0370-C1

Social Science Research in The Canadian Model Forest Network

William A. White^[1]

Abstract

Sustainable forest management is composed of three areas: environment, economic and social. Research programs in forestry have focused on the environmental or biological aspects of forestry. The Canadian Model Forest Network has helped overcome this shortcoming by funding numerous studies across the country that focus on the social sciences. This paper provides an overview of this work, along with a comprehensive list of references of published papers. This provides an example for other countries or jurisdictions of the type of work that can be conducted to better understand the human dimensions of forestry and to provide input for policy-makers and land managers.

Background

The focus of forest management is evolving from sustaining only timber production to sustaining a range of values. These extend beyond values in the economic sense to held values as used in sociology. Sustainable forest management (SFM) is concerned not only with producing trees for timber, but also with how actions on the forest landbase affect humans in general. Indeed, sustainable forest management, like the broader concept of sustainable development, includes environmental, economic and social components. Land mangers' decisions must be evaluated not only for their effects on timber production, but also on how they affect other economic activities on the landbase, such as recreation, and how they affect communities and individuals who depend on the landbase.

The Canadian Model Forest Network (CMFN) was developed to address this challenge of balancing the many demands placed on forests today. The Model Forests serve as a demonstration of recognizing the diverse values provided by the forest and helping ensure that managers and other partners work together to achieve SFM.

Objectives

The purpose of this paper is to review the work of the CMFN in two core areas of SFM: economic and social sustainability. While by definition these elements make up two-thirds of SFM, they often comprise a much smaller portion of research programs that purport to study SFM. There are a number of reasons why this may be so. Forest managers and forest scientists who often lead research initiatives come from a physical science background and are comfortable working with like-minded researchers. They are not familiar with social science research and its potential to inform forest policy and decisions on the forest landbase. A second reason is that management of the forests for multiple values is a fairly recent phenomenon. Incorporating the social science research program was not done historically, and change is often slow and difficult. A related reason is the lack of forest social science research capacity in Canada. As there has not been a tradition of carrying out this type of research, a critical mass of researchers was not in place to take up the work when it became of interest.^[2] Only a small number of researchers scattered across the country are capable of leading forest-related studies in economics, sociology, political science and other social sciences.

To be useful, research must be move from the researcher to the landbase. In the social sciences, this movement is often in the form of policy changes. Figure 1 shows how social science research can come together to inform policy. This requires co-ordination, not only between physical and social scientists, but also within the various social science disciplines to provide policy makers with a comprehensive view of the human dimension of land managers' decisions.

Figure 1: Linking the social sciences to inform policy

The paper will review the work done under the auspices of the CMFN by grouping papers into the three broad disciplines of Traditional Economics, Sociology, and Non-timber Valuation. This marks the first time this body of social science research has been assembled in one document. Traditional Economics will include studies on the workings of the economy in general (on a community or regional basis) and studies on the forest sector. The Sociology section will review research on public involvement, social indicators and perceptions, attitudes, and values. The Non-timber section will include studies on recreation, environmental services, and other non-timber activities.

The paper will not attempt to review every piece of work in each of these areas, but will discuss why each area of study is important and provide examples of work done.^[3] The goal of the discussion is to provide researchers and research managers in other jurisdictions and countries with examples of what work can be done by social scientists, and to ensure that all values and human dimensions of decisions on the forested landbase are accounted for when decisions are made.

Discussion

Traditional Economics

Studies in this area are vital in understanding how decisions on the forest landbase will affect local and regional economies. These types of studies can answer questions such as "How will the decision to expand a sawmill impact local employment?" Work on understanding forest product markets also fits in this category.

The primary activities within this topic were describing and modeling the economies of the regions in which the model forests are situated. The former is an essential stage in the development of the latter.

The McGregor Model Forest (MMF) assessed the economic contribution of a number of sectors of the regional economy (Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants 1996). The work focused on forest-based activities such as the forest sector, trapping, fishing, outfitting, and commercial recreation.

Foothills Model Forest (FMF) has done the most extensive work in this area. In addition to obtaining estimates for forestry and other sectors, separate studies were carried out to estimate sectors such as tourism (Wellstead et al 2001) and the mineral sector (Patriquin et al 1998). Another study estimated the level of local consumer expenditures (Jagger et al 1998) to further refine the modeling exercise. These sectors were built into a computable general equilibrium model that could be used to estimate the impacts of events such as the closing of coalmines in the area (Alavalapati et al 1998).

