What stands in the way of the future of sustainable forest management? There are many answers to this question, but the deepest answer may be colonialism. The very structure of our governing bodies and institutions have made it very difficult to try new things. It is possible that our colonial system of organization and decision making now stands in the way of progress. Organizations have to fight against the system to make new decisions, and move in new directions. The first thing we have to do is recognize the problem.
Resources
Dynamics in the landscape ecology of institutions
The Paradigm Shift with Garry Merkel
Sponsors
Quotes
10.31 - 10.48: “Sustainability is a dynamic process of stewarding landscapes that's guided by an inclusive recognition and monitoring of diverse values or ecosystem services coupled with an adequate societal response that can ensure the supply of those ecosystem services into the future.”
1.27.55 - 1.28.02: “Can we really transform these systems into something generally sustainable if we cannot transform ourselves first?”
Takeaways
Soul fire (04.50)
Ira studied natural resource conservation in his undergrad and engaged deeply with a wide variety of environmental challenges in BC (British Columbia) and elsewhere in the world. He was spurred on to take action about the dismal state of affairs caused by capitalism and a narrow view of the world. He was inspired by the ecosystem services paradigm as an alternative model which prioritizes multiple values instead of just monetary benefits. He was fortunate to find a mentor in his graduate program to work with this model and contribute to the community. He believes that if different and equally important values are presented to decision-makers, they will make the decision holistically keeping those values in mind.
What sustainability means (10.00)
Ira defines sustainability as a dynamic process of constant learning. “It is built on a foundation of having an inclusive recognition and intention towards all the diverse contributions of forests and landscapes”, he adds. What that may look like in practice is incorporating small changes in the forest management plans to ensure adequate responses to the current situation. Institutions are meant to be constantly monitoring changes in the environment and adapting and evolving in response to those changes. However, multiple factors may get in the way of their desire or ability to make those changes in reality.
Institutions and processes (18.51)
Ira points out that historically, forest management institutions in BC were colonial and were required to fund themselves by collecting taxes from mining, fisheries and timber. “Institutions are the formal and informal sets of rules and norms that govern how society manages or interacts with forests”, Ira explains, which includes policies, agreements and relationships. Institutional processes are the activities conducted on the land base, e.g., timber harvesting, wildfire suppression, tree planting, etc. which provide feedback for monitoring to the institutions.
Rebalancing power (21.55)
Ira notes that the key change in institutional structures came with the arrival of the provincial colonial government which became the main decision-making authority for all lands in BC and in the precolonial era, even though over 200 different First Nations had various systems of rights. From the 1970s to the 1990s, environmental NGOs began having some say with international boycotts against BC timber products. Since the 1970s, First Nations ancestral rights have also been recognized through case law in BC.
Wise use (24.10)
To truly create sustainable landscapes, Ira says, “We need to broaden who’s allowed to be involved in making these decisions”. The growing conservation movement around the world brought to light the problems in BC’s forest management practices, in a time when moving towards a more utilitarian approach was encouraged. So, in BC, many areas were protected as forests and a change away from the wasteful early timber harvesting practices began to prevent wildfires and ensure more resources for future generations.
Sustained yield forest management (28.17)
Sustained yield forest management in 1948 formalized the goals BC had for its forests, and it sought to have a continuous or even perpetually increasing supply of timber by managing the forests with a maximum sustained yield and using innovative silviculture to try to increase the amount of timber. Those policies intersected with major world development policies and the post-war boom which now manifests as highways being built throughout the interior of BC and communities popping up in the north, where that timber was previously inaccessible. BC is also employing highly recognized and effective industrial fire technologies to manage fire.
Intention vs. outcome (30.15)
Ira highlights that even though the early institutional functions in BC were well intended for wise use, they did not consider Indigenous land rights and the needs of the Indigenous people. Forest management was seen very favourably after the war for the jobs it created, and the concept of tree farms resonated with colonial and agricultural mentality. Sustained yield forest management was based on the idea of removing all old forests and converting them to managed stands. It was viewed as desirable and maintained the structural complexity of the landscape. However, this homogenizing of the landscape led to the pine needle epidemic of the 1990s and the wildfires since then.
