Thanks to Ellen Pond for submitting this aerial view of Kimberley, home to a CIT pilot project on visualizing climate change scenarios. A review of the project will be featured in the May 2009 issue of the CIT Information Resource.
Welcome to the fourth issue of the Communities in Transition Information Resource! We’re starting to get some feedback from you. What we’re hearing tells us that, while there need to be some changes (we’ll probably always being in some kind of ‘transition’ ourselves), we are providing an important service.
That’s good to hear. It’s also consistent with what CIT is about, and what the Real Estate Foundation of BC is about. ... Keep your comments coming. Post your comments, or contact Foundation staff directly . The conversation about land use practices and conservation that we’re committed to supporting gets stronger and deeper with your participation. (more at... )
IN THE MARCH 2009 ISSUE:
Learning from Reversing the Tide: A Conversation with Victor Cumming
by hans peter meyer
"Communities and businesses involved in the forest or wood sector have been operating in a policy context that doesn't encourage local or regional solutions using forestry as an economic driver. This is based on an assumption that entrepreneurs will look after things, that they will create and embrace the opportunities. The consequence of following this assumption, however, is that we've seen the centralizing of capital, and a centralizing of control over the Annual Allowable Cut. This doesn't leave much room for community based development or even small business development. The opportunity and the complexity that a larger regional approach could address is lost because the current provincial government isn’t interested, and because of the limited sub-regional focus that municipalities, CFDCs, and RDs take in their economic development activities." (more at.... )
Community and Sustainability: The Conversation Today
by Tim Pringle
"Has the market slowdown had an impact on the conversation? Yes. In some ways it's underlining what northern communities have been learning over the past decade: that a community's ability to survive is more than a question of economics. From Dawson Creek to the South Okanagan, to the Comox Valley on Vancouver Island I'm seeing and hearing more support for the ecological viewpoint than ever. (more at... )
Launch of "new" Water Balance Model earns Award and 300 new Subscribers in 2009
by Kim A. Stephens
The Water Balance Model (WBM) ... is the professional computational and communication backbone that will help local governments achieve the sustainable reality of implementing best practices the greening of the man-made environment. (more at... )
Speaking About Trees...
by hans peter meyer
Our relations to trees and forests is complex. The presence of our settlements on the East Coast of Vancouver Island is a testament to the richness that the trees have given us. We would do well to speak more of and about the trees, the forests, and how we sustain them, that we may be sustained. (more at... )
Green Values Vancouver Island
...[M]any communities are struggling to deal effectively with the pressures of growth and development. GVVI is envisioned as a way to support local public, [conservation & stewardship sector], and private sector leadership and to advance the level of development practices on the Island towards sustainability. (more at... )
ABOUT COMMUNITIES IN TRANSITION
If you're new to CIT, go to www.communitytransition.org/about for background on this Special Program of the Real Estate Foundation of BC.
For more information regarding CIT applications and projects please contact Jen McCaffrey, CIT Coordinator with the Real Estate Foundation of BC at info@communitytransition.org or 604-688-6800 /1-866-912-6800.
We look forward to sharing these resources with you. We welcome your suggestions as to how we can be more effective in communicating with you and your peers.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CIT SITE IS STILL IN DEVELOPMENT.
We are making a number of changes to make the site more functional as a place of conversation. We hope to see these changes in place within about four months. In the meantime, keep the conversation going:
* let us know how we’re doing
* let us know where you think we should be putting our attention
* give our writers and researchers feedback on the conversations they’re engaged in.
You can email me directly at "editor (at) communtytransition.org". You can also contact Jen, Tim, or Karin Kirkpatrick (Executive Director at the Real Estate Foundation as of November 1st) through the Foundation.
hans peter meyer
CIT Information Resource Editor & Writer
editor (at) communitytransition.org
IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO RECEIVE CIT RELATED EMAILS, please let us know with an email to info@communitytransition.org marked "REMOVE" in the subject header.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Editorial Notes, March 19, 2009
Welcome to the fourth issue of the Communities in Transition Information Resource! We’re starting to get some feedback from you. What we’re hearing tells us that, while there need to be some changes (we’ll probably always being in some kind of ‘transition’ ourselves), we are providing an important service.
That’s good to hear. It’s also consistent with what CIT is about, and what the Real Estate Foundation of BC is about. We surveyed land use practitioners in 2007 about the Foundation’s 20 year legacy, and many pointed to the success of a practice that emphasizes sharing research, resources, and information. The CIT Information Resource is an intentional extension of that practice. Keep your comments coming. Post your comments, or contact Foundation staff directly . The conversation about land use practices and conservation that we’re committed to supporting gets stronger and deeper with your participation.
The breadth of this conversation is a testament to the complexity with which BC communities understand their relationship to the land base. This issue gives a taste of that diversity. Our “cover picture” comes from Kimberley, which is hosting an important pilot project on visualizing climate change scenarios. (In our May issue we’ll feature a report on several current projects, including this one in Kimberley and the province-wide “Smart Planning” initiative.) Our feature article focuses on learnings from the October 2008 Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George. The conversation with long-time community economic development practitioner Victor Cumming points to challenges that face rural communities across the province, and to some basic, yet challenging, shifts that need to happen for community sustainability. For over 20 years Tim Pringle has been listening to and participating in the “conversation” about sustainability that’s been taking shape in BC’s communities. His article gives a snapshot of the current state of that “conversation,” drawing on the Foundation’s work in Northern BC, and on what he’s hearing from BC communities post-market collapse.
Kim Stephens returns to the CIT Information Resource with more news about ‘design with nature’ approaches to community, land development, and water management. This time he brings an overview of the Water Balance Model (WBM). Revamped towards the end of 2008, the “new” WBM has earned an award -- and is quickly attracting new municipal participation and application. One of our editorial team described Kim’s treatment as the best overview she’s come across.
A column on forests, conservation, and land use on Vancouver Island touches on challenges facing many Island communities with an historic forest economy. It is important to stress that while the opinions expressed in this, or other, editorial columns are those of the editor, they are not necessarily expressive of CIT or the Real Estate Foundation policy. Instead, they are intended as a spur to dialogue on important issues facing rural communities in BC. We encourage you, as practitioners in community, and as readers of this CIT Information Resource, to continue the conversation about community, values, and change. Please use the comment forms on this site. Or send us your ‘letters to the editor.’ Tell us what you think about the editor’s opinions - or those of any other writer here at CIT!
Finally, we’ve posted an important backgrounder to the Foundation’s Green Values Vancouver Island (GVVI) initiative. As Tim points out in his article, GVVI is one of those instances where the Foundation is taking a strong role in advancing sustainable land use practices.
Finally, it is our editorial policy to encourage the use of the materials published through the CIT Information Resource. We hope that you, as readers and as practitioners in community transition, will take what you like here, reference it, and share it for educational and non-commercial purpose. We only ask that you let us know how you are using it, even if it’s just to circulate an article in the office or amongst friends. We look forward to hearing from you!
hans peter meyer
Editor, Communities in Transition Information Resource
editor (at) communitytransition.org
That’s good to hear. It’s also consistent with what CIT is about, and what the Real Estate Foundation of BC is about. We surveyed land use practitioners in 2007 about the Foundation’s 20 year legacy, and many pointed to the success of a practice that emphasizes sharing research, resources, and information. The CIT Information Resource is an intentional extension of that practice. Keep your comments coming. Post your comments, or contact Foundation staff directly . The conversation about land use practices and conservation that we’re committed to supporting gets stronger and deeper with your participation.
