The Contributions of Model Forest Organizations towards Governance for Sustainable Forest Management of Small-scale Forests: Lessons from Eastern Ontario and Kyoto Model Forests

Abstract

The Model Forest (MF) concept emerged in Canada in the early 1990’s to promote partnership arrangements for the sustainable governance of forest landscapes. Since then, the concept has grown internationally, attracting interests from both policy-makers and researchers. Internationally, MF arrangements provide a platform not only for fostering multi-level governance arrangements but also to act as bridging organizations that facilitate the interaction of multiple actors from the state, market and community to achieve sustainability within specific socio-ecological landscapes. For instance, in some jurisdictions, the role of MFs in facilitating partnership arrangements between local communities and markets described as private-social partnership arrangements to enhance the sustainable management of forests has been noted. However, our understanding of the effectiveness of MFs in promoting private-social partnership arrangements for the sustainable management of small-scale forests across different institutional settings is less well known. Hence, this thesis examines the effectiveness of Model Forests (MF) as bridging organizations that facilitate the participation of small-scale foresters in private-social partnerships to achieve sustainability in forest landscapes. Consequently, two MF organizations; the Kyoto Model Forest Association (KMFA) in Japan, and the Eastern Ontario Model Forest (EOMF) in Canada, both with a similar focus on small-scale foresters were selected as case studies. The objectives of the research were: (a) assess the effectiveness of MFs as bridging organizations in convening private-social partnership arrangements to improve local socio-ecological sustainability; (b) assess the effectiveness of MFs as bridging organizations to improving the effective participation of local actors in private-social partnership arrangements; (c) examine how MFs can improve local dimensions of well-being linked to ecosystem functioning; and (d) consider the implications of private-social partnerships in multi-level forest governance arrangements for the sustainable management of small-scale forests. Data was collected using a mixed-method approach involving document analysis, semi-structured and group interviews, a questionnaire survey, and field observations. Two key findings emerged from this research. First, both MFs performed several bridging or intermediary functions that improved the effectiveness of private-social partnership arrangements for improved socio-ecological system governance. In the Kyoto case, the findings showed that the KMFA designed and aligned private-social partnership arrangements involving collaboration between private non-forest corporations, local governments, and local forestry associations to improve the management and conservation of rural underutilized forest landscapes. Specifically, the KMFA improved the effectiveness of partnership arrangements to address the lack of management and utilization of rural forest landscapes through the provision of public education to broaden participation; investing in places and systems to reduce participation costs; building trust and reducing value mismatches; providing incentives and building management capacity; and providing leadership to draw on the skills, knowledge and resources of diverse organizations. In the Ontario case, the EOMF promoted the effective participation of small-scale private foresters in a market-based forest governance arrangement by drawing on its social capital – networks and trust – to access required management skills and run the program at a relatively low cost; providing specialized locally relevant forestry services required by local actors; and, innovating and adapting to program changes and stakeholder demands. Thus, in both cases, the MFs improved the effectiveness of private-social partnership arrangements by reducing challenges to participation for different actors, leveraging on its network to improve access to resources and skills, defining roles and responsibility of various actors to improve cooperation and coordination, and optimizing broader governance arrangements to align with the needs, interests and preferences of actors, particularly local actors. Second and finally, the findings showed that both MFs served as catalyst to generate capabilities that improved forest-ecosystem interdependence and local dimensions of well-being dependent on ecosystems. Acting as spaces for collective action, both MFs helped to define and align common goals and interests, and the freedom to act, thereby expanding the choices and capabilities of actors. Specifically, both MFs enhanced the capability set of actors relative to livelihoods and activities; knowledge and technology; relationships building and coordination; and freedom and voice. Collectively, these capabilities improved access, use and management of the ecosystem for a diverse set of actors, thus promoting mutually reinforcing environmental and social outcomes. The findings provide a rare example of MFs contribution to local sustainability and well-being outcomes from the perspectives of local actors. Also, the findings demonstrate that looking at MFs as a collective voluntary action space is helpful in revealing the mediating role of social institutions in improving the well-being benefit from ecosystem services. In conclusion, the findings of this study have demonstrated that MFs by design, hold the potential to design or facilitate governance arrangements that promote the effective participation and cooperation of multi-level actors from government, private sector and community to improve the governance and management of place-specific socio-ecological challenges. Model Forest attributes such networking and leadership, multi-stakeholder and voluntary partnerships, a commitment to experiment and innovate, and share knowledge are crucial to their effectiveness. Also, the fact that MFs enjoy support and legitimacy from multiple sectors and levels of society within specific socio-political spaces makes them important to the broader question of multi-level environmental governance. These attributes suggest ongoing policy and research attention to MFs can support better understanding and advancement of partnership arrangements for sustainable forest management