The forest practices code (34.25)
Ira’s definition of sustainability is the opposite of sustained yield forestry. As it was originally envisioned, sustained yield forestry was premised on maximizing timber. However, for foresters, it is implicit that they should be mitigating impacts on other values like wildlife but it wasn't till the 1980s that economists started building models to factor in multiple other values. The forest practices code was introduced in 1995 and many heralded it as breaking new ground in forest management globally. 11 different values have to be managed alongside timber, such as biodiversity.
Timber bias (36.56)
Ira laments that even though new policies have been created, they are layered on top of the old ones, adding more restrictions to the old policies, but it doesn’t remove the emphasis on sustained yield in forest management in BC. New environmental forestry practices are expected to uphold the same yield. Despite the best efforts of academics like Ira, there is a lot of complexity, interconnections and sunk costs that make it difficult for the government to step away from a timber focus.
Everything is a complex adaptive system (42.11)
Ira clarifies adaptive changes as incremental changes to an existing system to adjust to new conditions whereas transformative changes are higher-level changes usually involving the inclusion of diverse or previously excluded voices and potentially changing the fundamental structure of the system. “In order to remain resilient, systems have to change”, he emphasizes. Ira conceptualizes the new policies and institutional functions in BC as adaptations to changing social or ecological context whereas transformation has not yet been seen.
Change is coming (44.50)
Ira believes that BC may be on the cusp of transformation, as seen in the Great Bear Rainforest. They have restricted converting forest to regulated stands to 15% of the land, elevated First Nations decision-makers in the area and created new types of conservation zones. The other goal is to make ecosystem health the fundamental goal of forest management. Emulating natural disturbances may already be a part of Indigenous forest management practices without framing it within some existing scientific framework.
Ask like Einstein (51.10)
“The biggest roadblock to transformational change is a lack of imagination”, comments Ira. He is sure that many talented and highly trained foresters and natural resource policymakers exist. He is supportive of creating space to ask important questions and host forums and discussions to reimagine what the future of forest management may look like - 5 years, 100 years and 7 generations down the line. Ira acknowledges that when working with long-living organisms, foresters do think of the future and overcome the bystander effect to make a difference.
Sustainability is a social values question (59.40)
Ira’s research paper measures biophysical structures within the forest and uses that as a proxy to estimate the capacity of a given forest and provide multiple ecosystem services. He believes that methods and data need to be advanced to measure and recognize different social values of sustainability. The need of the hour is scientific frameworks to turn data into a depiction of multiple values. In his research paper, Ira shows how to use readily available data as a proxy for multiple values. Focus group workshops and participant mapping are other ways to understand how people interact with landscapes.
Multi-dimensional approach (1.03.15)
Ira opines that better data on multiple ecosystem services and a structured decision-making process need to inform forest management practices, using different values to drive the exploration of different alternatives. A more structured economic decision-making framework would be more transparent than a subjective decision-making framework. It assigns some subjective weights different values transparently with ideally as much social inclusion as possible towards a selection of different alternatives.
Polycentric forest governance (1.11.11)
Managing the forest locally is the top recommendation in Ira’s paper to effectively monitor changes, understand local values and make management decisions that reflect those. In BC, successful community forests have been operating for over 20 years with increasing tenure distribution to these community forests and to First Nations with lots. An annual symposium brings together the different communities for them to learn from each other’s different styles of forest management. Ira believes a polycentric governance system will be more resilient for managing the forest in BC.
Forest management recommendations (1.14.30)
Ira is excited about Indigenous people becoming decision-makers for their territories in BC and is optimistic that BC is moving in the direction of developing a resilience governance system for managing the forest. The second recommendation in Ira’s paper is to maintain and restore complex landscapes, with heterogeneity at the stand and landscape scale for ecologically resilient landscapes. The third recommendation is to help institutions adapt through reflective processes. Foresters do this daily, but Ira would like to see BC do so more regularly than its present-day intervals of strategic reviews and with more diverse voices at the table.
Deep historical reflection and future visioning (1.21.15)
Ira recognizes that “we live in a colonial system and a lot of the fundamental inequalities we are dealing with today hark back to 150 years to the way things were set through the process of colonization”. Even though it is a part of the history of this country, present-day ongoing learning and reflection will help create the space to acknowledge the uncomfortable and have difficult conversations to move forward. Ira believes and teaches that working from a whole system perspective helps understand the system. Sharing the good work foresters do with humility and optimism helps inform and inspire others.
If you liked this podcast, please rate and review it, share it on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, tag a friend, and send your feedback and comments to yourforestpodcast@gmail.com.