Watershed Management and Sustainable Development: Lessons Learned and Future Directions

This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Watershed Management and Sustainable Development: Lessons Learned and Future Directions Karlyn Eckmanl, Hans M. Gregersenl, and Allen L. Lundgrenl Abstract.-A fundamental belief underlying the direction and content paper is that the paradigms of land and water manage- of this paper is that the paradigms of land and water management ment evolving into the 21" century increasingly favor a evolving into the 21st century increasingly favor a watershed focused watershed focused approach. The logic of using a water- approach. Underlying that approach is an appreciation of the processes of sustainable development and resource use. The increasing recogni- shed management approach as the unit of management tion that sustainable development and sustainable ecosystem manage- has been well documented, and encompasses multiple ment are processes rather than end states, is coupled with an increasing technical and socioeconomic dimensions. Underlying that awareness that these processes are fraught with uncertainty, and that approach is an appreciation of the processes of sustainable cumulative effects matter. ,This recognition opens a number of new doors in terms of participatory adaptive management. Practical strate- development and resource use. While all is not rosy and gies for dealing with uncertainty and avoiding unsustainable develop- nice in the world, we see some fundamental trends that ment include more coordinated policies and programs that link distinct are leading toward a more sustainable management of our political entities; greater flexibility in planning and management; comple- natural resources and ecosystems. menting technical appraisals with socioeconomic assessments; using Greater emphasis also is being given to decentralized, interdisciplinary and participatory planning approaches at all levels; and precautionary monitoring with early warning signs. participatory approaches to land use planning and management, ones that (1) are sensitive to the interests of a wider range of stakeholders, (2) recognize the need to deal in an open way with the tradeoffs that inevitably exist between maximizing production and environmental con- Where Are We Going? servation, (3) introduce novel and more effective conflict management approaches from a sustainability perspec- tive, and (4) recogruze the right of future generations to inherit a landscape that is still productive, both in terms of General Trends in Watershed Management producing goods and in terms of supplying needed environmental services. There is now much greater sensitivity A recent USDA Forest Service report stated: to the positive "externalities" associated with proper natu- "Throughout their history, conservation science and ral resources use: clean and adequate water supplies, sustainable-yield management have failed to main- ecosystem protection from adequate instream water flows, tain the productivity of living resources. Repeated access to biodiversity, carbon sequestration and so forth. overexploitation of economic species, loss of biologi- Lant (1999) points out that there are now more than cal diversity, and degradation of regional environ- 1,500 locally-led watershed management initiatives in the ments now call into question the economic ideas and United States, almost all established since 1990. These values that have formed the foundation of scientific types of initiatives focus on (1) a watershed or landscape management of natural resources. In particular, level rather than small area or plot level planning and management efforts intended to maximize produc- management, (2) interactions between resources and their tion and ensure efficientuse of economic "resources" uses and the impacts of such uses, including downstream, have consistently degraded the larger support sys- and (3) the nonmarket costs and benefits (particularly the tems upon which these and all other species ulti- environmental services) associated with land use. mately depend." (Bottom et al. 1996). These evolving approaches recognize that sustainable land and water management is a process and not an end We learn from our past mistakes and move forward, state that can be defined. This recognition opens a number hopefully, with greater wisdom and experience. A funda- of new doors in terms of participatory adaptive management mental belief underlying the direction and content of this (PAM),including those associated with the model forest program introduced in Canada and now spreading to other countries, participatory approaches used in devel- 'Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St. oping countries, various integrated natural resources Paul, MN management programs in the US., and the ecoregional USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-13. 2000 approaches introduced by a number of groups around the Our past work has uncovered some basic principles of globe. The increasing recognition that sustainable devel- sustainable development: opment and sustainable ecosystem management are pro- An interdisciplina y approach is essential. The sustainable cesses rather than end states, is coupled with an increasing management and use of natural resources involves the awareness that these processes are fraught with uncer- interaction of human society with the biophysical envi- tainty, that cumulative effects matter, and that there is ronment. Awide range of scientific disciplines is required need for flexibility in planning and management. The sum to understand and address the problems involved in of these merging themes leads land and water managers anticipating and solving sustainability problems. to a fundamental conclusion: "Sustainable development" Sustainability is a process, not an end state. Developing is a useful term in political and high-level policy discus- sustainable natural resource management and use re- sions, and participatory adaptive management is a useful quires viewing sustainability as a process, not as an end operational counterpart for management. In the sections result. Policies and programs designed to promote sus- that follow we attempt to weave these basic concepts tainability are faced with continuing changes in physical, together into a view of where we should be going, based biological and social conditions over time, and must adapt on the lessons from the past. to such changing conditions. Sustainability has spatial and temporal dimensions. Sus- tainability policies and programs typically have distinct spatial boundaries within which they are to be applied - a watershed, a village, a state. Yet exchanges and move- Principles of ments of materials, energy, people, goods, and services, Sustainable Development take place across any arbitrary boundaries that may be established. Further, althoughpolicies and programs have fixed spans of activity, their direct results and indirect or Sustainable development can be defined as using water- second-order consequences are likely to continue far into sheds and forests to produce goods and environmental the future. Both spatial and temporal externalities and services that increase or maintain the welfare of people indirect consequences should be anticipated and taken today, while protecting the environment and natural re- into consideration in designing sustainability policies and source base, on which future production will depend, for programs. In doing so, physical, biological, cultural, and future generations (Gregersen et al. 1998).This concept of political realities must be recognized. natural resource sustainability is not new. It has its roots in Distributional consequences must be considered. Changes concerns during the 1800s about perpetuating the forest in natural resource management and use to better address resource base of countries in Europe, and a growing con- sustainability issues inevitably involve changes in who cern about the dwindling timber supply in this country. In benefits and who bears costs in society, both now and in his presidential message of December 2, 1901, Theodore the future. Such changes in the distribution of costs and Roosevelt asserted: "The fundamental idea of forestry is the benefits among individuals and groups in society should perpetuation of forests by use. Forest protection is not an be anticipated and evaluated before decisions are made end in itself; it is a means to increase and sustain the about proposed policies and programs. resources of our country and the industries whch depend Consistency and stability of policies and programs are neces- upon them." (Pinchot 1947, p.190). The president also em- say. Some degree of consistency and stability in the exter- phasized the importance of protecting water supplies. This nal and internal operating environment is necessary. This early vision recopzed the need to sustain natural re- includes consistency and stability in policies and pro- sources in order to be able to meet the present and future grams, and in the availability of funding and capital needs of people dependent upon them. Gifford Pinchot, resources, natural resources, and knowledgeable and first Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, became an influential skilled people. Some change is tolerable, and perhaps advocate of ths conservation philosophy: "The conserva- beneficial if you can adapt to it, but major unexpected tion of natural resources is the key to the future. It is the key changes may inhibit continued

Load more