IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v118y2020ics1389934119304964.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The state of Canada's forests: A global comparison of the performance on Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Gilani, Haris R.
  • Innes, John L.

Abstract

In recent years, the concept of sustainable forest management has evolved into a number of Criteria and Indicators schemes that are designed to guide the practice of sustainable forestry. One such mechanism is the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators, which identifies seven criteria and 54 indicators associated with these seven criteria. While there is sufficient basic forest data available through the FAO's Global Forest Resource Assessment (2015), it is unclear how big forest countries compare in the key parameters surrounding sustainable forest management as defined by major Criteria and Indicator schemes. To accomplish this, we performed analyses of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015 (FRA) country report data to provide insights into the current status and trends in the period 1990–2015 in eight jurisdictions, namely Australia, Canada, China, Japan, the European Union, New Zealand, the Russian Federation and the USA. This study found that Canada has performed well against several key sustainable forest management parameters of the Montréal Process, including forest area designated for multiple use, and protective functions such as soil and water conservation and ecosystems services. Forest area in Canada remained stable over the past 25 years, although a relatively small area of forest had been lost. Compared to other countries, the rate of deforestation (which involves a change in land use) in Canada is small and has declined from 65,000 ha per year in 1990 to 48,000 ha per year in 2010. Forest area was also compared in the category of primary forest. Canada lost 741,000 ha of primary forest from 1990 to 2015, although this does not necessarily imply a change in total forest area. Our findings show that Canada, has some of the most stringent forest management legal and policy frameworks. While most other jurisdictions have only national and state level policies and a legislative framework to support sustainable forest management, Canada has comprehensive policies and a legislative framework in place at the national, provincial and local levels. In terms of social parameters, stakeholders are allowed to be involved in the planning, operations and review of almost all forest areas in our selected jurisdictions. This study demonstrates that the forest management and conservation regime in Canada, within the studied domains i.e. legal framework, management plans, national forest inventory and stakeholder involvement, incorporates a sophisticated understanding of the global, national and local interests linking economic, environmental and social issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Gilani, Haris R. & Innes, John L., 2020. "The state of Canada's forests: A global comparison of the performance on Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:118:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119304964
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934119304964
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102234?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:forpol:v:118:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119304964. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.