Governance and Decision-Making in Mountain Areas
June 4–8, 2005
The fifth conference in the Mountain Communities series
News release: Grizzly conservation on the agenda for Banff Centre Mountain Areas conference
Theme
How do we improve governance and decision-making practices in mountain areas worldwide so that they involve stakeholders better, lead to sustainable development and management practices, preserve ecological and aesthetic values, respect tradition and heritage, meet social and economic needs, and reflect a knowledge of best practices?
Structural issues
- Comparison and contrast between mountain and non-mountain areas in terms of factors that will affect governance and decision-making (e.g.: topography, political marginalization, hazard management, proportion of public/private land ownership)
- The complex web of stakeholders, including how to recognize and incorporate the surrounding flatlands’ relationship with the mountain areas
- Governance and decision-making at a transnational level
- Regional, multi-jurisdictional cooperation
- Governance structures in mountain protected areas
Best practices
- Incorporating science into policy-making
- Respectful incorporation of traditional knowledge and decision-making systems
- Getting stakeholder buy in for changes in land management
- Successful examples of stakeholder involvement in the governance of mountain areas, including protected areas
- Voluntary codes of conduct as a method of implementing policy (e.g. sustainable tourism codes) — is this approach successful?
- Reducing polarity in policy discussions
Advisory Committee
- Robert Aitken, mountain consultant, Scotland
- Michael Church, lecturer in geography, University of British Columbia
- Tim Duane, professor of environmental planning and policy at the University of California, Berkeley, author of Shaping the Sierra: Nature, Culture, and Conflict in the Changing West
- Ron Hooper, superintendent, Jasper National Park, Canada
- Daniel Kemmis, director of the Centre for the Rocky Mountain West, University of Montana, former mayor of Missoula, former Speaker of the Montana House of Representatives, author of This Sovereign Land: A New Vision for Governing the West
- David Mattson, wildlife biologist, US Geological Service
Dates and Venue
June 4–8, 2005, The Banff Centre, Banff, Alberta, Canada
Format
The conference began on the evening of June 4 with a plenary session examining the difficult relationship between science and decisions.
Each of the three following conference days included plenary addresses on aspects of the sub-themes. Concurrent case study sessions highlighted examples from mountain areas around the world.
Departure was on the morning of June 8.
Conference Language
The conference language was English.
Thoughts on our theme and sub-themes from our advisory committee
“I see the fundamental challenge in governance as people being able to identify and secure their common interests through formal and informal policy processes, maintaining the dignity of everyone involved.”
— David Mattson, USGS
“There remains a huge gap between the concepts included in the theme statement and the actual objectives of governance almost anywhere. In most places at most times, ‘governance’ is really about power of one group over another, or, at best, about arrangements for more or less equitable sharing of power…”
— Michael Church, UBC
“The fascinating consequence of mountains’ linearity is that the concentration of human use frequently occurs in areas of ecological significance.”
— Ron Hooper, Parks Canada
“This combination of mountain factors physical isolation, timing of settlement, political marginalization, etc. plays out (at least in North America) with a large fraction of land in mountainous regions being held in public ownership.”
— Tim Duane, UC Berkeley
“Now we have North America’s fastest growing region being the one with by far the highest percentage of land that is off-limits to human dwelling. This creates some unique dynamics.”
— Daniel Kemmis, Centre for the Rocky Mountain West
“One of the points that distinguishes mountain areas is the complexity of their interrelationships with surrounding areas, particularly lowlands… stakeholders in mountains include those well beyond the local residents… as the UN Year put it, ‘We are all mountain people.’”
— Robert Aitken, mountain consultant, Scotland