Lauren Abrahams _ Futures in Common? by EMU European post-master in Urbanism at TU Delft

FUTURES IN COMMON? NEW DIRECTIONS FOR SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT IN SHRINKING RESOURCE REGIONS

LAUREN ABRAHAMS EMU THESIS JUNE 2012

FUTURES IN COMMON? NEW DIRECTIONS FOR SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT IN SHRINKING RESOURCE REGIONS

advisors: PROF. VINCENT NADIN PROF. PAOLA VIGANÒ readers: PROF. KELLY SHANNON PROF. JOAQUIM SABATÉ

LAUREN ABRAHAMS EMU THESIS JUNE 2012

* ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my advisors, Prof. Vincent Nadin and Prof. Paola Viganò, for challenging me to think in new ways and through new mediums. I have valued their guidance in the thesis process enormously. A special thank you to all the people in Nova Scotia who shared their time and insights with me, namely: James Boxall, Arthur Bull, David Daniels, Jennifer Graham, Dan Kahn & N. Barrett, Max Lapierre, Bill Oland, Courtenay Parlee, Raymond Plourde, Gretchen Polkhamp and Robert White. I would also like to thank my EMU colleagues, who enriched my experience studying both in Delft and Venice. Finally, I want to thank Ron and Joanne Abrahams for encouraging me through the thesis process – and always. I am grateful for their support during the field work; especially for lending me their car to explore the muddy, back roads of Nova Scotia.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION

2 SHRINKING RESOURCE REGIONS

3 RESOURCES & RIGHTS

4 RETHINKING RESOURCES

i. questions ii. approach iii. structure iv. site

i. what is shrinking? ii. driving processes iii. problem field

i. settlement patterns ii. relating to resources

i. transforming landscape ii. a web of strategies iii. territories of design

5 POSSIBLE FUTURES

119

6 NEW DIRECTIONS

169

7 CONCLUSIONS

177

REFERENCES

183

i. why scenarios? ii. scenario construction iii. scenarios: supply - sustain - yield

1 INTRODUCTION

The sea-swept, broad-forested landscape of Nova Scotia represents both a source of livelihood and a way of life for rural communities, economically dependent on natural resources. The starting point of this research is recognising the host of challenges confronting these resource regions, both in Canada, and throughout the world. The past two decades have witnessed the rise of global processes, coupled with local political, economic and ecological shocks, leading to enormous uncertainty surrounding the viability of resource industries. Consequently, there is enormous uncertainty surrounding the future of rural communities dependent on these industries. Populations are shrinking and aging, unemployment is rising, infrastructures are failing and social services are receding. This climate of instability and decline is putting pressure on existing relationships between resources and rights making it increasingly difficult for communities to sustain livelihoods. New interests in the landscape are emerging, encouraging new systems to manage these interests. In resource regions, where settlement patterns are intrinsically linked to the natural and institutional landscape, these changing relationships have significant implications for spatial development. Despite an enduring commitment to traditional resource based activities, the problems facing rural Nova Scotia put into question the livelihood and way of life of all communities; at issue is the future of entire resource regions.

introduction

i. QUESTIONS This research is interested in the phenomenon of shrinking, occurring across resource dependent regions, with the aim of articulating possible roles for spatial design and planning to address this emerging condition. I take the position that there could be possibilities in rethinking resource values and rights to address the problems of decline. Through an exploration of the spatial consequences of shifting property rights on the physical and perceptual landscape of rural Nova Scotia, this research confronts possible futures for shrinking resource regions. The research is guided by two questions: a) how have changing relationships between resources and rights influenced spatial development? b) how can rethinking the relationships between resources and rights inform future directions for spatial development in shrinking resource regions?

ii. APPROACH Positioned within the EMU design research approach ‘situations, scenarios,’ (Viganò 2012) this research takes a two-fold approach to addressing the issue of shrinking in resource regions. The first aim is to name, explain and describe the problem field. This exercise takes place in the present, looking towards history to better explain current dynamics; using spatial analysis methods in combination with firsthand experiences of the place, through observation and informal interviews. Along the first research question, this close reading of the situation both establishes the existing relationships between resources, rights and spatial development, while simultaneously searching for opportunities latent in the ‘present time’ and in the ‘present territory’ (Viganò 2012) – ‘drawing out’ possibilities. The second aim of the research is to reflect on the present through the lens of the future. Using exploratory scenarios, a long term perspective is taken to test future directions for spatial development through reconsidering relationships between resources and rights. Thinking about multiple futures allows for testing of different outcomes for shrinking resource regions, informed by but not constrained by the present condition. Scenarios are therefore a tool used to expand the discussion field and to explore the limitations and opportunities of present decisions on future landscapes (Mulvihill & Kramkowski 2010; Viganò 2012). source: (top) The Chronicle Herald, 4 April 2012; (bottom) The Chronicle Herald, 5 April 2012 12

introduction

iii. STRUCTURE SITUATIONS

PROBLEMS

The structure of the research follows the situations, scenarios approach. The first part, situations, is made up of chapters 2, 3 and 4. The second part, scenarios, is comprised of chapters 5 and 6.

Chapter 2 names, explains and describes the problem field; developing the concept of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;shrinking resource regionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; by building on emerging research about shrinking territories as a new form of urbanism.

PROPERTIES

Chapter 3 aims to establish the historical relationship between resources, rights and spatial development. Towards understanding the territorial implications of shrinking, it frames spatial development in resource regions as a response to both the natural and institutional landscape of resources.

POSSIBILITIES

Chapter 4 unpacks the changes occurring within the shrinking processes, predominantly shifts in property rights. It spatialises these changing patterns of rights towards identifying possible geographies of intervention.

SCENARIOS

TESTING POSSIBILITIES

Chapter 5 shifts the time horizon away from the current situation and starts to think about the future of shrinking resource regions. Three scenarios are constructed in response to current tendencies and used as exploratory design tools. The following question is addressed: how can rethinking the relationships between resources and rights inform future directions for spatial development in shrinking resource regions? Finally, Chapter 6 reflects on the scenarios, outlining their contributions as a design tool, namely: expanding the limits of the current discussion about shrinking and identifying intervention roles for spatial design in addressing this new form of territorial transformation.

introduction

iv. SITE

D UN

55 000 km2 AT

HALIFAX

NOVA SCOTIA

This research takes as a case study the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia, a peninsula with an area of 55 000km2, is located on the eastern coast of the Atlantic Ocean. With a population of just under one million, the province plays an important role both historically and presently as a sea port. Outside of the main city of Halifax, much of the province is uninhabited, save for a ring of linear development along the coast, supporting hundreds of small communities. These areas remain heavily reliant on resource industries, namely fisheries and forestry, as have traditionally defined the provincial economy. â&#x20AC;&#x192;â&#x20AC;&#x192; Having grown up in Nova Scotia, born in a decade of relative prosperity before the current period of decline, I have been witness to major changes taking place across the territory. Now having lived outside of Nova Scotia for almost half my life, I am increasingly aware of the similar challenges facing resource dependent regions internationally. I have chosen Nova Scotia as a research area for two main reasons. On the one hand, it is a typical, almost diagrammatic representation of the emerging phenomenon of shrinking. It is geographically compact, with only one major metropolitan area,

100km

surrounded by vast territories in which communities rely on natural resources for livelihood. On the other hand, there are many historical, cultural and ecological conditions that make Nova Scotia a unique testing ground. The relevance of these conditions began as an intuition, supported by my first hand experiences with the place. My initial observations were confirmed throughout the research, both by the many people with whom I consulted and through my own analytical findings. Unlike many of the other resource areas in Canada which are very isolated, Nova Scotian communities are, by comparison, well connected. Remoteness in the Canadian sense of the word, inaccessibility by roads, is not applicable here. Yet the experiential sense of isolation in these communities, some less than an hour away from Halifax, could not be more concrete. This resource way of life, in many ways, has remained frozen in time, for decades, if not centuries. Many of the processes of transformation that define other post-industrial areas worldwide are just starting in Nova Scotia. So, from both a spatial and temporal point of view, there is much to learn from a study of the province, relevant both for the future of Nova Scotia, but also in relation to shrinking territories worldwide.

introduction

2 SHRINKING RESOURCE REGIONS

The image of the resourceful nineteenth century Nova Scotian ‘farmer-fisherman-woodlot owner’ – the fabled handiest man in the world (Sacouman 1980) - embodies an enduring ethos in rural areas. For many, the landscape of natural resources remains both an important source of livelihood and the foundation of a way of life. One of Canada’s eastern most provinces, the peripheral position of Nova Scotia on the Atlantic Ocean contributed both to its early settlement by Europeans and its subsequent ‘underdevelopment’ as much of the rest of the country industrialised (Sacouman 1980; Blake 2003). Like many other more isolated areas in Canada, the extraction and processing of natural resources continues to represent the main economic activity for resource dependent communities in Nova Scotia. Marked by periods of prosperity and hardship, these industries have linked communities to the landscape and defined patterns of spatial development – guiding the distribution of people, activities and cultures across the territory. Despite a persisting commitment by many communities to support the viability of resource industries against the global forces that are reshaping the natural resource economy, these regions are facing overwhelming challenges (Millward 2005; Markey et al. 2008; Young & Matthews 2010). As industries atrophy and populations decline, this traditional way of life is disappearing alongside the towns and villages whose livelihoods depend on it. This issue is not unique to Canada. It represents a growing problem in many de-industrialising areas worldwide. However, Canada is particularly affected given that the territory exhibits high levels of urbanisation coupled with a vast, sparsely populated hinterland supporting many communities that are economically dependent on natural resources (Leadbeater 2009). These ‘resource regions’, large and small, have been faced with major depopulation over the past two decades. An emerging body of scholarship is recognising the specific challenges facing entire regions in decline towards developing new approaches to planning and design for territories that are shrinking (Laursen & Tietjen 2008; Markey et al. 2008; Leadbeater 2008, 2009; Laursen 2008, 2011). This chapter builds on the shrinking territories concept with a focus on resource dependent areas, towards naming this specific condition ‘shrinking resource regions.’

shrinking resource regions

i. WHAT IS SHRINKING?

1 In Germany see: ‘Shrinking Cities’ project, 2000-2008 In the US see: (SCRIN) The Shrinking Cities International Research Network, 2004-ongoing

To explain the reasons why resource regions are shrinking, two structural processes are elaborated: globalisation of natural resources, and neoliberalisation of governance. When these ubiquitous processes intersect with the specific natural and cultural landscape of Nova Scotia, the resulting problems are far more complex than can be captured in demographic or economic statistical indicators. Again, building on the shrinking territories research, I develop the term ‘shrinking’ as a comprehensive definition that understands social, cultural and spatial changes as components of a multifaceted, interconnected problem field playing out over a long term time horizon. In resource regions, there is an overwhelming sentiment that life is difficult, it is only getting more difficult and that there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the future. At issue is the very existence of these communities, as shrinking processes threaten to return resource regions to an uninhabited ‘wilderness.’ I suggest that this deep connection with the landscape both defines the problem field and provides a starting point for exploring new possibilities, towards elaborating new directions and roles for spatial planning and design in addressing shrinking across resource regions.

The starting point of this research is asking the question what is ‘shrinking’ and why is it happening? The decline and disappearance of settlements is not a new phenomenon. Cities have always been growing and shrinking. Diseases, wars, epidemics and natural disasters have left their scars on ancient and modern built history. While these factors continue to contribute to the decline of cities worldwide, in recent decades, emerging global processes represent new causes and scales of decline. This has prompted a renewed academic interest in the process of shrinking. Over a decade ago, two parallel approaches to shrinking emerged in Germany and the United States, both of which focused exclusively on cities.1 More recently, this work is being expanded to address the issue of shrinking across entire territories. An important contribution of this research that differs from the previous work on shrinking cities is the notion that territorial shrinking cannot be understood as an isolated phenomenon, but must be placed within a regional continuum in which the dynamics of growth and decline are occurring in relation to one another (Hollander et al. 2009; MartinezFernandez et al. 2012). Across a region, ‘decline might in some cases even be seen as an aspect of growth, whereas the growth of some places influence the decline of others’ (Laursen 2008:12). Against this backdrop of uneven territorial transformation, contemporary research on shrinking is driven by the idea that this widespread phenomenon is not being addressed by planners and designers, still focused on traditional growth based models. There is considerable consensus in the literature that new strategies are necessary to address shrinking as a new form of urbanism. An important contribution of this emerging research looks to expand the definition of shrinking. Much of the earlier work on shrinking focuses exclusively on measures of demographic and economic decline. According to Laursen (2008, 2011) this limits the ability to capture the complexities of regional transformation. Laursen challenges the dominant focus on population dynamics on the grounds that many cities, such as Copenhagen, are experiencing population loss, but are in fact thriving along many other economic, social and cultural perspectives. As Leadbeater (2009), a Canadian resource economist points out, depopulation and outflow are sometimes beneficial to a region. He echoes the sentiment of Beauregard (1993), whose seminal work on urban decline in America suggests that it is not the absolute condition of population or job loss that signals decline, but rather the composition of the conditions within which these losses are occurring. So while it stands that population decline is typically associated with a number of other absolute and relative signs of decline – unemployment, decreased living standards, loss of opportunity (Millward 2005; Leadbeater