The breadth of this conversation is a testament to the complexity with which BC communities understand their relationship to the land base. This issue gives a taste of that diversity. Our “cover picture” comes from Kimberley, which is hosting an important pilot project on visualizing climate change scenarios. (In our May issue we’ll feature a report on several current projects, including this one in Kimberley and the province-wide “Smart Planning” initiative.) Our feature article focuses on learnings from the October 2008 Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George. The conversation with long-time community economic development practitioner Victor Cumming points to challenges that face rural communities across the province, and to some basic, yet challenging, shifts that need to happen for community sustainability. For over 20 years Tim Pringle has been listening to and participating in the “conversation” about sustainability that’s been taking shape in BC’s communities. His article gives a snapshot of the current state of that “conversation,” drawing on the Foundation’s work in Northern BC, and on what he’s hearing from BC communities post-market collapse.
Kim Stephens returns to the CIT Information Resource with more news about ‘design with nature’ approaches to community, land development, and water management. This time he brings an overview of the Water Balance Model (WBM). Revamped towards the end of 2008, the “new” WBM has earned an award -- and is quickly attracting new municipal participation and application. One of our editorial team described Kim’s treatment as the best overview she’s come across.
A column on forests, conservation, and land use on Vancouver Island touches on challenges facing many Island communities with an historic forest economy. It is important to stress that while the opinions expressed in this, or other, editorial columns are those of the editor, they are not necessarily expressive of CIT or the Real Estate Foundation policy. Instead, they are intended as a spur to dialogue on important issues facing rural communities in BC. We encourage you, as practitioners in community, and as readers of this CIT Information Resource, to continue the conversation about community, values, and change. Please use the comment forms on this site. Or send us your ‘letters to the editor.’ Tell us what you think about the editor’s opinions - or those of any other writer here at CIT!
Finally, we’ve posted an important backgrounder to the Foundation’s Green Values Vancouver Island (GVVI) initiative. As Tim points out in his article, GVVI is one of those instances where the Foundation is taking a strong role in advancing sustainable land use practices.
Finally, it is our editorial policy to encourage the use of the materials published through the CIT Information Resource. We hope that you, as readers and as practitioners in community transition, will take what you like here, reference it, and share it for educational and non-commercial purpose. We only ask that you let us know how you are using it, even if it’s just to circulate an article in the office or amongst friends. We look forward to hearing from you!
hans peter meyer
Editor, Communities in Transition Information Resource
editor (at) communitytransition.org
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Learning from Reversing the Tide: A Conversation with Victor Cumming
by hans peter meyer
Victor Cumming has made Vernon his home since 1992. His 30 years of work as a Community Economic Development practitioner, however, have taken him across Canada, and to live and work in the South Pacific, as well as Southern Africa. In Canada Victor is recognized for his long-term commitment to rural and First Nations' communities, and for his ability to effectively address the big questions in rural economic development. CIT interviewed Victor Cumming as part our ongoing follow-up activities related to the October 2008 Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George. We started by asking him about his impressions of the event, five months down the road.
Victor: The greatest value of the conference was that it brought into focus what is required for rural areas - not just municipalities and their surrounding area but large regions - for successful economic development. It really pointed to the need for BC to join a system of best practices that is proving itself internationally.
CIT: How is this different from what regional districts and municipalities have been doing for 20 years or more through their economic development functions?
VC: There are a number of differences. First of all, regional districts are usually too small to be actual economic regions, and they are most often operating in isolation from each other. The Okanagan is a good example: it’s split into three RDs and three Community Futures Development Corporations (CFDC) within one economic region, all of them with different, sometimes competing economic development strategies. It's even worse in the case of municipalities. They're often right beside each other, competing for the same things, not taking advantage of economies of scale or shared strategies.
Secondly, RDs and municipalities, with very few exceptions, work with a very limited set of tools. Their focus has been on marketing and business recruitment. These strategies do work well in regions that are growing or expanding. In regions whose economies are contracting, which is the case for many rural BC communities, these strategies work very poorly. In these cases the focus should be on business retention, expansion of opportunities based on existing assets, and new equity investment. Local governments’ economic development agencies are not practiced in these strategies, and they rarely hold any equity in anything, or act as front-end catalysts to clusters or economic sectors.
How we approach our natural resources is a good example. In Vernon we have a metal fabricating industry with the potential to grow: the training and the market conditions are very strong in the region; there are a lot of skills here, and lot of different metals available. But there is no local, sub-regional, or regional strategy to build on these assets. It's the same in the wood industry, whether in the Interior or on the Coast. Unfortunately, when it comes to the wood industry, the current provincial government has made it very clear that they don't want to see forestry as a tool for rural development. In fact, they've practically done the opposite. We are now living with the effects.
Communities and businesses involved in the forest or wood sector have been operating in a policy context that doesn't encourage local or regional solutions using forestry as an economic driver. This is based on an assumption that entrepreneurs will look after things, that they will create and embrace the opportunities. The consequence of following this assumption, however, is that we've seen the centralizing of capital, and a centralizing of control over the Annual Allowable Cut. This doesn't leave much room for community based development or even small business development. The opportunity and the complexity that a larger regional approach could address is lost because the current provincial government isn’t interested, and because of the limited sub-regional focus that municipalities, CFDCs, and RDs take in their economic development activities.
CIT: The long term impact of this is showing up in the recent proposal by Vancouver Island’s largest single landowner to turn large tracts of forest land into residential development.
VC: Yes, and that's exactly what happens. The idea of sustainable communities or sustainable incomes for individuals and families is lost to corporate agendas. It’s not new. It’s a pattern that rural communities in BC have experienced a number of times, based on the assumption that "revenue for large scale resource extraction enterprises in rural BC is good for rural residents." But this is looking at it from the wrong end of the telescope, where what is good for the major licensees, for example, is deemed to be good for rural communities. Unfortunately, this perspective fails to understand that when things aren't good for the licensee, the community or region begins to search for ways to 'make things better' for the licensee, rather than asking, 'What can we do to make things good for ourselves and our communities?'
You see this pattern around the world: short term thinking that ties the community or regional economic health to the welfare of a large corporate interest. It looks very good when the corporation arrives, generates employment, and spends. But it doesn't work when the corporation systematically eliminates employment or threatens to leave. These kinds of assumptions about economic development have, unfortunately, been at play in British Columbia for many decades.
CIT: This relates to your comments about local economic development strategies being guided by politicians who live and die by a 3 year election cycle, and that this doesn't match what it takes to do long term economic development. How long do successful rural economic development strategies generally take to unfold and benefit communities?
VC: Ideally, you've got to focus for at least a decade. Identifying opportunities, pulling together business plans, training people for skill sets that require more than a year of training - this is a 4-5 year process. To do a series of these, building on each other, a decade is the minimum. For example, the very successful Kentucky Highlands initiative has over 20, almost 30 years behind it. One of the basic assumptions about business start-ups is that it takes a 5-year time frame to become operational and show success. A regional economic development strategy would see start-ups building on each others' success. You start one up. Within 2-3 years it's beginning to have some kind of impact on the region. Then you launch another. This is a proven process. You can easily take a decade to see real results from this kind of strategy.
CIT: Are you seeing a willingness in BC to work at a larger regional scale?
VC: The beetle action committees in the Interior and the North are seeing the need for this kind of approach, in part because they've been operating on a broader regional level. But in general, there is a reluctance to understand and participate on the part of the provincial government. This is very unfortunate. Almost all of the other provinces are taking this broader regional approach, and they're starting to see some successes.
CIT: Are there any examples of BC communities and regions doing effective long term economic development without provincial participation?
VC: There are lots of bright lights. Which is both a strength and a weakness. It's a weakness because people look at very small, specific projects or business examples and say, 'There's a success.' But the magnitude isn't big enough. We're getting small drops in a large pool. The ripple effect is not big enough for these initiatives to connect for larger impact. Nevertheless, there are very good examples of small, individual projects having a limited larger effect. But unless they are in a bigger system, and they get the scale right, the impact of even these ripple effects is very small.
