North Coast Land and Resource Management Plan
Information Circular - Number 1: Stakeholder Views on Process Design
02/21/01
BACKGROUND
LRMPs are strategic level, integrated resource plans developed with community input.Their goal is to provide an opportunity for individuals, interest groups and local governments to help define how Crown land will be managed.
The provincial government is committed to a government-to-government relationship with First Nations, and is involved in ongoing discussions with First Nations about their role in the planning process.
AT WHAT STAGE IS THE NORTH COAST LRMP?
The North Coast LRMP is in the design phase. The provincial government has established a Process Team to consult with stakeholders, design the process, and convene a Planning Table. A government technical team is working to prepare technical information for the Table.
WHAT CONSULTATIONS HAVE OCCURRED?
In January 2001, government began consultation with individuals and groups who have expressed an interest in Land and Resource Management Planning in the North Coast.The process team conducted approximately 30 interviews to gather views on what kind of process should be used for the North Coast.
The Process Team has taken the information received and responded in several ways:
- Prepared this Information Circular that documents the general findings from stakeholder interviews;
- Responded to issues and questions raised by stakeholders. These responses are called “Process Team Response”;
- Incorporated feedback into a Draft Terms of Reference for review and discussion; and
- Identified specific process design issues which require additional follow-up and consultation.
The interview results and process team response are organized into five categories: terms of reference, process support, groundrules, information management, workplan and other issues.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Outcomes
Stakeholders have identified a range of desired outcomes for the North Coast LRMP. Most responses supported a plan that would result in environmental and economic sustainability with broad support from communities.
Given the coastal aspect of the planning area, several people interviewed asked for clarification on whether, and how, marine issues would be addressed in the plan.
Process Team Response
The province has established terrestrial planning as the priority. However, the plan will also address specific near-shore components where there is a direct link to terrestrial land use. The plan will not deal with offshore resources like off shore oil and gas exploration, or marine protected areas under federal jurisdiction. It is the province’s intent to do planning for additional coastal resources, such as aquaculture, once more progress has been made on terrestrial planning, and resources are available.
| The process that will be followed for an individual LRMP is usually found in three separate documents: Terms of Reference, Groundrules and Workplan. Each document serves a different purpose. Terms of Reference are usually developed first.
|
REPRESENTATION, STRUCTURE AND SIZE OF TABLE
A number of stakeholders raised issues of balance within the planning process:
- A desire to balance the range of social, environmental and economic interests. A desire for balance between local representation and broader provincial and international interests. Some participants view the process as locally-based, with participation coming from the plan area.
- The need for fair opportunity for representation of volunteer organizations.
- How to keep a manageable table size and at the same time ensure accommodation of all the different interests in the process.
All people interviewed considered First Nations participation to be critical.
Comments related to representation indicate that there is a strong desire for sectoral representation, where Table members formally represent identifiable groups. One person suggested the use of a perspectives model.
The emphasis on a sectoral model stemmed from desires to see:
- Clear lines of accountability for table members in plan negotiations;
- A small table size, to allow an efficient process; and
- Avoidance of situations where individual issues override broader concerns.
A number of suggestions were made regarding table structure, including the use of sub-groups or advisory bodies to provide support to each representative and alternate. The use of issue focused forums to solicit expert opinion and broader public input were also mentioned as useful structural elements.
It was generally noted that the size of the table should be limited in some manner to ensure an efficient and effective process. The average ideal table size mentioned was approximately 20 – 25 people. Some people felt smaller tables would work, but others felt that it was critical to ensure comprehensive access and participation, even if this means considering a larger table.
Process Team Response
Most people interviewed expressed interest in having a direct link between the table representatives and an organization or sector that would be committed to, and accountable for, table recommendations.
The next steps in process design will include specific consultation on:
- what model to choose for the table; and
- how to select table members that represent an appropriate balance of interests.
| LRMP Process Models
Two general representation models can be used as a basis for the structure of LRMP tables. Sectoral ModelThe sectoral model emphasizes the development of coalitions between organizations with common interests and mandates. Spokespeople for the sectors have clear lines of accountability for their coalitions and are obligated to carry forward its views and to promote its interests. In order to be effective, channels of communication must be organized between members within each coalition. The task of balancing of interests between coalition members must be managed by the coalition itself to ensure that the table representative presents a well-rounded perspective. Tables based on a sectoral model have the potential to create forums for broad and inclusive participation, with a relatively small number of participants at the table. To work well, the model relies on the coalitions to reconcile internal conflicts and remain unified over the course of the planning period. Selection Process for Sectoral Representatives
Table spokespeople are not directly empowered by or accountable to specific groups or organizations but rather to the broader community. Spokespeople are invited to reflect a particular value or perspective, which they as individuals are close to as a result of personal experience and knowledge. The model encourages a more citizen-based approach and may reduce positional behaviour. It reduces the need for communications structures and mechanisms between Table members and other individuals or organizations because it assumes an interested and cohesive community where representatives are trusted to be knowledgeable and judicious. In order to ensure that the community is well informed of the Table’s work there is a requirement for fairly extensive general public participation. Selection Process for Perspectives Model Representatives
Note:The information on sectoral and perspectives based models is drawn from the Strategic Land and Resource Management Planning Source Book. Daryl Brown. Commission on Resources and Environment 1996. |
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT
A range of views were received related to the role of government.
