Executive Brief4 Bringing “Place” In – Exploring the Role

of the Federal Government in Place-Based Approaches

Articles16 Issue-Driven Integrated Landscape

Management and Innovation in CanadaJean Thie

26 Integrated Management: A CoastalCommunity PerspectiveCoastal Community-UniversityResearch Alliance

35 Donec Prohibiti, Procidite: Building aKnowledge Infrastructure to SupportPlace-based PolicyDerek Cook

42 Exploring Integrated LandscapeManagement in CanadaBryan Oborne

50 From Restless Communities to ResilientPlaces: The Role of the NationalGovernment and The Importance ofIntegrated Community SustainabilityPlansMike Harcourt

54 Place-Based Policy and RegionalDevelopment in EuropeJohn Bachtler

59 Ecosystem-Based Management in theUnited StatesJudy Layzer

64 National Grants: A Mechanism forEmbedding Decentralized GovernanceArrangements for WatershedManagementLisa Robins Ph.D.

69 Balancing Geography: New Insights intoRural Development in Latin AmericaJulio A. Berdegué, Félix Modrego,Eduardo Ramírez, Rosamelia Andrade,and Rose Olfert

73 The Role of Institutions in IntegratedManagementRuthWaldick Ph.D.

81 Informing the Policy Process throughIntegrated ManagementLivia Bizikova Ph.D. andRuthWaldick Ph.D.

88 Utopia within Reach: HorizontalCollaboration on Place-Based Projectsfrom a Sustainable DevelopmentPerspectiveJacques Bourgault

95 Spatial Approaches to IntegratedManagement for SustainableDevelopmentBarry Sadler

106 Regional Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment for Integrated LandManagementBram Noble Ph.D. andJill Harriman Gunn Ph.D.

3

OverviewIntegrated Place-BasedApproaches forSustainable DevelopmentBernard Cantin

7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7

HORIZONS VOLUME 10 NUMBER 4

P O L I C Y R E S E A R C H I N I T I A T I V E

PRI Horizons TeamExecutive HeadThomasTownsend

Editorial BoardAndré Downs ThomasTownsendDavid Péloquin JudyWatlingAndréThivierge

Managing EditorBernard Cantin

ProductionStefanie Bowles Jean-Philippe VeilleuxMarissa Martin Élisabeth VuJulie Saumure NancyWhiteLouiseTremblay

Design and Layout byZsuzsanna Liko Visual Communication Inc.

ISSN 1487-7090

The Policy Research Initiative (PRI) conducts research insupport of the Government of Canada’s medium term pol-icy agenda. Its core mandate is to advance research onemerging horizontal issues, and to ensure the effectivetransfer of acquired knowledge to policy-makers.As a peer-reviewed journal targeting the federal policy community,Horizons publishes high-quality policy research papersfrom researchers across federal departments and fromexternal experts. For more information on the PRI orto consult previous issues of Horizons, please visit<www.pri-prp.gc.ca>.

All web sites referred to in this issue were confirmed as ofDecember 2009 unless indicated otherwise.

Any comments or questions? Requests for subscription orchange of address?

E-mail: horizons@pri-prp.gc.caPhone: 613-947-1956Fax: 613-995-6006

Alternative format: available on demade

The views expressed herein reflect solely thoseof the authors, and do not necessarily representthe views of the Government of Canada or any or-ganization with which the authors or Horizons areaffiliated.

Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2010.

Canada- Striking theBalance BetweenOpportunity andLimitation

Canada is a land of extremes andcontradictions that have set thestage for a series of unique ini-

tiatives and world-leading innovationsin the science, technology, practice, andpolicy associated with ecosystem sur-veys.The second largest country in theworld, with the longest shoreline andthe largest wetland (Hudson Bay Low-lands), Canada actually has a very smallland resource base suitable for agricul-ture; its climate and physiographyseverely restrict the capacity of its landfor agriculture and forestry. Only fivepercent of the almost 10million km2 ofland area in Canada is suitable for crop

production (CLI, 1976) and only 25percent is covered by commerciallyviable forests.

