Communities in Transition Information Resource: George Penfold

Showing posts with label George Penfold. Show all posts

Monday, June 7, 2010

George Penfold talks to CITinfoResource about Rural Development in BC

George Penfold is Regional Innovation Chair in Community Economic Development at Selkirk College in Castlegar, BC. CITinfoResource's hanspetermeyer talks to George about his recent post (written with Tim Pringle of the Real Estate Foundation of BC) for CITinfoResource.

This is part of an ongoing conversation about the future of rural communities in BC at CITinfoResource. George's research and work takes him across the province, and he is a frequent contributor to our work on non-metro BC communities here at the Real Estate Foundation of BC. Most recently, George was in Port Hardy for the bi-annual meeting of the BC Rural Network. CITinfoResource interviewed Maureen LeBourdais of the Fraser Basin Council about the Summit in May.

The RIC at Selkirk College is one of several in the province that have received significan endowments from the Real Estate Foundation of BC. Others include the Chair in Cattle Industry Sustainability at Thompson Rivers University (see our interviews with Dr. John Church and Associate VP Nancy Van Wagoner) and the Regional Innovation Chair in Tourism and Sustainable Rural Development at Vancouver Island University (see the article by Dr. Nicole Vaugeois here). Dr. Vaugeois also posts to her Rural Tourism Development Blog, and more information about her project is available at the Tourism Research Innovation Project website.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Creating more effective rural economic development in bc

by George Penfold

Following the successful Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George in October 2008, the Real Estate Foundation of BC hosted a follow up workshop in March of 2009. Approximately 40 folks representing a cross section of organizations and agencies working in rural BC met in Vancouver. Our purpose: to talk about possible follow-up and next steps.

It was clear from the conference that there are “missing pieces” of rural strategy and programs in BC, pieces that are in place in other jurisdictions and that are having some success in rural development. Over the last year those missing pieces have been discussed. A summary is included, below.

On behalf of the larger post-conference group, I presented this summary at the BC Rural Summit in Port Hardy in March 2010.

Based on the best practices research and the international success stories, the actions required to provide the focus, resources, and tools necessary to ensure that rural regions and communities have an opportunity to reach their full economic potential include:

1. Create a Rural Strategy and Strong Rural Advocates for BC

BC needs a meaningful provincial Rural Strategy and the creation of strong rural advocates within and outside of government. Both the provincial and federal governments must provide additional supportive policies and financial resources to facilitate rural development in BC.

2. Create new Rural Development Catalyst Organizations and Programs in BC

Best Practices from other jurisdictions have demonstrated the critical role that rural development catalyst organizations (e.g. RUPRI – Rural Policy and Research Institute; Rural Development Initiatives of Oregon; etc.) play in increasing knowledge, skills and practices to facilitating rural revitalization and development.

3. Create new Regional Development Organizations in Rural BC

To achieve the critical mass required in today’s global economy, rural communities must strategically collaborate and work at both the local and regional level. Best practices from other jurisdictions have demonstrated the critical role that regional rural development organizations play in rural revitalization and development. Regional organizations do not replace the need or role of local economic development agencies; instead they work at the regional and sector level where the magnitude of impact that is required can be obtained through economies of scale and focused specialized interventions.

4. Create a New Venture Capital Fund and Supporting Entrepreneurial Management Assistance

Venture capital is available in urban areas, but rural entrepreneurs have limited access to that capital and expertise. We need an equivalent fund that focuses only on companies and entrepreneurs in rural communities

5. Facilitate the Strategic Use of Public Lands and Resources for Regional Development in Rural BC

Rural BC communities are culturally and economically linked and dependent upon the lands and natural resources which surround their communities. These lands and resources will play a critical role in their future economic development.

6. Retain and Reinvest a Greater Proportion of Wealth in Rural BC

To adequately address the systemic barriers that limit innovation and economic growth and diversification in the rural regions of the province, rural BC needs new forms of dedicated multi-year financial resources that are controlled by rural regions themselves.

7. Maintain Viable Rural Communities in BC

Given the current economic and population challenges faced by many rural BC communities, a commitment to implement new or enhanced strategies and tools to maintain viable rural communities in BC is required.