- The primary role was seen to be in service-oriented provision of information and efficient management of the process itself.
- A number of people also said this should include development of broadly accepted criteria for scientific objectivity of information, and informing the table about relevant existing legislation and policy guidelines.
- The provincial government is also seen to have a key role in interacting with and facilitating the involvement of other levels of government including First Nations, Government of Canada, and local Governments.
Stakeholders expressed a range of views on the role government should play. Some people did not want government agency representatives as active table participants but the majority felt that they should be involved in table deliberations. There was wide agreement that government representatives should not be allowed to block the table from reaching consensus.
Process Team Response
Government representatives will be responsible for providing information to the table to facilitate informed decision-making.Members of the planning table from government agencies will participate in table discussions but they will not block consensus agreements.
TIMING
There are a range of views on the optimum time frame for the process. Most people want a process that is efficient, and concludes in a timely manner. For some, this is linked to the need for economic certainty.
For others, it is linked to the need to ensure that potential environmental options are not lost.There was also general acknowledgement of the need for adequate time to allow the table to address complex issues and make informed, good quality decisions.
Specific suggestions for an efficient process included ensuring that:
- Process management and facilitation is fair, but firm;
- The Process Team and government take advantage of accumulated best practices from other LRMPs and identify key milestones, develop clear workplans; and
- Government does advance preparation of materials related to process and non-controversial substantive issues. Such materials would then be reviewed and approved or revised by the table and would expedite decision-making.
People interviewed who have experience with other LRMPs viewed shorter time frames as feasible providing that process and procedures are developed early with drafting assistance from government, and that the table respects the spirit of interest-based negotiations. Others were concerned that people unfamiliar with the process and concepts of LRMP, or those who are already busy with with other processes, will need more time.
There were quite consistent views expressed that the table should not spend extensive time seeking consensus on process issues. However, most people felt that the table should deal with substantive issues rigorously, with clearly defined expectations about the need for consensus and agreed fallback measures to be used when consensus cannot be reached within specific time frames. Stakeholders identified several possible fallbacks including convening specific sub-groups, requesting independent advice and developing reports on dissenting views to be forwarded to higher levels of government responsible for the approval process.
Process Team Response
The draft Terms of Reference addresses several of these issues by separating the decisions on process from substance, and outlining procedures for decision making on both.
The provincial government has defined a 24 month timeframe for the process. Based on the feedback received, and with consideration of lessons learned in other LRMPs, the Process Team feels it will be feasible to complete the process within this time. This will depend on a number of factors, including the willingness of Table participants to adhere to Terms of Reference, Groundrules and Workplans.
GENERAL PROCESS SUPPORT
It was noted by many people that there are some general areas where government needs to provide support to facilitate an effective and balanced process. These include not only the provision of information as mentioned above, but also management of information distribution and consultation with the wider public.
Questions about the location of meetings were raised by a number of people.
Process Team Response
Most meetings will be held in the immediate vicinity of Prince Rupert due to the need for accommodation of table members. There will, however, be some field trips in the plan area.
Funding for participation was mentioned by a number of groups whose representatives, if they become involved, would have to travel from other areas to attend meetings.
Process Team Response
The Provincial government is committed to ensuring fair access to LRMP processes and information. The government will provide in-kind support to facilitate communication between table members and those they represent.This includes access to photocopying, electronic and phone services to help disseminate LRMP information. Local travel expenses, meals and accommodation costs will be covered for those representatives who don’t have access to internal funding. Coverage of additional travel expenses will be reviewed when the nature and scope of the table membership is clarified.
GROUND RULES
Groundrules guide people’s conduct at the LRMP table. Comments received during interviews indicate that groundrules should ensure a commitment to:
- Use of interest based negotiation;
- Respect for views of others;
- Equal opportunities for every representative to express their views;
- Agreed fallback processes for dealing with stalemates on significant substantive issues; and
- Consensus seeking and consensus building.
Process Team Response
There were a variety of views about what extent of consensus is required for process and substantive issues respectively. Agreement of exact definitions and situations will be finalized in the process groundrules. Process groundrules will be developed once there is more definition on the structure and participation in the planning Table.