Land, water, and climate-based issueshave driven Canada’s evolution fromsectoral to integrated resource manage-ment and sustainable development, andmade it a leader in geographic informa-tion, monitoring, and decision supportsystems.

Widespread conflicts over the sustain-ability of land and resource use sparkedthe federal and provincial governmentsto initiate the first wave of major pro-grams and acts that used what wenow call integrated ecosystem-basedapproaches.This paper provides thumb-nail sketches of some of past and present“horizontal” policy and program initia-tives and their impact, and exploresfuture opportunities. All these initia-tives use horizontal integrationapproaches enabled through a combi-nation of:

• interdisciplinary ecosystem science;

• location-based integrated monito-ring, assessment, and informationsystems;

• integrated policy and program ma-nagement focused on national issuesand results; and

• cross-sectoral andmulti-stakeholderinvolvement.

Our core competencies and leadershipin these key areas, combined with on-line knowledge management and socialparticipation tools enable the next waveof innovation including broad-basedsocietal initiatives like an integratedlandscape management-based Sustain-able Development Knowledge Com-mons.

The First ClimateCrisis Adaptationand MitigationMost settlement in Canada has takenplace in the last 120 years.Accessibilityby water and railway was the domi-nant factor in selecting land for use,and if settlement occurred on goodagricultural land it was more often by

16 W W W . P R I - P R P . G C . C A

Jean ThiePresidentEcoinformatics International Inc.

Issue-Driven IntegratedLandscape Managementand Innovation in Canada

17

accident than design (Coombs andThie, 1979).The drought of the 1930sand the associated wind erosion con-verted much of the short grass prairie,which had been placed in cereal pro-duction during settlement, into a vastdust bowl.This “climate” crisis duringthe Great Depression, and related farmabandonment resulted in the PrairieFarm Rehabilitation Act (PFRA) of1935.A land capability survey formedpart of the PFRA program to providethe first ecological knowledge base forthe conversion of cultivated semi-aridlands to ecologically more sustainablegrasslands and community pastures.This initiative ensuredmore sustainableuse by adapting land use practices toinherent climate and soil capabilities.

Non-Sustainable LandUse, Rural Poverty, andFarm AbandonmentRural areas continued to pay a highprice for the settlement of marginallands. The 1940s, ’50s, and ’60s werecharacterized by the use of science-based technologies, increased mecha-nization, and changes in marketpatterns that made only larger farms ongood soils sustainable.A new round offarm abandonment started (in the1960s at a rate of 10,000 per year),and poverty conditions emerged inrural Canada. In 1957, the SenateCommittee on Land Use argued foran inventory of land classified withregards to its suitability for particularuses. Further impetus was provided by

the Resources for Tomorrow Confe-rence of 1961, which focused onregional approaches to economic devel-opment and stressed the interdepen-dence of the use, development, andconservation of renewable resources(Rees, 1977), and recommended that acomprehensive land capability surveywas a necessary prerequisite for thesound future management of Canada’sland resources and the evolution ofpolicy for economic and social develop-ment in all regions of Canada. The fe-deral government responded with theAgricultural Rehabilitation andDevelop-ment Act (ARDA) of June 1961 thatprovided the framework for federal-provincial agreements to co-operate inrural resource management andresearch projects to facilitate land useadaptation to improve social and eco-nomic conditions. While the title ofthe ARDA shows a continued agricul-tural land use bias, the programs andprojects implemented under the Actreflect a systematic strategy toward inte-grated landscape planning, multipleuse, and sustainable development.

The Canada LandInventory: AcceleratingIntegrated LandscapeManagement for RuralDevelopmentIn 1963, the federal government inconsultation with the Canada Councilof Resource Ministers approved theundertaking of the Canada LandInventory (CLI). The CLI challengewas formidable.

It was to provide a comprehensive sur-vey of land capability and use designedto provide a basis for integratedresource and land use planning, within

HO R I Z O N S V O L U M E 1 0 N U M B E R 4

Figure 1Principle Zones of Soil Limitations for Agriculture in Canada

x

Source: “....for land’s sake” by David M.Welch, Lands Directorate, Environment Canada, Supply and ServicesCanada. 1980, Catalogue No.En 72-6/1980E: ISBN 0-660-10544-6. Page 12

Horizontal issues and solutionsneed compatible, horizontallyintegrated knowledge bases.