Kicking Horse Mountain Resort in Golden is an example. This was an idea and a concept from a small mountain community with a community ski hill. It was eventually bought by a larger consortium and turned intoKicking Horse Mountain Resort , which has now become a very large force in the local tourist economy. The community now has an extra plank in its economic system that they didn't have before. This involved a phenomenal amount of community effort and focus.
Another example of what can happen is Revelstoke's forest corporation . The magnitude of impact on the community and region isn't as large as the Golden example, as they harvest less than 10% of the local annual cut. Nevertheless, it's a good example of longer term community economic development and an approach to increasing the value of the natural resource before it leaves the region.
A third interesting project is taking shape in Quesnel around re-use or recycling of waste heat energy. They're just starting to work on a process that is expected to generate substantial benefits starting in late 2010 or 2011.
There are these small sub-regional economic strategies that, when implemented, have had or are having some positive impact. But the scale is limited.
CIT: What kind of impact are you seeing around the province as a result of the "Reversing the Tide" conference?
VC: The people I'm in contact with are far more aware of the issues I’ve been talking about, that these are common problems. They understand that we've got a system-wide, province-wide problem with time frame and lack of regional focus. Historically, the position in BC has been, 'We're doing what everybody else is doing.' But we're not. Other provinces are having far more success with their economic development initiatives.
One of the strengths of the conference was that it brought together some of the sub-regional groups in the North and the Cariboo/Chilcotin. They were in the same room, learning about the larger, regional nature of the problems and the opportunities that are affecting each of them individually. A number of these groups are gathering this Spring to follow up on what the conference raised. The conversation is going to be about how to bring together what we've learned to create large scale regional economic development in rural BC, instead of all acting independently, with each of us putting all of our energy into one-off projects and initiatives that can’t generate the required ripple-effect needed to build longer-term stability in rural communities in the province.
End of Part I: Learning from Reversing the Tide - In Conversation With Victor Cumming
The second part of the CIT interview with Victor Cumming will be published in the May 2009 issue of the CIT Information Resource. In Part II, Victor talks about how the market crisis and the need to address climate change are affecting how rural communities address economic development challenges.
For more information about Victor Cumming and his work, go to Westcoast CED.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009.
We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Victor Cumming has made Vernon his home since 1992. His 30 years of work as a Community Economic Development practitioner, however, have taken him across Canada, and to live and work in the South Pacific, as well as Southern Africa. In Canada Victor is recognized for his long-term commitment to rural and First Nations' communities, and for his ability to effectively address the big questions in rural economic development. CIT interviewed Victor Cumming as part our ongoing follow-up activities related to the October 2008 Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George. We started by asking him about his impressions of the event, five months down the road.
Victor: The greatest value of the conference was that it brought into focus what is required for rural areas - not just municipalities and their surrounding area but large regions - for successful economic development. It really pointed to the need for BC to join a system of best practices that is proving itself internationally.
CIT: How is this different from what regional districts and municipalities have been doing for 20 years or more through their economic development functions?
VC: There are a number of differences. First of all, regional districts are usually too small to be actual economic regions, and they are most often operating in isolation from each other. The Okanagan is a good example: it’s split into three RDs and three Community Futures Development Corporations (CFDC) within one economic region, all of them with different, sometimes competing economic development strategies. It's even worse in the case of municipalities. They're often right beside each other, competing for the same things, not taking advantage of economies of scale or shared strategies.
Secondly, RDs and municipalities, with very few exceptions, work with a very limited set of tools. Their focus has been on marketing and business recruitment. These strategies do work well in regions that are growing or expanding. In regions whose economies are contracting, which is the case for many rural BC communities, these strategies work very poorly. In these cases the focus should be on business retention, expansion of opportunities based on existing assets, and new equity investment. Local governments’ economic development agencies are not practiced in these strategies, and they rarely hold any equity in anything, or act as front-end catalysts to clusters or economic sectors.
How we approach our natural resources is a good example. In Vernon we have a metal fabricating industry with the potential to grow: the training and the market conditions are very strong in the region; there are a lot of skills here, and lot of different metals available. But there is no local, sub-regional, or regional strategy to build on these assets. It's the same in the wood industry, whether in the Interior or on the Coast. Unfortunately, when it comes to the wood industry, the current provincial government has made it very clear that they don't want to see forestry as a tool for rural development. In fact, they've practically done the opposite. We are now living with the effects.
Communities and businesses involved in the forest or wood sector have been operating in a policy context that doesn't encourage local or regional solutions using forestry as an economic driver. This is based on an assumption that entrepreneurs will look after things, that they will create and embrace the opportunities. The consequence of following this assumption, however, is that we've seen the centralizing of capital, and a centralizing of control over the Annual Allowable Cut. This doesn't leave much room for community based development or even small business development. The opportunity and the complexity that a larger regional approach could address is lost because the current provincial government isn’t interested, and because of the limited sub-regional focus that municipalities, CFDCs, and RDs take in their economic development activities.
CIT: The long term impact of this is showing up in the recent proposal by Vancouver Island’s largest single landowner to turn large tracts of forest land into residential development.
VC: Yes, and that's exactly what happens. The idea of sustainable communities or sustainable incomes for individuals and families is lost to corporate agendas. It’s not new. It’s a pattern that rural communities in BC have experienced a number of times, based on the assumption that "revenue for large scale resource extraction enterprises in rural BC is good for rural residents." But this is looking at it from the wrong end of the telescope, where what is good for the major licensees, for example, is deemed to be good for rural communities. Unfortunately, this perspective fails to understand that when things aren't good for the licensee, the community or region begins to search for ways to 'make things better' for the licensee, rather than asking, 'What can we do to make things good for ourselves and our communities?'
You see this pattern around the world: short term thinking that ties the community or regional economic health to the welfare of a large corporate interest. It looks very good when the corporation arrives, generates employment, and spends. But it doesn't work when the corporation systematically eliminates employment or threatens to leave. These kinds of assumptions about economic development have, unfortunately, been at play in British Columbia for many decades.
CIT: This relates to your comments about local economic development strategies being guided by politicians who live and die by a 3 year election cycle, and that this doesn't match what it takes to do long term economic development. How long do successful rural economic development strategies generally take to unfold and benefit communities?
VC: Ideally, you've got to focus for at least a decade. Identifying opportunities, pulling together business plans, training people for skill sets that require more than a year of training - this is a 4-5 year process. To do a series of these, building on each other, a decade is the minimum. For example, the very successful Kentucky Highlands initiative has over 20, almost 30 years behind it. One of the basic assumptions about business start-ups is that it takes a 5-year time frame to become operational and show success. A regional economic development strategy would see start-ups building on each others' success. You start one up. Within 2-3 years it's beginning to have some kind of impact on the region. Then you launch another. This is a proven process. You can easily take a decade to see real results from this kind of strategy.
CIT: Are you seeing a willingness in BC to work at a larger regional scale?
VC: The beetle action committees in the Interior and the North are seeing the need for this kind of approach, in part because they've been operating on a broader regional level. But in general, there is a reluctance to understand and participate on the part of the provincial government. This is very unfortunate. Almost all of the other provinces are taking this broader regional approach, and they're starting to see some successes.
CIT: Are there any examples of BC communities and regions doing effective long term economic development without provincial participation?
VC: There are lots of bright lights. Which is both a strength and a weakness. It's a weakness because people look at very small, specific projects or business examples and say, 'There's a success.' But the magnitude isn't big enough. We're getting small drops in a large pool. The ripple effect is not big enough for these initiatives to connect for larger impact. Nevertheless, there are very good examples of small, individual projects having a limited larger effect. But unless they are in a bigger system, and they get the scale right, the impact of even these ripple effects is very small.
