Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred
The use of rationalized risk assessment to identify the costs and benefits of protecting Aboriginal sacred sites is ubiquitous in Canadian law. Like other contemporary critics of cost-benefit analysis, I voice concerns with its use to adjudicate moral claims and recognize that it can misidentify the...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | unknown |
Published: |
2023
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.32920/22223377.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Resourceful_impacts_Harm_and_valuation_of_the_sacred/22223377 |
id |
fttorometrofigs:oai:figshare.com:article/22223377 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
fttorometrofigs:oai:figshare.com:article/22223377 2023-11-12T04:23:30+01:00 Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred Sari Graben 2023-03-06T20:18:50Z https://doi.org/10.32920/22223377.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Resourceful_impacts_Harm_and_valuation_of_the_sacred/22223377 unknown doi:10.32920/22223377.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Resourceful_impacts_Harm_and_valuation_of_the_sacred/22223377 In Copyright Indigenous law risk environmental assessment aboriginal rights valuation sacred sites cultural loss cost-benefit analysis Text Journal contribution 2023 fttorometrofigs https://doi.org/10.32920/22223377.v1 2023-10-15T05:43:34Z The use of rationalized risk assessment to identify the costs and benefits of protecting Aboriginal sacred sites is ubiquitous in Canadian law. Like other contemporary critics of cost-benefit analysis, I voice concerns with its use to adjudicate moral claims and recognize that it can misidentify the depth of loss experienced by Aboriginal peoples when sacred sites are destroyed. Nonetheless, in this article, I question in what ways technocratic approaches to risk could be helpful in protecting sacred sites. The article draws on two recent environmental assessments, the Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project in British Columbia and the Screech Lake Uranium Exploration Project in the Northwest Territories, to argue that innovative approaches to characterizing loss illustrate the potential of rationalized methods to identify harm better than it has in the past. The panels’ recommendations to reject the projects, based on the risk that the communities would suffer mental and psychological harm, reflect a genuine effort to provide decision makers with the real cost of approving these two projects. While I do not suggest that cost-benefit analysis can represent the loss of absolute values, I argue that, if done with cultural context in mind, assessment may help to extract the type of information needed to find the depth of empathy from which legal solutions may be constructed. Article in Journal/Newspaper Northwest Territories Research from Toronto Metropolitan University Copper Mine ENVELOPE(-59.667,-59.667,-62.383,-62.383) Northwest Territories |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Research from Toronto Metropolitan University |
op_collection_id |
fttorometrofigs |
language |
unknown |
topic |
Indigenous law risk environmental assessment aboriginal rights valuation sacred sites cultural loss cost-benefit analysis |
spellingShingle |
Indigenous law risk environmental assessment aboriginal rights valuation sacred sites cultural loss cost-benefit analysis Sari Graben Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
topic_facet |
Indigenous law risk environmental assessment aboriginal rights valuation sacred sites cultural loss cost-benefit analysis |
description |
The use of rationalized risk assessment to identify the costs and benefits of protecting Aboriginal sacred sites is ubiquitous in Canadian law. Like other contemporary critics of cost-benefit analysis, I voice concerns with its use to adjudicate moral claims and recognize that it can misidentify the depth of loss experienced by Aboriginal peoples when sacred sites are destroyed. Nonetheless, in this article, I question in what ways technocratic approaches to risk could be helpful in protecting sacred sites. The article draws on two recent environmental assessments, the Prosperity Gold-Copper Mine Project in British Columbia and the Screech Lake Uranium Exploration Project in the Northwest Territories, to argue that innovative approaches to characterizing loss illustrate the potential of rationalized methods to identify harm better than it has in the past. The panels’ recommendations to reject the projects, based on the risk that the communities would suffer mental and psychological harm, reflect a genuine effort to provide decision makers with the real cost of approving these two projects. While I do not suggest that cost-benefit analysis can represent the loss of absolute values, I argue that, if done with cultural context in mind, assessment may help to extract the type of information needed to find the depth of empathy from which legal solutions may be constructed. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Sari Graben |
author_facet |
Sari Graben |
author_sort |
Sari Graben |
title |
Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
title_short |
Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
title_full |
Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
title_fullStr |
Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
title_full_unstemmed |
Resourceful impacts: Harm and valuation of the sacred |
title_sort |
resourceful impacts: harm and valuation of the sacred |
publishDate |
2023 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.32920/22223377.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Resourceful_impacts_Harm_and_valuation_of_the_sacred/22223377 |
long_lat |
ENVELOPE(-59.667,-59.667,-62.383,-62.383) |
geographic |
Copper Mine Northwest Territories |
geographic_facet |
Copper Mine Northwest Territories |
genre |
Northwest Territories |
genre_facet |
Northwest Territories |
op_relation |
doi:10.32920/22223377.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Resourceful_impacts_Harm_and_valuation_of_the_sacred/22223377 |
op_rights |
In Copyright |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.32920/22223377.v1 |
_version_ |
1782338250268999680 |