5 years, for the settled portion ofCanada, approximately 2.5 millionkm2. It included cross sector assess-ment of land capability for agriculture,forestry, recreation,wildlife (waterfowl andungulates), present landuse, sport fish as well aspilot integrated land useplanning projects ineach province.

Guidelines for biophys-ical land classificationwere developed (Lacate, 1969) to pro-vide the ecological framework and basisfor the capability classification of thelandscape. In addition, present landuse was mapped as a baseline forregional planning and to measure landuse change over time. This knowledgebase would be summarized in over30,000 land capability maps at scalesvarying from 1:1,000,000, (for strategicanalysis and policy applications) to1:250,000 (to support regional plan-ning and analysis) and 1:50,000 (tosupport integrated land use planningand zoning).

The Federal Role in, andImpact of, the CanadaLand InventoryThe rapid program implementationrequired significant innovation in fed-eral-provincial program co-operation,organization, and horizontal programintegration strategies to allow for a“scale down” from national to provin-cial and regional perspectives.The fed-eral government role (in addition tofinancing) focused on four goals.

• Develop a horizontally compatibleand ecologically based classificationand national survey standards.

Impact:The CLI capability classes 1(best) to 7 (poorest) have becomepart of the land resource planningvocabulary.

• Facilitate and corre-late national commu-nities of practicein land capabilityclassification andland use planning.Impact: The over1,500 professionaland technical staff

involved in the CLI moved on afterits completion to influential roles inregional planning, environment,and research, and facilitated itsapplication in policy, programs, andprojects.

• Provide national co-ordinationof the survey and pilot land useplanning projects. Impact: This

accelerated the development ofprovincial institutions and programsfor integrated resource planning.

• Publish maps and reports, and cre-ate a national digital land resourcedatabase and system. Impact: TheCanadian Geographic InformationSystem (CGIS) designed for theCLI became the world’s first GIS. Itsdigital maps are still accessiblethrough the GeoGratis componentof the Canadian Geospatial DataInfrastructure.

The provinces were responsible forimplementation; they established thesurvey and land use planning teamsand, ultimately, integrated the resultsin forward-looking, land resourcemanagement strategies, policies, andprograms. Some provinces, such asManitoba, established integrated teams

W W W . P R I - P R P . G C . C A18

Figure 2Canada's Cropland CLI Class 1,2,3

x

Canada Land Inventory, Report No. 10. 1976. Land Capability for Agriculture. Page 7. Lands Directorate,Fisheries and Environement Canada, Ottawa

The CLI can be

acclaimed as the sin-

gle most significant

federal influence on

rural land use.

of agrologists, ecologists, biologists,economists, foresters, recreationspecialists, land use experts, and plan-ners to carry out the survey. BritishColumbia established the Land UseCommittee and Secretariat to guideimplementation. In all cases, theseprovincial solutions ensured the effec-tive completion of the program and anunusually rapid integration of theresults in policy, legislation, and plan-ning.

The Canada Council on Land Usesummarized progress:

The CLI can be acclaimed as thesingle most significant federalinfluence on rural land use. Insum, it would seem that “infor-mation” as a federal activity ismore appropriate than “develop-ment” in contributions to jointFederal/Provincial efforts. Therole of information has not beengiven the weight it should be. Itis neutral, value-free as much asanything can be, and is availableto all.1

By that time, CLI ratings of land capa-bility had become common. The pro-tection of Canada’ prime lands becamethe focus of the federal policy on landuse, and of provincial policies and leg-islation. The scarcity of prime agricul-tural lands influenced protectivepolicies, legislation, and zoning inBritish Columbia, Ontario, Quebec,Prince Edward Island, andNewfound-land and Labrador. In these cases, theCLI helped set the agenda for the

policy and legislative initiatives, but italso provided the implementationframework.

