Rescaling water governance - Governing Transboundary Waters: Canada, the United States, and Indigenous Communities - page 89

Some motivation exists within the IJC to try to merge these boards (at least
theoretically), as described below by two different IJC staff members:
We noted that water quality and water quantity functions were handled
separately, and they were also handled not only by different groups, but with
different reporting structures. [We] had a board that handled water quantity
issues, and . . . a water quality group, [that] reported directly to governments.
So, you had different groups exchanging diplomatic notes, and directing all
of their functions to the IJC . . . we are in the process of working with those
groups to basically bring the issues together, and then we'll see how that
progresses. But again, it's a slow process.
And:
So maybe if the Commission were to push harder and merge the boards, it
might work. That's a little bit of a push and a pull with what makes sense to
the people that live there, so that's sort of the situation there. Again, the boards,
I think, are working well together as a group. They hold their meetings jointly.
They do give us our report jointly. So, they're acting [together], but they are
not one.
The attempted convergence of water quality and quantity issues under the umbrella
of the Watersheds Initiative marks a widening of governance for the IJC consistent
with the new Participatory Era of water governance (Pentland and Hurley, 2007).
IWI and Indigenous communities
To move towards a Postcolonial Era of governance, the IJC will need to continue
its efforts for greater inclusion of non-State actors and to actively include First
Nations and Tribal governments as equal partners in the governance process. The
designated membership of First Nations, Metis, and Tribal members in the
Rainy-Lake of the Woods Board is certainly promising. Whether the other boards
will follow suit, however, is yet to be seen. In addition, in previous years,
Indigenous governments have been invited to the table as “stakeholders”, on equal
footing with other citizen groups. This approach, at its foundation, is flawed, as
Indigenous communities have unique sovereign status, which needs to be addressed
through formal government-to-government relationships (Ranco et al. , 2011; Von
der Porten and de Loë, 2013a, 2013b). As Ranco et al. (2011, p. 221) note, in the
context of Indigenous communities in the U.S.:
Environmental justice in the tribal context cannot be contemplated apart from
a recognition of American Indian tribes' unique historical, political, and legal
circumstances. American Indian tribes are sovereign governments, with
inherent powers of self-government over their citizens and their territories.