 
|
Al-Pac Case Study
- Part II
Daniel
Farr, Biota Research
Steve Kennett, Canadian Institute of Resources Law
Monique M. Ross, Canadian Institute of Resources Law
Brad Stelfox, Forem Technologies
Marian Weber, Alberta Research Council
|
|
|
This case study has been commissioned as background research
for the NRTEE’s Conserving Canada’s Natural
Capital: The Boreal Forest program.
The views expressed in the case study are those of the authors,
and do not necessarily represent those of the National Round
Table, its members, or the members of the program’s
Task Force.
July 2004
|
1. Introduction
This is Part 2 of a three-part case
study report examining conservation issues within the Alberta-Pacific
(Al-Pac) Forest Management Area (FMA) in northeastern Alberta.
The goal of this part is to explore regulatory barriers to the
conservation of natural capital and policy options for overcoming
those barriers. The term “regulatory” is broadly defined
to include the legal, institutional and policy framework for managing
land and resource use within the Al-Pac FMA. The other two parts
of the case study report review conservation values, land and
resource uses, and management objectives for the Al-Pac FMA (Part
1) and discuss fiscal barriers and associated policy options,
including the use of economic instruments, relating to the conservation
of natural capital (Part 3).
This present document begins with brief
sections on the objectives and scope of the Al-Pac case study
and the study methodology. The discussion then turns to a two-stage
analysis of barriers and policy options. The first stage addresses
cross-cutting barriers to the conservation of natural capital
and corresponding regulatory responses. The second stage focuses
on specific regulatory issues relating to each of the management
objectives identified in Part 1 of the report. Throughout these
sections, instances where stakeholders within the Al-Pac FMA have
adopted innovative approaches to promoting or facilitating the
conservation of natural capital are identified as “best
practices.” For ease of reference, key recommendations and
conclusions are italicized. The final sections identify areas
for future research and provide brief concluding comments.
|
