A/HRC/22/50/Add.1 Northern Development Canada or the public of their airfreight costs. As such, the federal Government has no way of verifying if the subsidy is being passed on, despite the obligation imposed on subsidy recipients to attest that they have complied with this requirement every time that they submit a subsidy claim, and the compliance reviews performed by independent auditors. 60. Questions were also raised regarding the eligibility criteria on which communities fall within the scope of the programme and which items are subsidized. Under Nutrition North Canada, 31 isolated northern communities that had been eligible under the Food Mail Program, allegedly became ineligible though they had not been relying on the programme in recent years. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that Nutrition North Canada was designed and is being implemented without an inclusive and transparent process that provides Northern communities with an opportunity to exercise their right to active and meaningful participation. 61. The Special Rapporteur recognizes that neither Nutrition North Canada nor the Food Mail Program could address other factors responsible for the high food costs in northern communities, such as the high cost of energy for heating and refrigeration, electricity generation, building construction, equipment maintenance, etc. Food costs remain higher in the North than elsewhere in Canada for legitimate reasons, but more needs to be done to improve the effectiveness of Nutrition North Canada. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the progress made in this direction. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada recently released information showing that, on average, in communities eligible for a full subsidy, the cost of a healthy diet for a family of four was 8 percent lower in March 2012 under NNC than one year prior to the launch of the programme; on average, in communities eligible for the partial subsidy, the cost decreased by 2 per cent (in comparison, food prices elsewhere in Canada increased 2.2 per cent between March 2011 and March 2012). B. Access to traditional/country foods 62. Indigenous peoples are also uniquely positioned with respect to food by virtue of their relationship with traditional lands and the natural resources therein, which is a central component of their identity. Accordingly, indigenous peoples are generally recognized as having broader rights to natural resources under international human rights law. They have the right to use natural resources as a means of supporting their cultural integrity through traditional economic activities, such as subsistence agriculture, hunting and fishing, as well as religious or spiritual activities.58 63. Historically, indigenous peoples have had their own food systems, relying on traditional knowledge of hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering. According to the Manitoba First Nations Regional Health Survey (2008), approximately 85 per cent of First Nations adults sometimes or often had someone who shared traditional food (also known as “country” food) with their household. In 2006, 65 per cent of Inuit residing in Northern Canada were reported to live in households where at least half of the meat and fish consumed was country foods. A study involving Inuit adults found that diets contained significantly more vitamins A, D, E and B6, riboflavin, iron zinc, potassium and selenium, 58 18 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 1, para. 2; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 1; United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 31, para.1; ILO Convention No. 169 (1989), art. 2, para. 2 (b); Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 21 (2009) on the right of everyone to take part in cultural life, paras. 36-37; CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.5, para. 7. See also Communication No. 671/1995, Jouni E. Länsman et al. v. Finland (CCPR/C/58/D/671/1995).