1. Presented to: BESTEN Think Tank VII 2007
G. Keith Henning, PhD
Assistant Professor of Management
Adelphi University, NY
The COMMUNITY OF COMMUNICATORS and the COMMUNICATION of SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT to VISITORS of a NATIONAL PARK

2. Issue
How does a World Heritage Site move beyond debilitating conflict with and among stakeholders to a place where everyone works together to improve ecological integrity and tourism and communicate the importance of ecological integrity to visitors?

3. Site Banff National Park, Canada National Icon
Leading tourism destination
Flashpoint for ecological protection
Part of World Heritage Site – Mountain Parks
Area 25% less than Yellowstone National Park, USA
Visitation (2003 – BNP 3.4 M; YNP – 3.1 M)

4. Situation – late 1980s/early 1990s
BNP part of Parks Canada, Federal government department
Canadian government:
Successive deep cuts in funding the Parks system
Made tourism an economic priority
Political masters not interested in Park

5. Situation – late 1980s/early 1990s
“National Parks Act” 1988 (c. 48) enacted
First priority: visitor use subject to maintenance of ecological integrity s. 5(1.2)
Some public participation in policy and management plan development s. 5(1.4)
Should lead to democratization of bureaucracy through public opinion (Weber)
Conflict with
Importance of expert knowledge to organization gives rise to organizational culture of secrecy (Weber)

6. Situation – late 1980s/early 1990s
RESULT:
Public wars among stakeholders and with BNP
Conflicting public opinion
Immobilized Park management unable to protect the environment

7. Solution Community of Communicators
Unique to BNP in Canadian Parks System
Involve outsiders:
In management planning
Doing science and
Interpretation
With right comes responsibility
Communication of protection of environment
Four major elements

8. Solution (cont’d) Banff-Bow Valley Study - 1994
Canadian government initiated
Roundtables with all stakeholders
Able to voice views
Heard for first time
Developed Consensus
Some 500 recommendations – most related to communication and collaboration

9. Solution (cont’d) BNP organization:
Implemented internal collaborative management
Slowly – still a work in progress
“Parks Canada Agency Act” 1998 (c. 31)
Altered relationship between Federal government and Parks Canada
Parks Canada now agency not department
Weber: leads to weakening of bureaucratic structure

10. Solution (cont’d) “Canada National Parks Act” 2000 (c. 32)
Expanded available role of public participation in Parks management
More clearly defined ecological integrity
First priority of Park
“Maintained and made use of so as to leave … unimpaired for … future generations” s. 4(1)
“A condition … determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to persist, including … composition … rates of change and supporting processes” s. 2(1)

11. Solution (cont’d) Everyone involved in Park is a communicator
Culture inside BNP
Rather than cut back on management of ecosystems as per other parks
Interpretation by outsiders
Formed Mountain Parks Heritage Interpretive Association – 1997 – with outside organization
Train outside stakeholders in interpretation
Ensure quality and integrity of function

12. Result – an Example Vermilion Lakes guided hike
Conducted by The Friends of Banff National Park
Arm’s length not-for-profit organization
Communication of restoration and maintenance of ecological integrity including history
Interviews with hikers – enjoyed and learned lots

13. Conclusion
Conditions and factors for successful innovation in public sector sustainable developments where communication and education is important
Legislation
Support by senior management
Organization wide culture disseminated outside to stakeholders
Supportive stakeholders
Involvement of stakeholders with controls