This thesis examines attempts to transform access to land and housing in First Nations (‘Indian Reservations’) in Canada through the mechanism of market development. This initiative, proposed by the Government of Canada to First Nations, is a deliberate shift away from socially funded housing to owner occupied housing as a way to increase wealth and address social conditions. The thesis begins with a brief statement of how recent policy shifts in First Nation housing have been justified by neoliberalism, and outlines policy and planning interventions consistent with neoliberalism to develop First Nation homeownership programs. Next, the thesis examines market development in Indigenous lands internationally and draws on lessons learned that may take shape in First Nations. Finally, the thesis examines how interventions in First Nations have been discussed in recent policy documents leading up to the Kelowna Accord signed in 2005, and reports on critical discourse analysis of the documents that were authored by the signatories to support negotiations on the Accord. The purpose is not so much to evaluate the interventionist policies as it to highlight what they attempt to achieve, and to identify some of the challenges they present to planners. Specifically, the thesis addresses the question: what underlying meanings have been embedded in the documentation supporting negotiations on the land questions between Ottawa and Aboriginal organisations? To this end, it extends the analysis by Skelton and Ribeiro (2006), which raises concerns in relation to social rights, Aboriginal governance and social relations that may accompany the introduction of land markets. Findings show how powerful policy discourses shaped by ideological beliefs privilege particular market forms. However, the emphasis on developing market mechanisms fails to address fundamental issues, such as the underlying cause of poverty and homelessness in First Nations. Such insights challenge current direction in First Nations housing policy and calls for socially responsive and community-based solutions to housing that are relevant to culture, context and place.

This thesis examines attempts to transform access to land and housing in First Nations (‘Indian Reservations’) in Canada through the mechanism of market development. This initiative, proposed by the Government of Canada to First Nations, is a deliberate shift away from socially funded housing to owner occupied housing as a way to increase wealth and address social conditions. The thesis begins with a brief statement of how recent policy shifts in First Nation housing have been justified by neoliberalism, and outlines policy and planning interventions consistent with neoliberalism to develop First Nation homeownership programs. Next, the thesis examines market development in Indigenous lands internationally and draws on lessons learned that may take shape in First Nations. Finally, the thesis examines how interventions in First Nations have been discussed in recent policy documents leading up to the Kelowna Accord signed in 2005, and reports on critical discourse analysis of the documents that were authored by the signatories to support negotiations on the Accord. The purpose is not so much to evaluate the interventionist policies as it to highlight what they attempt to achieve, and to identify some of the challenges they present to planners. Specifically, the thesis addresses the question: what underlying meanings have been embedded in the documentation supporting negotiations on the land questions between Ottawa and Aboriginal organisations? To this end, it extends the analysis by Skelton and Ribeiro (2006), which raises concerns in relation to social rights, Aboriginal governance and social relations that may accompany the introduction of land markets. Findings show how powerful policy discourses shaped by ideological beliefs privilege particular market forms. However, the emphasis on developing market mechanisms fails to address fundamental issues, such as the underlying cause of poverty and homelessness in First Nations. Such insights challenge current direction in First Nations housing policy and calls for socially responsive and community-based solutions to housing that are relevant to culture, context and place.

L’objectif du présent mémoire est double. D’une part, il cherche à identifier les facteurs qui permettent au gouvernement canadien et aux peuples autochtones de s’entendre sur des politiques publiques, malgré la persistance d’une logique coloniale. Nous verrons que l’atteinte d’une entente est conditionnelle à la légitimité du processus d’élaboration de la politique publique d’un point de vue autochtone. D’autre part, ce travail invite à penser le processus d’élaboration des politiques publiques comme espace potentiel d’autodétermination. Étant donné la malléabilité des règles qui encadrent l’élaboration des politiques publiques en contexte canadien, le gouvernement – s’il en a la volonté - peut modeler le processus d’élaboration de façon à le rendre plus égalitaire et donc plus légitime d’un point de vue autochtone. Il sera démontré que, dans une optique de changements progressifs, un tel processus d’élaboration peut permettre aux peuples autochtones de regagner une certaine autonomie décisionnelle et ainsi atténuer les rapports de pouvoir inégalitaires. Notre cadre théorique a été construit à l’aide de différents courants analytiques, issus notamment des littératures sur le colonialisme, sur les politiques publiques et sur la légitimité. La comparaison de deux études de cas, soit les processus d’élaboration de l’Accord de Kelowna et du projet de loi C-33, Loi sur le contrôle par les Premières Nations de leur système d’éducation, permettra d’illustrer nos arguments et d’en démontrer l’applicabilité pratique. En somme, nous verrons comment la première étude de cas permet de concevoir l’élaboration des politiques publiques comme espace potentiel d’autodétermination, et comment la deuxième, au contraire, démontre que cette sphère peut encore en être une d’oppression. / The purpose of this thesis is twofold. First, it seeks to identify factors that enable the federal government and Aboriginal peoples to agree on public policies despite the persistence of settler colonialism. It demonstrates that such an agreement is conditional upon the legitimacy, from an Aboriginal perspective, of the policy-making process. Second, this thesis uses a pragmatic approach to call for a reflection on the capacity for policy-making processes to become a space for Aboriginal self-determination. Given the flexibility of current rules that govern the policy-making process in Canada, a government – if it has the will - can shape the process in a more egalitarian fashion, thus increasing the process’s legitimacy from an Aboriginal viewpoint. In a perspective of incremental change, such policy-making process could help Aboriginal people regain some decisional autonomy and hence mitigate the unequal power relationship that actually exists between them and the Canadian state. Building on a theoretical framework that blends different approaches, notably from literatures on public policy, colonialism and legitimacy, this thesis explores two case studies : the policy-making process that led to the Kelowna Accord in 2005 and the one that led to Bill C-33, First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act, in 2014. The comparison of both cases illustrates our arguments and demonstrates its practical applicability. In brief, it shows how the policy-making process can be both a self-determination space and a tool of oppression.