I will. Thank you.
In Canada, we have the unusual situation of having over 90% public ownership of forests, yet having private industry largely responsible for harvesting and management, regulated by provincial forest tenure arrangements. This situation implies that the resilience of the forest industry and the resilience of Canada's public forests are intertwined. Moreover, with provinces in control of forest tenures, there has historically been little room for federal policies to influence outcomes.
However, circumstances have changed the situation markedly, which makes the work of this committee of paramount importance.
Central to discussions of forest industry and forest resilience are concerns about the role of climate change in influencing future forests and the role of forests in influencing future climate change. Concerns tend to be focused on the resilience of three sets of values that define sustainable forest management—that is, economic, ecological and cultural.
Climate change can significantly affect the profitability of the forest industry, because it influences wood supply by affecting ecological processes such as regeneration, insects and disease, and fire. Responding to climate change is also central to maintaining social licence to manage public forests through the effective management of forest resources such as biodiversity and recreation.
Though most discussions of resilient sustainable forest management centre on considerations of climate change, a more recent and potentially more pressing consideration is the resilience of the forest industry—and therefore forests—to changing trade patterns. The new geopolitical order—or disorder—has enormous implications for the forest industry and beyond. Though trade disputes with the United States over software lumber go back to the early 1980s, the level of trade restrictions now being faced is unprecedented and will require a more diversified strategy that will involve new trade flows and alliances.
With provincial governments largely in control of forest policy with forest tenure arrangements, federal forest policy has historically had little scope for substantial impact. However, these new sources of volatility clearly overreach the current scopes of provincial tenure policies. Therefore, we are at the beginning of a new era of federal forest policy, where key issues that face the forest industry are more related to federal jurisdictions than ever before.
With respect to climate change and carbon considerations, policies are needed to facilitate planning for new dynamics of forests associated with changing climates. Part of this approach could consider how to incent forest managers to include carbon flows in management decisions. A prerequisite for such incentives is to delineate which party, i.e., which level of of government or industry, has rights and/or responsibilities to manage carbon. Incentives could come from carbon policy directed specifically at the forest sector or from more general policies that affect numerous sectors, such as biofuel initiatives.
Yet another important component is to support research to better understand how alternative forest structures will function and produce under new dynamic conditions, and how life cycles of carbon are impacted. At a global scale, tensions about the role of forests in climate policy continue to indicate an important role for federal involvement.
With respect to trade disruptions, diversification away from trade with the United States and diversification towards new products such as biofuels will be an ongoing priority. Along these lines, careful attention will be needed to assess potential policy impacts across sectors, such as how biofuel policies may impact forestry operations.
These two emerging areas of challenges have a key characteristic in common that suggests an increasing role for federal forest policy—neither respect provincial boundaries. Trade considerations are obviously so, but as a case in point for climate change issues, consider the case of wildfire, which has largely been a provincial government responsibility. The fire in Jasper National Park highlighted the need for more coordination among federal, provincial and municipal governments. Moreover, with indigenous peoples disproportionately influenced by wildfires, consultation with these governments becomes even more important.
In summary, Canada's forest industry and forests are being increasingly challenged by emerging sources of volatility at unprecedented scales. These larger scales point towards an increasing importance in federal forest policy. However, for the federal government response to be effective, it will be vital that this emerging situation does not result in new attempts at power shifts in forest governance within and among provincial and federal policy-makers and indigenous peoples. Instead, a new era of co-operation and coordination over multiple scales of government will be necessary.
Thank you.