Kicking Horse Mountain Resort in Golden is an example. This was an idea and a concept from a small mountain community with a community ski hill. It was eventually bought by a larger consortium and turned intoKicking Horse Mountain Resort , which has now become a very large force in the local tourist economy. The community now has an extra plank in its economic system that they didn't have before. This involved a phenomenal amount of community effort and focus.
Another example of what can happen is Revelstoke's forest corporation . The magnitude of impact on the community and region isn't as large as the Golden example, as they harvest less than 10% of the local annual cut. Nevertheless, it's a good example of longer term community economic development and an approach to increasing the value of the natural resource before it leaves the region.
A third interesting project is taking shape in Quesnel around re-use or recycling of waste heat energy. They're just starting to work on a process that is expected to generate substantial benefits starting in late 2010 or 2011.
There are these small sub-regional economic strategies that, when implemented, have had or are having some positive impact. But the scale is limited.
CIT: What kind of impact are you seeing around the province as a result of the "Reversing the Tide" conference?
VC: The people I'm in contact with are far more aware of the issues I’ve been talking about, that these are common problems. They understand that we've got a system-wide, province-wide problem with time frame and lack of regional focus. Historically, the position in BC has been, 'We're doing what everybody else is doing.' But we're not. Other provinces are having far more success with their economic development initiatives.
One of the strengths of the conference was that it brought together some of the sub-regional groups in the North and the Cariboo/Chilcotin. They were in the same room, learning about the larger, regional nature of the problems and the opportunities that are affecting each of them individually. A number of these groups are gathering this Spring to follow up on what the conference raised. The conversation is going to be about how to bring together what we've learned to create large scale regional economic development in rural BC, instead of all acting independently, with each of us putting all of our energy into one-off projects and initiatives that can’t generate the required ripple-effect needed to build longer-term stability in rural communities in the province.
End of Part I: Learning from Reversing the Tide - In Conversation With Victor Cumming
The second part of the CIT interview with Victor Cumming will be published in the May 2009 issue of the CIT Information Resource. In Part II, Victor talks about how the market crisis and the need to address climate change are affecting how rural communities address economic development challenges.
For more information about Victor Cumming and his work, go to Westcoast CED.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009.
We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Community and Sustainability: The Conversation Today
by Tim Pringle
Does the sustainability conversation have legs in today’s context? At a community level, there is always the uneasy balancing of economic, social, and ecological priorities. "Inconvenient truths" about climate change, our dependence on natural systems, and the vulnerability of human settlements have driven a significant shift in the conversation towards ecological priorities. Does concern over current financial straits threaten to shift this conversation in another direction?
At the Foundation, we’ve taken the position that sustainable land use practices are important to all land use practitioners, from stream stewards through local government staff, to real estate brokers. Our role has been one of encouraging research, education, supporting new initiatives, and listening to what practitioners are saying. Sometimes, as with the Green Values Vancouver Island (GVVI) initiative, we take a more active role in promoting the conversation. All of this is a slow process of course. It takes time for on-the-ground results to show up. What I'm seeing is that we're on the right track with GVVI.
Fifteen years ago the ecological side of the conversation about land uses and community strategies was just beginning to get profile. Organizations like the Nature Conservancy, Nature Trust of BC, and the Sierra Club were leading the way. But the conversation often has an edge. The core ideas and values were highly contested between the conservation and stewardship sector (C&S) and business and industry. The flash points included Clayoquot Sound, and later the Great Bear Rainforest campaign.
When I look back on where we were I’m encouraged to see the distance we've come. Things like the LRMP (Land and Resource Management Plan) processes have had a significant positive impact. Contesting parties realized that the conversation needed to change, that we needed to find common values, and to work from those. There is a good example of this in the coastal forestry industry. A north coast company is setting a new tone in its working relationship with First Nations, which in turn is having a positive impact on management of the land base. Across the province our conversations about sustainability are quite different from the ones we were having even five years ago. I’m seeing a lot of indicators of positive change as community leaders recognize ecological values as important to the well being of their communities.
Is the current economic situation having an impact on the sustainability conversation in BC's rural communities? Yes, but this is part of a number of things that are happening within that conversation.
One is that over the last decade a growing proportion of land use practitioners, particularly in local government, business, and the C&S sector have become aware that the ‘old business as usual’ isn’t working. Increasingly, they accept that economic gain is not a trump card played before social and ecological considerations get on the table. I’m seeing a growing urgency among engineers, planners, and others to get on with adopting and applying improved practices regarding use and conservation of our lands. Ten years ago I didn't see this kind of urgency and interest. It was hard to even have the conversation about what needed to change.
A second thing that I'm seeing is the redefining of what "sustainability" means for communities, local government, and industry. There are tools, like Smart Growth, for example, that can help some communities or situations move towards a sustainability goal. But that tool doesn't work in all situations. There are developers who are seriously looking for 'green' technologies and approaches, and there are those who use 'green' language and approaches as a kind of wallpaper to sell a product. There is a healthy scepticism, not about the need for sustainable approaches, but about the definition.
Another important change in the context is the role that the provincial government has taken. They have committed to sustainability strategies through things like the Green Cities Agenda and Climate Change Agenda made with local governments.
Most recently, I am seeing northern BC communities search for strategies to help them become more resilient. In October 2008 at Prince George, the Foundation sponsored the Reversing the Tide conference. We heard from communities wanting to focus on understanding their assets – people, land/resources, ingenuity, commitment to community. They are placing sustainability near the top of their agendas.
Late last fall we surveyed a number of land use practitioners about how they were responding to the abrupt slowdown in settlement-related activity. What I heard then, and since, is that many are seeing the slowdown as an opportunity to spend some time on the value questions in their communities. I'm not hearing what I heard a decade or so ago, that there is an either/or choice: either we have "sustainability" or we have "economic survival." There's a complexity now that wasn't apparent 10-15 years ago.
Increasingly, in the local government context, proposals for real state development will go through a more holistic review process that reflects how communities plan for and accommodate settlement change. That’s sticking; it’s not going away. Of course, the economic downturn means less money for developers to propose and local governments to review projects. But this lull doesn’t necessarily mean that planning will slow down.
In northern BC the need to plan for transition has been pressing for a decade or more. Economic sector trends have been driving change: industrial forestry and manufacturing is down; oil and gas have been up. A significant number of households have to consider relocating for employment. Northern communities want to engage in the ‘rural resiliency’ discussion and they’re interested in understanding holistic community change. These communities have, through the pine beetle experience as well as what has happened in resource industries generally, recognized that there are systemic challenges, and that previous economic development approaches are very limited. Victor Cumming talks about this from a community economic development perspective . What he describes is echoed in my conversations with people in the North: They're moving away from a model that relies solely on attracting new business, to one that is based in an asset assessment approach. Who are the people in our community? What kinds of skills do they have, or do they need to develop? What are our natural resources? Our amenities? What is our stock of built infrastructure? I'm hearing community leaders say, 'If we make ourselves more sustainable and 'greener,' if we have a strategy that shows we're committed to these values, we're more likely to hold and attract people than if we don't do that.'
Quesnel and Smithers are good examples of where this kind of thinking is taking shape. Prince George is another. Their Smart Growth on the Ground initiative is bringing the sustainability conversation into the community, influencing how the City is approaching its planning challenges. In both Smithers and Quesnel I'm seeing the community taking the position that they need to set their values first, and that appropriate economic stimulation will follow. They're not using the old model, where a community tries to do everything possible to suit an outside investor. I think that's a good signal, to see communities taking this kind of position. It'll be interesting to see, in our upcoming community forums, if other communities are taking this kind of leadership.
