| Summary: | This thesis addresses questions of how development planning theory has influenced policymaking for Indians in Canada and how it could be improved for making better policies in the future. These questions are considered around a nexus of central state-Indian relations. There is a focus on the multi-dimensional problems of poverty faced by many reserve communities, especially of those located in more rural and remote regions. The thesis criticizes the serious dualism within and between prevailing development doctrines and proposes remedies through a 'relational' approach. An original typology categorizes 'substantive' development planning theories into two opposing doctrines. The more dominant liberal assimilationist doctrine centers on modernization theory and internalizes blame on Indians for their "own" problems, but is challenged by radical autonomist doctrine which centers on underdevelopment theory (UDT) and its 'internal colony' variant, and contrarily externalizes blame onto the state. A third body of reformist planning is grounded in the practices of welfare statism. Relational analysis of the history of Indian policy shows that underdevelopment of Indian communities has been caused by the interaction of both external and internal causes. Liberal doctrine strongly influenced the central state's assimilative agenda during the 'traditional' era of Indian policy, including its oppressive 'reserve system' and landmark 1969 White Paper. It is agreed that radical criticism properly reveals the racism and economic exploitation underlying state-sponsored process of 'internal colonization,' and also helps to explain the consequent rise of Indian ethnic nationalism. However, it is concluded that radical criticism does not adequately explain events in the 'contemporary era' where Indian leaders have more influence over policy-making, but have expended much of their energies pursuing a 'modernist' nationalist agenda in a power struggle with the central state. The resulting policy vacuum between the deadlocked liberal state and radical Indian positions has been filled by default with misguided reformist programs of welfare statism, with terribly destructive effects in many reserve communities. The criticism of current development theories when applied in practice is reinforced by their criticism as theories. The deficiencies of current 'substantive' development theories are shown to be endemic because of shortcomings in their underlying 'process' planning theories. In particular, the reductionist dualism of extreme liberal and radical development doctrines, which contributes to polarization in practice, is revealed. Instead of the current practice of applying single explanations and prescriptions to Indian policy-making, a relational approach is advocated which selectively combines liberal, reformist, and radical perspectives. The thesis concludes with an exposition of how a relational approach can be applied to examine widespread poverty and dependency in reserve communities as an interconnected 'external/internal' problem, and, leading from this, to propose mutually-reinforcing state and community actions. Applied Science, Faculty of Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of Graduate
|
|---|