As a complement to the CLI, theNorthern Land Use Information Series(NLUIS) was developed in 1971 bythe Lands Directorate and Indian andNorthern Affairs as a rapid environ-mental and social reconnaissance map-ping program for Yukon and theNorthwest Territories. The map seriesincluded integrated information onwildlife, fish resources, Native land use,ecological land classification, and socio-economic and cultural data.The mapsassist with identifying potential landuse conflicts, processing land use per-mit applications, and preliminaryscreening of the environmental andsocial dimensions of exploration pro-grams and northern development.

Ecoregions andIntegrated LandManagement - AnEcological Frameworkfor CanadaThe CLI did not cover two thirds ofCanada. In 1976, to fill the gap, federaland provincial governments establishedthe Canada Committee on EcologicalLand Classification (CCELC) to con-tinue development and use of a uni-form ecological (biophysical) approachto land classification for resource plan-ning, management, and environmentalimpact assessment. Over 600 specialistsrepresenting various governments,academia, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations contributedto its working groups and special prod-ucts including the following:

HO R I Z O N S V O L U M E 1 0 N U M B E R 4 19

Figure 3Ecological Classification Linked to Levels of Planning

x

Thie, J., E.B.Wiken, and C.D.A. Rubec. 1986. Ecological land Survey as Basis for Land resource Planning andManagement in Canada. In Land and its Uses – Actual and potential.NATOConference Series 1: Ecology Volume10. Pages 437-452 Plenum Press. NewYork and London.

1. <http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/CLI/council.html>, Council on Rural Development Canada 1979.

• The Canadian Ecological LandClassification System and Surveywas established to map and describeecologically significant parts of thelandscape and organize this in a for-mat suitable for planning andman-agement scaled from global to locallevels.

• In 1989, the Ecoclimatic Regions ofCanada project mapped broad areasof the Earth’s surface characterizedby distinctive ecological responsesto climate, as expressed by vegeta-tion and reflected in soils, wildlife,biodiversity, and water. This map isone of the most powerful tools avai-lable to develop ecosystem-based cli-mate change adaptation strategiesand scenarios for Canada.

• The Wetland Classification Systemand National Map provided thebasis for monitoring wetland lossand the formulation of the federalpolicy onWetland Conservation in1991.

• Ecoregion and ecodistrict mappingfor most of Canada was started, butterminated in 1988 when the LandsDirectorate was reorganized into asustainable development and a stateof the environment reportingbranch.

The Ecological Land Survey approachwas applied in most of Canada’snational parks, in major environmentalassessments, and in developments, suchas the James Bay hydro-electric project.In the mid-1980s, acid rain sensitivityin Eastern Canada was assessed usingterrestrial ecoregions and districts.

W W W . P R I - P R P . G C . C A

Figure 4Ecoclimatic Regions of Canada

x

EcoregionsWorking Group, Canada Committee on Ecological Land Classification (CCELC) 1989 S.C. Zoltai,Chair. Ecoclimatic Regions of Canada. Ecological Land Classification Series No. 23. CanadianWildlife Service,Environment Canada.

Figure 5North American Ecoregions

x

Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) 1997. Ecological Regions of NorthAmerica. SecretariatCEC, Montreal, Canada. ISBN 2-922305-18-X, Page 9<http://www.cec.org/files/pdf/BIODIVERSITY/eco-eng_EN.pdf>

20

In 1991, in support of the Green Planand state of the environment reporting,the federal-provincial Ecological Stra-tification Working Group was formedto develop a national ecological frame-work for Canada, which was publishedin 1996. It is now widely used nation-ally and internationally as a strategyframework for policy, research, moni-toring, assessment, and reporting.

