Transcript Policy Formulation: the foundations of policy analysis

Policy Formulation II: talking
October 16, 2014
Midterm October 21
• You are responsible for
readings, lectures, and
themes up through this
week (through October
16)
• Theme list for midterms is
finalized
• Be Connect smart:
download lectures rather
than relying on system
• Today:
– Finish policy formulation
– Midterm review
• Special office hours
– Monday 10-12, 2-3
Today’s agenda
• Collaborative planning
• Great Bear Rainforest
case study
• Evolution of land use
planning in BC
• End of
multistakeholderism
• Midterm Review
Policy Cycle Model
Agenda-Setting
Policy Formulation
Decisionmaking
Policy Implementation
Monitoring and Evaluation
4
Policy Formulation
Thinking

Policy analysis of alternatives
Talking

Consultation with stakeholders
5
Policy formulation: Talking –
consultation alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Private consultations
Notice and comment
Web consultation
Public hearings
Establish a roundtable
Opinion polls
Referendum
Collaborative planning in BC
Cullen et al; Price et al
• Collaborative planning:
– Engage stakeholders
– Interest-based
– Consensus oriented
• Two-tiered planning:
– All stakeholders in consensus LRMP process
– Gov and FN only: “government to government”
G2G
Collaborative Planning – Pros and Cons
(Cullen et al p. 334)
benefits
1. Better at resolving conflicts
2. Great buy-in facilitates
implementation
3. Higher quality agreement
4. Increase social capital
risks
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Requires full participation
Power differences
2nd best or vague solutions
Process challenges
Risk to accountability of
government
Case Study of Successful Collaboration:
the Great Bear Rainforest
GBR: the place
• Central and North Coast
regions of BC
• Globally significant ecosystem:
largest areas of remaining
intact coastal temperate
rainforest in the world
• Valuable timber resources
• Remote communities
• Unresolved aboriginal land
claims
October 16, 2014
10
GBR:
The Campaign
• 1995 - Enviros launch
campaign to protect
“Great Bear
Rainforest”
– direct action
– market-based
campaign targeting
large purchasers
October 16, 2014
11
GBR: Planning
• 1996 – Land and
Resource
Management Plan
(LRMP) - Multistakeholder planning
process
• enviros boycott
October 16, 2014
12
GBR: enviro-industry cooperation
• Enviros’ market campaign forces industry into
(secret) negotiations outside of formal process
• 1998: Enviros and industry agree to ceasefire:
– industry agrees to suspend logging in intact areas
– engos agree to suspend market campaign and join
LRMP process
October 16, 2014
13
GBR: 2001 framework
agreement
• April 2001 Framework Agreement (BC Gov, FN, engos,
companies)
– protected areas (20%)
– deferrals (11%)
– remainder covered by ecosystem-based management
– established independent “Coast Information Team”
• 2004: Land and Resource Management Plan recommendations
• 2004-2005 – Government to Government negotiations
– Crown government and First Nations
October 16, 2014
14
GBR: 2006 Announcement
October 16, 2014
15
October 16, 2014
16
land base of 6.4 million ha (16 million acres)
October 16, 2014
17
Insights from GBR
• One of most important land use decisions
• Extraordinary instance of collaborative
decisionmaking
• Power shift created by enviros’ use of
international market pressures
• Landmark co-jurisdictional arrangements with
First Nations
• Challenging issues in policy design*
• Revealing implementation challenges*
October 16, 2014
*addressed after midterm
18
Status of Land Use Planning
• Forest Practices Board, “Provincial Land Use Planning: Which Way from
Here?” November 2008
• 26 CORE and LRMP plans completed, covers 85% of
the provincial land base (together called SLUPs)
– 1 in G2G negotiations (Lillooet)
– 8 areas without plans
FRST 415
19
Forest Practices Board
November 10, 2009
FRST 415
20
Forest Practices Board
November 10, 2009
FRST 415
21
Where to find plans
• http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/slrp/
BC Liberals “New Direction” 1
• ILMB Report: A New Direction for Strategic Land Use Planning
in BC (December 06)
• full implementation April 2008
• Brings end to provincial scale, comprehensive strategic land
use planning
• All ongoing SLUPs to be completed by March 2010
• new planning will be undertaken only where business drivers
demonstrate a need
– New policy and legislative changes
– FNs’ interests and values
– major environmental changes such as Mountain Pine
Beetle infestation
FRST 415
23
BC Liberals “New Direction” 2
• Process for new planning
– Led by government(s)
– FNs’ involvement on a G2G basis where interested
– Interest groups and stakeholders serve in a meaningful advisory
capacity
– Clearly defined process, timelines and products
The end of multistakeholderism?
FRST 415
24
Special Committee on Timber Supply
Recommendation
Recommendation 1.2 The Committee recommends to the
Legislative Assembly that the Ministry:
a) Assess the feasibility of re-establishing the monitoring
committees for land and resource management plans (LRMPs)
and, if feasible, task them with conducting a time-limited
review of the LRMPs and their relevance, in light of changes to
the forested landscape. The appropriate role of local First
Nations needs to be reviewed with them.
b) Use the best available science to establish key priorities for
monitoring committees to review in each management unit
under LRMPs and local area plans. The purpose of the reviews
is to ensure that the plans are meeting their original intent,
given the changes in the forest that have occurred as a result
of the mountain pine beetle epidemic.
BC government response
•
The ministry agrees fully with the need to periodically review and update land use
plans and/or resource management objectives. We will assess the feasibility of reestablishing monitoring committees for land and resource management plans in
the highest priority areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle. Where feasible
and appropriate, the ministry will engage with communities, First Nations and
stakeholders. In some management units, the most effective means to address this
recommendation is through workshops and/or by enhancing the level of public
discussion in the Chief Forester’s timber supply review processes.
•
In the longer term, the ministry will develop a framework for community-based
engagement on resource management that incorporates the monitoring of land
use plans and allows for public engagement on a broader suite of natural resource
management initiatives, consistent with the integrated approach that the ministry
embodies. The future engagement process will take advantage of our increasing
ability to post and utilize real-time data on the Internet and be consistent with
open government initiatives. Our engagement work will be initially focused on
areas that are most heavily impacted by the mountain pine beetle. The longer
term approach will be introduced over time starting in 2014.
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/mid-term-timber-supply-project/MTTS-Action-Plan-201210.pdf
Why has BC only used collaborative
planning in land use?
Why has BC ended collaborative planning
in land use?
Policy formulation: Talking –
criteria for selection?
•
•
•
•
Participatory
Transparent
Well-informed
Coordinated to avoid
jurisdictional conflicts
and overlaps
• Timely
There are tradeoffs between these values. Fostering legitimacy while being
timely requires adequately resourced processes
28
Updated themes
• The policy cycle consists of 5 stages: agenda setting,
formulation, decision-making, implementation, and
monitoring/evaluation
• Issues get on the government agenda through a
confluence of problem and politics streams
• Policy formulation involves both “thinking” (analysis)
and “talking” (consultation with stakeholders)
• Collaborative planning or “multistakeholderism” has
been a BC success story in land use, but the
government is no longer using it
Sustainable Forest Policy
29
Next week:
• Tuesday – midterm
• Homework: midterm
survey
• Thursday – second
tutorial
www.rodcharlesworth.com