|
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3 |
Question 1: What are the principal
stressors related to integrated resource management affecting the North American
Great Plains? Economic, policy, environmental, and social/cultural stressors
should be considered. These stressors should be considered on various scales
ranging from local to global.
The following stressors on integrated resource management were identified:
Data, Information, and Knowledge (Local/Global)
- Lack of data and research hampers integrated planning; people need to
better understand the options.
- Action must be at the local level, but people must first understand the
issues. Local people must be involved in the decision process.
- Rapid change is a problem; Internet will only accelerate the rate of
change. We need more efficient information flow. The border between the United
States and Canada sometimes hinders the flow of information.
- Traditional sources of information (e.g., agricultural extension
specialists) are being bypassed because their information is considered out of
date. Industry is providing information to local leaders. The average person
generally does not have the information needed and does not know how to get it.
Access to information is a significant problem in addressing issues related to
sustainability. For example, endangered species are a public good, but the
purveyor of much of the information on that public good is often government.
Government often does not make this information available to the public.
- There is little motivation for people to acquire knowledge because no
direct return is perceived.
- Misinformation is a considerable problem.
- Incompatibility of data bases between the United States and Canada makes it
difficult to share data and collaborate on problems common to the region. The
Great Plains data base currently being set up by the EROS Data Center is
attempting to address this issue through the efforts of the Western Governors'
Association and the Western Premiers Association.
- Lack of regional models hampers the analysis of problems.
- Government is reluctant to turn programs (i.e., power) over to local
people.
Policy and Institutional
- Government (departments and programs) is too compartmentalized to be
effective in addressing many issues associated with sustainability. Existing
infrastructure dictates how business is conducted and procedures for making
decisions. This is very bureaucratic and difficult to change.
- Approaches to policy development (e.g., narrow focus, stovepipe approach)
make it hard for government to contribute to local decision making effectively.
It is difficult to integrate policies between departments or agencies (e.g.,
high walls) and levels of government. The structure of government is a real
stressor to getting the right information in the hands of people at the local
level.
- The legislative and policy climate must be improved so that priorities are
set on economically viable solutions that are ecologically sound. Policy
decisions are typically for short-term economic agendas, in contrast to
long-term environmental agendas. No consideration is given to ecological
objectives (e.g., LIFT set-aside program for wheat acres resulted in excess
summer fallow).
- Local leadership is required to tackle the issues associated with
sustainability and environmental protection and preservation. Institutions are
creatures of statutes; therefore, there is little hope of changing the way
decisions are made (i.e., locally based solutions).
- Leadership lacks continuity because government and agency heads (and
therefore policies) change. Actions of political leaders are closely tied to
those that will produce votes in the short term. The "system" must
somehow allocate resources to natural resource/environmental protection.
- Government programs and policies are inflexible. The same program does not
work in each setting. Financial resources should be provided to meet the
objectives of sustainable development. Local agencies and organizations should
be empowered to use these resources to achieve these objectives, according to
local needs. This approach would encourage innovative approaches to solving
local problems. Government should view itself as a facilitator to get the job
done. Top-down approaches usually do not work.
Mandate does not matter if the goal is to get the job done rather than worry
about whose job it is.
Integrated resource management will be implemented by individual
resource managers.
Failure of the market to provide incentives for private stewardship of
the land. Most land is privately owned and there is no market incentive for
landowners to provide private stewardship of that land. There is no economic
incentive for a rancher to protect a burrowing owl. The North American Waterfowl
Management Plan is the only place where there is some market for an ecological
service (producing ducks).
Clean water and good soil management does not have a market value. In
contrast, draining a wetland increases the land's market value (because of
increased agricultural productivity).
Options that are both economically and environmentally good are readily
adopted. Others take an incentive of some type.
In democracy, it is not "them," it is "us." This
approach is not working. Wetlands are societal or shared resources; society must
pay to preserve and restore them, not the individual. The tax system may be a
tool to accomplish this goal. State/provincial government must direct local
government to preserve and restore wetlands; they may have to transfer resources
to the local government to achieve this goal.
The role of federal government
The federal government's role is to bring about consensus. Local people need
to make decisions on how to achieve the goal. Government can set a framework for
policy, but this must be viewed as a guideline for accomplishing goals. There
must also be in place some mechanism or process to resolve conflicts.
Government can also be a mediator, if it can do so without creating greater
conflict. If common goals can be established by government and local
communities, most conflict can be eliminated. There should be a great deal of
public involvement in the development of public policy.
The government's role is to identify opportunities and bring interests
together. We need a buyer and seller for environmental commodities. Lack of a
marketplace for environmental variables is a stressor.
Government has a broader vision than most people. Government can help us see
the whole ecosystem. In river systems, farmers know their own land but may not
care about interactions. Government has to look at the big picture and look as
far ahead as possible.
Sociocultural
- Sustainable development is easier to accomplish if the people affected
understand the things that they share. This results in a convergence of personal
agendas.
- Values are stressors. For example, landowners care about the environment.