Managing DecliningMigratory BirdPopulationsThe North American Waterfowl Ma-nagement Plan (NAWMP) shows howintegrated landscape management canbe applied to continental issues andimplemented locally, if supported by acredible knowledge base for multi-stakeholder partnership negotiations,setting strategic objectives, and devel-oping implementation plans. Thedecline in migratory bird populationsin the 1980s was linked to the loss ofhabitat (wetlands) in the critical flightways inWestern and Eastern Canada.In 1986, Canada and the United Statessigned the NAWMP agreement;Mexico joined in 1988. The Plan pro-vides a policy framework for analyzingNorth American waterfowl issues andsets out a number of objectives relatingto waterfowl habitat and populations.Joint ventures and financing fromnational and provincial/state govern-ments, and substantial financial flows(almost $300 million) from non-government and not-for-profit organi-zations in Canada and the UnitedStates were directed to wetland preser-vation and habitat improvement. Thisincluded financial support to farmers to

maintain critical prairie pothole habitatas part of the Prairie Habitat/PotholeJoint Venture.

Sustainable Developmentand the Green Plan:Integrated ScienceMonitoring and Assessment,and Action PlansIn response to interest in the environ-ment and sustainable development cre-ated by the Brundtland CommissionReport, Our Common Future, the late1980s and early ’90s saw the develop-ment of significant integrated initia-tives, some of which were reinforced bythe 1990 Green Plan.

• Integrated science and monitor-ing.The EcologicalMonitoring andAssessment Network (EMAN) was

part of a comprehensive strategy tointegrate terrestrial, aquatic, andatmospheric monitoring networks,sites, and research across Canada.The goal was to provide a nationalperspective on how Canadianecosystems are affected by the manyenvironmental stressors, give scien-tifically defensible rationales forpollution control and resourcemanagement policies, evaluate andreport to Canadians on the effective-ness of resource managementpolicies, and identify new environ-mental issues at the earliest possiblestage.

• Sustainable landscape and forestmanagement.TheCanadianModelForest Network (CMFN) includes14model forest sites across Canada.

HO R I Z O N S V O L U M E 1 0 N U M B E R 4 21

1

2

3

4

56

78

9

10

11

1213

14

Clayoquot Forest Community

Resources North Association

Foothills Research Institute

Prince Albert Model Forest

Manitoba Model Forest

Northeast Superior ForestCommunity

Lake Abitibi Model Forest

Eastern Ontario Model Forest

Waswanipi Cree Model Forest

Le Bourdon Projet

Lac-Saint-Jean Model Forest

Fundy Model Forest

Nova Forest Alliance

Model Forest of Newfoundland& Labrador

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Figure 6Model Forest NetworK

xSource : <http://www.modelforest.net/cmfn/en/forests/>

Each site involves numerous part-ners working toward sustainableforest and landscape management.Partners include forest companies,Aboriginal communities, private ci-tizens, parks, environmental groups,governments, and universities.Model forests can be seen as testbeds for interdisciplinary ecosystemscience and participatory planningat the forefront of sustainable forestmanagement. They provide a stan-dard and window on sustainable for-est management (SFM) practices inCanada and together with criteriaand indicators of SFM provide pub-lic and international credibility tothe Canadian forest managementcertification process. This effectiveCanadian initiative has beenexpanded globally in the Interna-tionalModel Forest Network involv-ing over 20 countries and coveringmost continents.

• Drainage basin action plans likethose for the Fraser River, GreatLakes, and St. Lawrence River pro-vide effective mechanisms for hori-zontal integration of federal andprovincial programs through co-operative and integrated manage-ment objectives and methods basedon principles of sustainability. Theconcentration of significant financialflows, with a focus on clear results,have made these integrated actionplans very effective.

Integrated Land Manage-ment and Location-BasedInformationThe Canada Geographic Informa-tion System (CGIS). The CLI gener-ated over 30,000 maps! Traditionalmanual analysis, overlays, and presenta-tion would significantlylimit use of the data.Roger Tomlinson, uni-versally considered the“father of GIS” workedwith Spartan Air Ser-vices in Ottawa andexplored with IBM inthe early 1960s the linkbetweenmaps, location-based information, andcomputers.A chance air-plane encounter withLee Pratt, the first Chiefof the CLI led to a feasi-bility study for a geo-information system forthe CLI.

• In 1963, the designwork started for theCanada GeographicInformation System.