As Director of Special Programs I'm fortunate to hear and see first-hand some of the big changes taking shape, particularly in BC's rural areas, in the changing conversation about sustainability. The ideas are complex, and situations are often challenging. The importance of ecological thinking, about the importance of natural systems to the economic and social resilience of our communities takes time to show up in real, on-the-ground progress. What's encouraging is to see how many practitioners are now actively engaged in the conversation, looking for ways to take the ideas and make them real for their communities. Has the market slowdown had an impact on the conversation? Yes. In some ways it's underlining what northern communities have been learning over the past decade: that a community's ability to survive is more than a question of economics. From Dawson Creek to the South Okanagan, to the Comox Valley on Vancouver Island I'm seeing and hearing more support for the ecological viewpoint than ever. This bodes well for the larger "sustainability conversation" the Foundation has been involved with since the early '90s.
Tim Pringle is Director of Special Projects at the Real Estate Foundation of BC. Tim was the Executive Director of the Foundation for 20 years, from 1988 to 2008.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Does the sustainability conversation have legs in today’s context? At a community level, there is always the uneasy balancing of economic, social, and ecological priorities. "Inconvenient truths" about climate change, our dependence on natural systems, and the vulnerability of human settlements have driven a significant shift in the conversation towards ecological priorities. Does concern over current financial straits threaten to shift this conversation in another direction?
At the Foundation, we’ve taken the position that sustainable land use practices are important to all land use practitioners, from stream stewards through local government staff, to real estate brokers. Our role has been one of encouraging research, education, supporting new initiatives, and listening to what practitioners are saying. Sometimes, as with the Green Values Vancouver Island (GVVI) initiative, we take a more active role in promoting the conversation. All of this is a slow process of course. It takes time for on-the-ground results to show up. What I'm seeing is that we're on the right track with GVVI.
Fifteen years ago the ecological side of the conversation about land uses and community strategies was just beginning to get profile. Organizations like the Nature Conservancy, Nature Trust of BC, and the Sierra Club were leading the way. But the conversation often has an edge. The core ideas and values were highly contested between the conservation and stewardship sector (C&S) and business and industry. The flash points included Clayoquot Sound, and later the Great Bear Rainforest campaign.
When I look back on where we were I’m encouraged to see the distance we've come. Things like the LRMP (Land and Resource Management Plan) processes have had a significant positive impact. Contesting parties realized that the conversation needed to change, that we needed to find common values, and to work from those. There is a good example of this in the coastal forestry industry. A north coast company is setting a new tone in its working relationship with First Nations, which in turn is having a positive impact on management of the land base. Across the province our conversations about sustainability are quite different from the ones we were having even five years ago. I’m seeing a lot of indicators of positive change as community leaders recognize ecological values as important to the well being of their communities.
Is the current economic situation having an impact on the sustainability conversation in BC's rural communities? Yes, but this is part of a number of things that are happening within that conversation.
One is that over the last decade a growing proportion of land use practitioners, particularly in local government, business, and the C&S sector have become aware that the ‘old business as usual’ isn’t working. Increasingly, they accept that economic gain is not a trump card played before social and ecological considerations get on the table. I’m seeing a growing urgency among engineers, planners, and others to get on with adopting and applying improved practices regarding use and conservation of our lands. Ten years ago I didn't see this kind of urgency and interest. It was hard to even have the conversation about what needed to change.
A second thing that I'm seeing is the redefining of what "sustainability" means for communities, local government, and industry. There are tools, like Smart Growth, for example, that can help some communities or situations move towards a sustainability goal. But that tool doesn't work in all situations. There are developers who are seriously looking for 'green' technologies and approaches, and there are those who use 'green' language and approaches as a kind of wallpaper to sell a product. There is a healthy scepticism, not about the need for sustainable approaches, but about the definition.
Another important change in the context is the role that the provincial government has taken. They have committed to sustainability strategies through things like the Green Cities Agenda and Climate Change Agenda made with local governments.
Most recently, I am seeing northern BC communities search for strategies to help them become more resilient. In October 2008 at Prince George, the Foundation sponsored the Reversing the Tide conference. We heard from communities wanting to focus on understanding their assets – people, land/resources, ingenuity, commitment to community. They are placing sustainability near the top of their agendas.
Late last fall we surveyed a number of land use practitioners about how they were responding to the abrupt slowdown in settlement-related activity. What I heard then, and since, is that many are seeing the slowdown as an opportunity to spend some time on the value questions in their communities. I'm not hearing what I heard a decade or so ago, that there is an either/or choice: either we have "sustainability" or we have "economic survival." There's a complexity now that wasn't apparent 10-15 years ago.
Increasingly, in the local government context, proposals for real state development will go through a more holistic review process that reflects how communities plan for and accommodate settlement change. That’s sticking; it’s not going away. Of course, the economic downturn means less money for developers to propose and local governments to review projects. But this lull doesn’t necessarily mean that planning will slow down.
In northern BC the need to plan for transition has been pressing for a decade or more. Economic sector trends have been driving change: industrial forestry and manufacturing is down; oil and gas have been up. A significant number of households have to consider relocating for employment. Northern communities want to engage in the ‘rural resiliency’ discussion and they’re interested in understanding holistic community change. These communities have, through the pine beetle experience as well as what has happened in resource industries generally, recognized that there are systemic challenges, and that previous economic development approaches are very limited. Victor Cumming talks about this from a community economic development perspective . What he describes is echoed in my conversations with people in the North: They're moving away from a model that relies solely on attracting new business, to one that is based in an asset assessment approach. Who are the people in our community? What kinds of skills do they have, or do they need to develop? What are our natural resources? Our amenities? What is our stock of built infrastructure? I'm hearing community leaders say, 'If we make ourselves more sustainable and 'greener,' if we have a strategy that shows we're committed to these values, we're more likely to hold and attract people than if we don't do that.'
Quesnel and Smithers are good examples of where this kind of thinking is taking shape. Prince George is another. Their Smart Growth on the Ground initiative is bringing the sustainability conversation into the community, influencing how the City is approaching its planning challenges. In both Smithers and Quesnel I'm seeing the community taking the position that they need to set their values first, and that appropriate economic stimulation will follow. They're not using the old model, where a community tries to do everything possible to suit an outside investor. I think that's a good signal, to see communities taking this kind of position. It'll be interesting to see, in our upcoming community forums, if other communities are taking this kind of leadership.
As Director of Special Programs I'm fortunate to hear and see first-hand some of the big changes taking shape, particularly in BC's rural areas, in the changing conversation about sustainability. The ideas are complex, and situations are often challenging. The importance of ecological thinking, about the importance of natural systems to the economic and social resilience of our communities takes time to show up in real, on-the-ground progress. What's encouraging is to see how many practitioners are now actively engaged in the conversation, looking for ways to take the ideas and make them real for their communities. Has the market slowdown had an impact on the conversation? Yes. In some ways it's underlining what northern communities have been learning over the past decade: that a community's ability to survive is more than a question of economics. From Dawson Creek to the South Okanagan, to the Comox Valley on Vancouver Island I'm seeing and hearing more support for the ecological viewpoint than ever. This bodes well for the larger "sustainability conversation" the Foundation has been involved with since the early '90s.
Tim Pringle is Director of Special Projects at the Real Estate Foundation of BC. Tim was the Executive Director of the Foundation for 20 years, from 1988 to 2008.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Launch of "new" Water Balance Model earns Award and 300 new Subscribers in 2009
By Kim A. Stephens
The Water Balance Model (WBM), as an approach to managing rainwater, was first introduced in 2003. It was an impressive step towards applying a ‘design with nature’ solution to a growing problem for many municipalities. A ‘new’ WBM was launched at the end of 2008 to considerable acclaim. It garnered the Premier’s Award for Innovation & Excellence in February 2009 and considerable attention as an important “decision support tool” to help improve the way we develop land in British Columbia.