Prince Albert Model Forest (PAMF) commissioned a number of studies on the workings of the local economy and built a regional input-output model (Kulshreshtha et al 1994; Florizone et al 1995). Lake Abitibi Model Forest also developed an input-output model (Parton and Sjonnesen 1999).

Other studies focused on the economics of the wood sector and market development. Kulshreshtha (1995a) developed an assessment procedure for forest management options for the PAMF. Manitoba Model Forest investigated the market for special forest products (Mark Mitchell and Associates 1997). The Eastern Ontario Model Forest investigated the feasibility of a wood products industrial complex (Milley 1992) and a mobile at-the-stump canter system (Ewing/Hamilton 1996). The viability of forest tenant farming was evaluated for the Bas-Saint-Laurent Model Forest (Masse 2001). The Fundy Model Forest investigated forest economics issues such as wood flow patterns and forest product markets on private woodlots (Gibson 1995; Runyon 1996).

Sociology

Sociology's contribution to forest management has increased substantially in recent years. Once limited primarily to the study of social issues surrounding forest-dependent communities, the discipline now makes important contributions in the areas of public involvement, in identifying social indicators of community sustainability, and in measuring stakeholder attitudes and values. Canada's model forests have taken a leading role in supporting research in forest sociology and developing a critical mass of young researchers in this relatively new field.

Reviewing the work published in the model forests from west to east, we find the following:

The MMF has investigated social trends (Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants 1995), measured social indicators (Robinson and Hawley 1997), and assessed public opinion on forest values (Robinson et al 1997).

Monitoring community sustainability through social indicators was the focus of a major study done for the FMF (Parkins and Beckley 2001). The ability of advisory groups to represent the public's interest is an example of an ongoing study of public involvement in the model forest (Parkins et al 2001a). The attitudes and values of various stakeholders within and outside the region have also been studied, providing a valuable database to land mangers' decisions affecting people in the area (McFarlane and Boxall 1998a, 1999, 2000; Parkins et al 1999).

PAMF's sociology work has focused on community sustainability (Hawkins and Varghese 2002) through the identification of local-level indicators, with an emphasis on First Nations communities (Kulshreshtha 1995b) and locally-defined indicators (Parkins et al 2001b). This is in contrast to the Manitoba Model Forest's work, which focused on stakeholder views, attitudes and values (Beckley et al 1997; Sinclair and Smith 1995). Fundy Model Forest studied public participation (Arsenault 1996) and natural resource accounting as a tool for monitoring indicators (MacGregor and MacFarlane 1997).

Non-timber Valuation

For many forest activities, valuation does not pose a problem because goods and services are traded in markets. Other forest activities (particularly on public forestland) such as recreation or providing environmental services such as watershed protection and biodiversity do not provide market prices and quantities; therefore, they require a different means of valuation. Progress has been made in developing techniques to place monetary values on non-market goods and services and the Model Forest Network has funded research to contribute to this line of research.

The MMF funded a study to review means of valuing non-use and non-forestry uses of the forest (Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants 1996). FMF sponsored studies that both identified users of the forest and trends (Haener and Watson 2001; McFarlane and Boxall 1996; McFarlane et al 1999 ) and valued camping as a non-market activity (McFarlane and Boxall 1998b). Studies on participation in and value of recreation in PAMF have also been conducted (Loewen and Kulshreshtha 1995a,b,c). This included a study focused aboriginal valuation of recreation (Loewen and Kulshreshtha 1995d). The Manitoba Model Forest also looked at valuing non-market forest outputs (Gray 1994). Fundy Model Forest's work in non-timber valuation focused on deer hunting (Zundel et al 1996) and increasing the economic value of wildlife (MacGregor et al 1995).

Conclusions

The human dimension of sustainable forest management has been the weak link in forestry research programs. The CMFN has encouraged the growth of this research area and has developed a growing number of young researchers in this field. In the years to come, the studies identified here and studies in progress will be able to influence policy and decisions on the forestland base.