shrinking resource regions

2009), on its own, depopulation does not necessarily indicate shrinking. A more comprehensive definition is required. Within the recent scholarship, shrinking is being understood as an umbrella term that encompasses many themes, not all of which are easily measured by statistical indicators. The term is increasingly being used to imply a ‘multidimensional process with multidimensional effects’ (Martinez-Fernandez et al. 2012:213). Demographic and economic changes are only two axes of shrinking, along with other factors such as social, cultural, physical and ecological dynamics. Together, these quantitative and qualitative signs represent an interconnected problem field. Furthermore the sequence of triggers and outcomes can be difficult to discern. This is sometimes referred to as the ‘vicious circle’ which posits that any one change, such as loss of employment, will ultimately exacerbate a range of other demographic, social and physical changes (Millward 2005). Also important to the expanded definition of shrinking is the temporal dimension, emphasising that the process unfolds over the long term. This implies that shrinking territories will go through phases during which the priority issues can change. The ultimate outcome of shrinking may or may not be complete abandonment. What is important to understand is that shrinking influences spatial development in a diversity of ways, both materially and institutionally. Accordingly, new planning approaches and design strategies must be prepared to address the multiple, interrelated dimensions of shrinking in both the short term and the long term. Much of the research on shrinking posits that the ‘urban growth model’ is no longer a valid approach to spatial development. According to Martinez-Fernandez et al. (2012:214) ‘the planning discipline in particular needs to refocus the way that the instruments and mechanisms of city development are applied, so as to take into account the multiple dimensions of urban shrinkage.’ This is echoed in the work of Hollander et al. (2009) who focus on emerging planning issues in light of shrinking. Towards adapting existing strategies and developing new ones, they call for a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of shrinking; how change to the physical and social environment can be conceptualised, managed and ultimately addressed by designers and policy makers. This is a useful starting point to begin an analysis of shrinking in the Canadian context, where the pro-growth orientation in planning is being challenged by increasingly uneven patterns of territorial transformation. Across the country, urbanised regions are growing and rural and remote regions are experiencing significant declines. This process of urban concentration and rural deconcentration constitutes a form of spatial polarisation that is characterising regional development throughout the world. While the overall population of the country continues to grow, and growing

shrinking resource regions

communities comprise almost 80 percent of the country’s population, these communities tend to be larger and in close proximity to urban centres. An outlying 2.6 million people living in smaller, more remote regions are witnessing continuous, often drastic population decline within their communities (Leadbeater 2009). Most of these areas are characterised by an economic dependence on primary resource industries such as mining, fisheries and forestry. According to many in government and civil society alike, these staggering depopulation figures suggest that rural decline is an inevitability; a sentiment being challenged by an emerging body of scholarship focused on explaining and addressing the specific challenges facing resource regions (Markey et al. 2008). RESOURCE REGIONS As Martinez-Fernadez et al. (2012:213) suggest, shrinking is still ‘little understood in all its manifestations.’ This is the starting point for my research, the notion that shrinking occurring in resource dependent areas can be differentiated from shrinking occurring in other de-industrialising regions where the focus has been primarily on urban decline; single industry cities that are unable to recover after the loss of manufacturing. While this theme has dominated much of the shrinking research, recently, there is notable work emerging that is addressing resource dependent areas specifically (Markey et al. 2008; Leadbeater 2009; Martinez-Fernandez 2009). My hypothesis is that resource regions differ from other shrinking territories in one fundamental way; an embedded physical, institutional and cultural connection to the natural landscape. And that this characteristic, which links resource communities to geographically and ecologically specific landscape resources, can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of territorial transformations as well as to defining new directions for spatial development. Building on the shrinking territories research, this thesis addresses the specific manifestation of the phenomenon of decline across resource dependent communities, what I am naming ‘shrinking resource regions.’

ii. DRIVING PROCESSES So why is shrinking occurring in resource regions? As Markey et al. (2008:419) state in their research on rural decline on the west coast of Canada, ‘there are significant external factors that contribute to rural decline. Economic restructuring and the relative power of senior governments within a globalising world underscore many factors of decline beyond local policy control.’ These two driving forces, globalisation of natural resources and neoliberal governance are elaborated to explain the global conditions that are triggering transformations in resource regions worldwide. The following section unpacks these structural trends and describes how they con-

tribute to the condition of shrinking in resource regions in general and how they interface with local conditions in Canada and Nova Scotia in particular. GLOBALISATION OF PRODUCTION While debates continue within research communities about the starting point of economic globalisation there is consensus that the current, more complete state is significantly impacting natural resource industries in Canada and throughout the de-industrialising world. The restructuring of production, distribution and consumption regions is resulting in major reorientations within traditional resource industries such as fisheries and forestry as emerging resource regions compete for a place in the global economy. These deep changes to traditional resource activities are leading to severe reductions in employment and receding investment by federal and provincial governments in struggling resource regions. Canadian resource sectors have traditionally been internationally, export oriented. This relationship with international resource economies has shaped local development in Canada as both a former British colony and more recently because of its position as America’s northern, resource rich neighbour (Young & Matthews 2010). However, as new global production regions open up, the historic place of Canadian products in the international market is being challenged. Another important factor is that Canadian resource industries have focused on high-volume/low-value production. Coupled with the dependency on international markets, many scholars state that these two factors have led Canada into a trap by which secondary manufacturing and research and development has been stunted due to the vast wealth of resources and their historic success in the global market. This is especially true in Nova Scotia where very few value added industries have developed. Reliance on raw or semi-finished products continues to define forestry and fisheries. Attempts to diversify the rural economy have proven difficult leading to the current predicament in which the ‘protracted restructuring’ of these industries has not only failed to diversify the economic base but has also eliminated jobs in farming, forestry and fishing in the process (Millward 2005). Since mid last century, the forestry industry has been dominated by pulp and paper production. Currently, the few mills that have withstood major economic shocks are mainly producing a semi-finished product that is then shipped overseas, mostly to China, for value added work. Thus, new jobs are being created outside of Nova Scotia as mill workers and foresters within the province struggle to make a living. Furthermore, as competition from new regions, namely South American forests, ramps up and Canadians are losing their market share, they are also losing their ability to influence pricing, making an already vulnerable situation more volatile. Fisheries are another good example. In the 1950s,

shrinking resource regions

Canadian fisheries production, of which most is attributed to the eastern provinces, made up five percent of global production. By 2000, this number had dropped to one percent (Young & Matthews, 2010). Unlike forestry, the overall fishery industry in Canada has in fact grown, but not nearly as substantially as other global regions such as Scandinavia and Russia. To compensate for these changes, resource regions are being forced towards even higher volume production; ‘communities dependent upon the moretraditional resource industries (logging - mining - fishing - agriculture) are declining - BECAUSE they cannot find something new to export at a fast enough pace to compensate for the decline in labour needed to export more and more lumber, nickel, fish, wheat, etc.’ (CCN 2004). Given the continued dependence on natural resources, Nova Scotia is becoming increasingly vulnerable to the external forces of global restructuring. NEOLIBERAL GOVERNANCE Along with significant changes to the structure of resource economies the involvement of government in managing rural and resource development is also changing. Neoliberalisation can be understood as the political and regulatory foundation of economic globalisation. Emerging in recent decades, neoliberal governance can be described as a shift from an industrial climate that favoured development and government regulation of resource industries to a neoliberal ideology that organises governance and policy based on deregulation, competition and increased participation by market actors (Young & Matthews 2010). Canadian governments have traditionally understood resource development as an opportunity for both nation and province ‘building’ (Blake 2003). Disparities between urban and rural development were of great concern to the federal government who initiated equalisation payments across the provinces to support resource regions known for their vulnerability to external booms and busts. Throughout the last century, programs were developed to couple resource and rural development with social programs, supporting seasonal work and investing in secondary processing through more centralised policy. Until the 1960s, governments focused policies on increasing productivity in fishing, farming and forestry. This was evidenced by a number of programs in Nova Scotia aimed at entrepreneurial development in resource communities, struggling to survive in the face of low productivity and antiquated equipment. However, this support was short lived. By the mid 1960s, this approach gave way to a focus on manufacturing and urban-industrial growth (Blake 2003). Since then, Canadian policy has been increasingly shifting its orientation away from resource regions and towards urbanisation, often at the expense of peripheral rural areas (Leadbeater 2009). As increased urban

shrinking resource regions

centralisation occurs, investment and resources are being drained from already struggling resource regions. Recent decades have seen the withdrawal of services and devolution of authority in two directions. Firstly, private firms, often foreign, are increasingly engaging in resource development in Canada. These corporations are not being held responsible for traditional obligations to rural communities. As Markey et al. (2008) assert, this political restructuring supported by government withdrawal from development planning has ‘maintained an economic position of resource dependence, while fundamentally altering and lessening government and industry commitments to hinterland communities.’ Secondly, increased responsibility is being downloaded to local governments. On the one hand, this can lead to more community control over resources, but on the other hand, this increases the burden on areas already facing significant capacity challenges. As Pinkerton and Silver (2011:63) point out, the recent economic downturn affecting world markets highlights the ‘dangers of excessive use of market-based regulatory instruments for resource ownership, management, and development which have been increasingly permitted or advocated by federal and provincial governments in Canada and worldwide.’

iii. PROBLEM FIELD When the structural processes of globalisation and neoliberalisation intersect with the specific conditions of resource regions in Canada and Nova Scotia the result has been major demographic changes. As stated above, while population decline only represents one dimension of shrinking, it is a useful starting point to identify regional transformation. Depopulation is not a new issue in Canada. Along with many other international examples, places that exhibit high levels of economic dependency on resource industries are familiar with waves of growth and decline, at the mercy of political, economic and ecological forces. However, in the past two decades, long term population decline has come to characterise almost all resource regions throughout Canada, including Nova Scotia (figure 2.1), leading to the current ‘existential predicament’, being termed the ‘new hinterland economic crisis’ (Leadbeater 2009). Population decline and resource dependence are strongly linked in Nova Scotia where overdependence on resources has been a major issue for more than a century. The continued, long term path of depopulation seen over the last two decades marks a new phase of shrinking where the stacking of social, ecological and cultural challenges seems insurmountable. The areas most afflicted by shrinking tend to exhibit the following characteristics: were never well settled and have very low population density (figure 2.3) and ii) resource dependence remains high (figure 2.4) (Millward 2005).

2 Data source: Community Counts, <http:// www.gov.ns.ca/ finance/communitycounts/>, 2012

Within the last two decades, the total population of Nova Scotia has increased slightly from just under to just over 900 000 inhabitants. At the scale of the province the Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM), the major urban centre of the province, is expanding to form a contiguous growth region, connecting with two nearby towns within its commuter shed. However, the provincial population has remained relatively stable over the past decade, as outside of this ‘central triangle of growth’ the rest of the territory is shrinking. Halifax has grown considerably since 1991, increasing its population from around 330 000 to over 400 000 at a growth rate of 23 percent over this 20 year period. Accordingly, the growth of Halifax is paralleled by decline almost everywhere else in the province. Between 1991 and 2011, 14 out of the 18 mainland counties experienced depopulation (figure 2.2). The average rate of decline amongst the shrinking communities in that period measures over 15 percent.2 The current challenges facing resource regions in Nova Scotia are common to many shrinking territories worldwide; connecting economic, demographic, physical and cultural signs of decline. Prompted by loss of employment in resource industries, as populations dip below critical thresholds, the provision of centralised infrastructure and social services is becoming more difficult, with major cuts by the provincial government to health

shrinking resource regions

pre1631

1631 to 1751

1751 to1871

1871 to 1931

1931 to 1991

1991 to 2011

AX LIF

. 40 pop

> +5% 0 to 5% -5 to 0% -15 to -5% < -15% depopulating areas data source: community counts, 2012 figure 2.1 population change 1991 to 2011 (%)

Population dynamics (figure 2.2): each line represents the population of one of the 18 counties, highlighting the spatial polarisation between the explosive growth of Halifax and the steady decline of the rest of the province. It is interesting to note that the most extreme growth in Halifax happened during the 1931 to 1991 period, aligned with growth in other parts of the province.

figure 2.2 historic population dynamics 30

100km

CAPE BRE TON pop. 10 4 010

VICTORIA pop. 1 550 shrinking resource regions

100km

figure 2.3 population density 2006 (per km2)

Population density: Within the Canadian context, Nova Scotia is the province with the second highest population density in the country. This is due to the relatively small land mass. Despite this claim, the population is very thinly distributed outside of the HRM leading to densities in many areas <10/km2. Half of the province demonstrates densities <1/ km2 and can be considered uninhabited or ‘wilderness.’ In analysing population density, two indicators of ‘urban’ density were used. The Canadian census indicator of 400/km2 appears alongside the OECD standard of 150/km2 to allow for a comparative reading of the territory.

> 400 150 to 400 (Can. rural) 30 to 150 (OECD rural) 10 to 30 5 to 10

figure 2.4 resource dependence 2006 (% total employment)

Resource dependence: can be measured in a number of ways. For the purposes of this research, it is measured along percentage of population employed in resource industries (Randall & Ironside 1996). According to statistics Canada this includes fisheries, forestry, farming, and hunting. Without exact counts, in Nova Scotia the bulk of these jobs are in fisheries and forestry. As a relative measure, the analysis of resource dependence builds on the statistical ranges presented in Randall and Ironside (1996) paper: <10%, 10 to 20%, 20 to 40% and >40%.

> 20 10 to 20

1 to 5

5 to 10

< 1 (uninhabited)

data source: community counts, 2012

100km

data source: community counts, 2012

shrinking resource regions

source: (bottom) Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources (NSDNR) 34

shrinking resource regions

care and education in recent months. This is further exacerbated by aging populations, putting pressure on already stressed services. Where younger generations are remaining, the downturn in resource industries is encouraging an exodus to the local service centres, to Halifax, or even farther abroad to find work. These are problems of the present, requiring immediate action. But beyond responding to short term challenges, these signs of decline raise bigger questions about the future of shrinking communities.

