Cs8 p23 murphy non forest timber products
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
300
On Slideshare
300
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Brenda Murphy, Annette Chretien, Laura Brown With assistance from: Amy HluchyjInterdisciplinary FrameworkGIS Elmira Maple Syrup Festival and WellbeingWork With Aboriginal Producers
  • 2. Draws on Insights From Larger ProjectReports Specifically on Survey Data Fall 2010, Stratford, Ontario International Maple Syrup Institute, the North American  Maple Syrup Council and the Ontario Maple Syrup  Producers’ Association joint conference 200 attendees, 33 respondentsNon‐Timber Forest Product (NTFP) Biological Resources, Products and Services Harvested  From Forests for Subsistence and/or Trade Undervalued, but currently experiencing a renaissance Key component of Indigenous cultures and economies
  • 3. Rural Governance Formal Policies Government Legislation, Regulations, Directives, Policies Informal Policies Local, Customary, Voluntary, NormsAdaptive Capacity Ability to implement strategies that deal with negative  effects and capitalize on opportunities Climate Change Strategies: Both Mitigation and AdaptationMaple Syrup Important Canadian NTFP Social, Economic, Cultural, Ecologic, Aesthetic Value Thesis: Contributes to ‘adaptive capacity’ esp. in rural spaces Who are the harvesters, where are they located? How does  production contribute to  adaptive capacity? Are harvesting practices sustainable? Impact of weather variability and climate change? How does/could governance support/increase capacities?
  • 4. Canadian Industry: •Quebec •Ontario  •New Brunswick •Nova Scotia Ontario Maple Syrup ‘Locals’ Sugar Maple Range Canadian Production 2010: •7.4 million gallons •$280 millionImpact on maple syrup production understudied:•Timing & length of season, quality & quantity of syrup,•Impact of droughts, storms
  • 5. Land Tenure Own, rent, common property, crown landSiloed Government Departments OMAF, MNR, CFIA, AAFCLegislation/Regulation Maple Products RegulationsVoluntary Certification Organic, woodlot, maple productsNorms, Guidelines, Local/Traditional Knowledges Social networking, conferences, workshops, etc.Characteristics of Survey Population High involvement with production (88%) Long time involvement with industry
  • 6. Benefits # of Respondents Provide Opportunities to Meet/Network 28 (85%) Provide Opportunities to Learn New 27 (82%) Skills Conduct Research on Important Topics 26 (79%) Lobby Government on Important Issues 21 (64%)Changes/Opportunities Not at all Somewhat Quite Don’t Important Important Important Know/NANew rules about food safety 0 11 (33%) 22 (67%) 0Proposed new rules about maple 2 (6%) 16 (49%) 15 (46%) 0syrup gradingFiscal incentives to modernize 4 (12%) 15 (46%) 13 (39%) 1 (3%)operationsContinued erosion of government 4 (12%) 14 (42%) 11 (33%) 1 (3%)staff
  • 7. Buying local is good for communities 70%Health benefits of maple products 61%‘Eat local’ diet  58%Trees remove carbon, so should be protected 39%Decreasing Access to help 39%Increasing Level of technology 94% Costs 82% # of taps 73% Level of bureaucracy  64% 82% of Canadians; 47% of Americans Participation in organizations 61% Health of trees 42% Impact of climate change 36% 
  • 8. Weather Less Variable No Change More Variable Don’t Know/Factors Not ApplicableStart of Season 0 5 (15% 24 (73%) 1 (3%)End of Season 2 (6%) 7 (21%) 20 (61%) 1 (3%)Day Temp 2 (6%) 7 (21%) 18 (55%) 3 (9%)Sap Production 1 (3%) 8 (24%) 17 (52%) 3 (9%)Night Temp 2 (6%) 9 (27%) 16 (49%) 3 (9%)Snow Cover 1 (3%) 12 (36%) 14 (42%) 3 (9%)Drought 0 15 (46%) 11 (33%) 4 (12%)Violence, Storms 1 (3%) 15 (46%) 11 (33%) 3 (9%) Canadians noted more variability than Americans
  • 9. Canadians more likely to choose ‘yes’Strategies New Technology 57% Active Tree Management 48%Barriers Uncertainty of impacts 39% Long lifespan of trees 39% Too expensive 35% Don’t know what to do 26%
  • 10. #1. The maple syrup industry contributes to the adaptive capacity and resilience of rural spaces and should be encouraged to flourish in a way that contributes to social, economic and ecological sustainability.#2.  More research is needed to reduce uncertainty and understand the impact of climate change on the maple industry and affected rural spaces.  #3.  Adaptation must be oriented towards strategies that meet immediate needs and long‐term adaptive capacity.#4.  The identification and implementation of adaptation strategies, including knowledge transfer, should capitalize on existing policies, protocols, organizational structures and informal networks.#5. Governance policies should be oriented toward holistic frameworks that break down silos (academic, governmental, societal).#6. Governance policies should be oriented to achieve both mitigation and adaption goals
  • 11. #7. Adaptive capacity will be increased by strategies that are robust enough to achieve sustainability while being flexible enough to meet the requirements of different regions and the farm‐level needs of producers.#8.  Adaptive strategies should capitalize on existing or emerging public discourses, but should shape growth in the maple industry to meet sustainability goals.#9. A separate set of appropriate adaptive strategies will need to be developed by and with Indigenous peoples.