If you have any comments or suggestions on these ideas, send them to me at Selkirk College, or to Tim Pringle at the BC Real Estate Foundation of BC.

– 30 –

About the author:

GEORGE PENFOLD is the Regional Innovation Chair (RIC) in Rural Economic Development at Selkirk College in Castlegar, BC and Adjunct Professor at the School of Business and Economics at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, BC. In 2005 the Real Estate Foundation of BC contributed $100,000 to the RIC endowment fund at Selkirk College as part of its support for sustainable community planning and informed development in the greater Kootenay region. George is a regular contributor to CITinfoResource.com.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Local Food and Agriculture: Six Questionable Assumptions

by George Penfold

Over the last few months I have attended several public events in the Kootenay region that have focussed on economic development. Invariably, local food and agriculture is part of the conversation. As I listen to comments, I hear several implicit and sometimes explicit assumptions made about local food and agriculture that need more careful consideration.

1) Local agriculture means local food.
This is a big assumption and one that is most questionable in my mind. Farmers are business people. Unless there is some agreement, through a Community Supported Agriculture initiative for example, I see no reason why farmers won’t continue to sell their products to the highest bidder, wherever they might be located. Food will move from one locale to another, based on market factors, other things being equal.

2) Local food will be less expensive.
Food is energy. As long as we have enough economic and political stability to have functioning markets, food prices will follow energy and the overall food “market” prices.

3) Local agriculture will result in local food security.
Agriculture is always vulnerable to disease, pests, weather, drought, and markets. All crop failures are “local” in the region where they happen, and we are not immune to these disasters.

4) We can expand the agricultural industry under current market conditions.
This will be very difficult. High land values, insufficient returns, lack of access to land and water, lack of skills, insufficient interest in “food” farming – among other things – all stand in the way of expanded agriculture. Strategies such as community supported agriculture, farm gate sales, etc. can help, but many farmers aren’t interested in that form of marketing.

5) Growing local food is ecologically sound.
If BC is only 50% self sufficient in food, and if we maintain our current diet, tens of thousands of hectares currently in grass and trees will have to be opened up to cultivation, and much of it would have to be irrigated. That change would have significant ecological consequence, even with organic or other so called “environmentally friendly” farming methods.

6) Local e.g., "100 mile diet," is the best strategy
Not all areas of the province, or even Western Canada, have equivalent resources in terms of land, climate, and water. The lower mainland and the Okanagan are well off. But what do the folks in Prince George and area do for a full range of food? The best of our lands are well suited for growing fruits and vegetables. Wouldn’t we be better off to grow fruit and vegetables here and buy or trade grain (by rail with peak oil) with the Prairies?

These assumptions and the questions they raise are by no means specific to the Kootenay region. You can find them in many "locales" where food, economy, and community sustainability are being talked about. You'll see them showing up in the food discussion taking place at CITinfoResource.com, or – to cite another region – in the conversation online at Sustainable Food Vancouver Island on Facebook.

Is it about food security?
Although many local food initiatives use the term food security, the need for basic nutrition – think of Somolia or Haiti – is not the issue either now or likely in the future. We do not have a problem with basic nutrition; in fact more of us die from eating too much than too little. We are rich and as long as food is available somewhere in the world, it will be ours, albeit at a higher price when peak oil unfolds.

We have always seemed quite willing to eat well while others go hungry while they watch "our" export food grow in their back yard. I see no evidence that we are inclined to move up the moral ladder to higher ground, especially if we have a crisis. Even if we did move up the moral ladder, or lost import options as a result of oil prices, economic or political instability etc. we are nowhere near having a basic food security problem. When I look at the consumption figures in Canada, it’s pretty clear that by changing our food lifestyle to include less processed grain in the form of meat, dairy, etc., and growing some of our own in our back and front yards, and if we reduced the amount of food we waste, we could be awash in food – especially grain – in one growing season (although we would likely have to develop "adjustment" programs for our dairy, beef and pork farmers, and put more dollars into CIDA to address the international consequences).

Or is it about protecting our "food lifestyle?"
More troubling to me is that some of the comments I hear seem to be about protecting our “food lifestyle,” a lifestyle based on the broadest range of possible choices. This food lifestyle is also highly energy consumptive and very injurious to the environment, land, and farmers in our own country and around the world.