If they are asked to choose between personal rights and environment, they will
choose personal rights, even if this decision is detrimental to the rights of
others. Individual rights are paramount.
- Government emphasis on regulation leads to backlash in people who champion
individual rights. The system is driving behavior.
- Adversarial approaches between government and people are a stressor for
sustainable development. Government may panic and try to solve newly perceived
problems through control (i.e., regulation). If we can get stakeholders together
to discuss these problems, answers can often be found. This process usually
leads to a better solution than the panic/regulation approach. Local people
often do not get involved in the process until it is too late.
- The philosophy of individual rights in the United States is a problem when
trying to protect community or shared resources. We need a paradigm shift to
emphasize community behavior, not exclusively individualistic behavior.
Environmental Stressors
- Climate is highly variable in the region and could be a barrier to an
integrated approach to resource management. Climate studies should focus on
regional variation, not just variations on a local or global scale.
- Climatic extremes often affect the entire region, making the process of
integrating management strategies more difficult. Economic diversification could
reduce the impact of climate variability.
- Ad hoc programs in Canada in response to droughts and price fluctuations
prevent an integrated approach. These programs have a narrow focus. There should
be more emphasis on the systems approach to policy/program development.
- Pathogens can travel very easily in the region because no physical barriers
exist. Monoculture is a disaster in this context. For example, the risk of rust
prevents people from growing winter wheat, limiting diversification options that
could integrate economic and environmental objectives.
- The Great Plains lack a focal point for mobilizing public concern about
environmental issues. For example, public concern over environmental issues in
the Great Lakes is mobilized around these water bodies and their protection.
Question 2: What are examples of
successes (e.g., best practices, tools)? How do you know they work? Where are
the gaps?
- Political action to "save the CRP" could be considered a success.
This issue has brought together some interest groups. Stakeholders have
identified individual benefits, and they realize they must work together. CRP
was a positive action but was undertaken for the wrong reasons. It was sold on
the basis of a set-aside program but has paid for itself as an ecological
program.
- Conservation Districts in Manitoba and Natural Resource Districts in
Nebraska are successful. These districts are watershed-based, locally driven,
responsible for both soil and water, and provide opportunities to work on
associated resources.
- The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) is resulting in money
moving across an international boundary to public and private agencies. The most
important partner is the producer. NAWMP started out as a narrowly focused
program and later broadened as things started to happen on the ground. At
present there is some disagreement about its success, but its value is
recognized.
- In response to the problem of silting (from soil erosion) in Lake Dauphin,
local people formed committees. They used some government money, but they took
ownership of the problem and solved it. This was an integrated issue at the
outset (economic development, environment, water quality).
- Ducks Unlimited and the Eastern Irrigation District have had 50 years of
success. Wetlands have enhanced recreation and economic activities.
- The Resource Conservation and Development Program (through the resources
conservation program) has a county-level person working with local stakeholders
to address needs. This results in a 10:1 leveraging of public funding. Some
projects are multi-county in scope. This program is effective, but it has been
zeroed out in the 1996 budget.
- The "Know Your Watershed" program of the National Association of
Conservation Districts is delivered by the Conservation Tillage Information
Center. This is a private initiative, created as a companion to the Soil
Conservation Service. The focus is information and awareness.
- Round table discussions in Canada have allowed for public consultation and
consensus building on common goals. These round tables have encouraged and
facilitated the public involvement/discussion process. Actual action occurs
closer to the ground. Manitoba is starting to use local round tables to define
local issues. This may be a way of bridging the gap between farm and rural
townspeople.
- Operation Greenstrip introduces filterstrips along streams and allows
children to plant trees.
- TransAlta is a project that composts municipal wastes from Edmonton and
uses the material in rehabilitation work.
- A carbon sequestration project of the Saskatchewan Soil Conservation
Society, TransAlta, and Monsanto is a direct seeding project. The intent of this
project is to offset carbon produced from coal burning.
- Composting yard waste, instead of putting it into landfills, has become
quite popular, and some counties are selling this material. A Minnesota
regulation prevents yard waste from being deposited in a landfill. Winnipeg has
started its own composting program.
- A wind energy task force has been established in Nebraska (composed of
public power companies, the Department of Economic Development, state senators,
and environmental citizens groups) to assess the wind resources in Nebraska.
This task force is looking to the future when Nebraska may need more energy
capacity. Wind energy generation requires little land and can be integrated with
agriculture or other resource uses. This effort could reduce the demand for
energy from sources outside the state. Financial resources will remain in the
state, leading to local jobs and, possibly, tourism opportunities.
- Great Plains International Data Network is a U.S./Canadian partnership that
can provide the data tools for integrated resource management.
An important key to these success stories is that they identified a
problem and applied the necessary resources.
A lot of activity is driven by a local issue, often a single issue. It
can build from there as the group works together and finds success.
Local action is critical for effective integrated resource management.
Question 3: Identify specific actions
or programs that would lead to a more sustainable future for the region. Be
specific by addressing the following questions: What can be done? How can it be
done? Who will implement it? What can WE do?
