Table 1:
First, second and third-tier variables from the SES framework retained for the purpose of this study.
| First-tier variables | Second-tier variables | Third-tier variables |
|---|---|---|
| Governance systems (GS) | GS1 – Policy area | |
| GS2 – Geographic scale of gov. system | ||
| GS3 – Population | ||
| GS4 – Regime type | ||
| GS5 – Rule making organization | Public sector organizations | |
| Private sector organizations | ||
| Nongovernmental, non-profit org. | ||
| Community-based organizations | ||
| Hybrid organizations | ||
| GS6 – Rules-in-use | Operational-choice rules | |
| Collective-choice rules | ||
| Constitutional-choice rules | ||
| GS7 – Property rights systems | ||
| GS8 – Repertoire of norms and strategies | ||
| GS9 – Network structure | ||
| GS10 – Historical continuity | ||
| Actions-situations: interactions (I) → outcomes (O) | I1 – Harvesting | |
| I2 – Information sharing* | ||
| I3 – Deliberation processes* | ||
| I4 – Conflicts | ||
| I5 – Investment activities | ||
| I6 – Lobbying activities | ||
| I7 – Self-organizing activities* | ||
| I8 – Networking activities* | ||
| I9 – Monitoring activities | ||
| I10 – Evaluative activities* |
*Main variables related to adaptive governance. Source: McGinnis and Ostrom (2014).
Table 2:
Second- and third-tier variables of community forests’ Governance system (GS) according to the social-ecological system’s framework.
| Working definition | Randolph CF (N.-H) | Larose CF (Ontario) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GS1 – Policy area | Area of expertise | Multiple uses collective forestland management | Multiple uses collective forestland management |
| GS2 – Geographic scale of governance | CF area | 4047 ha | 11,000 ha |
| GS3 – Population | Total population of CF | 610 (2010) (2 municipalities) | 85,381 (2011) (8 municipalities) |
| GS5.1 – State government | State or provincial government role. (legislative/monitoring) | Significant role: – Oversight of the forest conservation easement – Annual allowable cut forest management guidelines | Moderate role: – Forest management guidelines |
| GS5.2 – Municipal government | Regional and local government role | Significant role: – Land owner – Forest Commission: Orientations and long-term financial management – Planning Board: management | Very significant role: – Land owner, financing – Dpt. of Planning and Forestry: Advisory Committee – Management, Planning – Water protection |
| GS5.3 – Nongovernmental, non-profit organizations | Nongovernmental organization role | Significant role: – Technical and organizational support – Tree Farm System Certification | Moderate role: – Technical support – FSC certification – Aboriginal groups – Forest association – Tourism organisation |
| GS5.4 – Community-based organizations | Community-based organization and users groups role | Moderate role: – Trails and land management | Moderate role: – Trails and land management |
| GS5.5 – Private sector organizations | Private organism and company role | Significant role: – Forestry consulting – Wood harvest – Sugar bush | Significant role: – Wood harvest – Forestry consulting – Sugar bush |
| GS6.1 Operational choice rules | Operational decision-making | Forest Commission (municipal) and forest easement (state) | Municipal land planning and forest service |
| GS6.2 Collective-choice rules | Tactical and strategical decision-making | Forest Commission (5 members – Monthly meetings) (Users groups are consulted once a year) Planning Board | Advisory Committee (12 members – Monthly meetings) (5-year revision of operational plan) |
| GS6.3 Constitutional-choice rules | Legal framework | Town council, State government | Counties council, Provincial government |
| GS7 – Property-rights systems | Property of the CF | Municipal property with State conservation easement | Municipal property |
| GS8 – Repertoire of norms and strategies | Norms, planning and management tools | Forest ordinance Forest management plan (20 years) Forest operational plan (5 years) Bidding and contractual process for logging operations (when necessary) | Land development and protection plan (20 years) Forest management plan (20 years) Forest operational plan (5 years) Bidding and contractual process for logging operations (each year) |
| GS9 – Network structure | Vertical and horizontal partners in management | Multiple horizontal and vertical networks | Multiple horizontal and vertical networks |
| GS10 – Historical continuity | CF evolution | Maintenance of historical free access, progressive expansion, and diversification of uses | Maintenance of historical free access, progressive expansion, and diversification of uses |
Figure 1:
Schematic representation of the polycentric configuration of relations in the governance system of community forest (CF) initiatives. Comparison between Randolph CF, New Hampshire and Larose CF, Ontario.