2.  For future years, fix the first critique of R-C – doesn’t really make sense  Consider dropping or consolidating theories part. It’s too elaborate and just a legacy of old stuff October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 1

3. 2 Artist: Holly FriesenHolly Friesen

4.  Decision-making theories Case: 6% solution  policy design  Tools - instrument choice  Configuration October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy3

5. October 28, 30 – Decision-making: Dilemmas in policy design: choice of instrument, making trade-offs, optimal precision of rules George Hoberg, “The 6 Percent Solution: The Forest Practices Code, in Cashore et al, In Search of Sustainability, (UBC Press, 2001), pp. 69- 75. Marty Luckert, David Haley, and George Hoberg, Policies for Sustainably Managing Canada’s Forests: Provincial Tenure, Stumpage Fees, and Forest Practices, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011), pp. 97-102 CONCEPTS OF POLICY DESIGN AS APPLIED TO FOREST PRACTICES, ACCOMMODATING SPATIAL DIVERSITY Forest Practices Board, A Decade in Review: Observations on Regulation of Forest and Range Practices in British Columbia HOW FRPA IS DESIGNED October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 4

6.  Because of the challenges on conflict resolution, policy is often made without clarifying objectives  Because of limited resources, rational decision-making is usually not feasible  A major challenge for forest policy making is designing policies to accommodate spatial diversity October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 5

7. 6 Agenda-Setting Policy Formulation Decisionmaking Policy Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation

8.  Theories: How policy makers decide  Policy Design: What kind of things they decide about – tools October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 7

9.  clarify objectives, prioritize them  list all alternatives  assess consequences of alternatives  compare alternatives  choose alternative that maximizes/optimizes objectives October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 8

10.  Assumes values can be identified and compared  pervasive conflict  result: policy often made without clarifying objectives  Assumes complete information on alternatives, consequences  criticism: ▪ lack of information, understanding, time/resources  result: rational approach impossible or too costly October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 9

11.  no means-ends distinction  alternative search limited to those closest to status quo  ignores possible consequences  decision rule: “satisfice”  test of good policy: agreement  successive limited comparisons: trial and error learning October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 10

12.  policies divisible  errors tolerable  every interest has its watchdog October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy11

13.  Helps to explain  government drift, inertia  inability to think big  difficulty with long term planning  vague policies that postpone conflict resolution October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 12

14.  Under Lindblom’s incrementalism framework, the test of a good of a good policy A. Maximizing net benefits B. Minimizing environmental risks C. Optimization D. Specificity E. Getting agreement October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 13

15.  rational model – useful to aspire to, but poor account of real world  Incremental model – shows how governments not so much “stupid” but “constrained”  More feasible when context has:  few actors  good information  stability October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 14

16.  decision-making theories Case: 6% solution  policy design  Tools - instrument choice  policy design  Tools - instrument choice  Configuration October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy15

17. 1. Allocation of “Crown” timber-- tenuretenure 2. Pricing -- stumpagestumpage 3. Rate of harvest – allowable annual cut (AAC) 4. Land Use – zoning for different values (logging, conservation, etc) Land Use 5. Regulation of harvesting -- Forest PracticesForest Practices 6. Emergent areas and overlaps (energy, carbon)energy carbon 16

18. October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 17  Forest Practices Code:  NDP government (introduced 1994; in effect 1995)  Significant increase in regulation to protect environmental values  Resulted in business alarm about impact on industry

19. October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 18  How should environment and economic criteria be balanced?  rational model: objectives, consequences, decision ▪ optimal balance between environmental and timber objectives  Reality: backward policy-making (Hoberg 2001)  Cabinet directive to limit impact on AAC to 6%  no publicly available explanation or rationale

20.  FPC Timber Supply Analysis (Feb 96)Feb 96  stated as projection of AAC impacts  remarkable coincidence! Answer: 6%  became policy output, not input  Remains in force today October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy19

21. Sustainable Forest Policy 20

22. October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 21  when facing harsh tradeoffs, adopt constraints to guide decision making and implementation  advantage: certainty for industry  disadvantage: arbitrariness  incrementalism, not “rational”

23.  Decision-making theories Case: 6% solution  policy design  Tools - instrument choice  Configuration October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy22

24.  Policy Instruments  category  Settings  configuration October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 23

25.  persuasion, education  property rights  spending  taxation  regulation  information  activities  direct provision October 28, 2014 24

26. October 28, 2014 25 ApproachExample from protecting riparian values guidelines (best practices)suggest, but do not require, practices like stream buffers technology- or practice-based regulations 30 meter no harvest zone performance- or results-based regulations maintain water quality within the range of natural variation compulsory management planningrequirement to develop a plan to protect riparian values

27.  formality - guidelines or rules?  transparency  simplicity  congruence: rule varies to match problem October 28, 2014 26

28.  formality - guidelines or rules?  transparency  simplicity  congruence: rule varies to match problem October 28, 2014 27

29. October 28, 2014 28

30. Objective: congruent, but simple and clear 1. Vary the rules to account for different circumstances (Prescriptive congruence) 2. Rely on professional judgment (Professional delegation) 3. Rely on local plans (Geographical delegation) October 28, 2014 29

31. October 28, 2014 30 congruencetransparencysimplicity Prescriptive congruence good poor Professional delegation goodpoorgood Geographical delegation goodmedium

32.  Using forest policy examples, describe the three approaches to accommodating spatial diversity. October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 31

33.  Because of the challenges on conflict resolution, policy is often made without clarifying objectives  Because of limited resources, rational decision-making is usually not feasible  A major challenge for forest policy making is designing policies to accommodate spatial diversity October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy 32

34.  FRPA case study  Tutorials 3 + 4 October 28, 2014Sustainable Forest Policy33 Artist: Holly FriesenHolly Friesen