🗓️ Published on December 18, 2024

When Canada joined the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and transitioned to the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), the aim was to open economic doors and provide inclusive opportunities for all. These agreements claimed to protect marginalized communities, including Indigenous peoples, by promoting fair trade practices and access to broader markets. However, the reality faced by Indigenous entrepreneurs today is far from this vision.

For instance, small Indigenous business owners, particularly those producing natural products, struggle to break into international markets due to stringent regulations and lack of support. These challenges spotlight the gap between the promises made by CUSMA and the lived experiences of Indigenous entrepreneurs. By imposing complex rules and favouring large corporations, CUSMA fails to support the economic interests of Indigenous communities, despite their long-standing tradition of trade and commerce in North America.

For instance, small Indigenous business owners, particularly those producing natural products, struggle to break into international markets due to stringent regulations and lack of support. These challenges spotlight the gap between the promises made by CUSMA and the lived experiences of Indigenous entrepreneurs. By imposing complex rules and favouring large corporations, CUSMA fails to support the economic interests of Indigenous communities, despite their long-standing tradition of trade and commerce in North America.

Before NAFTA and CUSMA, Indigenous peoples had extensive and well-established trade networks. Communities across North America exchanged goods like food, medicinal plants, and artisanal crafts, maintaining these systems based on reciprocity and sustainability. One notable example is the trade networks of the Blackfoot Confederacy, which connected Northern Plains tribes with Indigenous communities as far south as present-day Mexico.

These Indigenous trade systems functioned with a deep respect for the land and its resources, in stark contrast to today’s profit-driven, neoliberal models of international trade. Indigenous economic principles focused on mutual benefit, which is notably absent from current trade agreements like CUSMA.   NAFTA, and later CUSMA, were introduced with commitments to fairer trade systems, including provisions that explicitly mentioned Indigenous protections. Yet, these protections often reduced Indigenous participation to promoting “cultural” goods, such as arts and crafts, while ignoring broader economic contributions, such as food products, natural health goods, or services based on traditional knowledge.

These Indigenous trade systems functioned with a deep respect for the land and its resources, in stark contrast to today’s profit-driven, neoliberal models of international trade. Indigenous economic principles focused on mutual benefit, which is notably absent from current trade agreements like CUSMA. NAFTA, and later CUSMA, were introduced with commitments to fairer trade systems, including provisions that explicitly mentioned Indigenous protections. Yet, these protections often reduced Indigenous participation to promoting “cultural” goods, such as arts and crafts, while ignoring broader economic contributions, such as food products, natural health goods, or services based on traditional knowledge.

These Indigenous trade systems functioned with a deep respect for the land and its resources, in stark contrast to today’s profit-driven, neoliberal models of international trade. Indigenous economic principles focused on mutual benefit, which is notably absent from current trade agreements like CUSMA. NAFTA, and later CUSMA, were introduced with commitments to fairer trade systems, including provisions that explicitly mentioned Indigenous protections. Yet, these protections often reduced Indigenous participation to promoting “cultural” goods, such as arts and crafts, while ignoring broader economic contributions, such as food products, natural health goods, or services based on traditional knowledge.

These Indigenous trade systems functioned with a deep respect for the land and its resources, in stark contrast to today’s profit-driven, neoliberal models of international trade. Indigenous economic principles focused on mutual benefit, which is notably absent from current trade agreements like CUSMA. NAFTA, and later CUSMA, were introduced with commitments to fairer trade systems, including provisions that explicitly mentioned Indigenous protections. Yet, these protections often reduced Indigenous participation to promoting “cultural” goods, such as arts and crafts, while ignoring broader economic contributions, such as food products, natural health goods, or services based on traditional knowledge.

These Indigenous trade systems functioned with a deep respect for the land and its resources, in stark contrast to today’s profit-driven, neoliberal models of international trade. Indigenous economic principles focused on mutual benefit, which is notably absent from current trade agreements like CUSMA. NAFTA, and later CUSMA, were introduced with commitments to fairer trade systems, including provisions that explicitly mentioned Indigenous protections. Yet, these protections often reduced Indigenous participation to promoting “cultural” goods, such as arts and crafts, while ignoring broader economic contributions, such as food products, natural health goods, or services based on traditional knowledge.