3 See figures 2.3 & 2.4 for ranges of population change and resource dependence used to create the weighted baseline map

CASE 1 1 hr

rs 2h CASE 2

hr s

CASE 3

*HALIFAX

DEPOPULATION 0 to -5%

5h rs CASE 4

figure 2.5 case study selection

< -5%

> 20% 10 to 20%

1.7

DEPENDENCE

2.5

APPROACHING SHRINKING In resource regions, thinly settled and deeply embedded in the landscape, the long term outcome of shrinking processes is eventual abandonment – the complete disappearance of inhabitation. I posit that this prospect, a return to ‘wilderness’, defines both the problem field and the starting point for exploring new possibilities for spatial design in resource regions. I am interested in investigating ways to reframe decline as an opportunity, specifically along a better understanding of the role that resources play in influencing spatial development. According to Laursen (2008: 254), in relation to shrinking across Danish regions, ‘landscape becomes the dominating structure that both develops and unwinds territories. The landscape can be seen as a medium which contains development as well as unwinding and it can be used in rural and urban areas alike.’ I build on this approach, taking the position that the interconnected natural and institutional landscape of resources has defined spatial development in Nova Scotia and that it could contain latent opportunities to investigate new directions and roles for spatial design to address the challenge of shrinking in resource regions. To explain the historic and potential future connections between territorial transformation and natural resources requires a close reading of the landscape. The research is thus structured along two main scales, the scale of the province and the introduction of smaller case study areas. To define the case areas I used the following method: I created a baseline map that weights levels of population decline and levels of resource dependence. 3 From within this isolated group, four areas were chosen, each exhibiting the highest instances of both conditions (figure 2.5). While the sites share the same statistical indicators, they are purposefully within varying distances from Halifax and have varying natural landscape conditions. With the same baseline conditions, the case studies allow for comparison of other forms of transformation. Through the case studies, I address the multidimensional process of shrinking with a multidimensional approach that combines spatial analysis with first hand experiences of the place. These sites are simultaneously ‘territories of description,’ used to establish the relationship between resources, rights and spatial development and ‘territories of design’, grounds to test new directions in shrinking resource regions (Viganò 2012).

shrinking resource regions

100km

CASE STUDY AREAS

figure 2.6.1 case 1

figure 2.6.2 case 2

figure 2.6.3 case 3

figure 2.6.4 case 4

IC A

CASE 1

CASE 2

CASE 4

10km

Case study areas: are all located in the central/ south-western part of the province. While there is considerable depopulation in the eastern and northern parts of the province, and in fact these areas have very high levels of resource dependence and very low population density, to accommodate field work it was necessary to limit the distance between the sites.

CASE 3

shrinking resource regions

3 RESOURCES & RIGHTS

As was established in the previous chapter, resource regions in Nova Scotia are shrinking along multiple themes. These long term processes of transformation are confronting well established patterns of spatial development that define resource regions. In Nova Scotia, spatial development and natural resources have a long, linked history. The occupation and economic patterns established in Nova Scotia from the European settlers in the 1700s persisted well into the twentieth century. Early settlement patterns were defined by the harsh landscape; cold seas, rocky cliffs and densely forested hinterlands limited the locations for permanent settlement while fostering opportunities to work with resources to cultivate the territory in support of growing populations (Bird 1955; Wynn 1987). The resulting configuration is a dispersed linear settlement form, occasionally punctuated by clusters of urban concentration. This chapter aims to describe and explain the existing spatial patterns in resource regions, shaped by two factors of interest to the research: i) natural landscape conditions and interest in resources and ii) systems of formal and informal rights devised to manage interactions with resources, towards addressing the first research question; How have changing relationships between resources and rights influenced spatial development in resource regions? Spatial analyses at both the scale of the province and the case study areas are carried out, through historical periods, to unpack these driving factors and illustrate their influence on spatial development. The natural conditions of the territory are examined and the ways in which the landscape has been used as a resource is outlined. Patterns vary depending on the properties of the resource, the moment in time when competition over use developed and the perception of ecological limits. In Nova Scotia, where fisheries and forestry have dominated, the two industries have very different territorial footprints and have been managed in very different ways. Property rights to land and resources are also the inheritance of historical patterns, varying across the country on account of the significant difference in natural conditions and the different histories of colonisation. Where most provinces control resource development through public or ‘crown’ lands, Nova Scotia is mostly in private hands, on account of its early settlement

resources and rights

Linear settlement form: these panoramas emphasise the linear form of development along the coast. Densely forested hinterlands have never been inhabited, as can be seen in the background of both images - a clear line that separates settlement from â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;wilderness.â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

resources and rights

agenda. This dual tradition in Nova Scotia of public and private management of lands and resources is elaborated towards emphasising the spatial implications of institutional changes on settlement patterns. In illustrating the changing relationships between resource interests, property rights and settlement distribution, spatial development in resource regions is framed along the interconnected natural and institutional landscape.

i. SETTLEMENT PATTERNS The dominant settlement pattern in Nova Scotia is easily comprehensible from even the most basic of road maps. A single highway follows the coastline, crossing the mainland at only a few intervals. The linear figures of the road and coast structure a band of development. This ring of settlement is bounded by expansive bodies of water and bounds expansive forested hinterlands. Hundreds of small towns and villages are represented on a typical map by various sized dots, a cartographic convention that fails to accurately describe the spatial conditions of settlement. In Nova Scotia, contrary to the standard portrayal of communities as separated nodes, ‘you can never see where the edge of town is and you can’t see where the next town starts’ (Pohlkamp 2012, personal communication). Outside of the concentrated urban core of the Halifax Regional Municipality and a handful of planned eighteenth century British towns, much of the province is defined by a diffuse linear settlement pattern, considerably different from other early Canadian villages. Across North America, early settlements usually developed around a central main street. Towns in Nova Scotia differed, lacking a formal ‘centre of gravity’ as settlements organically extended along coasts, rivers and other natural features (Ennals & Holdsworth 1988). This continuous strip of development has varying levels of density; clusters developed, for example, around naturally occurring harbours and important infrastructures that enabled a productive relationship with the landscape. Over time, this band of development has thinned in places, filled in others. Within the last century, and increasingly in recent decades, the more concentrated hamlets have encroached on the hinterlands through two main expansion processes, strip development along roads and subdivision of previously undeveloped lots. However, the bulk of the provincial landmass is virtually uninhabited, a settlement condition that has remained unchanged since its development in the 1700s. The underlying, geometrically irregular structure of lot divisions is also representative of historic settlement processes in which ‘the settlers came before the surveyors’ (Pohlkamp 2012, personal communication). This has led to a diversity of lot patterns that differ greatly across the regions of the province. Looking more closely to the case study areas, figure 3.6

figure 3.1 (top) long narrow coastal lots, (centre) inland lots (bottom) large interior lots 1 dot = 2 new occupied dwellings 1 dot = 2 fewer occupied dwellings data source: SNSMR, 2008; forestry inventory, NSDNR, 2012

figure 3.2 (top) settlement, (bottom) change in occupied dwelling 1996 to 2006

resources and rights

100km

figure 3.3 typical coastal settlement pattern and lot division

illustrates a wide range of lot types and orientations. One common observation is that around the coast, where development is concentrated, lots tend to be much smaller; much longer and oriented to create as many properties with coastal access as possible. Moving inland, the lots become considerably larger and less narrow (figure 3.1). Where there is a semblance of more regular divisions of land, these areas always defer to natural features, such as rivers, lakes and hills, emphasising the importance of maximising the environmental benefits (figure 3.4). Figure 3.7 highlights only the lots that are currently developed with built form, emphasising the fragmented, varying linear concentration of settlement characteristic of resource regions. The diffuse nature of settlement coupled with the relative small land mass of the province differentiates resource regions in Nova Scotia from elsewhere in Canada. While there are many areas that are very sparsely populated and are perceived as being isolated, the geographic compactness of the province ensures that no areas are in fact ‘remote’ meaning that all regions are accessible by roads.1 It is important to distinguish this form of rural resource regions in Nova Scotia from the truly remote communities in the more northern parts of the country that also are resource dependent

data source: NSTDB, 2012; NSCAF, 2012

1 In Canada, there is no official definition of ‘remote.’ It usually is understood to mean areas that are inaccessible by road.

figure 3.4 irregular lot divisions along rivers

and also are facing major depopulation. Both areas risk abandonment as the final outcome of shrinking, as has been evidenced throughout Canadian history with the booms and bust of numerous resource dependent towns. However, in Nova Scotia, because of geographic compactness and the central proximity of Halifax, the restructuring of resource communities takes place within a larger provincial spatial structure. Unlike isolated ghost towns hundreds of kilometres from another settlement, the transforming footprint of rural communities in Nova Scotia transforms the entire province. The regional dynamics of growth and decline are capture in figure 3.2, which illustrates spatial patterns through changes in occupied dwellings. Forms of spatial polarisation can be seen at two scales from this analysis. Firstly, at the scale of the province, the explosive growth of dwellings in Halifax clearly evidences the uneven urbanisation underway over the past decades. Secondly, at the scale of resource regions themselves, there is a mix of abandonment of dwellings alongside increased occupation. This starts to speak to the condition of shrinking more as a process of transformation that takes many shapes, rather than a linear course of decline.

resources and rights

CASE 1

CASE 2

CASE 3

CASE 4

figure 3.5.1 built form case 1

figure 3.5.2 built form case 2

figure 3.5.3 built form case 3

figure 3.5.4 built form case 4

figure 3.6.1 lot divisions case 1

figure 3.6.2 lot divisions case 2

figure 3.6.3 lot divisions case 3

figure 3.6.4 lot divisions case 4

figure 3.7.1 built lots case 1

figure 3.7.2 built lots case 2

figure 3.7.3 built lots case 3

figure 3.7.4 built lots case 4

data source: NSTDB, 2012; NSCAF, 2012

10km

resources and rights

NATURAL CONDITIONS

A. B. C.

200m

figure 3.8 natural conditions

B. A. OCEAN B. MUDFLATS C. MARSHES D. DRUMLIN FIELDS E. FORESTS F. INLAND WATER & WETLANDS

resources and rights

ii. RELATING TO RESOURCES In rural areas where so much is tied to the land and the landscape, much of the shared experience of the region relates to the local environmental history and practices’ - Hamin and Marcucci (2008:469) To explain the current settlement patterns, I look to two influential and interconnected factors that have shaped the dispersed linear configuration: the natural landscape conditions and the institutional landscape of rights to resources. Through the following spatial analyses, organised through historical periods, I aim to establish how spatial development is a direct consequence of the changing natural and institutional landscape of resources. This description of resource regions is critical towards understanding how processes of shrinking are transforming these territories. The historical analysis is organised along six periods of time. Although periodisation reduces the real life overlaps and incongruities of history, it is useful because it allows for the identification of dominant patterns and relate them across time and space (Laursen 2008). The periods chosen are based on commonly referenced periods in historical accounts of Nova Scotia, spanning many different disciplines. The following periods constitute the historical analysis: pre 1631s: subsisting, 1631-1751: settling, 17511871: industrialising, 1871-1931: nationalising, 1931-1991: urbanising, 1991-2011: globalising. Both the province and the case areas are analysed. NATURAL CONDITIONS Technically a peninsula, the extensive coastline of Nova Scotia gives the feeling of an island; defined both geographically and culturally by the ocean. Within the boundary of the sea, the mainland is almost entirely covered in forests. These expansive landscapes, of woods and waters, have both helped and hindered development, physically limiting where settlement can occur while simultaneous offering opportunities to cultivate the land and culture of resource based livelihoods, namely the main industries of fisheries and forestry. These two seemingly ubiquitous land and seascapes mask the rich diversity of ecosystems (figure 3.8). For a relatively small land mass in the Canadian context, the province of Nova Scotia has varied natural conditions due to its complex glacial and geological history. Along the prominent figure of the sea, there are a variety of coastal ecosystems, which vary from rocky, barren cliffs, to salt marshes to broad intertidal beaches. Because of its extreme tidal dynamics, boasting the highest recorded tidal change in the world, the Bay of Fundy is particularly notable for its wide mudflats and nutrient rich tidal marshes, formed by sediment transfer. Another important landscape type is the glacially

created drumlin fields. These features represent the only lands suitable for agriculture and have extensively been cleared for both productive and settlement purposes. The forests that originally covered the province are Acadian - marked by a dense canopy of old growth mixed hardwood and softwood. But the forests today bear little resemblance to their original state. Nova Scotia also has many mineral resources which have played an important role in spatial development, and influenced settlement location. Many mining communities are amongst those facing shrinking or have already been nearly abandoned. However, the scope of this research is narrowed to focus on renewable natural resources. The topography of the province is relatively consistent. A few topographic features provide variation from this flatness, namely the Cape Breton highlands in the north east of the province and the ridge along the Bay of Fundy that creates the Annapolis valley. NATURE’S VALUES When the early settlers in the seventeenth century landed in Nova Scotia, they encountered a landscape that was completely forested, with no open places except the margins of the sea where meadows were created from overflows (Bird 1955). They ‘sought to place form and meaning on the chaos of wilderness.’ While there was no evidence of permanent human occupation

resources and rights

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1 dot = 150 people cleared lands data source: Canadian population census, 1931; Bird 1955 figure 3.9.1 population distribution 1631

in this vast landscape, ‘wide and empty’, for centuries first nations communities had lived off the land, using and interacting with the many benefits that it provided. For the Mi’k maq, the early colonists and populations to come, the ‘natural attributes of place elicited specific responses to nature’ which manifest in centuries of adaptation, modification and appreciation of Nova Scotia’s resources (McLeod 1995). According to Hanna et al. (1996) in the book Rights to Nature, ‘when people use nature’s goods and services they transform nature into a resource.’ At the foundation of these environmental adaptations is what we as humans value in nature and what goals and motivations we have in using nature’s resources. Our views of nature and the parts of nature of interest as a resource change across space, time and cultures. This is precisely the case in Canada, where economic interests in the landscape have always coexisted with cultural interests, where resource regions make up an important part of the ‘culturally distinctive Canadian landscape’ (Randall & Irondale 1996). The natural landscape of Nova Scotia has been used by humans as long as

figure 3.9.2 population distribution 1751

100km

there has been habitation. Prior to the arrival of European colonists, aboriginal communities lived off the land for centuries. The Mi’kmaq, the largest of the first nations communities, did not establish permanent settlements or clear land for agricultural cultivation. They relied on the naturally occurring resources: using the rivers for fishing and transport, using the forest materials to construct shelters and boats, and wild animals for food. The scale and scope of territorial transformations greatly increased with the arrival of European settlers. Attitudes and aims towards natural resources translated into different ways of organising settlement and modifying land uses. Evolving needs and interests led communities to harvest resources, while at the same time, ‘resources were the engine that drove European involvement with the land and settlements were a means to harness them’ (McLeod 1995). The first permanent settlements were established in the early 1600s by the Acadians marking the beginning of a century long process of settling the fertile river valleys and shores of the Bay of Fundy. Using a complex dyking system, they took advantage of the nutrient rich sediments transported to

