Indigenous self-determination through collaborative governance? Potential and limits of joint policy making in Canada

While we tend to equate Indigenous self-determination with self-rule and political autonomy, institutions designed to facilitate Indigenous-state coordination, or shared rule, are arguably also essential to achieving changes in colonial relationships. In Canada, where a growing number of Indigenous peoples exercise self-government through negotiated agreement with federal and provincial authorities, mechanisms of shared rule remain remarkably weak. There are no guaranteed seats for Indigenous representatives in federal and provincial legislatures and no elected representative body that can speak on behalf of all Indigenous nations and communities in relations with federal and provincial authorities. This institutional void contributes to the weak legitimacy of policies affecting indigenous peoples designed at the federal or provincial levels. To compensate for this lack of proper shared rule institutions, federal and provincial authorities are increasingly engaging in joint policy-making or collaborative governance exercises with Indigenous self-governments and political representation organizations. Building on qualitative fieldwork involving participant observations and interviews with key informants involved in two such processes, I ask to what extent, and if so under what conditions collaborative governance exercises can become effective instruments of shared rule supporting Indigenous self-determination.