• In 1965, the CGIS delivered theworld’s first optical scanner capableof reading 1:30,000maps into a dig-ital form (now in the Museum ofScience and Technology, Ottawa).

• In 1971, the CGIS became theworld’s first fully operational GIS. Ithas a unique ability to overlay allCLI maps, integrate socio-economiclayers, build continent-wide data-bases, and provide analysis at thenational, provincial, regional, andlocal levels.

• In 1975, the CGIS became the firstGIS to offer nationally remoteaccess to interactive graphic analysisof its integrated databases.

Typical applications and use of theCGIS, combining CLI andmany otherdata sets included (Thie et al., 1982)

federal land use andwetland policy develop-ment; the NorthAmerican WaterfowlManagement Plan, sup-porting Canada-USnegotiations; biophysi-cal/ecological databasesfor national parks plan-ning and management;land use monitoring(e.g., loss of high capa-bility agriculture andwetlands around urbanareas); mapping terres-trial sensitivity to acidrain; and spruce bud-worm damage monitor-ing and assessment.

TheCanadian RemoteSensing Program. Par-

allel in time to the development in earlyGIS in Canada, the new field of air-borne and satellite remote sensingemerged. In 1970, the Interdepartmen-tal PlanningOffice on Remote Sensingobtained approval to modify the satel-lite receiving station in Prince Albert,Saskatchewan, to receive data fromNASA’s Earth Resources TechnologySatellite (ERTS). Exploration andincreased environmental awarenessmoved the federal government to fundthis initiative and ensure that Cana-dians would have equal or better accessthan their neighbours to this new

W W W . P R I - P R P . G C . C A22

Land, water, and

climate-based issues

have driven

Canada’s evolution

from sectoral to

integrated resource

management

and sustainable

development, and

made it a leader

in geographic

information,

monitoring, and

decision support

systems.

HO R I Z O N S V O L U M E 1 0 N U M B E R 4

source of information about Canada’sland and water, and forest and mineralresources. The first objective was toproduce the remotely sensed data andinformation needed for natural resourceand environmental managementquickly and efficiently, and supportresearch and development on the col-lection, processing, and interpretationof data.

The intelligent use of Canada’s private-sector capabilities (including Compu-ting Devices of Ottawa andMacDonald-Dettwiler and AssociatesLtd.) enabled Canada to receive andprocess the first ERTS satellite imagesa week before NASA was able to do so.This achievement provided the founda-tion for MacDonald-Dettwiler andAssociates to corner the global marketin ERTS/ LANDSAT and SEASATreceiving stations. Through the Cana-dian Advisory Committee on RemoteSensing (CACRS), a loosely integratedfederal-provincial program was devel-oped that resulted in the establishmentof provincial remote sensing interpreta-tion centres, and centres of excellence atCanadian universities.

The early successes of Canadian tech-nology at home and globally providedthe basis for the successful developmentof the RADARSAT program andlaunch of Canada’s all-weather radarsatellites 1 and 2. Again, the first stepsto a radar satellite were taken throughan interdepartmental planning office.The Canadian geomatics industryreceived another boost in its competi-tiveness in global markets, exemplifiedby the global leadership position ofMacDonald-Dettwiler and Associates

in building on its success in the conver-gence of remote sensing systems, GIS,and resource management.

Canadian Geospatial Data Infra-structure (CGDI).The federal Inter-agency Committee on Geomatics(IACG) has worked for many years toimprove the collection, management,and integration of location-based infor-mation to enable improved decisionand policy making. However, the Inter-net drastically changed the dimensionsof what was possible. Canada was anearly adapter with innovative initiativeslike SchoolNet andCommunityAccess.In 1994, theNationalAtlas InformationService (Geomatics Canada) launchedthe world’s first GIS capability on theInternet, providing wide public interac-

tive access to national thematic, issue,and policy maps, and making mapsfrom national databases, such as theNational Pollutant Release Inventory,dynamic.

