Policy Formulation II: talking October 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 BC Cullen 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 conflicts 2.Great buy-in facilitates implementation 3.Higher quality agreement 4.Increase social capital risks 1.Requires full participation 2.Power differences 3.2 nd best or vague solutions 4.Process challenges 5.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 claims October 16,

GBR: The Campaign Enviros launch campaign to protect “Great Bear Rainforest” – direct action – market-based campaign targeting large purchasers October 16,

GBR: Planning 1996 – Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) - Multi- stakeholder planning process enviros boycott October 16,

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,

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 – Government to Government negotiations – Crown government and First Nations October 16,

GBR: 2006 Announcement October 16,

October 16,

October 16, 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, *addressed after midterm

FRST Status of Land Use Planning Forest Practices Board, “Provincial Land Use Planning: Which Way from Here?” November 2008 Forest Practices Board, “Provincial Land Use Planning: Which Way from Here?” November 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, 2009FRST Forest Practices Board

November 10, 2009FRST Forest Practices Board

Where to find plans

FRST BC Liberals “New Direction” 1 ILMB Report: A New Direction for Strategic Land Use Planning in BC (December 06)A New Direction for Strategic Land Use Planning in BC 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 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

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 Policy29

Next week: Tuesday – midterm Homework: midterm survey Thursday – second tutorial