- The goal of the programs described below is the development of a
sustainable ecosystem in the Great Plains. They require a bottom-up approach
that is locally driven to be successful.
- Conduct a regionally integrated vulnerability assessment of the Great
Plains that includes a variety of climate model scenarios and other factors such
as changes in regional hydrology, crop suitability, economy, demographics, and
trade.
- Establish a set of integrated sustainability indicators for the Great
Plains (e.g., quantity and quality of ground water, rates of depletion or
recharge, soil loss). We need baseline data for these indicators.
- Establish programs for joint evaluation (research community, government,
and local citizens/groups) of basic scientific issues (e.g., ground water
depletion, water quality, wetland preservation).
- Goal-setting exercises at community, regional, and national levels is
critical. Initial goals for the Great Plains should be basic and macro in scale.
Local and regional goals can then fit under these broader goals. Manitoba is
trying to do this with their local/regional round tables, fitting these goals
into the provincial process. Local goals and actions cannot take place in
isolation or there will be competition between communities.
- Government should establish the limits of resources. Knowing limits to
available resources will help in integrated resource management because we need
to know how much time is available to address problems. For example, there is an
ab-solute limit to the availability of petroleum. There is a lack of commitment
to conservation largely because people do not understand the limits or believe
the information available.
- Establish an environmental information center. Its goal would be to put
impartial data and information in the hands of decision makers.
- We need action. We need to convert information into action and we need to
know how to accomplish objectives. There is a distinction between government
plans and real action plans. There are lots of plans that will never be
implemented because there was no community buy-in to the process. How do you
initiate the process of community action? There must be a top-down buy-in for
the bottom-up process to work. Proactive action is preferred, but this process
is often started by a crisis (i.e., reactive response). Examples of success from
other jurisdictions can help to get the process started. We must get political
leaders interested if government is to buy into the process. In Manitoba, the
premier chairs the sustainable development round table. Workbooks have been
created for different sectors. Now this information is being made available to
local round tables. Community action plans have not yet been developed, but
there is hope that these will emerge from this process. In the United States,
states can drive environmental policy if credible models are available for the
federal government to follow. The vehicle for Great Plains action may be the
Great Plains Partnership Council, which includes some governors and premiers and
NGOs like The Nature Conservancy. Leadership is necessary from both the public
and private sectors; public participation is also required.
- Make the report of this symposium available through Internet, possibly by
the International Institute for Sustainable Development's Web site and/or the
Great Plains Data Network.
What? How? Who?
The tools necessary to achieve sustainability objectives are partnerships,
process, and programs. The Bow River Water Quality Council is a good example of
how this can operate. Their first step was to develop partnerships. Participants
were not paid, but representatives from local NGOs had their expenses covered.
The government facilitated this process. Where data was incomplete or incorrect,
government was able to assist in finding better data. The council made 37
recommendations, which they are now working on implementing, and public
enthusiasm for the process and the results is high.
How can you provide a focus on Great Plains sustainability? The region needs
to be subdivided because of its size and diversity in order to identify the
proper focus. There are many jurisdictions and no single authority to provide
access to data. Action priorities are likely to be different among
jurisdictions, again emphasizing the importance of local involvement in the
process. Could the Great Plains Partnership Council be the tool to initiate this
process? It has political (binational) representatives that may provide the
vehicle for committing resources and/or providing some common direction. It also
has NGO representatives. Whatever the vehicle, it must have political legitimacy
and be able to make concrete recommendations.
Rationale for Action
The Great Plains region must strive to find common solutions to common
economic, social, and environmental challenges. Long-term economic policies that
have helped to define the region are changing. We are in a time of flux that
provides a strategic opportunity for fundamental change.
We need an effective, grassroots-driven process for setting goals,
priorities, and policies for the Great Plains region. Buy-in by the region's
political (elected) leaders is essential for political legitimacy. The elected
state and provincial officials that make up the Great Plains Partnership Council
may be the logical place for political authorization.
Initiation of Task Force
The Great Plains Partnership Council, with some adjustment in membership,
could provide a starting place for a task force with broad representation. The
task force representation should include a broad base of representative
stakeholders (binational interests and expertise). This group must not be
government or dominated by government. It must be able to operate autonomously
and draw on government and stakeholder data and expertise as required. The task
force should be assigned a specific time frame for achieving its objectives.
Charges to Task Force
- Determine what is necessary to achieve sustainability for the North
American Great Plains, balancing resource availability and use.
- Assess data availability, data quality, and data gaps.
- Create indicators that provide a measure of progress toward achieving
sustainability (e.g., community measures, physical and biological measures,
etc.).
- Develop a set of achievable goals and directions through a process of
extensive public involvement.
- Once goals have been determined, work toward developing integrated policies
and policy instruments with extensive stakeholder dialog and negotiation.
- Transfer responsibility to local groups or communities for action.
These recommendations are to be made to political sponsors (possibly the
Great Plains Partnership Council) and to the public. The report to the public
must be clear, concise, and readily understandable.
|