IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v41y2017i3p156-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Canada's Model Forests 20 years on: towards forest and community sustainability?

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan Bullock
  • Kathryn Jastremski
  • Maureen G. Reed

Abstract

We review how Canadian Model Forests pursued forest and community sustainability over the course of two decades (1992–2012). Given its roots in the forest industry and forest science, Model Forest programming initially faced some challenges in pursuing the socio‐economic dimensions of sustainable forest management (SFM) in order to fulfil mandated community sustainability objectives. This was due, in part, to how objectives, stakeholders, and expertise were brought together to develop SFM. The programme helped to define sustainability and the SFM paradigm, advance forest science and social research, and bring together a mix of usually adversarial partners in the name of innovation. Ultimately, the termination of federal programming was linked to high‐level policy shifts, yet difficulty in delivering on the socio‐economic dimensions of SFM during a period of forest sector and community crisis was also a factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan Bullock & Kathryn Jastremski & Maureen G. Reed, 2017. "Canada's Model Forests 20 years on: towards forest and community sustainability?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(3), pages 156-166, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:41:y:2017:i:3:p:156-166
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12129
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-8947.12129?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Panagopoulos, T., 2009. "Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2485-2489, August.
    2. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2013. "How can formal research networks produce more socially robust forest science?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 44-56.
    3. Douglas Clark & D. Slocombe, 2011. "Grizzly Bear conservation in the Foothills Model Forest: appraisal of a collaborative ecosystem management effort," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(1), pages 1-11, March.
    4. Wellstead, Adam M. & Stedman, Richard C. & Parkins, John R., 2003. "Understanding the concept of representation within the context of local forest management decision making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, January.
    5. Wang, Sen, 2004. "One hundred faces of sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 205-213, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Młynarski, Wojciech & Prędki, Artur & Kaliszewski, Adam, 2021. "Efficiency and factors influencing it in forest districts in southern Poland: Application of Data Envelopment Analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2011. "Green marketing is a sustainable marketing system in the twenty first century," MPRA Paper 50857, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Feb 2012.
    3. Mariana Vallejo & M. Isabel Ramírez & Alejandro Reyes-González & Jairo G. López-Sánchez & Alejandro Casas, 2019. "Agroforestry Systems of the Tehuacán-Cuicatlán Valley: Land Use for Biocultural Diversity Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Real, Alejandra & Hickey, Gordon M., 2013. "Publicly funded research: A participative experience from the Chilean Native Forest Research Fund," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 37-43.
    5. Nenad Šimunović & Franziska Hesser & Tobias Stern, 2018. "Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    6. Stevanov, Mirjana & Böcher, Michael & Krott, Max & Krajter, Silvija & Vuletic, Dijana & Orlovic, Sasa, 2013. "The Research, Integration and Utilization (RIU) model as an analytical framework for the professionalization of departmental research organizations: Case studies of publicly funded forest research ins," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 20-28.
    7. Wang, Sen & Wilson, Bill, 2007. "Pluralism in the economics of sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 743-750, April.
    8. Chelsea Batavia & Michael Paul Nelson, 2018. "Translating climate change policy into forest management practice in a multiple-use context: the role of ethics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 81-94, May.
    9. Vassiliki Vlami & Stamatis Zogaris & Hakan Djuma & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2019. "A Field Method for Landscape Conservation Surveying: The Landscape Assessment Protocol (LAP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Kylie Clay & Lauren Cooper, 2022. "Safeguarding against Harm in a Climate-Smart Forest Economy: Definitions, Challenges, and Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, April.
    11. Riyadh Mundher & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Syuhaily Osman & Ammar Al-Sharaa & Hangyu Gao, 2022. "Exploring Awareness and Public Perception towards the Importance of Visual Aesthetics for Preservation of Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) in Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    12. Gonzalez-Duque, Jose Antonio & Panagopoulos, Thomas, 2013. "Evaluation of the Urban Green Infrastructure using Landscape Modules, GIS and a Population Survey: Linking Environmental with Social Aspects in Studying and Managing Urban Forests," Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, Cinturs - Research Centre for Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, University of Algarve, vol. 1(2), pages 82-95.
    13. Hoogstra-Klein, M.A. & Brukas, V. & Wallin, I., 2017. "Multiple-use forestry as a boundary object: From a shared ideal to multiple realities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 247-258.
    14. Kohsaka, Ryo & Flitner, Michael, 2004. "Exploring forest aesthetics using forestry photo contests: case studies examining Japanese and German public preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 289-299, June.
    15. Korobeinikov, A. & Read, P. & Parshotam, A. & Lermit, J., 2010. "Modelling regional markets for co-produced timber and biofuel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 553-561, January.
    16. Sutterlüty, Andrea & Šimunović, Nenad & Hesser, Franziska & Stern, Tobias & Schober, Andreas & Schuster, Kurt Christian, 2018. "Influence of the geographical scope on the research foci of sustainable forest management: Insights from a content analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 142-150.
    17. Luis Loures & Thomas Panagopoulos & Jon Bryan Burley, 2016. "Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 871-892, September.
    18. Marco Criado & Antonio Martínez-Graña & Fernando Santos-Francés & Leticia Merchán, 2020. "Landscape Evaluation as a Complementary Tool in Environmental Assessment. Study Case in Urban Areas: Salamanca (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-22, August.
    19. Kruger, C. & Boxall, P.C. & Luckert, M.K., 2013. "Preferences of community public advisory group members for characteristics of Canadian forest tenures in pursuit of sustainable forest management objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 121-130.
    20. Divinski, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2018. "Opportunity costs of alternative management options in a protected nature park: The case of Ramat Hanadiv, Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 494-504.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:41:y:2017:i:3:p:156-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.