Case report
Are Indigenous youth in a tug-of-war between community and city? Reflections from a visioning workshop in the Lac Simon Anishnaabeg community (Quebec, Canada)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2019.100168Get rights and content

Abstract

The proportion of Indigenous people living in urban areas has been increasing steadily in Canada over the last few decades. Young Indigenous people are increasingly tempted to leave their community on traditional territory to move to the city, and this could challenge their link to the land. An exploratory youth visioning workshop involving young adults from an Anishnaabeg community located in a forested setting allowed us to lift the veil on the factors pushing them towards the city or pulling them (back) to the community. We show that young Anishnaabeg leave their community to pursue postsecondary education, to work, to access housing, to receive healthcare and other services, to escape bullying, to stay away from drugs, and to seek adventure. However, they are also tempted to stay in – or come back to – the community, where they receive support from family and friends, do not experience racism, contribute to community development, and have easier access to the forest where they can engage in cultural practices. While it might seem that having a job – whether in the community or in the city – could prevent young Anishnaabeg from spending time in the forest, it is rather the opposite. Having a job provides the money needed to pay for pursuing traditional activities on the land. Instead of being in a tug-of-war between community and city, Indigenous youth show a circular mobility pattern in which work, culture, family and education are interrelated.

Introduction

Migration to and from urban areas can be a challenge for the development of rural areas, including Indigenous communities. In Canada for example, despite deep traditional ties to life on the land, the proportion of Indigenous people living in urban areas has been increasing steadily over the last few decades and now exceeds 55% according to the latest population census (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025a-eng.htm). Mobility, however, is not unidirectional, and Indigenous people frequently alternate between life in communities and in urban areas (Lévesque, 2002, Brown et al., 2005). This is particularly true for Indigenous youth, who tend to be more mobile than older community members (Goodman, Snyder, & Wilson, 2018).

Although movements of Indigenous youth to and from the city should be viewed as “part of a dynamic of continuity with, or extension of, community life” (Lévesque, 2002, p. 24), concerns continue to be expressed over the impact of outmigration from communities to cities on intergenerational cultural transmission and on the strength of family/community ties (Goodman et al., 2018). Indeed, Indigenous communities are generally located close to, or within, traditional territories that play a key role for identity building and cultural transmission (Basile, Asselin, & Martin, 2017). Moreover, as mentioned by Peters and Andersen (2013, p. 1), “the association of ‘authentic’ Indigenous identities with non-urban locations positions urban Indigenous cultures and lifeways as inauthentic and less legitimate”. Indigenous youth are still often seen as being in a tug-of-war between community and city, with deeper cultural roots in the former, but access to greater possibilities (e.g. education, work, services) in the latter.

As pointed out by Goodman et al. (2018, p. 314), “gaps persist in understanding the mobility experiences of Indigenous youth”. In this paper, we report on an exploratory youth visioning workshop with young Anishnaabeg adults discussing their future, and what role the community and the city will play in it. We show that youth see good reasons to move to the city, but also to stay in – or come back to – the community. Job opportunities are more numerous in cities, but instead of keeping Indigenous youth away from traditional territories, work provides them with the means to pursue cultural activities on the land, which are increasingly costly. Mobility shows a circular pattern in which work, culture, family and education are interrelated.

Section snippets

Setting

The Lac Simon Anishnaabeg community is located within the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of the province of Quebec (Canada), in a boreal forest setting somewhat remote from Val-d’Or, the nearest urban center accessible by road (32 km to the east; ca. 33,000 inhabitants). Lac Simon has ca. 2200 members, of which 20% live outside the community, mostly in Val-d’Or, or in other urban centers. Such a low proportion of outside residents is typical of rural Indigenous communities; it is much higher for

Results

Workshop participants included five women and one man between 26 and 37 years old. Although these six participants cannot be said to be statistically representative of the youth in Lac Simon, their viewpoints were strikingly similar to those of young people from Poplar River First Nation (Manitoba, Canada), another Anishnaabeg community where a youth visioning workshop took place (Robson et al. in press), lending support to the findings presented here.

Most participants (4/6) had at least one

Discussion

The push–pull factors identified by workshop participants are similar to those mentioned in previous studies on mobility of Indigenous people (Brown et al., 2005, Clatworthy and Norris, 2007, Goodman et al., 2018). But instead of seeing themselves in a tug-of-war between community and city, workshop participants emphasized that mobility should be viewed as a circular pattern during which stays in both places are part of one’s personal and professional life. The community (and the traditional

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the workshop participants for providing their perspectives on mobility between community and city. Thanks also to Donald Wabanonik who welcomed us in his lodge and facilitated the workshop, and to Joanie Caron, Eliane Grant and Julia Morarin who helped with logistics and note taking. Insightful comments on an earlier draft were provided by Iain Davidson-Hunt, James Robson and Sarah Wilson.

References (9)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

View full text