resources and rights

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1 dot = 150 people cleared lands data source: Canadian population census, 1931; Fernow 1912; Wynn 1987 figure 3.9.3 population distribution 1871

the marshes by the extreme tidal dynamics. In the process of claiming vast amounts of lands for farming, they modified the coast and river system. Clam digging along the extensive mudflats supplemented their food source along with intermittent fishing. Without encroaching on the woods, they used the forest’s resources to construct and heat their informal settlements. As early as the sixteenth century, scattered, seasonal fishing settlements dotted the Atlantic coast, taking advantage of the abundance of cod. After British colonisation, from mid eighteenth century on, fishermen began dividing beaches amongst themselves and erected small permanent communities around natural harbours and cleared beaches, defining the origin of the linear settlement pattern that persists today. At this time, they attempted to clear forested areas for agricultural production, but the soils were too difficult. So they relied on food from import or trade, occasionally also felling lumber and participating in the growing lumber and shipbuilding industry (Bird 1955; Wynn 1987). In the early 1800s an influx of European and American immigrants

figure 3.9.4 population distribution 1931

100km

arrived in Nova Scotia, fixing the population pattern that still holds today. Settlements along the Bay of Fundy had expanded and farms were the means and purpose of existence. The landscape had been extensively cultivated and the forest line was receding. Mixed farming was characteristic and fewer and fewer farmers were engaged in purely subsistence agriculture as a switch from a subsistence to a market economy was underway. The nineteenth century is marked by a booming shipbuilding industry fuelled by water power mills. This period also marks major transformations of the landscape, especially along the rivers where dams and logging transport significantly altered coastal habitats. The built landscape also changed as roads, telegraph lines, steamships and newly constructed railways linked all of the major population centres (Wynn 1987). Without remaining agriculturally suitable land, and with the natural limits of many resources already being met, the late 1800s marks the beginning of a wave of depopulation and outmigration. Following this wave of decline is a period of relative prosperity for resource industries, marked by

resources and rights

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1 dot = 150 people cleared lands data source: forestry inventory, NSDNR 2012, community counts, 2012 figure 3.9.5 population distribution 1991

larger scale exploitation and modification of woods and waters. Simultaneously, a collective interest in preserving nature was also developing. ‘In the early years of this century the Conservation Movement became a major political force in the United States and its influence spilled over into Canada’– a fear that vast tracts of land and resources were being exploited and that they would be depleted (Pearse 1988). During this time, urbanisation characterised development and much farmland was converted to residential use through processes of subdivision or simply abandoned. Populations increased and continued along this trend until the early 1990s when the current phase of shrinking began. Farming marked the first important period of resource use in Nova Scotia and the figure of agricultural land is closely related to the figure of settlement. This is most strikingly observed at the scale of the case study areas. Figure 3.10 & 3.13 overlays the footprint of agricultural lands in 1912 and 2011. Currently, 4 000 farms occupy close to 400 hectares compared to 47 000 small farms spread over 1.9 million hectares in 1921 (NSDA 2010).

figure 3.9.6 population distribution 2011

2 For more information on the methodology of forest modification see: ‘Recent (19902007) anthropogenic change within the forest landscapes of nova scotia’ <globalforestwatch. ca>

figure 3.10 overlay of farmland 2012 (white) and 1912

100km

This indicates that there is much more suitability than is currently being valued in resource regions. The exception is the Annapolis valley and the shore of the Bay of Fundy where settlement began and where agriculture still represents an important part of the local economy. The cases that fall in this area, as shown in figure 3.13.2, have retained much more farm land than the other cases. Forests are the dominant land cover, covering 80 percent of the province. However, the forests that we find now are drastically changed from the forests found by the settlers. In fact, only around one percent of the forest cover remains intact; most of the forests have been cut, up to three times in the last centuries. Figure 3.14 shows the extent of human modification of forested land through clear cutting and infrastructure development between 1990 and 2007. 2 Much of the intact forests are found in the south as shown in figure 3.14.4 where fisheries have dominated. Figure 3.12 approximates the intertidal zone found in each of the cases, as official survey data is not available. Beaches and near shore habitat

resources and rights

figure 3.11 (top) buildings (centre) built lots (bottom) extent of forest modification 1991-20072

represent another important landscape being used for livelihoods. Beyond providing access to ocean resources for fisherman, these areas also are home to numerous harvested species such as shellfish and plant species. Within the last few decades, a growing number of beaches and near shore areas are being used for aquaculture, understood as the wet equivalent of agriculture in which species of shellfish and finfish are seeded or spawned as commodities to be sold on the global food market. These relatively small but growing areas represent the emergence of new economic values in resources. From this historic overview of settlement patterns as influenced by natural resources, it is evident that in resource dependent communities, the landscape has been modified for centuries to support livelihoods; economic systems and resource interests are inseparable. Sometimes these modifications have been sensitive in scale and approach to the natural limits of the landscape. In other instances, they have proceeded with total disregard; valuing nature as an extractable commodity. And yet at the same time, nature has always been and continues to be valued for a multiplicity of reasons beyond wealth. According to McLeod (1995): ‘this culture of exploitation was paralleled by the culture of ‘nature as wonder’ as a new society emerged bonded by shared interests. A good number of people were very interested in the land’s wildlife, climate, soils and forests for the sole reason of trying to understand it. This was not a resource-extraction approach to the natural environment but rather a burning curiosity to unravel its puzzles. The study of nature, therefore, became a passionate pursuit for a considerable number of early Nova Scotians.’ While it is possible to identify dominant attitudes within different time periods, in resource regions multiple values towards nature have always coexisted; subsistence, habitat, wealth, recreation, biodiversity etc. Hanna et al. (1996) attributes this multiplicity of values to the notion that people see nature simultaneously as ‘property’ and ‘partner.’ This duality is a useful starting point to understand the complex landscape of interests that define resource regions. Considering the high level of economic dependence on resources, such areas have a long history of transforming nature into property; to be controlled and exploited for human gain. In the case of Nova Scotia, this intimate relationship with the natural environment, through cultivation and harvesting, also fostered an early awareness of the environmentally destructive potential of human activities. The inherent synergies and tensions of these different points of view have evolved together and feature prominently in contemporary ideas about human interactions with the natural environment. This dual condition, nature as both property and partner, defines Nova Scotia and is embodied in the diversity of ways in which people interact with and transform the natural landscape.

resources and rights

10km

figure 3.12.4 intertidal & nearshore case 4

figure 3.13.1 agricultural fields case 1

figure 3.13.2 agricultural fields case 2

figure 3.13.3 agricultural fields case 3

figure 3.13.4 agricultural fields case 4

figure 3.14.1 forests case 1

figure 3.14.2 forests case 2

figure 3.14.3 forests case 3

figure 3.14.4 forests case 4

data source: NSTDB, 2012 & NSCAF, 2012 & forest inventory NSDNR, 2012 & aquaculture sites NSDFA, 2012

resources and rights

forests

figure 3.12.3 intertidal & nearshore case 3

intact forests

figure 3.12.2 intertidal & nearshore case 2

significant modification 1990-20072

figure 3.12.1 intertidal & nearshore case 1

farmland 1912

CASE 4

farmland 2012

CASE 3

intertidal zone

CASE 2

aquaculture production

CASE 1

PROPERTY RIGHTS Understanding settlement patterns as a physical response to naturally occurring conditions can only explain part of the process of spatial development. Underpinning all adaptations and transformations of nature, whether viewed as property or partner, is an institutional environment that connects people with the landscape. These interactions between people and the environment have profound consequences for the distribution of the benefits from natural resources and the economic performance of the industries dependent on them, materially and perceptually affecting daily lives in resource regions (Pearse 1988; Neumann 2011). The subject of property rights is complex and is an important theme in governing natural resource. According to Sandberg (2007), the dominant paradigm in resource management has been that ‘property rights matter’ but that societies freely devise these systems in many different ways along many different objectives. In short, property rights can be understood as the systems of arrangements constructed by societies to guide the way people behave towards the natural environment and each other (Hanna et al. 1996; Berge 2007; Sandberg 2007). Like the multiple values that guide these interactions with nature, the systems of rights and the rules under which these rights are exercised differ widely across cultures and time periods. The design of the institutions profoundly affects the way that the natural landscape is used and modified. Over time, property rights evolve and new systems emerge in response to changing values towards resources. Different systems have different implications for the daily lives of people and the way that they transform their environment. This is especially true in resource regions in Canada. ‘The first Europeans to arrive on these shores helped themselves to the abundance of fish, timber, water and other resources of the land. There was no scarcity in the economic sense, and no allocation problem. There was therefore no need for individual property rights.’ As competition grew amongst resource uses and users, formalised systems were developed, reflecting the moment when the resources became scarce and so allocation seemed worth the trouble (Pearse 1988). Pearse’s account of the pattern of resource rights in Canada speaks to the central issue of what makes resource management so important and concurrently so difficult. The resources themselves, plentiful salmon lining the rivers, robust forests lined with hardwoods, were in abundance. With relatively few settlers it seems preposterous to think that within only a century, the vast wealth of nature would already have transitioned from a life support system where communities in Canada have ‘a long history of using these resources and of cooperating to enhance and protect their productivity’ (Wiber et al. 2011) to a ‘human-dominated ecosystem’, marked by increasingly large scale environmental transformations with increasingly wide-spread consequences (Young 2011).

resources and rights

In the early 1990s, Ostrom (1990), an economist and seminal figure in commons theory for resource governance, introduced the concept of a ‘common-pool resource’ to help unravel the challenges of resource management. Lakes, rivers, forests, fields, beaches, are all considered common-pool resources. This analytical category of goods is defined by two inherent biophysical properties that make these resources both easily available for livelihood harvesting but also create competition and risk depletion. The two characteristics are: 1) it is very costly to exclude people from accessing and harvesting the resource, and thus deriving benefit and 2) when one person extracts from the resource system, they subtract from the quantity available to others (Ostrom 1990). As Mercer Clark (2010) asserts in her recent research on coastal resource management in Nova Scotia, along this definition, the concept can be expanded to include land, a finite resource in itself. ‘While the use of land by one owner reduces its availability to serve the needs of others (e.g., conversion of agricultural land to urban sprawl), land use can also detrimentally affect the well-being of other conjoined and publicly owned resources (e.g., impacts to fisheries as a result of non-point source nutrient contamination of aquatic and marine waters).’ As history has demonstrated time and time again with increasing urgency, the ways that common-pool resources are managed have significant consequences not only for livelihoods but also, for the ecosystems of which they are part and connected life supporting features. As property rights systems are human inventions, there are endless arrangements under which natural resource management can occur. A good starting point to understand the complexity of property rights systems and further to begin an analysis of the ways that the evolution of these systems have shaped spatial development in Nova Scotia is the ‘bundle of rights’ metaphor put forward by Schlager and Ostrom (1992). This conceptual scheme arrays a variety of rights to a resource – ranging from rights to access, use, or even to exclude others from using – with a variety of positions in relation to those rights – ranging from owner to authorised user. Within this matrix, there are numerous ways to ‘bundle’ the different combination of rights. Four broad types of property rights systems are usually evoked in the literature about resource management (Nagendra & Ostrom 2008); 1) Government ownership: where a formal government claimed ownership of the resource and the right to fully determine who could or could not use and under what circumstances 2) Private ownership, where a single individual or private firm has full claims to determine use patterns 3) Community or common property ownership, where a group of individuals shares rights to ownership 4) Open Access: where there is no ownership

resources and rights

6% 40%

52%

25%

13% 8% 70%

private land data source: Statistics Canada, 2012

data source: NSCAF, 2012

figure 3.15 private land ownership Canada

figure 3.16 private land ownership Nova Scotia

However, it is important to recognise that these analytical categories are in fact abstractions of the true complexity of rights systems in which cultural and informal rights or ways of using the land are often incongruent with the legal rights. Von Benda-Beckmann et al. (2006) in their book The Changing Properties of Property argue that ‘these categories do not form a useful and consistent set that applies uniform criteria to the classification of diverse property categories... the ‘Big Four’ reduce complexity in misleading ways.’ This is precisely the case in Nova Scotia, where reconciling formal and informal systems of rights and public and private ownership have shaped livelihoods and a way of life in resource regions. Furthermore, it is important to clarify that the type of good does not necessitate the type of property rights systems. In other words, common-pool resources do not have to be managed under common property regimes, and rarely are in contemporary times. This has caused much confusion in the decades following Ostrom’s initial work, leading to the need to ‘decouple’ the natural properties of a resource and the human made property rights system that governs

it (Bromley 1992; McKean 2000; Sandberg 2007).