The launch of the GeoConnectionsProgram in 1999 increased the accessi-bility and use of new technologies, likeglobal positioning systems and web-based mapping. The CGDI wascreated to improve sharing, access, inte-gration, and use of geographic infor-mation. The initial investment of $60million (1999-2005) leveraged anadditional $110million to achieve theseobjectives. The second phase of theGeoConnections Program (2005-2011)has made integrated land management(ILM) one of its priority areas and

23

Figure 7Leaf Area Index from SPOT Satellite – Indicator of Carbon Absorbtion

x

< http://ess.nrcan.gc.ca/ercc-rrcc/proj3/theme6/images/index_11.jpg >< http://ess.nrcan.gc.ca/ercc-rrcc/proj3/theme6/index_e.php >

W W W . P R I - P R P . G C . C A24

supported IMAGINE Canada (Inte-grated Management and GeospatialInformation Network for the Environ-ment) in facilitating the conver-gence of ILM knowledge bases,geospatial technologies, and decisionsupport systems for national andregional applications. The GEOIDENetwork (GEOmatics for InformedDecisions) funded by the Networks ofCentres of Excellence Program (NCE)complements these initiatives bysupporting innovative research and net-working in geomatics across Canada.Its major thrusts include sustainablemanagement of land and marineresources, natural hazards, and the envi-ronment.

The Future: A SustainableDevelopment Commons

The last 20 years have set the stage andbuilt the technologies for the next waveof innovation in ILM. The next twodecades will see a paradigm shift whenconverging strategic technologies, soci-etal issues, and a knowledge-basedeconomy accelerate the developmentof an ILM-based sustainable develop-ment knowledge commons (SDKC).

Like ILM, an SDKC would be basedon integrating the best interdiscipli-nary ecosystem science with socio-economic knowledge, best practices (inplanning and adaptive management),and best policy development in a trans-parent multi-stakeholder participationprocess. The potential of the Internetfor sharing data, knowledge, and on-line analysis, and promoting participa-tory systems provides a uniqueopportunity for society to develop

common solutions and renew interestin the old “commons” concept. Thecreative commons movement, and theconservation commons of the IUCN– The World Conservation Union –have set the stage for an ILM-basedknowledge commons and infrastruc-ture. IMAGINE Canada is a smallstrategic step in this direction.

The key components of the SDKCinclude a shared knowledge base,empowerment tools and best practices,and governance support tools and sys-tems facilitating stakeholder participa-tion and measuring performance.

The federal government should viewthe SDKC as a strategic opportunity toshift its role from traditional infrastruc-ture to facilitating the new knowledgeinfrastructure critical for the new eco-nomy, sustainable development, andadapting to climate change. It shoulddevelop the strategic framework (per-haps through an interdepartmentalplanning office, which has been aneffective vehicle for Canada’s remotesensing programs) to set the stage for anational leadership role. Leadership inthe age of the Internet is a series ofsmall, smart investments, and a busi-ness model, which enables all stake-holders to participate, share, contribute,and benefit. Many federal programsand policy initiatives could directlybenefit from the horizontal integrationandmulti-stakeholder knowledge pro-vided by an SDKC. Many programslike GeoConnections or GEOIDEcould make significant contributionsin shifting the orientation from data (aconcept of the 1990s) to knowledgeinfrastructure.

Just imagine Canada when the powerof social networking tools transformsknowledge networking and the visua-lization power of video “gaming” builton geospatial modelling and decisionsupport systems, which can then beused to visualize future policies or land-scape adaptation scenarios.

ReferencesCanada Land Inventory. 1976. Land Capability

for Agriculture. Lands Directorate, Fisheriesand Environement Canada, Ottawa. ReportNo. 10.

Canada Land Inventory. 1970. Objectives,Scope and Organization. Department ofRegional Economic Expansion. Ottawa.Report No. 1.

Commission on Environmental Cooperation(CEC). 1997. Ecological Regions of northAmerica. Secretariat CEC, Montreal,Canada. ISBN 2-922305-18-X, Page 9.

Coombs, D.B., and J. Thie. 1979. “TheCanada Land Inventory System.” Pp. 909-933 in Planning the Uses andManagement ofLand. ASA, CSSA, Soil Science Society ofAmerica.

