|
A
Case Study of Conservation in the Abitibi Region (Quebec–Ontario
Border)
ArborVitae Environmental Services, Boldon
Group
Alexandre Boursier, Lorne Johnson, Thomas Stubbs
|
 |
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 21, 2004
|
3 Analysis Methodology
The project team conducted numerous interviews,
contacted a variety of organizations (see Appendix 1) and reviewed
a wide range of documents and legislation, as well as drawing
on its members’ knowledge of the area. The information reporting
and analysis process was structured through the use of a framework
organized according to the criteria and elements of sustainable
forest management (SFM) developed by the Canadian Council of Forest
Ministers (CCFM). It is important to understand that, while these
criteria and elements provide a basis for evaluating the sustainability
of the boreal forest in the Abitibi region, that they are not
specifically concerned with forestry or forest management activities.
They provide an objective framework for assessing the impacts
of any or all economic activities on the ecological integrity
of the boreal forest.
The CCFM has developed a hierarchical view of SFM,
with six criteria that need to be met if forests are to be considered
sustainable. For each criterion, there are several elements that
provide a more specific indication of the nature of the values
to be sustained, and under each element there are a number of
suggested indicators. In our template, we used the criteria and
elements as a basis for organizing information and framing key
strategic questions that we wished to assess as part of this case
study. Table 5 shows the six CCFM criteria of SFM and the elements
of each criterion. Note that Table 5 is also a highly condensed
version of our analysis template.
Table 5. The Six Criteria
of SFM and Associated Elements Developed by the CCFM
| CCFM
criterion |
CCFM
elements |
| 1. Conservation
of Biological Diversity |
Landscape
Diversity
Landscape Fragmentation
Species at Risk
Species Diversity
Genetic Diversity
Protected Areas |
| 2. Maintenance
and Enhancement of Ecosystem Condition and Productivity |
Ecosystem
Processes
Ecosystem Productivity |
| 3. Conservation
of Soil and Water Resources |
Soil
Conservation
Water Conservation |
| 4. Forest
Ecosystem Contributions to Global Ecological Cycles |
Carbon
Sequestration
Forest Land Conversion
Forest Restoration |
| 5. Multiple
Benefits to Society |
Sustainable
Flow of Benefits
Economic Diversification
Community Development
Equity |
| 6. Accepting
Society’s Responsibility for Sustainable Forest Management |
Aboriginal
and Treaty Rights
Aboriginal Values
Public Participation
Capacity Building |
The table shows that the conception
of SFM espoused by the CCFM is very broad and includes economic
and social/cultural dimensions. This approach was derived from
the so-called Montreal Process (arising from the Seminar of Experts
on the Sustainable Development of Boreal and Temperate Forests
held in 1993), and it has been widely implemented throughout the
Canadian forest sector. It is also consistent with international
approaches to SFM and with the requirements of the major independent
forest certification schemes.
It is critical to recognize that the
SFM criteria developed by the CCFM pertain to the forest as a
whole. The activities of all sectors that affect the forest are
to be considered in the assessment of sustainability, not just
the activities of the forest sector. For example, the element
under biodiversity that is concerned with forest fragmentation
and maintenance of connectivity will consider not only harvest
blocks and access roads built by the forest companies but also
the impacts of mineral exploration (line cutting, drilling, and
especially access construction), the strong desires of a major
tourism and recreation constituency for greater forest access,
and hydro transmission line corridors. Another element of the
SFM template addresses the conversion of forest land to other
uses. Here, we will be concerned with issues in sectors such as
agriculture (are there incentives to convert forest to agriculture?),
hydro (is more flooding planned?) and mining (the development
of mine sites and their rehabilitation).
As mentioned above, Table 5 is a condensed
version of our analysis template. Under each SFM element, the
consulting team identified the relevant indicators developed within
two prominent certification standards: the Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC) boreal standard and the Canadian Standards Association
(CSA) SFM standard. We then identified key general questions to
address as we evaluated the extent to which existing legislation,
planning processes, and implementation and monitoring activities
protected the values and met the principles espoused in the SFM
systems incorporated in the template.
For example, regarding landscape fragmentation,
an issue under criterion 1, we asked the two following questions:
These questions guided our review
of legislation, reports and plans and were also used to develop
the interview guides for the project. It must be emphasized that
the role of the template in this study was to provide guidance
as we collected data—it helped to ensure that all team members
were consistent and thorough in investigating the many dimensions
of conservation and sustainability. However, we did not adhere
slavishly to the content of the template. As issues emerged and
gaps were identified, these were explored in our analysis. In
this way, the template provided guidance but was not a constraint.