We also seem to want to make sure that we can also have that lifestyle as cheaply as possible. It's more than food lifestyle, it's really lifestyle and food's role in it. Food for many is about status, entertainment, and convenience. Those values are a long way from a value set that would rebuild food and agriculture based on food as an integral part of lifestyle – hobby (gardening), social experience (community gardening, processing), social value (making sure everyone has enough), insurance (investment in food production in case things do go really sideways), and a more general focus on building more resilient regional economies.

Looking in the mirror

Perhaps the food conversation needs to shift focus? Maybe we should be talking less about farmers and agriculture, and more about our personal food lifestyle. This may turn us towards altering our food consumption choices and producing our own food. We need to look in the mirror; we need to look more critically at what is in our shopping carts; and we need to look at our own back (or front) yards, rather than looking across the fence at what farmers are, or are not, growing. That may be a much shorter and more feasible path to food self sufficiency and resiliency.

About the author:
GEORGE PENFOLD is the Regional Innovation Chair (RIC) in Rural Economic Development at Selkirk College in Castlegar, BC and Adjunct Professor at the School of Business and Economicsat Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, BC. In 2005 the Real Estate Foundation of BC contributed $100,000 to the RIC endowment fund at Selkirk College as part of its support for sustainable community planning and informed development in the greater Kootenay region.

©Real Estate Foundation of BC/ 2010. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website for non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Welcome to the March postings of the CIT Information Resource

What's happening in land use and conservation in BC's non-metro communities?  

That's one of the questions that we're addressing with Communities in Transition Information Resource. We're also trying to connect a number of projects and people working on ways to enhance sustainability and quality of life in BC's non-metro communities.

Communities in Transition is a signature program at the Real Estate Foundation of BC. It was initiated in 2004 by the Governors of the Foundation as a way to focus some funding on the land-related challenges faced by rural and small town communities. Over its 22 years the Foundation has awarded 1500 grants for initiatives and projects in communities in BC. Of the 533 grants made since 2004, 10% have been for CIT projects that engage CIT partners and offer replicable services and deliverables in non-metro areas across the province, from Fort St. John to Campbell River.

These projects represent a wealth of knowledge and expertise, not only for the communities affected, but for any and all other communities that can tap into what is happing through CIT. The Foundation is able to extend the reach of this knowledge and expertise by recirculating it through CITinfoResource via our blog, Facebook, and Twitter posts.

The March 2010 posts  
Not all of what happens in our posts is about non-metro BC, however. For example, this month we've got the Foundation's Executive Director, Karin Kirkpatrick, talking about her decision to park her car and use public transit. Karin also talks about how her choices in metro Vancouver are different than those in a rural community, and about the Foundation's keen interest in innovative approaches to land use and transportation issues in these more challenging contexts.

As part of our commitment to extending the "life" and "reach" of real-time events we're posting Mark Holland's Resilient Cities Manifesto, his summary address to the October 2009 Gaining Ground Resilient Cities summit, as well as a followup audio interview with Mark about the Resilient Cities Manifesto and why it is significant. The Real Estate Foundation of BC makes significant investments in conferences like the Gaining Ground summits and the 2009 BC Land Summit. They're important resources for land use practitioners throughout BC. Through interviews and reports (before and after the event), key themes and ideas are re-presented from a variety of perspectives on land use, development, and conservation. CITinfoResource helps these ideas and perspectives reach a broader audience than the 100s who can actually attend the events. Ever wonder what a planner from Cumberland took in at the BC Land Summit? Or what a city councillor from Kelowna or a land trust activist from the Comox Valley brought home from Resilient Cities? These are a handful of examples of how CITinfoResource.com is linking non-metro resources across BC.

Among these resources are the Regional Innovation Chairs (RICs) located in a number of BC's post-secondary institutions. One of these is Dr. John Church, BC's RIC in Cattle Industry Sustainability (Thompson Rivers University, Kamloops). We have an audio post with John talking about his current work and the challenges facing meat producers and BC's grasslands. The Real Estate Foundation of BC has contributed to several RIC endowments, including the Chair at TRU. The work being done by John, by Dr. Nicole Vaugeois (in sustainability tourism at Vancouver Island University – read about it here), and George Penfold (in community economic development at Selkirk College in Castlegar – read his post on BC's rural policy here) is viewed by the Governors of the Foundation as a long-term investment in a range of sustainable land uses in BC.

