1. Reporting Results - Audiences and Uses Effectiveness Evaluation Workshop Victoria, November 7, 2002 Tom Niemann, Ministry of Forests

3. Why report? uBC’s forest policy development  Results based code  Tenure policy  Land use planning

4. Why report? uBC’s forest policy development uMarket access  information on SFM  certification

5. Why report? uBC’s forest policy development uMarket access uPublic’s keen interest in SFM  environment  jobs  recreation

6. Why report? uBC’s forest policy development uMarket access uPublic’s keen interest in SFM uFederal commitments  Montreal Process C&I  CCFM C&I  National Forest Strategy

7. Why report? uBC’s forest policy development uMarket access uPublic’s keen interest in SFM uFederal commitments One set of indicators? Report once for all?

8. What Audiences? uPolicy makers  JMC  JSC  Cabinet

9. What Audiences? uPolicy makers uIndustry audiences  workers, shareholders  buyers, consumers  certification auditors

10. What Audiences? uPolicy makers uIndustry audiences uPublic (BC and international)  individuals (well informed and not)  media  communities (PAGs, local government)  NGOs

11. What Audiences? uPolicy makers uIndustry audiences uPublic (BC and international) uAgencies  Forest Practices Board  BC Timber Sales  federal

12. uPolicy makers uIndustry audiences uPublic (BC and international) uAgencies Some indicators can serve several. Different reports! What Audiences?

13. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade?

14. Reporting Issues? uInform?  Support dialogue on SFM  Balanced, credible  Good news and bad news  Avoid bias in: V selection of indicators V assessment of indicators V presentation of results

15. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade?  Support change in V policy V programs for monitoring, research… V opinions  Methods and data are IMPECCABLE!  Results are JUST SUPER! V May backfire

16. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade? uScale  FMU, province, nation, global  Values, monitoring methods vary with scale V TSAs, TFLs: 10,000 ha - 14,800,000 ha  “Rolling up” data often does not work  Ecosystems cross administrative borders, so TEAM UP!

17. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade? uScale uTime period  Trends are more important than state  Choice of reporting period can change apparent trend  Forecasts

18. Time period time aspect

19. Time period time aspect

20. Time period time aspect

21. Time period time aspect ?

22. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade? uScale uTime period uOnly a few evaluations per year  Values change over time V FPC 1995, 2002 V CCFM C&I 1995, 2003  Can we assess SFM?

23. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade? uScale uTime period uOnly a few evaluations per year uThresholds  scientific, public, political  often difficult or unknown  What if only 1 of 6 evaluations > threshold?

24. Reporting Issues? uInform? or Persuade? uScale uTime period uOnly a few evaluations per year uThresholds uUncertainty and Risk  When do we know policy needs to change?  Accountability (“blame”)

25. Summary uReporting is not simple uEffectiveness evaluations can inform a variety of reports uWe have to look for synergies, a.k.a. cost savings uCo-operation will help us make progress towards SFM…..

26. Blank slide

27. Sustainable forest management uManagement to maintain and enhance the long-term health of forest ecosystems, while providing ecological, economic, social, and cultural opportunities for the benefit of present and future generations.  Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, 1992

28. Montreal Process criteria 1.Conservation of biological diversity 2.Maintenance of productive capacity of forest ecosystems 3.Maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality 4. Conservation and maintenance of soil and water resources 5.Maintenance of forest contribution to global carbon cycles 6.Maintenance and enhancement of long-term multiple socio-economic benefits to meet the needs of societies 7. Legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable management

29. Example: MP Indicators 1.1 Ecosystem diversity  Extent of area by forest type relative to total forest area  Extent of area by forest type and by age class or successional stage  Extent of forest type in protected area categories (IUCN or other)  Extent of area by forest type in protected areas defined by age class or successsional stage  Fragmentation of forest types 1.2 Species diversity (2 indicators) 1.3 Genetic diversity (2 indicators)

30. Canadian (CCFM) criteria 1.Conservation of biological diversity 2.Maintenance and enhancement of forest ecosystem condition and productivity 3.Conservation of soil and water 4.Forest ecosystem contribution to global ecological cycles 5.Multiple benefits to society 6.Accepting society’s responsibility for sustainable development

31. Example: CCFM Indicators 1.1 Ecosystem diversity  % and extent, in area, of forest types relative to historical condition and to total forest area  % and extent of area by forest type and age class  1.1.3 area, % and representativeness of forest types in protected areas  level of fragmentation and connectedness of forest ecosystem components. 1.2 Species diversity (3 indicators) 1.3 Genetic diversity (1 indicator)

32. Canadian (CCFM) C&I documents uDefining SFM (CCFM C&I) - 1995 uC&I of SFM, Progress to date - 1997 uC&I of SFM, Technical report - 1997 uFirst national report on C&I - 2000 (62 of 83 indicators)

33. Technical Challenges uunderstanding udata sources udata standards udata quality uclear definitions usampling designs utrend detection uanalytical tools uefficient processes uconsistent reporting uaccessibility of information usecurity of proprietary data uqualitative changes over time uarchiving information

34. Administrative Challenges ucommitment ubudget reductions ustaff workloads  partnerships  management cycle

35. Political Challenges ucommitment uprocess uscope / jurisdiction upotential for impact

36. Management Cycle Plan Set Objectives ImplementEvaluateMonitorAdjust

37. Management Cycle Plan Set Objectives Implement Evaluate Monitor Adjust

38. Presentation upolicy makers, public, agencies  relevant to values/issues  credible, comprehensive indicators  clear, concise language upeople with little time  clear design to help find parts of interest udomestic and international  Canadian values  clear links to international work

39. Top-down and bottom-up