Orientation: Engagement will be done with a mindset of continuous improvement based on feedback to improve outcomes for communities, and be guided by a commitment to capacity build for yourself and your team, regardless of previous experience.

4.0 Objectives of indigenous engagement

The following core objectives are the basis of relationship building and development of the engagement process:

• Streamline the engagement process as much as possible and identify a single point of contact to minimize overwhelming staff in indigenous communities
• Listen to communities’ needs and expertise, including ways to incorporate Traditional Knowledge to better inform flood mapping processes and products
• Communicate information using different methods, prioritizing accessibility (language, technical tools and programs, etc.) and cultural sensitivity
• Document all issues and concerns that the community presents
• Document communities’ preferred notification and engagement protocols
• Provide support to communities, such as capacity-building funds and expertise
• Offer suggestions or possible solutions to resolve issues as they arise
• Evaluate engagement effectiveness routinely and make changes for improvement where necessary.

5.0 Roles and responsibilities

In engagement activities, it is important to have representation from all parties involved in flood mapping projects. Recognize that Indigenous communities are often overwhelmed with requests for consultation and engagement and frequently interact with multiple government agencies while having limited resources.

To minimize overwhelming staff in Indigenous communities, there should be a single, inclusive engagement process for each community, and one main point of contact for communication. Generally, the organization that owns the project will act as the lead for engagement activities unless specifically delegated.

5.1. Coordinating with government organizations

Multiple government organizations contribute to flood mapping in Canada. To reduce engagement stress on Indigenous communities, and to promote cooperation between different offices, it is beneficial to contact other agencies and share information about engagement, projects, and relationships.

Coordinating with partner agencies can also help to understand communities better. If other agencies have been working closely with a community, the agency or department may be willing to make introductions and share pertinent information, such as contact information, draft engagement agreements, or how OCAP^® principles are being applied in the agreements, thus reducing duplication of work.

5.2. Intercultural considerations

Indigenous engagement is a practice of intercultural communication and relationship building. To facilitate respectful communication, while aiming to improve Nation-to-Nation relationships, it is recommended to:

• Be humble. Be open to trying new perspectives and experiences. Rather than seeking proof, take Indigenous perspectives at face value. Indigenous knowledge is holistic and can be seen as a departure from the status quo of Western sciences. Understanding traditional knowledge requires individuals to listen to understand, rather than listening to respond.
• Be patient. Allow people to reply to your questions in their own time. Some people may be less assertive or require more time to reflect during a discussion.
• Be accepting to diversity and inter-cultural differences. Be aware of social differences and take the time to work through internal biases. For example, linguistic patterns differ between groups and some linguistic vernaculars are stigmatized.
• Be trusting. Take a positive, relationship-building approach to engagement sessions. At the start of a relationship, build rapport and highlight shared interests and perspectives. This can be done through “ice breaker” exercises and introducing oneself by explaining one’s personal background ahead of professional title or achievements.
• Be knowledgeable. Research a community’s history, protocols, traditions, and current news events. Without lived experience in a particular community, operate as a visitor who’s open to learning.
• Be reliable and accountable. Value the community’s time and input, follow-up and share results with communities throughout the project’s lifecycle. When relationships are neglected after initial engagement and data collection stages, communities may feel exploited, and this is not helpful when seeking positive relationships based on good will.

The current preferred term when discussing First Nations, Métis, and Inuit as a collective group is “Indigenous”. Historical terms, such as Aboriginal, are no longer used except in the situation when referencing laws, policies, or when specifically requested by an Indigenous person in reference to a specific situation. Many of the historical terms are inaccurate, highly offensive, and should not be used. When wanting to build positive relationships and maintain a safe working environment for everyone, do not use terms that are unacceptable. In general, these terms are the preferred terms, and should be used where appropriate:

• Indigenous
• First Nations
• Inuit
• Métis
• The preferred term requested by an individual.

6.0 Engagement process

6.1. Planning

Engagement ought to be undertaken at project design stages. Engaging Indigenous communities at the outset ensures that potentially adversely affected Indigenous rights are identified early and that plans to accommodate and protect rights are implemented, reducing risk and avoiding project delays. Early engagement creates opportunities to incorporate additional benefits into the project plan such as:

• Nation-to-Nation collaboration
• Indigenous Traditional Knowledge
• Community needs or objectives (e.g., mapping an important area of interest).