The Governors have also identified key areas of the province as worthy of special programs. One of these is a high-growth and development part of Vancouver Island. Kim Stephens is Program Coordinator for the Water Sustainability Action Plan for BC. He's also very active in the Convening for Action Vancouver Island initiative that has received Foundation support. In this posting of CITinfoResource Kim writes about the February 2010 Bowker Creek Forum and why it's an important part of water and land use sustainability on Vancouver Island.

Staff CIT project reviews are a regular part of the CITinfoResource postings. This month we feature two innovative First Nations' Comprehensive Community Planning projects, one at Musqueam in the greater Vancouver region, the other at Sliammon north of Powell River. Addressing a range of complex land use, social, and economic issues and involving innovative engagement processes, these projects are, as one participant put it, helping these communities prepare for the "day after treaty."

We close this posting of CITinfoResource with an audio interview with long-time Invermere realtor and past-Chair of the Real Estate Foundation of BC, Barry Brown-John. Barry is familiar with the industry perspective on land; as a Governor with the Foundation he's become an advocate for sustainable approaches that will benefit the long-term health of the real estate industry. In this interview he talks about the real estate market, sustainability, the Kootenays, and his experiences with the Gaining Ground series of summits.

Changes at CITinfoResource.com

Within the coming months long-awaited changes in the Real Estate Foundation of BC website will begin to show up as changes to CITinfoResource.com. In the meantime, we're moving to more regular postings, rather than releasing 5-8 posts every 2 months. We'll still be providing a 6-times-a-year compendium of recents posts (like this one you're reading), but the workflow of producing (and reading or listening to) CITinfoResource posts will be spread out over several weeks.

Some posts to look forward to in coming weeks:

George Penfold (audio) on the March 2010 BC rural development conference in Port Hardy,
Tim Pringle (audio) responding to Kim Fowler's February 2010 exploration of "performance vs. regulatory" approaches to sustainability, and
the second in a series of video interviews with Gaining Ground wunderkind Gene Miller (the first one is posted here).

We think that posting more regularly will make our material more useful. Let us know what you think!

Please share these resources

Social media like our blog, Facebook, and Twitter accounts make it easy to achieve one of our goals: circulating interesting, information, sometimes challenging material to land use practitioners across BC. If you're on Facebook or Twitter, please add us to your lists – and please reTweet and share items that you find interesting and engaging.

We also hope to see your comments and "letters to the editor." Not only do these enrich the conversation; they let others know about your experience, knowledge, and interests, all of which can make the difference to someone working on a project in a community half-way across the province from you.

As I said in the opening, collaboration and sharing of resources are keys to the success of both the Real Estate Foundation of BC and of the many projects and organizations that have received Foundation support over 22+ years. The reproduction of CIT Information Resource articles and materials for non-profit educational purposes is an extension of this approach. In return, we ask that you please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.

hanspetermeyer

Editor,

CITinfoResource 

– 30 –

©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2010. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website for non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Where is BC's Rural Development Policy?

by George Penfold

In my role as Regional Innovation Chair at Selkirk College, I have the opportunity to participate in many great workshops and conferences. Two recent events stand out – the Reversing the Tide conference in Prince George in October 2008, and more recently the OECD conference in Quebec City in October 2009. Both were on the theme of rural development and revitalization. What stood out at both events was the strong emphasis that all other Canadian provinces and other OECD countries place on rural issues and rural development compared to the province of BC.

The Quebec example

In Canada for example, Quebec has a "national" policy that says that the province wants

strong rural areas,
to ensure the survival of rural communities and identity, and
to rethink ways of building on the extensive development potential of rural areas, all in a sustainable way.

These sentiments are backed up with a signed formal rural partnership agreement between the province, municipal organizations, and two province-wide rural interest groups. As all provincial parties have agreed, this partnership agreement will be sustained even if government changes. The main outcome of the Quebec rural partnership is a dedicated funding portfolio. Implementation happens through a regional priority setting and planning process, which in turn leads to a long-term funding agreement between the region and the province. They work with 7 year program time frames and provide support for management of implementation.