WORKPLAN
A number of people mentioned the need for clear milestones and a well defined workplan for the table. Others felt that having an effective workplan would allow table meetings to be kept to a minimum and to run as efficiently as possible so as not to waste the time and effort of those participating.
Comments also drew attention to the need to set priorities to deal with issues of varying scale, complexity and consequence. A number of people noted that extremely sensitive issues, which have the potential to create conflict, are often ‘put off until later’ and can undermine achievement of final consensus. There were suggestions that difficult issues should be addressed by sub-groups as they arise to facilitate and speed up the work of the table.
A number of people stressed the need for information sessions on what strategic Land and Resource Management Planning is, and what it involves, and for training in negotiation skills. There were different views expressed on how these two capacity development issues should be built into the table activities.
Process Team Response
Information sessions on the purpose, principles and function of LRMPs, as well as training in interest-based negotiation, will be an integral and ongoing part of the LRMP.
All table members and alternates will be expected to attend. Some of these information sessions may occur through sub-committees or other means, to make table meetings more efficient.
A workplan will be developed once there is general agreement on the table structure and representation.
INFORMATION
There is wide support for good communications with the general public to keep communities on the North Coast informed about the process, to build trust, and allow input from the general public.
There was considerable interest in information. Some sectors identified specific inventories or reports they felt were necessary for their involvement.These specific requests have been forwarded to government staff for further investigation.
Several people noted the need to set priorities for, and limits on, information collection. Additionally people expressed interest in how information will be handled based on lessons learned – particularly in relation to the development of a base case for the plan area, inventory compilation, gap analysis and modeling.
Process Team Response
An LRMP Information Strategy is being drafted based on needs of table representatives, lessons learned, and best practices in other strategic planning initiatives. This will be finalized once the table is formally convened.
Many of those interviewed stressed that credibility of information is very important. Specific ideas on how to achieve this were put forward – including a proposal for an independent science panel. Such initiatives are viewed as having the potential to supplement and complement the information collection and analysis of information currently being done by government.
The Process Team and the provincial government are looking at options to incorporate independent science and information in the process.
OTHER
A range of other issues came up during discussions about a North Coast strategic land and resources management plan.
FIRST NATIONS
As mentioned earlier, there were strong expressions of interest in having First Nations at the table in a way that is respectful to them, and that incorporates their expertise and local knowledge. Many of those interviewed were aware that the provincial government has existing government-to-government relationships with the First Nations in the plan area, and that discussions are under way to develop a mutually acceptable approach to land use planning. However, a number of people indicated that more information is needed on these issues as they progress.
Comments received on an optimal structure for the planning process point to the need for an inclusive planning forum that is linked to government-to-government protocols with First Nations and which is mindful and respectful of other discussions taking place concurrently at other levels.
Some people felt that the process should be used to build capacity in First Nations and other communities and to create options for diversification of local and provincial economies.
ECOSYSTEM PLANNING OF FOREST RESOURCES
A number of people interviewed stressed the importance of ecosystem based planning.There were a variety of reasons identified for this interest, including the need to explore:
- connections between ecosystem approaches and traditional ecological knowledge of First Nations;
- how basing the plan on ecosystem principles could proactively influence market forces within the broader international environment; and
- how the plan outcomes could facilitate forest product certification.
Process Team Response
Government is considering how these views can be incorporated into the planning process.
DEFERRALS
A number of people mentioned that there is a need for more clarity on the status on deferral areas within the boundary of the North Coast LRMP. Some stakeholders have asked government to make decisions and announcements about deferral areas because of concerns about loss of environmental options during the planning period, particularly in undeveloped watersheds. Others have indicated that deferrals should not proceed unless there are guarantees of employment security for workers, contractors and forest companies, and communities.
Process Team Response
As part of the Protected Areas Strategy, there are several Study Areas in the North Coast where logging is already deferred. Government is interested in determining the views of stakeholders, First Nations and local government on deferrals.
NEXT STEPS
- The process team is circulating this information circular to ensure that the full range of views has been captured, and to solicit feedback on process suggestions.
- A draft Terms of Reference is being circulated for review and comment.
- Stakeholders will be contacted to review the Terms of Reference,
and to discuss:
(a) What specific representation model will be used to structure the table; and
(b) How table representatives will be selected.
Once there is broad agreement on the structure of a planning table, a convening meeting will be held to review groundrules and a workplan, and to confirm table membership. The convening meeting could be held as early as the end of March.
WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION ON THE NORTH COAST LRMP?
If you have comments on this Circular or would like more information, contact LRMP Project Manager, Kevin Kriese at (250) 847-7546.
WATCH FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS IN MARCH
STORE FRONT
An LRMP storefront office will be opened soon, located in the Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District office. The storefront will have maps, reports and process information available for interested members of the public.
WEBSITE
The North Coast LRMP web site will be launched in March.The site will carry up-to-date information on the process. Watch for an announcement soon.