Communities ought to contribute to the project’s development to ensure their objectives and values are reflected in the project’s objectives and outcomes. Often, joint working groups do not consider Indigenous perspectives and processes. It is recommended that documents are co-authored, and measures are taken to ensure the community’s perspectives and values are incorporated.

6.2. Identifying indigenous communities to engage

As defined by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Crown has the duty and obligation to identify Indigenous communities whose traditional or treaty territory is within the project footprint or could be affected by project activities. When identifying communities to engage, it is important to ask and listen to community members as they may suggest other groups who ought to be included in the engagement activities. While identifying communities, it is recommended to contact a dedicated indigenous engagement officer, who can conduct background research to:

• Identify the treaty or traditional territory within the project footprint.
• Consult with other government organisations involved in flood mapping activities with Indigenous Peoples to ensure comprehensive research and coordination, such as Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs (CIRNAC), Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) and Public Safety (PS).
• Produce a list of recommended First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities to engage with, along with updated contact information to be used for each respective Nation.

It is crucial to use the contact information provided. Identifying the correct point of contact for a given project is a key strategy for the practical implementation of these guidelines. Using the correct contact information helps eliminate excessive engagement demands and administrative burdens.

Engagement officers need to be accessible throughout the entire project to ensure the community has a point of contact in the government, someone that can be responsive to their needs, and a person to support the community contributing to the project in partnership. Ongoing communication and dutiful information sharing empowers communities to act with Free, Prior, and Informed Consent^{Footnote 3} where possible.

Information sharing should occur at every stage of a project. The type of information shared will vary based on the stage of the project and the partnership itself.

6.3. Information sharing at the planning stage

When first planning engagement with communities, it is important to create a concise project information package for sharing. It is better to provide high-level information, such as a map of the project footprint and a short description of the project. Each community may have different capacities and may request different information at the beginning of the project. If the project incorporates technology, try to develop a plain language description of the tool and why it is the best option.

A project information package could include:

1. Map of Project footprint
2. Brief project description including reason for the project and potential project benefits/impacts for the community
3. List of technologies, methodologies, and applicable diagrams
4. Contact information.

7.0 Project initiation

Before any actions are taken on the land, there must be an opportunity for Indigenous communities to engage. This is the stage where Indigenous engagement will be the most meaningful. Any potential contributions or issues can be worked through and included in project planning. Clear objectives and outcomes from Indigenous engagement can be defined. Some objectives identified through Indigenous engagement could be:

• Identifying ways communities’ rights and interests may be adversely affected by project activities.
• Understanding the importance placed on each Aboriginal or treaty right that may be adversely impacted (e.g., determine if the affected activity is an integral part of the community versus a peripheral use).
• Ensuring the study area at question considers traditional uses in the region, that all flood hazards known to the community are being considered, and that traditional knowledge is incorporated into the flood mapping process.

7.1. Contacting a community

The following are decision points for contacting and engaging with Indigenous communities when there are planned activities in what is defined as the community’s traditional or treaty area:

• In some cases, Indigenous communities will have established protocol for communications. In such cases, follow these protocols. They will be found on the community’s website if they have one.
• Contact the Indigenous community, which can be accomplished in three ways:
  • Phone call to Environment or Lands office
  • Email to Environment or Lands office and copy Chief and Council
  • Letter to Environment or Lands office and send a copy to Chief and Council.
• Provide the community documentation regarding the project in the format they request. Do not overwhelm the community by sending large unsolicited information packages. More isolated communities will not have the bandwidth or the capacity to store large data files.
• Follow up on requests from the community, including answering all questions and providing all information as requested.

It may take some time for Indigenous communities to respond to your request. Communities are often understaffed, burdened with bureaucracy, and receive many requests for engagement. If you request engagement, you should:

• Do so early in your planning process to allow the community time to prepare and make room for you in their busy schedules. It's recommended to establish a regular schedule if both parties can agree.
• Give the community time to respond to you before re-contacting them with another request. Weeks-long delays during holiday, hunting periods, gathering times, and ceremonial periods can be expected.
• Follow up to avoid your project proceeding without the community’s input, for example, where external factors may have prevented them from getting back to you.