100km

PROPERTY RIGHTS AND RESOURCES IN NOVA SCOTIA The main contribution to the formal system of property rights found today in Nova Scotia is the heritage of British colonisation. Land granting along with regulation of resource use began as early as the mid 1700s. Over time, resource management in Nova Scotia has transformed, in some ways reflecting practices common to all Canadian provinces and in other ways, unique in its approach. In Canada, the dominant approach to resource management has been through ‘crown lands’. Crown lands are government owned lands that are managed by the provincial department of natural resources. In theory, these lands are held in trust for the public by the government and should thus be developed and used according to the greatest public benefit. Crown lands are typically managed and developed by private industry through the granting of leases and licenses. Reconciling public ownership with private development in Canada has led to exceedingly diverse systems

resources and rights

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

crown land data source: NSDNR, 2012 figure 3.17.1 township grants circa 1770s to 1800

of rights to resource use for livelihood ranging from complete privatisation to community management. Contrary to the rest of Canada marked by high levels of crown land ownership, Nova Scotiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lands are predominantly privately owned (figure 3.16). Almost 70 percent of the land in Nova Scotia is in private hands (figure 3.15). This is due to its early colonisation and interest in luring settlers. This process of granting land to private use and also holding land for management underlies many of the settlement patterns, supporting changing interests in resources through history. Currently, there are three main systems under which livelihoods are derived from the landscape; resource use and management on crown land, large private industrial holdings and, individual harvesters on private lots, each with a distinct but linked history . Public lands are also managed for other purposes such as recreation and more recently a strong interest in protecting biodiversity. While ecological protection is predominantly achieved on public lands, it is starting to also happen across private lands. These three master categories pertain to resource harvesting by forests, fields and beaches. The fisheries

figure 3.17.2 crown land, first survey circa 1930s/40s

100km

are outside of these designations, with a governing history that is quite different owing to the open access property of the sea. Broadly speaking fisheries are managed in two ways, either through licenses associated with zones and seasons within which fisherman are free to catch as much as they want, or more recently through quotas, defining the quantity of the catch per individual. The move to quotas, a reaction against overfishing under the more open regime, has introduced a property right to fish where previously none existed. â&#x20AC;&#x192;â&#x20AC;&#x192; Property arrangements in Nova Scotia emerged within a preexisting context of traditional community based relationships with resources, for hunting, gathering, recreating and subsistence making for a complex landscape of rights in which formal and informal systems often collide. The British presence marked the start of the formal system. During the settlement of Nova Scotia, the goal of the government was to transfer as much public land as possible into the private hands of settlers to promote agricultural, industrial and commercial development. The system of granting

resources and rights

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

1631

1751

1871

1931

1991 2011

large private industry land protected land crown land data source: NSDNR, 2012; NSCAF , 2012 figure 3.17.3 crown land 1971

developed somewhat haphazardly. Initially, grants were meant to provide settlers with multiple land holdings for a variety of economic purposes including fishing, lumber harvesting, trapping and hunting, pasturing of animals and subsistence farming. Between the peak years of 1759 and 1800, these first grants were given in the form of townships. Rather than focus on the town plot, many settlers built their houses on the larger upland lots, dispersing settlement. But as populations grew and pressure for land increased, land became scarce and highly valued, leading to the long narrow division of lots to provide coastal access (Wynn 1987); the beginning of the current diffuse pattern. After Canadian confederation in 1867, responsibility for granting rights fell to provincial governments, who now held authority over property and most natural resources (Pearse 1988). By the end of the nineteenth century, the provincial government began to ‘cast envious glances’ at industrial forestry development on crown lands in neighbouring provinces. By this time, land was more in demand for lumbering purposes then for

figure 3.17.4 crown land 2011

100km

settlement and agricultural cultivation. Little land was left ungranted and there was little if any regulation. All resource extraction was done for profit and often done with little or meaningless rules (NDLF 1973). To raise revenue on the remaining crown lands, the government started to grant long term forestry leases, creating an ‘almost privatised piece of public land’ (Plourde 2010, personal communication). Over the last century, the length of the term and the scale of the territory has continued to increase leading to the largest lease enacted through provincial legislation in 1961, granting all crown lands in the seven eastern counties to one company for a fifty year period. This approach to resource extraction, the promotion of large scale industrial extraction on crown lands remains a dominant force in resource development in Nova Scotia and has been foundational to provincial economic development (Sandberg 1996, 2002). Outside of the growing timber industry another interest in the landscape took hold around this time. The sentiment, that nature was limited and vulnerable to destructive human activities, had been present for many

resources and rights

years in Nova Scotia on account of the deep connection between livelihoods and the use of nature (McLeod 2005). However, it was not until the end of the 1930s that this became institutionalised in the form of national and provincial park designations. This marks the beginning of a shift in the pattern of land granting towards reconvening private lands back to the crown land bank. Between 1941 and 1971, public land holdings almost doubled, mostly for the development of the park system but also on account of abandoned former agricultural sites. Another trend during this period was the growing scale of industry; evidenced by amalgamations of smaller lots to accommodate large company holdings. In the 1990s, an important jurisdictional change occurred, giving authority over the intertidal zone to the provincial government from the federal government for management. This territory, from the high water to low water mark, is considered crown land, but is managed by the provincial department of fisheries and oceans. This has led to a new type of industrial lease and license system used to promote the growing industry of aquaculture, creating private property rights where previously there was open access for all public. While the footprint of this industry is still very small, the potential now exists for the entire intertidal area to be leased not unlike the inland forestry crown holdings. While parks and protected areas have gradually been introduced into the program of public land management over the past century, starting with the first Nova Scotia national park in 1936, it is only very recently that a concerted effort towards environmental protection is occurring. A defining act was passed in 2007 by the provincial government, the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act (EGSPA), which sets out a number of binding targets in relation to biodiversity protection, amongst other things such as renewable energy. The ecological protection objectives are being carried out through the 12 Percent - Wild Spaces plan which aims to protect 12 percent of Nova Scotia’s lands across both public and privately owned property by 2015 (EGSPA 2007). Currently, the tally of protected lands reaches just under nine percent. Partly as a way to assist in achieving this goal and also as a way to generate more revenue for the province, the provincial government launched the 2010 ‘Large Land Purchase Program.’ This initiative represents a ten times increase in the usual budget for crown land purchase by the government to reach 75 million CAD. This is unprecedented and the Nova Scotia government is the only jurisdiction in Canada that is actively buying back major land holdings, many of which are being released by private industrial interests. CROWN LANDS At the scale of the province, figure 3.17.4 illustrates how the footprint of crown

figure 3.18 (top) crown lands 1940s (bottom) crown lands 2012

land and settlement are inversely related. Most crown holdings are located within the interior of the province, precisely those areas that have never been settled. The relationship between crown land and industrial development has helped hold this figure. It also indicates that many people participating in forestry employment on crown land will live on the coast and work in the hinterland. Looking to the cases, it is clear that along the settled coast, there is very little crown presence. In the more sparsely settled areas there is a much higher presence of crown land, and even in the original swath that were never granted as private property. In comparing the amount of crown land in the 1940s and the present (figure 3.21) it is evident that a significant amount of land has been re-conveyed. It is also interesting to see in figure 3.20 the changing figure as the beaches have been put under crown jurisdiction, creating a new area for development where previously only informal arrangements existed. This is further emphasised by the designated parks and protected areas of crown land which are predominantly found in the interior, most of which fall on public land. It is also striking how fragmented the protected lands are. This is evidence of the current interest in biodiversity emerging much later than the interest in resource exploitation for wealth.

resources and rights

pre1631

1631 to 1751

1751 to1871

1871 to 1931

1931 to 1991

1991 to 2011

POPULATION DYNAMICS

CROWN LAND OWNERSHIP

CROWN LAND (30%)

30%

PROTECTED CROWN LAND (~8%) figure 3.19 historic population dynamics & crown land ownership

~8% 0

10km

figure 3.20.3 reconveyed crown land case 3

figure 3.20.4 reconveyed crown land case 4

figure 3.21.1 original crown land case 1

figure 3.21.2 original crown land case 2

figure 3.21.3 original crown land case 3

figure 3.21.4 original crown land case 4

figure 3.22.1 subdivision & amalgamation case 1

figure 3.22.2 subdivision & amalgamation case 2

figure 3.22.3 subdivision & amalgamation case 3

figure 3.22.4 subdivision & amalgamation case 4

data source: Crown grants index, NSDNR, 2012

resources and rights

subdivision (since original grant)

figure 3.20.2 reconveyed crown land case 2

amalgamation (since original grant)

figure 3.20.1 reconveyed crown land case 1

crown land reconveyed (between 1940s-2010)

CASE 4

crown land circa 1940s (never granted)

CASE 3

crown land protected status

CASE 2

crown land

CASE 1

10km

figure 3.23.3 large industrial owners case 3

figure 3.23.4 large industrial owners 4

figure 3.24.1 incorporated owners case 1

figure 3.24.2 incorporated owners case 2

figure 3.24.3 incorporated owners case 3

figure 3.24.4 incorporated owners case 4

figure 3.25.1 unincorporated owners case 1

figure 3.25..2 unincorporated owners case 2

figure 3.25.3 unincorporated owners case 3

figure 3.25.4 unincorporated owners case 4

data source: NSDNR, 2012 ; NSCAF, 2012

resources and rights

private unincorporated

figure 3.23.2 large industrial owners case 2

private

figure 3.23.1 large industrial owners case 1

private incorporated

CASE 4

private

CASE 3

private large industrial

CASE 2

private

CASE 1

INDUSTRIAL PRIVATE PROPERTY There are a handful of forestry companies that have very large, often contiguous land holdings, predominantly within the hinterlands of the province. For many people living in resource regions, these large scale enterprises have been a stable source of employment for generations. The dominant footprint of large scale forestry operations, while clearly related to the natural presence of forests, is also due to the footprint of crown lands and large industrial private holdings (figure 3.17.4) . Having land and resources locked up in such large adjoining pieces has contributed to maintaining the undeveloped character of the inland area, keeping settlement away from the centre of the province in favour of industrial development; clearly evidenced in the case study areas. Also notable, as seen in figure 3.22, is the scale of amalgamated lots as these companies have grown their holdings over the years by purchasing small wood lots and aggregating them. Recently, as the forestry industry struggles to remain viable in the face of mounting global pressures, many of these large landholdings are going on the private market as companies exit the industry. INDEPENDENT PRIVATE PROPERTY Alongside this industrial use of the landscape, tens of thousands of small woodlot owners and independent fisherman have sustained a small scale economy. This aggregation of livelihoods also affects the settlement patterns, and is more directly linked to the linear settlements themselves. One of the main resistances of municipal governments to putting stronger land use planning in place is to respect and uphold the tradition of multiuse in rural areas. So it is not uncommon that a full time fisherman will in fact own a large wooded piece of land. This land may simply sit uncultivated, it may be used for personal subsistence or, it may even be harvested through contracts with other small local mills or even industrial mills. The tradition of ownership as a social status has kept much unproductive land with productive potential out of the commercial market. While data is not available to confirm which lots are in use, certain correlations can be made from the analysis. A starting point is comparing the presence of small woodlots (not necessarily in use, but classified as having forest cover), and the large industrial holdings. The analysis finds that few small wood lot owners only own one piece of land. We can extend this study to analyse all built lots and also see that the same people or companies that own the developed pieces, in fact, own many other unbuilt lands within their communities (figures 3.27, 3.29 & 3.30). This land holding pattern supports the dispersed settlement form. It also means that as these regions continue to face challenges, the established pattern has the potential to change quite drastically. We are already seeing evidence of this as speculators come in and buy undeveloped lands,

figure 3.26 (top)

original division of lots granted (centre) amalgamation of lots to form single large industrial holding (bottom) built form around the lot

figure 3.27 (top) linear settlement along the coast(centre) built lots (bottom) lots owned by same owners as built lots

subdivide them, and create residential or leisure developments. While this process is happening much more within a closer proximity to Halifax, the potential to occur in the resource regions is there, considering that so much of the land is not being occupied and the land values are still relatively low. INFORMAL RIGHTS Outside of the formal systems of rights that guide the way lands are used and developed in resource regions, a deep tradition of informal arrangements still exists today. After years of working together with communities and policy makers, Jennifer Graham (2012, personal communication) of the nonprofit EAC (Ecology Action Centre) remarked that, ‘there’s a real disconnect between the official uses of the land and how communities are using it…what a lot of local folks want is access for things like hunting, fishing and these things just aren’t counted.’ There is a long standing tradition in Nova Scotia that lands that are not ‘cultivated’ or fenced (meaning all forests, waterways and beaches) can be freely crossed for the purpose of recreation, or hunting and trapping. According to Plourde (2012), also of the EAC, this tradition is in fact partly legislated in the provincial act that states it is the right of all Nova Scotians to cross such lands for the purpose of angling, in other words, to access fishing grounds that the properties may be obscuring. The coastline has also always been considered a shared resource and local communities have harvested shellfish, rockweed, dulse and other naturally occurring species for centuries as well as used the water for recreational purposes. On one of my visits, as the tide receded for kilometres in the late afternoon, I was astonished to see hundreds of clammers (including families with young children) emerging along the horizon; a daily occurrence I was told. While these practices tend be more about tradition and less about economic gain, there are families whose livelihoods depend on the for-profit harvesting of these resources. RESOURCES, RIGHTS AND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT This chapter has established that through history, changing interests in resources are reflected in parallel and overlapping approaches to resource management, both trying to reconcile public and private ownership and also regulate the use of resources on private lands. And that these systems have influenced settlement patterns and land use. It has also been demonstrated that major changes to existing property rights systems are underway, as new rights are developing and old rights are being rethought. However, the land use consequences of these changing relationships between the natural and institutional landscape of resources is yet to be realised. The following chapter aims to understand the material implications of these changes and connect them back to the phenomenon of shrinking.