The response of local governments has been very encouraging. Since the beginning of the year, over 300 individuals and organizations have taken out Trial Subscriptions, with new subscriptions being announced almost daily. The majority of major municipalities in Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley are now members of the Water Balance Model Partnership, and membership on Vancouver Island is growing rapidly.
The Need
The drought, forest fires and floods that British Columbia experienced in 2003 created a teachable moment in terms of how governments at every level view water. The drought resulted in many streams being at or below historical flow conditions; the public water supply was in jeopardy; and a survey showed that over 2 million people were affected, 84 water systems were under stress, and 43 more systems suffered in some degree.
“The 2003 situation highlighted the need to integrate ‘green’ development practices with water resource management,” says Ted van der Gulik, Chair of the Inter-Governmental Partnership (IGP) that developed and maintains the WBM. “But how [were we to do that]? A user-friendly tool was needed to evaluate the hydrologic effectiveness of site development practices that capture rain where it falls. The web-based Water Balance Model is that tool.”
Objectives
The IGP includes three provincial Ministries, (Agriculture and Lands, Environment, and Community Development), numerous local governments from four regions within BC, and three federal agencies. The IGP developed the WBM to support and/or help achieve these community planning objectives:
1. promote a design with nature way-of-thinking,
2. adapt to climate change,
3. reduce our hydrologic footprint,
4. create liveable communities,
5. reduce outdoor water use,
6. reduce rainwater runoff,
7. reduce flooding of agricultural land, and
8. protect and/or restore stream health.
Climate Change Adaptation
The WBM is unique, bridges engineering and planning, links development sites to the stream and watershed, and enables science-based runoff performance targets to be established. The ‘design with nature’ paradigm captures the essence of climate change adaptation. “Adaptation is about responding to the changes that will inevitably occur,” says Lynn Kriwoken, Director, Innovation and Planning in the Watershed Stewardship Division of the Ministry of Environment. “Adaptation is at the community level and is therefore about collaboration. If we can show how to get the water part right, then other parts are more likely to follow.”
Lynn Kriwoken is the Province’s lead person for delivering Living Water Smart , BC’s Water Plan. An over-arching goal is to encourage land and water managers to do business differently. The WBM adds depth to Living Water Smart.
About the Water Balance Model
The WBM is an easy-to-use tool. It is able to calculate in minutes or hours what previously took days or weeks, and enables urban planners, drainage engineers, developers and stewardship groups to:
* quantify the impact of development on rainwater runoff at a site,
* assess how rainwater leaving the site affects adjacent areas such as agriculture and urban/rural developments, fish streams or water for human use, and
* select on-site source controls so that, ideally, rainwater that leaves the site would be the same after the development as before.
Since 2003, the total investment to develop and enhance the WBM exceeds $1.0 million, including in-kind contributions for outreach and practitioner education. But no monetary value can be attached to the real benefits to society of an improved environment through reduced erosion of streams, increased carrying capacity of watercourses for fish spawning, increased storage capacity of topsoil to capture rainfall or reducing irrigation water demands during hot summer growing periods.
Subscribers, who contribute annual fees, consist mainly of local governments, but also include universities and consultants. Universities are key because they are training the next generation of planners (who prepare development plans) and local government engineers (who prepare the physical drainage and infrastructure plans). In addition, and thanks to funding from Canada Mortgage and Housing, WBM is now available to all provinces across Canada.
In summary, this tool is the professional computational and communication backbone that will help local governments achieve the sustainable reality of implementing best practices the greening of the man-made environment.
The Water Balance Model for British Columbia is a provincial tool developed under the umbrella of the Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia . Project partners include the British Columbia Water and Waste Association and the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia .
Kim A Stephens, MEng, PEng, is Program Coordinator for the Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
The Water Balance Model (WBM), as an approach to managing rainwater, was first introduced in 2003. It was an impressive step towards applying a ‘design with nature’ solution to a growing problem for many municipalities. A ‘new’ WBM was launched at the end of 2008 to considerable acclaim. It garnered the Premier’s Award for Innovation & Excellence in February 2009 and considerable attention as an important “decision support tool” to help improve the way we develop land in British Columbia.
The response of local governments has been very encouraging. Since the beginning of the year, over 300 individuals and organizations have taken out Trial Subscriptions, with new subscriptions being announced almost daily. The majority of major municipalities in Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley are now members of the Water Balance Model Partnership, and membership on Vancouver Island is growing rapidly.
The Need
The drought, forest fires and floods that British Columbia experienced in 2003 created a teachable moment in terms of how governments at every level view water. The drought resulted in many streams being at or below historical flow conditions; the public water supply was in jeopardy; and a survey showed that over 2 million people were affected, 84 water systems were under stress, and 43 more systems suffered in some degree.
“The 2003 situation highlighted the need to integrate ‘green’ development practices with water resource management,” says Ted van der Gulik, Chair of the Inter-Governmental Partnership (IGP) that developed and maintains the WBM. “But how [were we to do that]? A user-friendly tool was needed to evaluate the hydrologic effectiveness of site development practices that capture rain where it falls. The web-based Water Balance Model is that tool.”
Objectives
The IGP includes three provincial Ministries, (Agriculture and Lands, Environment, and Community Development), numerous local governments from four regions within BC, and three federal agencies. The IGP developed the WBM to support and/or help achieve these community planning objectives:
1. promote a design with nature way-of-thinking,
2. adapt to climate change,
3. reduce our hydrologic footprint,
4. create liveable communities,
5. reduce outdoor water use,
6. reduce rainwater runoff,
7. reduce flooding of agricultural land, and
8. protect and/or restore stream health.
Climate Change Adaptation
The WBM is unique, bridges engineering and planning, links development sites to the stream and watershed, and enables science-based runoff performance targets to be established. The ‘design with nature’ paradigm captures the essence of climate change adaptation. “Adaptation is about responding to the changes that will inevitably occur,” says Lynn Kriwoken, Director, Innovation and Planning in the Watershed Stewardship Division of the Ministry of Environment. “Adaptation is at the community level and is therefore about collaboration. If we can show how to get the water part right, then other parts are more likely to follow.”
Lynn Kriwoken is the Province’s lead person for delivering Living Water Smart , BC’s Water Plan. An over-arching goal is to encourage land and water managers to do business differently. The WBM adds depth to Living Water Smart.
About the Water Balance Model
The WBM is an easy-to-use tool. It is able to calculate in minutes or hours what previously took days or weeks, and enables urban planners, drainage engineers, developers and stewardship groups to:
* quantify the impact of development on rainwater runoff at a site,
* assess how rainwater leaving the site affects adjacent areas such as agriculture and urban/rural developments, fish streams or water for human use, and
* select on-site source controls so that, ideally, rainwater that leaves the site would be the same after the development as before.
Since 2003, the total investment to develop and enhance the WBM exceeds $1.0 million, including in-kind contributions for outreach and practitioner education. But no monetary value can be attached to the real benefits to society of an improved environment through reduced erosion of streams, increased carrying capacity of watercourses for fish spawning, increased storage capacity of topsoil to capture rainfall or reducing irrigation water demands during hot summer growing periods.
Subscribers, who contribute annual fees, consist mainly of local governments, but also include universities and consultants. Universities are key because they are training the next generation of planners (who prepare development plans) and local government engineers (who prepare the physical drainage and infrastructure plans). In addition, and thanks to funding from Canada Mortgage and Housing, WBM is now available to all provinces across Canada.