7.2. Information sharing during engagement

Indigenous communities have different processes than government, and this must be understood and respected. Practitioners may feel a single meeting is sufficient, however an Indigenous community may need more. Project Managers need to plan for and be flexible with Indigenous communities, reflecting this in the overall project timelines. Engagement is multi-staged and will require follow-up after a project is over. The approach may vary with each community, but the basics will be the same.

An important part of engagement is determining which data the communities are hoping to acquire and their goals, which data they are willing to share, and which data must be kept confidential (i.e. OCAP^®). It is also important to determine the form in which the data can be shared. Some remote communities will not have the bandwidth or the capacity to store, send, or receive large data files.

When engaging with communities, you should ask:

1. Is there an existing protocol that is important to follow? This is an important and respectful trust-building question to ask.
2. How would you like to communicate while planning for engagement? Do you prefer email, phone, video calls or in-person (where possible) meetings?
3. What groups should be engaged? The whole community? Band council? Traditional government? Elders? Women? Harvesters? Youth?

Once the communications process has been established, you should ask:

1. What does the community want out of the project? How would this project benefit them? What can we do to meet those needs?
2. How can we adapt the projects to create better outcomes for the community?
3. What information and knowledge do they want included and omitted from the project (referring to OCAP^® principles)? For example, a community may have an area where they harvest ceremonial plants, or a historic burial ground, or other archeological sites.

Project Managers should respond to information requests as quickly as possible. It is best practice to acknowledge communities’ response by email or phone upon receipt. When responding, be sure to inform the community that you have received their request and are working on gathering the information in the format they have requested. There is a balance between taking the time to gather data and collate information packages and responding to communities within a respectful timeframe.

Confidentiality

In cases where a third party, such as a consultant, is collecting project information for a community, be sure the consultant is authorized by the Indigenous community to do so. A consultant may contact a Project Manager stating they are working for an Indigenous community on the project and request information, but until the community can confirm this arrangement, no information should be shared. Project Managers can request a confirmation email from the community designating the third party as their consultant. If the information requested is sensitive, you should ask the community to provide a letter authorizing the third party to conduct work on behalf of the community. The letter should come from a department manager (e.g., Lands Manager) or from Chief and Council.

8.0 Maintaining the relationship: following up

Following up with communities should be done promptly, ideally within 24 hours of receiving communications. If you do not have an answer, simply state that, but commit to getting answers to their questions and be sure to follow up with them as quickly as possible. Honesty and promptness are important features of any relationship, communication does not need to be perfect, but it does have to be ongoing to ensure the quality of relationship.

When making a request from a community, it may take longer to get a response. It may take time for the community to respond as their capacity is generally much lower. Be patient and wait a few days before following up with the community on your requests. Lastly, if a commitment is made, make sure it is followed up on.

8.1. Information sharing following project completion

When a project is completed, the relationship built between the Practitioner and the Indigenous community needs to continue, especially in situations where the project has lasting effects beyond its lifecycle. It is also important to maintain the valuable Nation-to-Nation relationships to show respect, prevent communities from feeling abandoned, and create space for potential initiatives in the future.

The lives of Indigenous peoples are closely tied to the land, and the effects of projects go beyond the life of the project. The relationships that have been built over the course of the project will still require attention when the practitioners feels the project has finished. Building a relationship and abandoning it once the project is over should be avoided.

If a community contacts you after the project timelines have elapsed, you still have an obligation to work with them and provide information as requested. Similarly, ensure you have a thorough relationship hand-off if you move roles or shift teams. This includes informing the communities of the hand-off, and receiving approval along with any final feedback you can provide the new member of the engagement team.

Do not assume that once your project ends, the relationship ends as well.

Annex A: History of the relationship

History

Indigenous rights in what is now known as Canada, are practices that Indigenous peoples across Turtle Island (North America) have been conducting since before colonization. Indigenous rights encompass the customs, practices and traditions that were an integral part of the distinctive cultures of these Nations. They are embedded in the communities and culture, and include social, spiritual, and land activities. Common traditional Indigenous rights are the rights to hunt, fish, trap, and gather plants on a Nation’s traditional territory.