This is quite different from what rural interest groups have to deal with in BC. The typical scenario here is a project-by-project pursuit of funding, trying to access federal and provincial programs that seem to be in perpetual motion in terms of priorities, administrative structures, and funding for rural development.

International examples

An international example comes from Scotland. In 1965 the Scots decided to improve social and economic conditions in rural Scotland and to enable rural areas to play a more effective role in national development. They established and funded two regional development boards. In 1991, the development board in Northern Scotland evolved into Highlands and Islands Enterprise. It serves just over 440,000 people and has a budget of approximately $180 million annually. Their current focus is on:

supporting high-growth businesses and sectors (thereby raising growth rates across the area)
creating the infrastructure and conditions to improve regional competitiveness, and
strengthening fragile communities in the region.

To address these goals, Highlands and Island Enterprise (HIE) aims to establish 500 or so business relationships by 2011. These relationships will help businesses develop and implement a growth plan that can be assisted with HIE financial support. In response to the infrastructure objective, HIE has invested in:

wind turbine manufacturing and a related marine energy centre,
centres for health science and marine science, and
a new centre for creative and cultural industries on the Isle of Skye.

To strengthen fragile communities, the emphasis is on:

investment in social enterprise,
the acquisition and development of income-generating assets,
building community capacity, and
stimulating growth.

Another international example comes from Finland, which established (by legislation) a Rural Policy Committee (RPC). The Fins recently announced an objective of developing 100mbps internet access throughout the country. Compare this to BC, where most of our rural areas have – at best – 10mbps service, with some communities still on dial-up.A significant common theme in these examples is a strong national or “upper tier” government statement about the importance of rural regions to the future development of the province or country, and a strong regional development focus along with local development initiatives.

In BC we have no clear statement about the importance of rural BC to the future of the province. We do have the provincial regional trusts (such as the Columbia Basin Trust in the Kootenays and Northern Development Initiatives Trust in the north), and various federal programs (through Western Economic Diversification for example), but these initiatives tend to focus on specific projects, mostly at the local level. We have few regional development organizations, policies, management capacity, or investment dealing with the “big picture” or the types of regional needs and opportunities that are being addressed in Scotland for example. Victor Cumming, Vernon's resident economic development sage, talked about what this could look like here in BC in his conversations with CITinfoResource last year [see CITinfoResource interviews of March 2009 and June 2009].

What do we want for rural BC?

Rural BC also needs to be clear about what it wants. We do have history in BC with regional development in terms of delivery of provincial programs, but little history with regionally managed development initiatives. We've either been too focussed on "local", or not committed enough to make regional initiatives work, or not bold enough to allow real investment in the future. To some extent then, we have what we thought we wanted.

For most of rural BC, what we have is a piecemeal strategy of rural development with local and municipal focus. Rural communities have generally not fared well over the last 2 decades with this approach. Our strategy seems to lack any real rural focus, and has resulted in provincially uneven development. Do we want to continue with this lack luster rural focus and resulting imbalance into the "teen" decade? Is there a willingness within "upper tiers" of government to take the initiative? Is there sufficient desire at at the grassroots and at the local and regional leadership levels to follow the lead of other provinces and other countries to make long-term, systemic investment for rural – and provincial – economic success?

– 30 –

About the author:

GEORGE PENFOLD is the Regional Innovation Chair (RIC) in Rural Economic Development at Selkirk College in Castlegar, BC and Adjunct Professor at the School of Business and Economics at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, BC. In 2005 the Real Estate Foundation of BC contributed $100,000 to the RIC endowment fund at Selkirk College as part of its support for sustainable community planning and informed development in the greater Kootenay region. George is a regular contributor to CITinfoResource.com.

©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2010. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website for non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Editorial Notes: The September, "End of Summer" posting of the Communities in Transition Information Resource

by hans peter meyer, editor

Welcome to the September issue of the CIT Information Resource!