resources and rights

10km

figure 3.29.1 - ownership of built lots case 1

figure 3.29.2 - ownership of built lots case 2

figure 3.29.3 - ownership of built lots case 3

figure 3.29.4 - ownership of built lots case 4

figure 3.30.1 other land owned by built lot owners

figure 3.30.2 other land owned by built lot owners

figure 3.30.3 other land owned by built lot owners

figure 3.30.4 other land owned by built lot owners

private large industrial unbuilt

figure 3..28.4 land value 4

private large industrial built

figure 3.28.3 land value 3

private incorporated unbuilt

figure 3.28.2 land value case 2

private unincorporated unbuilt

figure 3.128 1 land value case 1

private incorporated built

CASE 4

private unincorporated built

CASE 3

< 20 000 CAD

CASE 2

> 10 000 000 CAD

CASE 1

crown

data source: NSDNR, 2012 ; NSCAF, 2012, NSTDB, 2012

resources and rights

4 RETHINKING RESOURCES

Up to this point I have established how spatial development in resource regions has been shaped by the presence of natural resources and the systems devised to interact with those resources. The aim of this chapter is to examine how shrinking is affecting the spatial and institutional landscape of resource regions. As the historical analyses demonstrated, there have always been changing dynamics between communities and resources. However, until recently, communities were able to sustain livelihoods based on natural resource harvesting and processing. Now, as a host of global and local forces (chapter 2) are pressuring this once sure state, existing systems of property rights are being challenged. The forestry industry is receding - opening up large tracts of land. The aquaculture industry is being promoted - enclosing previously open beaches. Ecological protection is gaining ground - limiting human activities across previously extracted areas. The result of these, and numerous other changes, is an increasingly unstable environment where the role of resources and the people benefiting from their use is rapidly diversifying. This chapter starts by explaining these changes along two main processes: 1) as traditional resource industries are struggling, interests in resource development are changing, such as a renewed interest in agriculture, a growing aquaculture industry and opportunities for renewable energy, namely biomass, tidal and wind. 2) At the same time as traditional practices are being reconsidered, new ecological values towards resources are emerging, challenging environmentally destructive extraction practices. While some of these changes can immediately be observed spatially, most of them are occurring at an institutional level and the impacts on land use are yet to be seen. The first aim of this chapter is to link these shifts in rights to the physical territory, describing the ways or potential ways that they influence spatial development. I argue that these processes of transformation are in fact part of the shrinking process. Ultimately, I am interested in how communities are being affected by these changes. As was mentioned in chapter 2, the dimensions of shrinking can be understood as a vicious circle. In other words, it is hard to pin down which changes are triggering decline and which

rethinking resources

are responding to it. This confusion is echoed in the changing role of the provincial government in rural and resource development. The well established position of the provincial government in support of large industrial resource development is diversifying, leading to multiple, often contradictory perspectives within government sectors towards resource management and the role of natural resources in relation to declining rural areas. A vast array of strategies and tools are being developed, both directly and indirectly aimed at the issue of shrinking in resource regions. Broadly speaking, there is an overwhelming sentiment that change is needed. ‘The status quo cannot sustain the biodiversity of our natural environment, enhance the economy, or preserve the rural lifestyle so valued by the citizens of this province... change must happen in all areas of natural resource management—and happen soon.’ (NSDNR 2009). However, ‘change’ is being evoked in vague terms, contributing to the environment of uncertainty and controversy. The second aim of this chapter is thus to identify the underlying patterns guiding government action and highlight their influence on resource regions. These strategies touch on a great number of issues, therefore, it is not surprising that in response to the multiple positions of government, communities and the private sector are responding with a diversity of perspectives regarding the new, proposed and potential land uses. For some, these changes are seen as the final blow for already declining communities. For others, these shifts offer a long overdue opportunity for governments and communities alike to rethink the relationship between resources, rights and rural development. This research takes the position that there could be potentials in these changing rights to the landscape to address the problems of shrinking; that these shifting landscapes of resources could act as testing grounds to play out different directions for future spatial development. Thus the aim of this chapter is ‘draw out’ the spaces of possibility, identifying where changing relationships between resource values and rights could reveal opportunities for spatial and institutional interventions to address shrinking.

Forestry practices: clear cutting is a common practice in Nova Scotia. Over the past two decades, as ecological values have emerged and influenced policy, a few new regulations have been introduced. The middle image shows mandatory ‘wildlife patches’ that foresters must leave when clear cutting. The top image shows blueberry brush overtaking an old lot that has not been replanted. Blueberries grow wild across the province, and have become a viable economic alternative for struggling foresters.

i. TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE As the last chapter began to illustrate, many changes to the institutional landscape have been occurring in the last two decades, which correspond with and contribute to the current period of depopulation. Within this climate of rapid social and economic change, existing systems of property relations and rights are being put under pressure, ‘opening up access to other actors and encouraging new laws that govern natural resource use’ (Wiber et al. 2011). Two main processes are underway, both triggered by

rethinking resources

and triggering demographic and economic decline: changing interest in traditional resource extraction and emerging interest in biodiversity. This section elaborates the role of the provincial government, as the largest land holder in the province, initiating or responding to these shifts. It also begins to speculate on opportunities for shrinking resource regions that can be found in these spatial and institutional changes. The viability of traditional resource industries in Nova Scotia, namely fisheries and forestry, has been challenged in recent years along global and local economic and political pressures. The first major blow came in the early 1990s with the collapse of the cod fishery, due in part to overfishing and in part to changing regulations. Since then other local shocks have been felt in response to moments of global economic downturn, considering the close relationship between primary industries in Nova Scotia and international markets. Decline in traditional fisheries and forestry industries have ‘thrown many communities into disarray as traditional patterns of work, spending and social states tied to these industries recede’ (Young & Matthews 2010). As previous land uses are shut down and new land use interests are emerging, resource regions are transforming. The territorial footprint of resource use - the shifting space of woods and waters - has incited great controversy in shrinking resource regions where landscape access and use is a matter of livelihood but also a matter of promoting traditional knowledge, practices and a way of life. For over a century, the provincial government has supported and promoted large scale forestry industry in Nova Scotia. Now, as the industry struggles to hold its place in the international market, there is much uncertainty about the future face of forestry in the province. In the last couple of years, two of the largest pulp and paper mills have shut down. These closure threats are the most recent in a long line of industry setbacks that have been resolved through money or relaxed regulation from the provincial and federal government . Some of the struggling companies are looking for buyers, putting their operations in ‘hot idle’, supported by government bailout funds. Other companies are abandoning the industry altogether, focusing their attention on other resource industries such as oil and gas. In light of the industry restructuring, a number of shifts are occurring. Firstly, large private landholdings are being put on the real estate market. These land holdings are changing ownership in two dominant directions, linked to their inland, isolated condition. They are either being purchased by real estate brokers and sold as private ‘natural wilderness’, mostly to foreign buyers, for residential or leisure developments. Some of the land is also being purchased by speculators who may or may not intend to develop these undeveloped areas. Secondly, as part of the government’s Large Land Purchase Program introduced in chapter 3, the province is also purchas-

Aquaculture: can be understood as the water equivalent of farming. While it is a centuries old practice in Nova Scotia, the recent industrial version is quite transformed from traditional methods. There are two types of aquaculture with different physical properties: Finfish (swimming fish): net pens, contained or semi contained, in nearshore waters or the stocking of lakes and pools Shellfish: ‘seeding’ of artificial habitat (often using bags or sucks hung off pontoons) that then becomes enclosed as private property

rethinking resources

ing swaths of this land to add to the crown land base. Much of the newly purchased land is being transferred or considered under protected status as part of the 12 percent plan. Figure 4.1 overlaps the proposed and confirmed 12 percent protected lands with the land purchases by the crown in 2009 to 2010 to give a sense of the scale and location of these property rights changes. Other shifts are occurring related to industrial leases to private enterprise on public land. The two largest forestry leases, granted mid twentieth century, gave control of enormous amounts of land to single companies; the largest lease being for all the crown lands in the entire seven eastern counties (figure 4.2). These leases, granted for 50 year periods, are now coming up. As the forestry industry atrophies, it is uncertain to whom and under what ecological conditions these lands will be released. As forestry leases are coming to term, new leases are being proposed and granted along the intertidal and near shore areas, to support a growing aquaculture industry. While some of these enterprises are still family run, a handful of industrial scale companies are accumulating rights, asserting a dominant position in the province. The rise of aquaculture is creating enormous controversy; being considered by many the ‘stealth privatization’ of shared resources that for centuries have been cooperatively used for multiple benefits within ecological limits (Wiber et al. 2011). Aquaculture is one example of new commercial interests in the landscape that are emerging as traditional interests in resource development are proving less viable. Another example is renewable energy. In Nova Scotia, this takes the form of three types of renewable energy, biomass, wind and tidal. With over 80 percent of the province’s power coming from burning coal and gas, the prospect of cleaner energy is being welcomed and a target of 25 percent renewably sourced energy by 2015 has been legislated under the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. This also indicates an opportunity for profit making by the province and private industry. There is already considerable interest by foreign investors to harvest wood for biomass however, according to David Daniels of the Nova Scotia Business Inc, ‘we really talk about Nova Scotia as the ideal place to invest from a renewable energy production perspective but when you actually get on the ground there are all sorts of limitations and issues that then get in the way.’ While the creation of the FORCE centre pilot project for tidal power in the Bay of Fundy marks a concrete move towards capitalising on these natural values, it is too early to observe the spatial changes that will accompany these new industries. So now I have outlined the context in which these changes are taking place. To really understand how these institutional changes are affecting shrinking resource communities, it is necessary to zoom in to the scale of

forestry lease 1961-2011 proposed 12 percent protected crown land purchases 2009-2010 data source: NSDNR, 2012 figure 4.1 crown land purchases (2009-2010) and proposed 12 percent protected areas

figure 4.2 photographs of industrial forestry lands purchased by the crown and in consideration for the 12 percent plan

100km

the cases, and connect the transforming properties to their natural and cultural context. To do this, I examine a handful of the numerous examples of property changes; choosing sites that occur within my case study areas. I organise the different sites in a matrix to compare their scale, geographic position and change in property rights. Referring back to Schlager and Ostrom’s (1992) ‘bundle of rights’ introduced in chapter 3, I relate ownership position with two types of rights; access and withdrawal and/or development and articulate the subsequent land use changes. While this chart should be understood as an abstraction, it is useful because it creates a baseline tool to both categorise the types of shifts and also to better organise their implications. The aim of this brief analysis is to bring forward the diversity of issues and interrelations between resources and rural development. In keeping with the scope of this research, I am ultimately interested in the spatial impact of these controversial changes. Figure 4.3 illustrates the types of property rights changes underway and figure 4.4 summarises the case results.

rethinking resources

RIGHTS access withdrawal/devel.

public

PRIMRY LAND USE

protected wilderness

CROWN OWNERSHIP

A. D. public

private (public)*

public (withdrawal)

private (leased)

undesignated (recreation, enjoyment of nature etc.)

industrial extraction

E. A. D. B.

PRIVATE OWNERSHIP

private (public)*

private

industrial extraction

private

nonindustrial (residential, commercial, recreational)

property condition prior to change

new property condition within same ownership regime new property condition in new ownership regime

* as introduced in chapter 3, there is an informal right of public access to cross all properties, regardless of ownership regime, if the property is not developed with built form and does not have a fence or a ‘no trespassing’ sign 96

figure 4.3 changing ‘bundles’ of property rights rethinking resources

5km

CASE 1 LAND USE CHANGE: industrial forestry -> protected wilderness SPATIAL IMPLICATIONS: forest/biodiversity regeneration, no future development

CASE 2 LAND USE CHANGE: open beach -> industrial aquaculture SPATIAL IMPLICATIONS: beaches closed for clam harvesting, development of processing facilities (on land) and net pens (in the water)

CASE 3 LAND USE CHANGE: industrial forestry -> protected wilderness & residential SPATIAL IMPLICATIONS: cleared forests, development in wilderness, inaccessibility across forested areas

CASE 4 LAND USE CHANGE: lobster grounds -> industrial aquaculture SPATIAL IMPLICATIONS: development of processing facilities (on land) and net pens (in the water) figure 4.4 property rights & case studies 98

rethinking resources

CASE 1 This region along the Bay of Fundy, one of the first to be settled, has a long forestry history. As an important centre in the nineteenth century ship building boom, the forests here have been cut for centuries, leaving behind a modified landscape with questionable ecological integrity. The forestry industry is being hard hit in this region. According to Bob White (2012, personal communication), whose family run mill has been closed for the past four years, ‘the big mills are pushing the small mills aside, and the government is supporting it. That’s what you don’t understand, they always would give them grants to keep going, grants to expand, and then they go bankrupt and they give them another grant to go back in business.’ This sentiment is shared by many in the community who blame the government and large industry for squeezing them out of the market. Within this climate of decline, the crown has been purchasing large industrial land holdings, mostly to add to the 12 percent protection lands (type A, figure 4.3). So while some large areas are being protected, other large areas are being cut even younger to try and salvage what is left of the small scale forestry economy. As Plourde (2012, personal communication) highlighted, it is a great achievement to get these lands, but they are fragmented - ‘islands of biodiversity.’ Practices across the ‘working landscape’ also need to be reconsidered, a tough sell to local foresters who are barely able to eke out a livelihood. So in Noel as in other nearby areas, there are dual processes underway. Public lands are being protected and private lands are being pillaged as livelihoods are made more and more difficult. CASE 2 Along the sandy banks of the Annapolis river valley, industrial aquaculture leases are changing the traditional relationship between independent clammers and their once open beaches. Here, as shown in figure 4.6, entire strips of land have been essentially privatised through the granting of exclusive rights leases (type E, figure 4.3). For centuries, clammers have freely harvested in this area, selling their digs to local processing plants. In the 1970s, issues began to emerge regarding pollution and contamination of the clams that were being harvested locally. The decision by the government was to set up depuration plants and require that clams harvested on certain beaches would have to be filtered through these plants. The contract for the depuration plants was given to a single company that also develops aquaculture sites. This monopoly remains today, and has greatly changed the landscape of rights across the beaches. In this region, there is enormous community mobilisation that has recently led to a pilot project for co-management between local clammers associations and the provincial department of fisheries. According to Arthur Bull (2012, personal communication), a founding member of numerous nonprofit fisheries resource centres and community groups as well as an policy analyst with the