In summary, this tool is the professional computational and communication backbone that will help local governments achieve the sustainable reality of implementing best practices the greening of the man-made environment.
The Water Balance Model for British Columbia is a provincial tool developed under the umbrella of the Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia . Project partners include the British Columbia Water and Waste Association and the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia .
Kim A Stephens, MEng, PEng, is Program Coordinator for the Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Speaking About Trees...
by hans peter meyer
Editorial Preface:
It is important to stress that while the opinions expressed in this, or other, editorial columns are those of the editor, they are not necessarily expressive of CIT or the Real Estate Foundation policy. Instead, they are intended as a spur to dialogue on important issues facing rural communities in BC. We encourage you, as practitioners in community, and as readers of this CIT Information Resource, to continue the conversation about community, values, and change. Please use the comment forms on this site. Or send us your ‘letters to the editor.’ Tell us what you think about the editor’s opinions - or those of any other writer here at CIT!
Speaking About Trees...
"Mister!" he said with a sawdusty sneeze,
"I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees.
I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.”
The Lorax, Dr. Seuss
I grew up in the murk and mosses of Black Creek, and trees are never far from my thoughts. This week they were front and centre.
First there was the proposal to turn a big chunk of Vancouver Island forest into rural sprawl in the name of shareholder profits. I admire the chutzpah of the big multinational making the pitch. But I shake my head in wonder: in what dark and ancient hole is this corporate head stuck?
We’re talking about our communities’ historical (and perhaps, hopefully, future) source of wealth: some of the best Douglas Fir ground in the known universe. Turning this into rural sprawl-type development flies in the face of all that we're learning about:
• how best to grow our communities;
• the value of natural capital to human settlements;
• sustainability (including the need for long term economic as well as environmental strategies), and;
• the need to adopt a "new business-as-usual" approach to land uses.
I'm not surprised by the lack of imagination. During the past 15+ years the company has been studiously liquidating its inventory of second growth on private lands. Most of these lands sit next to communities feeling huge growth pressures. For speculators and investors, these remnants of the E&N Land Grant still have the sheen of 19th century nation-building promise. 140 years ago, building towns and villages and marketable real estate out of clearcuts was a reasonable strategy. Today, it isn't.
In the early years of the 21st century we’re facing some "inconvenient truths." These forest lands are one of the few leverage points our communities have when it comes to sustaining quality of life. In recent years I’ve done a lot of research and writing about sustainability on Vancouver Island. In most quarters I’m finding little enthusiasm for get-rich-quick schemes built on private forest lands. But, the question remains: Is there any town or city with strong enough policy and leadership to handle this affront to the long term sustainability of Vancouver Island communities? If so, this is a good time for long term public policy to trump short term profit taking.
My second bit of “tree news” is of a very different nature. It comes out of a far-flung conversation I had with a third generation truck logger this past week, as part of an article I’m writing for the coastal forest industry. On the face of it, there is not a sexy industry from a sustainability perspective. Typically, the industry is pilloried as a big part of "the problem." Any conversation about community sustainability on the coast, however, needs to include the industry, if for no other reason than it remains the biggest single contributor to the standard of living all of us enjoy.
But there was more than making money (a big challenge for the industry these days) in our conversation. What was exciting was his attitude to risk and taking unusual approaches to challenging situations. He is taking these situations - locations loaded with environmental and First Nations issues - and creating new ways of doing business. His company's practices are helping to set the terms for what is now called Ecosystem Based Management. His approach to working with First Nations is credited with helping a number of communities move ahead on their social and economic agendas. Most of the private sector, whether in logging or land development, is not comfortable living on this high risk edge. To meet the ones who are is inspiring.
The third "tree" topic of the week came as an invitation to participate in the upcoming April 1st "Celebrating the Lorax" fundraising event. It’s hosted by one of my favourite local NGOs, the Comox Valley Land Trust. I’m inspired by these folks. They’re also on the edge of what NGOs typically do, breaking new ground in how they’re engaging local government and the private sector in creative and imaginative ways to look at land use issues. For this event they’ve teamed up with BC Hydro’s “Caring for the Trees” youth leadership initiative. This honours local kids, and it’ll see a tree planted in Simms Park. Tickets are available at My Tech Guys in Comox, the Green Room in Courtenay, and Dark Side Chocolates in Cumberland. To get a youth nomination form for the "Caring for the Trees" award, email vivian.dean@chislettmanson.com (deadline March 23, 2009).
Trees and forests have been central to my life. My mother was born into the stump farm in Black Creek, the leftovers of the great Block 29 Douglas Fir forest. My father was a logger from the time he arrived on the Island at age 18. Once upon a time I was a treeplanter. Before that, a logger. Now I live in town, and am slowly reforesting my little bit of the E&N Land Grant. I’m not sure if I passed on this love of the forest to my kids. The girls helped me plant a few trees on land I’d logged for lumber and firewood. At 13+, my youngest son is one of the most politically and environmentally astute young people I've ever met. I'm curious how he will interpret "sustainability" in his life, and whether he has an affinity for the forest. At his age, I wandered through the woods of Black Creek, trying to imagine what that great forest once looked like,...
Way back in the days when the grass was still green
and the pond was still wet
and the clouds were still clean,
and the song of the Swomee-Swans rang out in space...
one morning, I came to this glorious place.
And I first saw the trees! (Dr. Seuss, The Lorax)
Our relations to trees and forests is complex. The presence of our settlements on the East Coast of Vancouver Island is a testament to the richness that the trees have given us. We would do well to speak more of and about the trees, the forests, and how we sustain them, that we may be sustained.
- 30 -
Originally published in The Island Word, March 2009
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Editorial Preface:
It is important to stress that while the opinions expressed in this, or other, editorial columns are those of the editor, they are not necessarily expressive of CIT or the Real Estate Foundation policy. Instead, they are intended as a spur to dialogue on important issues facing rural communities in BC. We encourage you, as practitioners in community, and as readers of this CIT Information Resource, to continue the conversation about community, values, and change. Please use the comment forms on this site. Or send us your ‘letters to the editor.’ Tell us what you think about the editor’s opinions - or those of any other writer here at CIT!
Speaking About Trees...
"Mister!" he said with a sawdusty sneeze,
"I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees.
I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.”
The Lorax, Dr. Seuss
I grew up in the murk and mosses of Black Creek, and trees are never far from my thoughts. This week they were front and centre.
First there was the proposal to turn a big chunk of Vancouver Island forest into rural sprawl in the name of shareholder profits. I admire the chutzpah of the big multinational making the pitch. But I shake my head in wonder: in what dark and ancient hole is this corporate head stuck?
We’re talking about our communities’ historical (and perhaps, hopefully, future) source of wealth: some of the best Douglas Fir ground in the known universe. Turning this into rural sprawl-type development flies in the face of all that we're learning about:
• how best to grow our communities;
• the value of natural capital to human settlements;
• sustainability (including the need for long term economic as well as environmental strategies), and;
• the need to adopt a "new business-as-usual" approach to land uses.
I'm not surprised by the lack of imagination. During the past 15+ years the company has been studiously liquidating its inventory of second growth on private lands. Most of these lands sit next to communities feeling huge growth pressures. For speculators and investors, these remnants of the E&N Land Grant still have the sheen of 19th century nation-building promise. 140 years ago, building towns and villages and marketable real estate out of clearcuts was a reasonable strategy. Today, it isn't.
In the early years of the 21st century we’re facing some "inconvenient truths." These forest lands are one of the few leverage points our communities have when it comes to sustaining quality of life. In recent years I’ve done a lot of research and writing about sustainability on Vancouver Island. In most quarters I’m finding little enthusiasm for get-rich-quick schemes built on private forest lands. But, the question remains: Is there any town or city with strong enough policy and leadership to handle this affront to the long term sustainability of Vancouver Island communities? If so, this is a good time for long term public policy to trump short term profit taking.