During early colonization Europeans worked with Indigenous peoples in a Nation-to-Nation manner, acknowledging Indigenous peoples had their own government, laws, and unique cultures. In fact, if not for the help from Indigenous communities, most settlements would not have survived. It was not until Confederation that Indigenous rights were threatened by various policies. Understanding the legacies of colonization and appreciating that Indigenous Peoples have existing rights that predate colonization is critical when discussing Indigenous rights and moving forward with engagement activities.

A community’s “traditional territory” is the area that a Nation has historically lived on since before colonization, using the resources in that area to meet people’s and community needs through social and cultural activities, such as harvesting resources, building, and for ceremonial purposes. A community’s “treaty territory” is the land that is subject to a signed treaty and is generally significantly smaller than the traditional territory. Treaty territory can be very distant from traditional lands in certain circumstances where a community was forced to relocate.

In the context of FHIMP, Treaty Territory is inclusive of all land claims, self-governance agreements and modern treaties, both signed and under current negotiation (i.e., Dehcho First Nations Self-governance, Nunavut Agreement). Supreme court case rulings have stated Indigenous peoples are not limited to practising traditional rights within their treaties, and this protection extends to their traditional lands.

In the Royal Proclamation of 1763, Indigenous rights were defined by the Crown, when the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms replaced the previous constitution in 1982, they included sections into the act that would recognize and protect rights for Métis, Inuit, and First Nations people. The rights recognized in the Constitution are referenced in Section 35(1) and are referred to as Aboriginal^{Footnote 4} and treaty rights.

While treaty rights are enshrined in agreements between the Crown and Indigenous peoples, as well as Provinces and Territories and Indigenous peoples, Indigenous rights reflect the fact that Indigenous communities occupied Turtle Island long before to the arrival of Europeans.

The trigger for consultation is based in the duty and honour of the Crown and is not the same as engagement. The aim of consultation is to secure free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC). Consultation is triggered whenever the government proposes a decision or activity that has the potential to adversely affect the ability of Indigenous communities to exercise treaty and Indigenous rights and conduct traditional uses of lands and resources. Indigenous consultation is affirmed through Section 35 of the Constitution.

On the other hand, engagement is based in the honour of the Crown and should be undertaken as a step towards reconciliation. This principle does not have a legal trigger in the manner of consultation but acknowledges Canada’s commitment to building government-to-government (Nation-to-Nation) relationships with Indigenous Nations with the aim of securing FPIC in a spirit of respect and reconciliation, even where it is not legally mandated. Meaningful engagement goes beyond cases of required consultation, and ought to be a part of every activity and project the Crown undertakes on Indigenous treaty or traditional lands.

Indigenous Engagement Today

In 2020, Bill C-15, An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was introduced in the House of Commons by the Minister of Justice, David Lametti. The Bill was passed into law in June 2021, establishing a process for the domestic implementation of UNDRIP.

Bill C-15 aims to establish a framework to integrate the UNDRIP into Canadian law and policy. The intent of the Bill is to change the way we interpret existing Canadian legal frameworks and the processes by which we develop law and policy, using UNDRIP as a fresh lens through which to interpret law in Canada. The Bill includes language about rejecting all forms of colonialism.^{Footnote 5}

For civil servants, “rejecting all forms of colonialism”^{Footnote 6} looks like seeking Indigenous communities' input and taking a distinctions-based approach, rather than more antiquated, paternalistic approaches to decision-making, in which government agencies have conventionally made decisions on behalf of Indigenous Nations in the development of law, policy, and service provision.

The foundation of meaningful engagement with an Indigenous community is trust. Earning trust takes time, consistency, and transparency. The key to understanding why trust may be difficult to earn, lies in the history of Crown-Indigenous relations in Canada. It is nearly impossible to engage with an Indigenous community respectfully and effectively without knowledge of this history. It is vital that employees of NRCan learn the basics of the culture and history of the communities they wish to engage.

Engagement should not be something done off the side of the desk. It is a core component which ought to be incorporated into project planning and budget. Utilizing resources such as Indigenous Engagement Coordinators ensures that communities have a reliable and knowledgeable point of contact for questions and concerns and can facilitate timely and accurate messaging about project activities, progress, and impacts.

NRCan approaches the design and implementation of the FHIMP Indigenous engagement guidelines as a living document that will provide flexibility to parties to ensure the approaches taken to develop relationships and fulfillment of engagement efforts, meet the latest requirements, and promote best practices.