Council on Rural Development Canada. 1979.Report of the Council on Land use, Ottawap. 10. <http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/CLI/council.html >

EcoregionsWorking Group, Canada Commit-tee on Ecological Land Classification(CCELC). 1989. S.C. Zoltai, Chair. Ecocli-matic Regions of Canada. Ecological LandClassification Series No. 23. CanadianWildlife service, Environment Canada.

Lacate, D.S., Chair Subcommittee on Bio-Phys-ical Land Classification (comp.). 1969.Guideline for Bio-Physical Land Classifica-tion. National Committee on Forest Land,Canadian Forest Service, Publication No.1264, Ottawa.

Rees,W.E. 1977.The Canada Land Inventory inPerspective. Canada Land Inventory ReportNo. 12. Ottawa: LandsDirectorate, Fisheriesand Environment Canada.

25

Thie, J., E.B.Wiken, and C.D.A. Rubec. 1986.Ecological land Survey as Basis for Landresource Planning and Management inCanada. In Land and its Uses – Actual andpotential.NATO Conference Series 1: Eco-logy Volume 10. Pages 437-452 PlenumPress. New York and London.

Thie, J.,W.A. Switzer, andN. Chartrand. 1982.The Canada LandData System and Its Appli-cation to Landscape Planning and ResourceManagement.

Tomlinson, R.F. 1967. An Introduction to theGeo-Information System of the Canada LandInventory. ARDA, Canada Department ofForestry and Rural Development.

United Nations, World Commission on Envi-ronment and Development. 1987. OurCommon Future.Also known as the Brundt-land Commission report. Oxford UniversityPress.

Welch, D.M. 1980. ...for land’s sake. LandsDirectorate, Environment Canada, Cata-logue No. En 72-6/1980E: ISBN 0-660-10544-6. Page 12.

HO R I Z O N S V O L U M E 1 0 N U M B E R 4

GeoConnections is a national project currently being ledbyNatural Resources Canada that aims to help decision-makers tackle some of Canada’s most pressing chal-lenges through the use of geomatics. “Geomatics” refersto gathering, storing, processing, and delivering geo-graphic information in sophisticated and interactivemapping systems. MapQuest™ and Google Earth™are great examples of geomatics at work. GeoConnec-tions advances the use of geomatics by supporting andexpanding the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastruc-ture (CGDI), the system responsible for formalizing thestructure and process for organizing, using and sharinggeospatial data and services in Canada.To date GeoCon-nections has assisted decisionmakers with issues rangingfrom public safety and health, to the environment andsustainable development.

Governments at all levels are implementing comprehen-sive approaches to managing landscapes, ecosystems,watersheds, coastal zones, oceans, etc. Integrated land-scape management (ILM) is often used to capture theseholistic approaches. ILM is inherently a “place-based”approach that lends itself well to the use of use geospa-tial data and geomatics technologies, especially whenused in conjunction with forecasting and modeling

programs. Integrating the use of geomatics when dealingwith place-based issues has contributed to better environ-mental assessment and land-use planning. For examplethe Nova Scotia Department of Environment has devel-oped an online geomatics project-planning and decision-making tool to improve provincial environmentalassessments (EAs). Similarly, Indian andNorthernAffairsCanada in collaboration with the Government of theNorthwest Territories have created the Mackenzie GasProject (MGP) and the Mackenzie Gas Portal, makingdiverse government place-based data available to supportdecision-making associated with the pipeline develop-ment.

Geomatics technologies and geospatial data are key pil-lars to the successful delivery of place-based integratedmanagement. As the use of placed-based approachesincreases there will be a corresponding increase in expec-tation of accuracy, currency and reliability of geospatialdata from authoritative sources. There will also be ademand that geospatial data be easily integrated and ana-lyzed without specialized expertise making projects likeGeoConnections and IMAGINE Canada all the moreimportant.

The GeoConnections Program and Place-Based Approaches to LandscapeManagement

Amore detailed description of this initiative can be found on the Policy Research Initiative web site at <www.pri-prp.gc.ca>.