Public engagement in forest governance in Canada: whose values are being represented anyway?

Abstract

Researchers and advocates have long argued that on-going engagement by broad segments of the public can help make forests and forest-based communities more sustainable and decisions more enduring. In Canada, public engagement in sustainable forest management has primarily taken one of two approaches – advisory forums through forest-sector advisory committees (FACs) and direct decision-making authority through community forest boards (CFBs). The purpose of this paper is to compare these two approaches by focusing on who participates and the values participants bring to their deliberations. We conducted a national survey of FACs and CFBs, involving 402 participants. Results showed that both models favoured well-educated, Caucasian men and fell short on the representation of women and Indigenous peoples. Additionally, despite different levels of authority in relation to forest management decisions, participants in CFBs and FACs shared similar forest values. Hence, we conclude neither model of forest governance encourages participation from a diverse public. Our findings suggest the need to find new ways of recruiting diverse participants and to investigate more deeply whether local and extra-local pressures and power dynamics shape these processes. Such information can inform the establishment of more robust institutions for decision making in support of sustainable forest management.

Youth Inclusion in Forest Policy Dialogue: Contemplating Human–Forest Relationships through Arts-Based Methods

“…However, we observe that while youth may gain capacities to participate as environmental citizens through designated spaces for arts-based experimentation and reflexive learning (Bentz and O'Brien, 2019), other operating channels would be required to ensure their views are heard in forest policy arenas. This goes against the current general trend towards the prevalent role of participation professionals (Kleinschmit et al, 2018) and narrow groups of forest policy representatives (Egunyu et al, 2020). Comparable evidence from the western United States shows that participation of youth in collaborative forest governance is weak (Davis et al, 2017).…”

Forest Recreation and Landscape Protection

“…The introduction of the FSC and forestry reporting under the Montreal Process are driving social and environmental responsibilities with respect to production plantation forest management [137,143]. Even if no legal contractual obligation is present, a growing social contract to the surrounding community, coupled with an increasing public desire to access the exotic forests in their locality, may require forest managers (particularly where forests are located close to urban centres) to actively manage and implement policies which accommodate recreational mountain biking access [144,145].…”