References

Alavalapati, J.; White, W; Wellstead, A; Patriquin, M. 1998. An Economic Impact Model of the Foothills Model Forest. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre,

Edmonton, Alberta and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, Alberta. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/pdf/impact.pdf

Arsenault, D. 1996. Community Participation in Forest Management Decision making in New Brunswick; Fundy Model Forest, Sussex, New Brunswick. 64p.

Beckley, T. M.; P.C. Boxall, L. Just, and A. Wellstead. 1997. Manitoba Model Forest Stakeholders: a Preliminary Assessment of Their Attitudes and Values. Project 96-2-25. Manitoba Model Forest, Pine Falls, Manitoba. 44 p.

Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants. 1995. Social and Economic trends that potentially affect forest management. McGregor Model Forest Association. 85 p. http://www.mcgregor.bc.ca/publications/SocialTrends.pdf.

Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants. 1996. Assessing the economic contribution of forestry, tourism, recreation and other industries and activities linked to the McGregor Model Forest. McGregor Model Forest Association. 61 p. http://www.mcgregor.bc.ca/publications/SocialEconomicContribution.pdf

Ewing/Hamilton. 1996. A Mobile at-the-Stump Canter System: A Cost Analysis and Feasibility Study of the Concept. Eastern Ontario Model Forest, Kemptville, Ontario. Information Report No. 16. 13 p.

Florizone, A.; Kulshreshtha, S. N.; Siemens, J. K. 1995. Economic Impact Assessment Using the Prince Albert Model Forest Input-Output Model - PAMFI092 - A User's Manual. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 103 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/009.html

Gibson, K. 1995. Forest Products Markets and Implications for Forest Management on Private Woodlots in Fundy Model Forest. New Brunswick Federation of Woodlot Owners. Fundy Model Forest, Sussex, New Brunswick. 71p.

Gray, John A. 1994. Valuation of Non-Market Forest Outputs from the Manitoba Model Forest. Project 93-2-10. Manitoba Model Forest, Pine Falls, Manitoba. 107 p.

Haener, M.; Watson, D. 2001. Jasper National Park: A Descriptive Analysis of Backcountry Users, 1994-2001. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/pdf/DavidWatsonJasperReport2001.pdf

Hawkins, J and Varghese, J. 2002. State of Local Level Community Sustainability for Two Communities Within the Prince Albert Model Forest. PAMF Ecosystem Health/Local Levels Indicator Working Group, Prince Albert Model Forest Association, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 65 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/CL_WL_Baseline.pdf

Jagger, P.; Wellstead, A; White, W. 1998. An Expenditure Based Analysis of Community Dependence: A Case Study of the Foothills Model Forest.

Kulshreshtha, S. N.; Siemens, J. K.; Doell, W. S. M.; Walker, H. V. 1994. Economic Perspective on the Prince Albert Model Forest Region of Saskatchewan. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 210 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/010.html

Kulshreshtha, S. N. 1995a. Economic Assessment Procedure for Forest Management Options in the Prince Albert Model Forest Region. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 67 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/008.html

Kulshreshtha, S. N. 1995b. Report Number 26. Socio-economic Baseline Survey of Montreal Lake Cree Nation. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 142 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/026.pdf

Loewen, K.G.; Kulshreshtha, S.N. 1995a. Economic Aspects of Recreation Activity at the Prince Albert National Park. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 53 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/006.html

Loewen, K. G.; Kulshreshtha, S. N. 1995b. Economic Value of the Recreation Experience at the Prince Albert National Park of Saskatchewan; Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 97 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/011.html

Loewen, K. G.; Kulshreshtha, S. N. 1995c. Recreation and Wilderness: Participation and Economic Significance in Saskatchewan. Prince Albert Model Forest Assoc. Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 61 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/021.html

Loewen, K.G.; Kulshreshtha, S.N. 1995d. Report Number 15. Economic Aspects of Wilderness Valuation and Recreation uses by Aboriginal Households: A Case Study of Prince Albert. 55 p. http://www.pamodelforest.sk.ca/pubs/069915.pdf

MacGregor, H.; MacFarlane, D. 1997. Natural Resource Accounting - A Tool to Monitor Indicators? Natural Resources Canada; Canadian Forest Service; Fundy Model Forest, Sussex, New Brunswick. 21p.

