Wicihitowin: History
The concept of Wicihitowin was born from three years of Aboriginal community dialogues and consultations which was facilitated by the Edmonton Urban Aboriginal Community Dialogue Process, which was facilitated by Edmonton Aboriginal Urban Affairs Committee and the City of Edmonton with support and participation from the Edmonton Housing Trust Fund (now called Edmonton Homeward Trust), Urban Aboriginal Strategy through the Office of the Federal Interlocutor for Métis of DIAND, and the Government of Alberta through the Ministry of International, Intergovernmental, and Aboriginal Relations (now called Aboriginal Relations).
The Edmonton Urban Aboriginal Community Dialogue Process from 2004 to 2007 sought input and consensus from urban Aboriginal people on how to best work together to identify issues, concerns, and solutions through community-led and solution focused Community and Action Circles. It was through this community designed process, and guided by a Circle of Aboriginal Elders, that the Aboriginal community identified three areas of work that are critical in meeting the needs of Aboriginal people in Edmonton:
- Identifying urgent issues and priorities
- Creating an Accord Relationship Agreement to provide a set of Principles and Values to establish working relations, and
- To create a community mechanism for New Ways of Working together now called: “Wicihitowin: Circle of Shared Responsibility & Stewardship.”
While Wicihitowin is a governance mechanism, it is not a government. In fact, when creating Wicihitowin, the Aboriginal community felt that all orders and levels of governments must work together with local community members, through Action Circles and the Circle of Shared Responsibility, to better make use of resources to deliver much needed support for priority needs in the city. Aboriginal governments along with Federal, Provincial, and Municipal governments have identified places and roles within the Wicihitowin: Circle of Shared Responsibility from which their inclusion and participation in this consensus-driven governance model is made clear.