My second bit of “tree news” is of a very different nature. It comes out of a far-flung conversation I had with a third generation truck logger this past week, as part of an article I’m writing for the coastal forest industry. On the face of it, there is not a sexy industry from a sustainability perspective. Typically, the industry is pilloried as a big part of "the problem." Any conversation about community sustainability on the coast, however, needs to include the industry, if for no other reason than it remains the biggest single contributor to the standard of living all of us enjoy.
But there was more than making money (a big challenge for the industry these days) in our conversation. What was exciting was his attitude to risk and taking unusual approaches to challenging situations. He is taking these situations - locations loaded with environmental and First Nations issues - and creating new ways of doing business. His company's practices are helping to set the terms for what is now called Ecosystem Based Management. His approach to working with First Nations is credited with helping a number of communities move ahead on their social and economic agendas. Most of the private sector, whether in logging or land development, is not comfortable living on this high risk edge. To meet the ones who are is inspiring.
The third "tree" topic of the week came as an invitation to participate in the upcoming April 1st "Celebrating the Lorax" fundraising event. It’s hosted by one of my favourite local NGOs, the Comox Valley Land Trust. I’m inspired by these folks. They’re also on the edge of what NGOs typically do, breaking new ground in how they’re engaging local government and the private sector in creative and imaginative ways to look at land use issues. For this event they’ve teamed up with BC Hydro’s “Caring for the Trees” youth leadership initiative. This honours local kids, and it’ll see a tree planted in Simms Park. Tickets are available at My Tech Guys in Comox, the Green Room in Courtenay, and Dark Side Chocolates in Cumberland. To get a youth nomination form for the "Caring for the Trees" award, email vivian.dean@chislettmanson.com (deadline March 23, 2009).
Trees and forests have been central to my life. My mother was born into the stump farm in Black Creek, the leftovers of the great Block 29 Douglas Fir forest. My father was a logger from the time he arrived on the Island at age 18. Once upon a time I was a treeplanter. Before that, a logger. Now I live in town, and am slowly reforesting my little bit of the E&N Land Grant. I’m not sure if I passed on this love of the forest to my kids. The girls helped me plant a few trees on land I’d logged for lumber and firewood. At 13+, my youngest son is one of the most politically and environmentally astute young people I've ever met. I'm curious how he will interpret "sustainability" in his life, and whether he has an affinity for the forest. At his age, I wandered through the woods of Black Creek, trying to imagine what that great forest once looked like,...
Way back in the days when the grass was still green
and the pond was still wet
and the clouds were still clean,
and the song of the Swomee-Swans rang out in space...
one morning, I came to this glorious place.
And I first saw the trees! (Dr. Seuss, The Lorax)
Our relations to trees and forests is complex. The presence of our settlements on the East Coast of Vancouver Island is a testament to the richness that the trees have given us. We would do well to speak more of and about the trees, the forests, and how we sustain them, that we may be sustained.
- 30 -
Originally published in The Island Word, March 2009
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Green Values Vancouver Island
The Green Values Vancouver Island (GVVI) initiative was launched in 2006 by the Governors of the Real Estate Foundation of BC as a way to encourage local governments, landowners, developers and consultants to learn about and implement approaches to use and conservation of land that acheive economic, social and governance objectives while minimizing or eliminating harm to the ecology that underlies the well being of Island communities.
Vancouver Island represents a singular confluence of interests and opportunities. In a province comprised mostly of publicly held lands, the south-western quarter of the Island has a relative abundance of large, privately held parcels. This portion of the Island is also the focus of considerable market interest (locally, regionally, and internationally) in real estate and development. As well, communities in the region host a number of well-established and reputable stewardship and conservation (S&C) organizations. Complementing this strength is a growing body of private sector developers and land-owners proposing and building "green" or "sustainable" type projects.
Through the Foundation's historic and ongoing investment in improved land use practices at the local government and S&C levels, it was apparent that many communities are struggling to deal effectively with the pressures of growth and development. GVVI is envisioned as a way to support local public, C&S, and private sector leadership and to advance the level of development practices on the Island towards sustainability.
GOALS
The Foundation's goal with the GVVI initiative is to persuade local government bodies to adopt "green value" approaches when considering proposals for development. As well as serving the ends of community sustainability, the Foundation believes that such approaches serve the long-term purposes/ends of all who work with the land base, from stream stewards to planners to real estate brokers. Effective, long term husbandry of the source of community well being on Vancouver Island demands that all practitioners attend to sustaining the myriad forms of wealth and natural services provided by the land base.
The Foundation will pursue it's GVVI goal through a number of mechanisms. These include:
* Focusing on innovation and success in GV approaches
* Providing research and educational materials to support practitioners and decision-makers in improving GV approaches and practices
* Educating local government officials and staff, land owners and developers and others about GV approaches
* Finding the delivery mechanisms to do this educational work effectively, which is why the Foundation is
o Working with Convening for Action on Vancouver Island (CAVI) on this initiative: a range of educational programs and services provided. The Ministries of Community Development and Environment together with the Foundation fund CAVI.
o Involved with the Gaining Ground Victoria summits: Gaining Ground allows the Foundation to develop "round table" events for an important and interested audience of practitioners
o Ulitizing expertise of West Coast Environmental Law Association and other NGOs.
* Expanding our audience incrementally:
o Local government officials and staff
o Developers
o Stewardship and Conservation organizations
* Co-funding projects: this allows the Foundation to play an influential role, at the same time as it allows the Foundation to be influenced by the knowledge and experience of other partners
TIME FRAME
Influencing local government practices is a process of encouraging and developing leadership. The Governors of the Real Estate Foundation understand that such a process will take time and significant investment of resources. Initially, the Governors have committed to a 3-5 year GVVI program, with a current horizon of 2010 or 2011.
DEFINING 'GREEN VALUES'
Critical to the long term success of the GVVI initiative is a practicable definition of "green values." As a working definition, the Real Estate Foundation of BC proposes that "green value" strategies may include any or all of the following:
* Recognition of landscape scale natural, ecological, and human values; and protection of same. Examples are riparian and wildlife corridors, wildlife habitat, soils quality, First Nations cultural sites, etc.
* Appreciation of watershed ecological values including sensitive natural areas, groundwater recharge areas, flora and fauna species, lands with agricultural use/potential etc. For further information consult Nature Without Borders, The Comox Valley Land Trust Regional Conservation Strategy .
* Green infrastructure approaches to locating development on one or more sites in a parcel of land proposed for development, dedication of parks and natural areas, protection of agricultural lands, retaining rainwater on site (re-infiltration strategies) and water sustainability, etc.
* Use of the "Eight Pillars of a Sustainable Community*" for planning; "these are fundamental to future prosperity, quality of life and reducing the ecological footprint" (of settlement activity).
1. Complete, compact, liveable neighbourhoods
2. Efficient, innovative transportation with options to using automobiles
3. Advancing green buildings and site design
4. Efficient, integrated infrastructure
5. Open space and local food systems
6. Strong and healthy communities with expressed commons values (cultural services, attainable housing, attractive public realm, etc.)
7. Sustainable economic development
8. Progressive and integrated management.
(*For further reference see Approaches to Growth Management for sustainable Communities in the Comox Valley, prepared by Holland Barrs Planning Group & Chislett Manson for the "Comox Valley Sustainable Development Strategy Project.")
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Please contact Tim Pringle, Director of Special Programs at tpringle (at) realestatefoundation.com.
©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2008-2009.
We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)