Food

It's appropriate that "food" should be at the top of our posts this "harvest" issue. There's a growing "foodie" culture, at least a part of which is focused on "local" and "organic." We are beginning to realize that Big Food, like so many Big things, isn't always looking out for the best interests of communities. In what has almost become a regular column, George Penfold weighs in with timely insights on the realities of harvest: What does it mean when communities or regions say they want to be self-reliant as food producers? What are the challenges to this "motherhood" topic? George's questions should be asked of every region and community that announces its intention to be Canada's next "Provence" or "Tuscany."

Green Values Vancouver Island
What does it mean to a region when huge tracts of land are moving towards development? This is one the questions Tim Pringle addresses in his current article, an overview of one of the big conservation, real estate, and governance opportunities (and challenges) in BC: the question concerning the future of the highly attractive EN Land Grant lands on the east coast of Vancouver Island.

CIT Project Summary - the Lake Windermere Project
CIT is also about on-the-ground projects addressing issues that affect the day-to-day health and quality of life in BC communities. An overview of the past 12 months or so of CIT grants is provided, as well as a summary of the four-year Healthy Water, Healthy Communities – Lake Windermere project. As project coordinator Heather Leschied indicates, long time residents in the Lake Windermere region are starting to weigh the costs and benefits of amenity-related development, and "are seeing that this has long-term implications for the aquatic health of the system." Foundation project funding through the CIT program is helping to establish baseline scientific data that is then feeding into public education, as well as local and provincial government policy.

BC Land Summit coverage continues
We continue our coverage of one of the significant gatherings of land use practitioners in the province, the May 2009 BC Land Summit. In this issue we include an interview with social researcher Angus McAllister, whose work on "solving for similarity" is helping to shape some new and positive ways of building and re-building communities and neighbourhoods.

Gaining Ground Summit: Resilient Cities, October 20-22
Finally, we conclude this end of summer issue with a look ahead to the upcoming Gaining Ground Summit: Resilient Cities (GGRC09). We interview Gene Miller, the visionary behind the Gaining Ground Summit series on what GG is, and why it's important today. As an aside, it's important to note that while Resilient Cities may be about "cities," the lessons and methodologies apply equally to small communities: in the face of significant and common challenges (ie. climate change), we are all called on to be imaginative, informed, and ready to try new ways of working together, new ways of looking at our resources and our challenges. As Gene suggests, there is a "note of hope and optimism" sounded by the GGSummit series. Something most BC communities – and citizens – would likely enjoy hearing.

Stepping into Social Media at CIT
About half a year ago CIT stepped into the "social media" world with this blog. The CIT Information Resource is now taking some additional steps into other forms of social media. We've just set up a Facebook page, as well as Twitter, Flickr, and YouTube accounts. There's not much at any of these accounts – yet. We encourage you to share your words and images with us. Tag your posts with "#CIT" or "#CITinfoResource" (and, if you're at GGRC09, please tag everything with #GGRC09). That helps us share some of the many inspiring things that are happening, either directly through the CIT program or through the agency of our partners.

Why are we taking these steps? We're hoping that they'll become very useful tools for sharing the insights, knowledge, and experience of creating healthy, thriving neighbourhoods, communities, and regions. For example, most of us can't regularly travel from Vanderhoof or Castlegar or Cumberland to be at gatherings in Vancouver, Victoria – or Prince George. GGRC09 is going to be great. Many of us won't be able to make it due to financial, familial, or work constraints. With "on site" and "live" postings, however, as well as after-the-fact postings of blogs, photographs, and vidoes, we can tap into these events, share our observations and stories, and give these kinds of events a "longer tail" than a 2-3 day event usually has.

What can you do? Please check out and contribute to our social media resources. Leave comments on our blog posts. Send us links to project and event posts – pics, videos, blogs, tweets, etc. We'll be sharing stories about communities in transition, about people making a difference. Help us be more effective in what we do, so that we can be more effective in helping you. Join us online!

Use and share these resources
One of the hallmarks of the Real Estate Foundation's 22+ years is collaboration and sharing of resources. We actively encourage the reproduction of CIT Information Resource articles and materials for non-profit educational purposes. In return, we ask that you please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.

– 30 –

©Real Estate Foundation of BC / 2009. We encourage the reproduction of articles on this website for non-profit educational purposes. Please notify the Foundation and the author of all reproductions, including in-house uses.