Policy Formulation II: talkingOctober 16, 2014

Midterm October 21

• You are responsible for readings, lectures, and themes up through this week (through October 16)

• Theme list for midterms is finalized

• Be Connect smart: download lectures rather than relying on system

• Today:– Finish policy formulation– Midterm review

• Special office hours– Monday 10-12, 2-3

Today’s agenda

• Collaborative planning• Great Bear Rainforest

case study• Evolution of land use

planning in BC• End of

multistakeholderism• Midterm Review

Policy Cycle Model

4

Agenda-Setting

Policy Formulation

Decisionmaking

Policy Implementation

Monitoring and Evaluation

Policy Formulation

Thinking Policy analysis of alternatives

Talking Consultation with stakeholders

5

Policy formulation: Talking – consultation alternatives

• Private consultations• Notice and comment• Web consultation• Public hearings• Establish a roundtable• Opinion polls• Referendum

Collaborative planning in BCCullen et al; Price et al

• Collaborative planning:– Engage stakeholders– Interest-based – Consensus oriented

• Two-tiered planning:– All stakeholders in consensus LRMP process– Gov and FN only: “government to government”

G2G

Collaborative Planning – Pros and Cons(Cullen et al p. 334)

benefits

1. Better at resolving conflicts2. Great buy-in facilitates

implementation3. Higher quality agreement4. Increase social capital

risks

1. Requires full participation2. Power differences3. 2nd best or vague solutions4. Process challenges5. Risk to accountability of

government

Case Study of Successful Collaboration: the Great Bear Rainforest

GBR: the place

• Central and North Coast regions of BC

• Globally significant ecosystem: largest areas of remaining intact coastal temperate rainforest in the world

• Valuable timber resources• Remote communities• Unresolved aboriginal land

claimsOctober 16, 2014 10

GBR: The Campaign

• 1995 - Enviros launch campaign to protect “Great Bear Rainforest”– direct action– market-based

campaign targeting large purchasers

October 16, 2014 11

GBR: Planning

• 1996 – Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) - Multi-stakeholder planning process

• enviros boycott

October 16, 2014 12

GBR: enviro-industry cooperation

• Enviros’ market campaign forces industry into (secret) negotiations outside of formal process

• 1998: Enviros and industry agree to cease-fire:– industry agrees to suspend logging in intact areas– engos agree to suspend market campaign and join

LRMP process

October 16, 2014 13

GBR: 2001 framework agreement

• April 2001 Framework Agreement (BC Gov, FN, engos,

companies)– protected areas (20%)

– deferrals (11%)

– remainder covered by ecosystem-based management

– established independent “Coast Information Team”

• 2004: Land and Resource Management Plan recommendations

• 2004-2005 – Government to Government negotiations

– Crown government and First Nations

October 16, 2014 14

GBR: 2006 Announcement

October 16, 2014 15

October 16, 2014 16

October 16, 2014 17

land base of 6.4 million ha (16 million acres)

Insights from GBR

• One of most important land use decisions• Extraordinary instance of collaborative

decisionmaking• Power shift created by enviros’ use of international

market pressures• Landmark co-jurisdictional arrangements with First

Nations• Challenging issues in policy design*• Revealing implementation challenges*

October 16, 2014 18*addressed after midterm

FRST 415 19

Status of Land Use Planning

• Forest Practices Board, “Provincial Land Use Planning: Which Way from Here?” November 2008

• 26 CORE and LRMP plans completed, covers 85% of the provincial land base (together called SLUPs)– 1 in G2G negotiations (Lillooet)– 8 areas without plans

November 10, 2009 FRST 415 20

Forest Practices Board

November 10, 2009 FRST 415 21

Forest Practices Board

Where to find plans

• http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/slrp/

FRST 415 23

BC Liberals “New Direction” 1

• ILMB Report: A New Direction for Strategic Land Use Planning in BC (December 06)

• full implementation April 2008• Brings end to provincial scale, comprehensive strategic land

use planning• All ongoing SLUPs to be completed by March 2010• new planning will be undertaken only where business drivers

demonstrate a need– New policy and legislative changes– FNs’ interests and values– major environmental changes such as Mountain Pine

Beetle infestation

FRST 415 24

BC Liberals “New Direction” 2

• Process for new planning– Led by government(s)– FNs’ involvement on a G2G basis where interested– Interest groups and stakeholders serve in a meaningful advisory

capacity– Clearly defined process, timelines and products

The end of multistakeholderism?

Special Committee on Timber Supply Recommendation

Recommendation 1.2 The Committee recommends to the Legislative Assembly that the Ministry:a) Assess the feasibility of re-establishing the monitoring committees for land and resource management plans (LRMPs) and, if feasible, task them with conducting a time-limited review of the LRMPs and their relevance, in light of changes to the forested landscape. The appropriate role of local First Nations needs to be reviewed with them.b) Use the best available science to establish key priorities for monitoring committees to review in each management unit under LRMPs and local area plans. The purpose of the reviews is to ensure that the plans are meeting their original intent, given the changes in the forest that have occurred as a result of the mountain pine beetle epidemic.

BC government response• The ministry agrees fully with the need to periodically review and update land use plans

and/or resource management objectives. We will assess the feasibility of re-establishing monitoring committees for land and resource management plans in the highest priority areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle. Where feasible and appropriate, the ministry will engage with communities, First Nations and stakeholders. In some management units, the most effective means to address this recommendation is through workshops and/or by enhancing the level of public discussion in the Chief Forester’s timber supply review processes.

• In the longer term, the ministry will develop a framework for community-based engagement on resource management that incorporates the monitoring of land use plans and allows for public engagement on a broader suite of natural resource management initiatives, consistent with the integrated approach that the ministry embodies. The future engagement process will take advantage of our increasing ability to post and utilize real-time data on the Internet and be consistent with open government initiatives. Our engagement work will be initially focused on areas that are most heavily impacted by the mountain pine beetle. The longer term approach will be introduced over time starting in 2014.

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/mid-term-timber-supply-project/MTTS-Action-Plan-201210.pdf

Why has BC only used collaborative planning in land use?

Why has BC ended collaborative planning in land use?

Policy formulation: Talking – criteria for selection?

• Participatory• Transparent • Well-informed• Coordinated to avoid

jurisdictional conflicts and overlaps

• Timely

28

There are tradeoffs between these values. Fostering legitimacy while being timely requires adequately resourced processes

Updated themes

• The policy cycle consists of 5 stages: agenda setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation, and monitoring/evaluation

• Issues get on the government agenda through a confluence of problem and politics streams

• Policy formulation involves both “thinking” (analysis) and “talking” (consultation with stakeholders)

• Collaborative planning or “multistakeholderism” has been a BC success story in land use, but the government is no longer using it

Sustainable Forest Policy 29

Next week:

• Tuesday – midterm

• Homework: midterm survey

• Thursday – second tutorial

www.rodcharlesworth.com