MacGregor, H.; Zundel, P.; Savage, G. 1995. Increasing the Economic Value of Wildlife Based Recreation in the Fundy Model Forest: 1994 Final Report of Phase 1. Fundy Model Forest, Sussex, New Brunswick. 51p.

Mark Mitchell and Associates. 1997. The Harvest, Market and Availability of Special Forest Products in the Manitoba Model Forest. Project: 95-4-09. Manitoba Model Forest Inc., Pine Falls, Manitoba.

Masse, S. 2001. Socio-economic viability of forest tenant farming: evaluation report. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Laurentian Forestry Centre, Sainte-Foy, Quebec. 75 p.

McFarlane, B.L.; Boxall, P.C. 1996. Recreation in the Foothills Model Forest. Phase I: An Overview of Camping Activity. 35 p.

McFarlane, B.L.; Boxall, P.C. 1998a. Forest Social Values and Management Preferences of Campers in Foothills Model Forest. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/for.pdf

McFarlane, B.L.; Boxall, P.C. 1998b. An overview and nonmarket valuation of camping in the Foothills Model Forest. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-358. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/natural/nonmark.html

McFarlane, B.L.; Boxall, P.C. 1999. Forest values and management preferences of two stakeholder groups in the Foothills Model Forest. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-364.

McFarlane, B.L.; Boxall, P.C. 2000. Forest values and attitudes of the public environmentalists, professional foresters and members of public advisory groups in Alberta. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, , Edmonton, Alberta and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-374.

McFarlane, B.L., Boxall, P.C. and Adamowicz. W. 1999. Descriptive analysis of hunting trends in Alberta. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-366.

Milley, P. 1992. Feasibility Study of a Proposed Wood Products Industrial Complex in Eastern Ontario. Eastern Ontario Model Forest, Kemptville, Ontario. Inf. Rep. No. 2. 126 pp.

Parkins, J; Beckley, T. 2001. Monitoring community sustainability in the Foothills Model Forest : a social indicators approach. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB. Inf. Rep. M-X-211E.

Parkins, J.; McFarlane, B; Boxall, P; Beckley, T. 1999. Sustainable Forest Management, Protected Areas and Biodiversity: A Focus Group Study in the Foothills Model Forest. Interim Report, Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, AB. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/pdf/report.PDF

Parkins, J.R.; Stedman, R.C.; McFarlane, B.L. 2001a. Public involvement in Alberta forest management : do advisory groups represent the public? Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, AB. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-382.

Parkins, J.; Varghese, J; Stedman, R. 2001b. Locally defined indicators of community sustainability in the Prince Albert Model Forest. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-379.

Parton, S.; Sjonnesen, S. 1999. Community Development Impact Model - Project Information Note, Lake Abitibi Model Forest. 4p. http://www.lamf.net/Downloads/cdim.pdf

Patriquin, M, Wellstead, A; Alavalapati, J; White, W. 1998. Economic overview of the mineral sector in Alberta and the Foothills Model Forest. http://www.fmf.ab.ca/pdf/mineral.PDF

Robinson, D.W., Hawley. 1997. Social indicators and management implications derived from the Canadian Forest Survey '96. McGregor Model Forest Association. 49 p. http://www.mcgregor.bc.ca/publications/SocialIndicators.pdf

Robinson, D.W., Hawley, A.W.L., Robson, M. 1997. Social valuation of the McGregor Model Forest: assessing public opinion on forest values and forest management. Results of the Canadian Forest Survey 96'. McGregor Model Forest Association. 179 p. http://www.mcgregor.bc.ca/publications/SocialValuationSurvey.pdf

Runyon, K.; Forest Resources Consultants Inc. 1996. Study of Forest Products Markets and Resources on Private Woodlots within the Fundy Model Forest in Order to Identify and Assess Opportunities for Sustainable Forest Management and Marketing. Fundy Model Forest, Sussex, New Brunswick. 88p.

Sinclair, J.; Smith, D. 1995. Multi-Stakeholder Decision Making and Management in the Manitoba Model Forest. Project 95-2-27. Manitoba Model Forest, Pine Falls, Manitoba. 84 p.

Wellstead, A.M.; Olsen, C.R.,White, W.A. 2001. Measuring the economic value of the visitor sector of a regional economy: A case study of the Foothills Model Forest. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta and Foothills Model Forest, Hinton, Alberta. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-378.