100

data source: CARP, 2012

figure 4.5 ‘wildlife clumps’

figure 4.6 Annapolis Basin clam beds status 2012

provincial government,many groups are urging the clam associations to apply for their own leases, gaining exclusive access to an area of beach for their community. The reply tends to unanimous. These groups claim that they don’t want to own a part of one beach, they just want to practice clamming in the same traditional roaming way with the same rights that their ancestors had. CASE 3 The Weymouth area also has a long history in forestry. The Weymouth mill, originally powered by the Sissiboo River, has been reinvented numerous times over the last century, a process that recently came to an end. J.D. Irving, one of the largest forestry companies in Nova Scotia, shut down the mill and in 2009, put some of their land holding on the market (figure 4.7). This caused major unrest within the area as communities feared that these lands would be sold to foreign brokers for residential and leisure development purposes. This worried many people who were afraid that new owners would upset the composition of the landscape. They also worried that they would lose the right to freely hike and canoe across these properties (an informal right outlined in chapter 3.) The ‘Buy Back Nova Scotia’ movement emerged, and was successful in convincing the crown to

rethinking resources

101

large industrial lands of folded forestry company

leasable crown intertidal zone

lands purchased by the crown

aquaculture leases of one company

figure 4.7 comparison between (left) crown purchase & (right) aquaculture lease

purchase large pieces of land, much of which is being transferred under protected status (type A, figure 4.3). However, other pieces were sold, including entire islands, to American developers and it is yet to be seen if significant modifications will be made (type C, figure 4.3). Out of this movement came the recent introduction of the Community Land Trust Act. This instrument, which is not connected to funding, is a type of easement that helps communities to purchase land and then protect certain features, such as agriculture use or a dedicated species. Different from a conservation easement which limits human activity, this tool allows for certain productive characteristics of the landscape to be ‘protected.’ The provincial government offered this tool as a negotiation with communities essentially saying that while the government cannot ‘buy back’ all the land, they can offer to help communities to purchase and protect landscapes that they value. CASE 4 This Atlantic coast region is one of the most prosperous lobster areas in the province. Unlike the ground fisheries where quotas were introduced, the lobster fishery still operates with area licenses. This comes with strong traditions of cooperative management within communities

102

figure 4.8 ‘No! fish farms’ and ‘Citizens FOR sustainable aquaculture’

to protect and steward the source of their livelihoods. Two aquaculture lease proposal are under review for one of the largest Canadian aquaculture companies, Cooke aquaculture. Small communities in the region are completely divided as to whether aquaculture is a welcome employment opportunity or a major threat to the lobster fishery. Figure 4.8 shows opposing protect signs on neighbouring lawns, an alternating pattern that continues throughout the area. The situation along the bays in this region is a perfect example of what Young and Matthews (2010) have termed ‘the aquaculture controversy’ in their recent book with the same title. The mixed sentiment within the community is also a reflection of mixed motivations. Some community fisherman claim that the net pens will affect lobster habitat, pollute the area and ultimately compromise their ability to fish. Others see this as an opportunity to grow their community, providing more certainty for the future. Young and Matthews (2010) attribute the confusion to the fact that aquaculture is the first ‘new’ resource industry to emerge since globalising processes have taken hold. Without precedents, it is difficult to anticipate the future of this industry and the ecological and social outcomes of changes such as the proposed leases in this area.

rethinking resources

103

All of these changes, regardless of their motivations and outcomes, raise an important question about ownership rights. As Plourde (2012) states, ‘nature doesn’t know from ownership.’ This is being reflected in the 12 percent strategy that is using different mechanisms to protect land on both public and private lots. But the issue extends beyond nature protection to all spatial development in shrinking resource regions. As Mercer Clark (2010) recently stated in her work about the socio-ecological system of the inhabited coast of Nova Scotia, governance systems ‘must expand their traditional roles in the management of commons resources (typically marine fisheries and non-renewable resources) to address management of what may largely be privately-held resources (typically land and property).’

ii. A WEB OF STRATEGIES

As participants, observers and initiators of many of the changes above, provincial government departments are responding with a raft of strategies, acts, tools and proposals to address the many issues facing resource regions. These strategies range in focus from economic development to environmental protection, sometimes discussed jointly or sometimes in contradiction. As in other places in Canada where provincial governments are facing rural decline, ‘Against this backdrop of economic and demographic variability... the political response has struggled and has contributed an interesting mix of both policy consistency and change’ (Markey et al. 2008). This section provides a brief overview of this web, towards identifying underlying patterns and direction. I am interested in understanding if or how the problem of shrinking is being addressed, specifically along the connection between resources and spatial development. There has been a conscious effort in policy and strategy writing within Nova Scotia not to distinguish between ‘rural’ and ‘urban’ policy. This is based on a long standing criticism of the government that it biases Halifax and consequently further marginalises rural areas. As a geographically compact province, in which no areas are truly remote, on the surface, the current position of the government is to consider the entire province as one system; carefully wording policies and strategies to seem inclusive of all regions. However, many of the directions and approaches are decidedly rural. Yet, without explicit statements that reference rural issues, explicit goals for shrinking areas are also vaguely being described, if described at all. In reading through these documents as well as speaking with policy makers, community members and NGO representatives, some underlying patterns can be seen, summarised along two dominant thrusts: 1) increased control devolved to communities and 2) increased regulatory role of the province. To fully understand the diversifying government position, it is

104

town has MPS MPS MPS & LUB data source: EAC. 2009 figure 4.9 municipal planning in Nova Scotia

first necessary to understand some general concepts about the planning system in Canada and Nova Scotia in particular. Outside of a few national matters such as main transportation networks, national parks, national defense etc., the Canadian constitution delegates most governance responsibilities to the provincial governments. According to provincial legislation, land use planning occurs at the municipal level. In order for municipalities to exercise their power to regulate development within their jurisdiction, they must produce a Municipal Planning Strategy (MPS). To implement the MPS, land use bylaws (LUB) are developed, using instruments such as zoning and land sub-division. Municipal plans are not required to take special measures to protect the coast, and therefore development is often permitted without, for example, setback specification. The provincial government does not have the authority to require municipalities to adopt an MPS, and subsequently, many of the rural municipalities have no form of local planning. Figure 4.9 illustrates the land use planning context, high-

rethinking resources

105

From Strategy to Action An Action Plan for The Path We Share A Natural Resources Strategy for Nova Scotia

Homegrown Success a 10-year plan for agriculture

an initiative of

jobsHere

lighting the location of the case study changes, most of which are located outside of planned jurisdictions. The lack of land use planning coupled with an entrenched, cultural resistance to public regulation across private territories means private landowners hold an enormous amount of power regarding land use decisions across their property. Against this backdrop, policies and strategies are aimed in two, divergent directions. Firstly, as was touched upon in chapter 2, there is an ever stronger push towards ‘putting tools in the hands of communities.’ This can be interpreted through the numerous mechanisms and programs initiated in recent years as both a means to build local capacity as well as a means to support market based regulatory instruments. At the same time, the province is realising that for certain issues, a more centralised, province wide approach is necessary. This is a departure from a deeply embedded attitude that government should not interfere in local planning and management and is translating differently across different departments. Across the web of strategies and opposing directions, the role of natural resources as an important issue in rural communities is appearing in many sectors, from economic development strategies to environmental protection. However, the references remain vague and rarely attach binding commitments or focused actions. The ‘jobs Here’ strategy, a multisector economic development strategy put forth by the 2002 founded provincial department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism (ERDT) states: ‘jobs Here builds on our powerful assets and significant opportunities to accelerate economic growth: Vital rural communities built on plentiful natural resources and well-managed ecosystems’ (ERDT 2010). Under the umbrella of jobs Here, a natural resource strategy entitled ‘The Path We Share’ was developed, opening with the assertion, ‘The strategy marks a departure from traditional natural resource management.’ (NSDNR 2011). This statement is based on a more extensive background report that detailed the results of comprehensive community consultation, namely in resource regions, in which communities expressed concern that ‘the rural lifestyle, and the natural resources upon which it depends, are already under threat and urgently in need of a new management plan.’ Yet the final strategy gives no explanation of what traditional natural resource management was and how new management will be different. In fact, there is not even a single mention of rural communities in relation to resource management. The watered down strategy is being received by some as a missed opportunity to commit to higher ecological standards and benefits for rural communities. And for others, looking towards potential economic opportunities for resources, ‘there’s a disconnect between the desire, the intent to increase investment in rural areas with respect to natural resources and the actual policies that protect the forests.’ (Daniels 2012, personal communication).

source: (top & bottom) The Chronicle Herald, 16 June 2012 106

rethinking resources

107

The agricultural arm of the jobs here strategy, entitled ‘Homegrown Success’ is more direct in its reference to rural areas. It clearly states that ‘The vision of a stronger Nova Scotia with vibrant rural economies is inextricably linked to an agricultural industry that sustains itself and sustains those things valued by Nova Scotians’ and that growing the industry can ‘create good jobs, and revitalize rural communities’ (NSDA 2010). While these statements reflect a recognition of the link between rural and resources, the communities along the Annapolis valley for example where farming has managed to remain important and even carve out new niche markets, are faring much better in the face of shrinking than the regions where forestry and fisheries are the primary industries. Within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the important connection between rural communities and resource development is more understood. They are quick to point out that the natural resource strategy developed under the jobs Here plan is not a Department of natural resources strategy but rather a provincial strategy for which DNR was a consultant. In speaking with the director of the Lands Services Branch, it is evident that DNR is taking a decidedly different approach to the management of crown lands. After years of catering to the forestry companies, they are reorienting away from a passive approach – by which individuals or organisation would come to them to propose new uses for crown land – towards an active approach – finding suitability and opportunity within their land holdings and inviting potential developers to put in bids. They have initiated a pilot project called the Land Asset Management (LAM) Program to, amongst other goals, identify suitable places for more diversified production outside of forestry, such as cranberries, blueberries and sugar bush as well as opportunities for wind energy. So while economic development and environmental protection is actively being pursued on crown land, the interface with rural communities remains underdeveloped. Communities adjacent to crown land, many of which are shrinking, are being addressed by the LAM, but not by understanding diversified production as an opportunity for these resource regions. Instead, buffers are being drawn around settlements to limit the impact that, for example, wind turbines might have on disturbing the community. However, as a first step, this project marks a decidedly different and more integrated approach to management of natural resources than has yet been seen by the province. Outside of the government context, it is important to note that Nova Scotia has an enormous amount of non-governmental participation in policy issues. For a province with such a small population, the sheer number of volunteers community groups and nonprofit agencies of all scales of scopes is remarkable. And these organisations have a strong voice, often affecting real change in policy. A number of these groups have been set up to deal

108

with rural issues, specifically related to rights to resources. These groups operate at the interface between community, government and private industry, many with a strong foundation in or connection to academia. An underlying direction in the work of the more visible groups has been a major push towards community based resource management.

iii. TERRITORIES OF DESIGN Natural resources mean many things to many people. They are a source of economic wealth, a natural wonder to be preserved, a place to enjoy life outdoors - Our Shared Path, natural resource strategy 2011 The second main question guiding this research is how can rethinking resources and rights inform new directions for spatial development in shrinking resource regions? From all the analysis presented up to this point, it is clear that traditional attitudes towards resources and rights are currently being reconsidered by governments, communities and the private resource sector alike. Economic development and environmental protection are both high on the policy agenda and traditional practices are being questioned.

rethinking resources

109

WHAT IF ALL THE PRIVATE INDUSTRIAL FORESTRY LAND COMES OPEN?

WHAT IF ALL THE CROWN LAND BECOMES PROTECTED?

AND all the land is purchased by non-industrial developers

30%

SHRINKING: GROWING INTERIOR, DECLINING COASTS

private industrial forestry land

PROTECTED AREAS

crown land

SHRINKING: DECLINING INTERIOR, DECLINING COASTS

WHAT IF ALL THE INTERTIDAL BEACHES ARE LEASED FOR AQUACULTURE PRODUCTION?

OR all the land is used for biomass production

100%

ENERGY FROM RENEWABLE SOURCES

SHRINKING: GROWING COASTS

SHRINKING: GROWING CENTRE, DECLINING COASTS intertidal zone

110

figure 4.10 - territories of design rethinking resources

111

However, missing from the array of strategies is a comprehensive discussion about how these new directions will affect resource regions. While it is true that employment targets, social service strategies, etc. are being put forward, none seem to acknowledge the long term implications of shrinking; the possible abandonment of much of Nova Scotia’s inhabited rural coastline. This consideration raises many questions, informed by the territorial transformations already underway that have yet to enter the discussion: What if all the industrial forestry land holdings come open? What if the crown land holdings are all put under protected status? What if all the intertidal areas are leased out? What if all the built structures are abandoned? The aim of the rest of this research is to explore these possibilities as a means to frame the discussion surrounding the future of shrinking resource regions and to identify roles for design in enacting these transformations. Considering potential new patterns of resource use - ‘rethinking’ the relationship between resources, rights and spatial development – evokes another set of questions: What values towards resources are dominant? Whose interests are being accommodated and whose interests are being denied? At what scale(s) are these representational claims spatialised? The ultimate aim being to explore how patterns of settlement and land use will change to accommodate these dynamics. The first step towards speculating on the future is to try and make sense out of the complex and contradictory web of players, perspectives and possible outcomes. In many ways the shifting spatial and institutional landscape is marked by internal contradictions. The array of approaches and the accompanying sense of vagueness foster much uncertainty regarding actual outcomes for shrinking regions. At the heart of all the uncertainty is reconciling changing resource values and changing roles of rights with spatial development in resource regions. Much of the conflict derives from the problem of different people holding different interests in the same landscape leading to diversified expectations about how the land and resources should be used (Hanna et al. 1996; Von Benda-Beckmann et al. 2006; Berge 2007; Sandberg 2007). This is precisely the case in the examples given at the beginning of this chapter, where different stakeholders have different ideas about the best use of the territory. Reconciling these competing claims, especially between nature as property and as partner, is a global challenge but it takes on a particular significance in resource regions where many environmentally destructive practices have supported livelihoods for generations. It is even further complicated in shrinking regions. In relation to rural decline in western Canada, Markey et al. (2008) remark, ‘rural development is a complex process that has been made increasingly so within a planning environment of multiplicity in values and interests. Designing the right kind of intervention and

WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF THE BUILT LANDSCAPE? AS shrinking processes continue to transform resource regions

figure 4.11 - future of the built landscape? 112

rethinking resources

113

level of human activity required in landscape

rivalry between users for benefits no rivalry between users for benefits

subtractability of goods & services

+ sustained human interaction required

sustained human interaction not required

1. extraction cultivated harvesting

2. provision hunting, gathering

3. recreation playing, learning

4. protection biodiversity, existence

Adapting Berge’s (2007) descriptions, of the four areas are as follows: 1. extraction area: resources can be enjoyed outside the landscape, sustained human activity within the area is required. 2. provision area: resources can be enjoyed outside the landscape, human activity within the area is not required. 3. recreation area: resources can be enjoyed only within the landscape, sustained human activity within the area is required. 4. protection area : resources can be enjoyed everywhere, human activity within the area is not required.

figure 4.12 landscape framework, adapted Berge (2007)

114

figure 4.13 (top) traditional resource harvesting values, (bottom) new ecological values

achieving expected results is a precarious endeavor under even the best circumstances.’ The examples given at the beginning of this chapter illustrate the intertwined nature of ecological, economic and cultural issues in resource regions. And these are but a few examples of the many issues at play. How can these competing claims be reconciled and how will the landscape change? In order to start to make sense of this confusion, it is necessary to find tools that help in reducing the complexity of the situation. The starting point for this exercise is the work of Berge (2002, 2007), whose research on property rights systems and renewable resources in Norway touches on many of the same issues as are found in resource regions in Canada. A main objective of his work is trying to reconcile the new value of environmental protection with traditional value of resource management towards new forms of governance. He argues that these two issues, environmental protection and natural resource management are rarely discussed together and that understanding how these things interact is crucial to the design of better institutions, especially in resource regions such as the ones I am looking at in Nova Scotia. His argument is that the values deserving consideration are quite different across the two themes. Whereas environmental protection is concerned with protecting and preserving precarious resources of common interest from destructive human action, resource management is concerned with access to and extraction of resources seen as limited but essential for the survival of local communities (figure 4.13). This is precisely the situation that I have illustrated in resource regions in Nova Scotia where both attitudes are influential, though have traditionally been approached as conceptually and jurisdictionally segregated. Berge (2007) builds on commons theory to elaborate a framework that captures all values within a single analytical framework to better make decisions about distribution of benefits and reduction of negative externalities. The foundation of Berge’s framework (figure 4.12) is the notion that the same landscape can be valued in many different ways by many different people. Along these values people are motivated to engage with the environment in a variety of ways, from extracting nature’s resources for profit, to simply enjoying a walk in the woods, to recognising its ecological regulating capacity. Returning to the discussion opened in chapter 3 regarding the inherent properties of goods, Berge claims that human motivation is related to the benefit that can be taken from interacting with a particular good, structured by the inherent properties of subtractability and excludibility of beneficiaries. The framework, therefore, classifies the landscape according to human interactions, with each other and the landscape, namely – the level of rivalry for benefits and the level of interaction required to sustain those benefit. This leads to a classification of four landscape areas. It is important to note that in reality it is both possible and probable that all of these types

rethinking resources

115

figure 4.14 landscape framework applied to aquaculture site

1. clam extraction industrial harvesting

2. clam gathering personal use

3. beach recreation boats and trails

4. coastal ecosystem protection unmodified environment

will exist in the same landscape. In fact, organising multiple values in the same landscape is a main aim of using this framework. Conflicting ideas about land use can be identified along with opportunities for integration. While my research is not directly concerned with the design of institutions, there is value in using this framework because it forms a link between attitudes towards the landscape and the material ways that people modify the landscape. By articulating the way in which humans are using and participating in the landscape along common terms, it is possible to speculate on the spatial implications of these interactions. For example, looking to the intertidal landscape given as an example in case 2 (figure 4.14), for the clam harvesters, the dominant value in the landscape is for ‘provision’ or uncultivated extraction (area 2). They want to freely and openly move across the beaches and harvest clam in response to the changing dynamics of their habitat. For other people, the beach is seen as a place for recreation (area 3), as well as a place for personal gathering of clams (area 2). For the industrial players gaining leases over the beaches, industry, the main value in the landscape is for cultivated extraction (area 1). This framework does not speak directly to the means by which the goals can be achieved. For example as case 4 shows, aquaculture (along with all extraction processes) can be practiced in ecologically supportive or destructive ways, a qualification that cannot be distinguished using this model. However, it is a good starting point to highlight different claims and how they relate to the territory. It is therefore useful to open a discussion about structures and interventions that could accommodate as many of these values as possible in the way most sensitive to livelihoods and ecosystems. For me, this is an interesting starting point to link a more theoretical discussion about resource rights with concrete, observable implications for spatial development. In the following chapter, in which I use scenarios to explore possible futures for shrinking regions, this framework is employed to help construct the different scenarios and organise the actions related to each in reconciling resources as a source of livelihood and a life source.

figure 4.15 landscape framework applied to cases

116

rethinking resources

117

5 POSSIBLE FUTURES

At this point in the research, the time horizon needs to shift. Having established the influence of changing patterns of resource rights and use on spatial development and having identified territories of opportunity with the potential to address shrinking in resource regions, the following chapters reflect on the present from a position far in the future. As the last chapter demonstrated, there are many different perspectives regarding the roles of and rights to resources in shrinking communities. These perspectives are deeply embedded in the political but also cultural context of Nova Scotia. The aim of this chapter is to look beyond the confusion and controversy of the present condition towards imaging possible futures, informed but unconstrained by current realities. Scenarios are used to push forward different trajectories, building on the current directions amidst the array of territorial transformations and of provincial government approaches. The scenarios are not seen as a representation of a desired state, but rather as a tool to explore the limits and possibilities of change (Viganò 2012). This means that each scenario assesses the effect that different approaches to resources will have on addressing the challenge of shrinking. Taking the possibility of abandonment as a base assumption creates a spectrum of possible directions, investigating continued decline, stability and potential growth unevenly distributed across these regions. This method builds on a body of research within the future thinking literature that considers openly describing multiple futures, even undesirable ones, as a way to engage new perspectives and pose new questions (Myers & Kitsuse 2000; Mulvihill & Kramkowski 2010; Viganò 2012). Along this thinking, three scenarios are constructed and compared. The aim of using scenarios is twofold: to expand the discussion field by testing the limitations and opportunities of present decisions on future shrinking landscapes and to identify and articulate new roles for spatial design and planning within these transforming territories.

118

possible futures

119

i. WHY SCENARIOS? The phenomenon of shrinking is a dynamic, long term process that unfolds over time. As the previous chapters have demonstrated, the different dimensions of decline trigger institutional and spatial transformations. The unexpected outcomes of these shrinking processes reorient the traditional roles of design and planning in rural and resource development. Considering new ways to intervene in resource regions requires both a stepping outside of the conventional boundaries of design and planning and an extended time horizon that parallels the long term characteristics of shrinking. This type of transformational change – of institutions, ideas and cultures – can only occur over periods that ‘extend well beyond those of mainstream approaches to planning’ (Mulvihill & Kramkowski 2010:2449). Yet despite the fundamental dimension of time in planning and design, opening to the future evokes ‘a time frame that the design of cities and territories has often feared and rarely evoked’ (Viganò 2012:9). In recent years, there has been growing enthusiasm in both design research and practice to challenge the fear of the future and embrace time, the very ‘substance’ of spatial planning and design (Myers & Kitsuse 2000; Hopkins & Zapata, 2007; Viganò 2012). This has led to a renewed interest in and appropriation of a range of future thinking tools developed across multiple disciplines. Scenarios are one tool that is slowly being incorporated into design theory and practice. The evolution of scenarios as a strategy tool has been well documented since their first uses mid last century. Scenarios came about as a way to deal with the increasing complexity and interconnectivity of political, social and ecological challenges facing people in a globalising world. Much of the early theory was related to risk management, primarily addressing military and corporate applications. The prospective school, developed by Gaston Berger in the 1950s in France, presented a more philosophical approach to future thinking. In light of rapid change and increasing uncertainty about the future at that time, prospective called for a long term orientation (Godet & Roubelot 1996:164): to look far away--because la prospective is a long term preoccupation; to look breadthwise--to take care of interactions; to look in depth--to find the factors and trends that are really important; to take risks--because far horizons can make us change our long-term plans; to take care of mankind--because la prospective is primarily interested in human consequences.

120

possible futures

121

Scenarios now represent an approach to design related problems that is slowly gaining ground in theory and practice. Building on the foundational work of Berger and emerging scholarship in planning and design, I define and use scenarios along the following principle: they need not be probable, only possible. In this way, they aim to ‘illuminate the choices of the present in the light of “possible futures”... not necessarily those which are realized, but those which lead to action’ (Godet & Roubelot 1996 ). As Rotmans et al. (2000:809) assert, ‘such tools are needed on the interface between the short-term and the long-term, the objective and the value-laden, the quantitative and qualitative, and the certain and uncertain.’ Within this broad definition, there still exists room to work with possible futures towards different objectives. In the literature there is much discussion about the role of scenarios as either a normative or exploratory tool. Mulvihill and Kramkowski (2010:2452) suggest the use of exploratory scenarios as the most appropriate instrument for dealing with the uncertainty surrounding emerging issues of sustainability and ecological change. They claim that using scenarios in this way can open up possibilities otherwise obscured by a purely normative process, allowing users to ‘explore a range of distinct plausible futures and suspend explicit judgment about their desireability.’ Godet (2000) claims that scenarios involve both exploratory and normative thinking. That they should start by exploring many possible futures, especially those that are undesirable, but that they then should accept agency towards outlining specific actions in the present that will lead to desirable outcomes in the future. For the purpose of my research, the scenarios will remain primarily in an exploratory phase. However, without proposing concrete action, I will reflect on the different directions investigated through the scenarios and suggest areas where actions should be further investigated. I use scenarios as both a way to think about what worlds to prepare for and a way to initiate change within those worlds. There are a number of reasons why scenarios are an appropriate tool to address shrinking. First and foremost, inherent to the phenomenon of shrinking is a temporal dimension; understood as a process that unfolds over time. Because the present in shrinking areas is already shrouded in difficulty, the long term is often neglected when considering approaches in favour of dealing with the urgencies at hand. Paradoxically, it is precisely the urgency of the present that suggests a forward orientation, recognising that the challenges of the present will become the challenges of the future, only magnified. Scenarios have already been used in a number of European projects that look at the future of declining rural areas. In the EURURALIS (2004) project one of the main reasons cited for using scenarios, specific to the rural condition, was that many of the territorial transforma-

122

tions occurring in rural regions are irreversible: such as depopulation, loss of productive lands but also intensification of production and urbanisation (Westhoek 2006). This also points to the temporal dimension and the need for tools that consider the long term implications of latent processes. Another reason that scenarios are useful for addressing shrinking, specifically in resource regions, is because they can help to reconcile the increasingly multidirectional connection between local livelihood practices and global ecosystem changes. As Young (2011:77) points out, resource users in the past ‘might exhaust a local fish stock or deplete the supply of game in a limited area, but they could not disrupt biophysical systems on a large scale.’ Whereas now, ‘human actions have burgeoned into a pervasive force leading to the emergence of human-dominated ecosystems on a global scale’. This raises concerns for the future of the planet’s life support systems. In the face of shrinking, environmentally exploitative practices are on the one hand being reconsidered but on the other hand, harvesters are being required to, for example, cut more trees and cut them younger. Scenarios are a useful tool to explore the far reaching implications of reconciling nature as partner and property. As a relatively new tool in design practice, there is still much confusion in the literature over the aim and appropriateness of scenarios in addressing emerging issues such as shrinking as a form of urbanism. According to Gopkins and Zapata (2007:14) ‘there is nothing selfevident about what to do with these tools or how to use them once made. Presently, we overvalue expertise in creating forecasts, scenarios, plans, and projects, and undervalue learning how to use them.’ Despite their long term orientation, Mulvihill and Kramkowski (2010:2461) point out that scenarios tend to be most convincing when they can also successfully point out the shorter term benefits of the process, namely ‘generating insights that challenge prevailing assumptions, and ... lead to better questions that otherwise might not be asked.’ This legitimate concern calls for the need to clearly articulate the way in which I am using scenarios to address the future of shrinking resource regions. The following section explains the aim of using scenarios and the method of constructing scenarios in support of this aim.

possible futures

123

ii. SCENARIO CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY SCENARIO 1

SCENARIO 1

SCENARIO 2

SCENARIO 3

figure 5.1 dominant resource values in scenarios

To construct the scenarios, I started by outlining different positions towards the role of the landscape of natural resources in the future of the province; rethinking traditional practices alongside emerging ecological values. The scenarios build on directions, strategies and aspirations that have been introduced in the preceding chapters and revealed through my analysis. By looking far into the future, the scenarios explore the direct influence that changing approaches to resources and rights could have on shrinking regions. Taking as foundational the assumption that resources and communities are interconnected in these areas, three scenarios are used to ‘draw out’ possible futures for resource regions based on intervening in the natural and institutional landscape.

124

1 These targets were originally proposed in the EGSPA (2007). the renewable energy target has since been amended.

The starting point of this scenario is seeing opportunity, both qualitative and quantitative, in the expansive character of the landscape. In response to the challenges facing primary resource industries and the criticism of their ecologically destructive practices, this scenario rethinks the long tradition of resource extraction towards the dual objective of profit and protection. It confronts the notion of supply; looking to the landscape as both a source of renewable energy and ecosystem services provision, at the provincial and global scale . This scenario moves beyond the current targets of 40 percent renewable energy production by 2020 and 12 percent ecological protection by 2015.1 It investigates potential for the province to become a net renewably-sourced energy producer and tests the role of resource communities in this transformed landscape.

possible futures

125

SUSTAIN SCENARIO 2

The starting point of this scenario is recognising opportunity in a community based approach to resource management and use. In response to the fisheries collapse, blamed in part on an increasingly top-down regulation strategy, a number of local initiatives have advocated for increased authority at the community level as a way to foster economic and ecological resilience. Many important productive infrastructures have already been downloaded to communities; a dual effort to bring decision making and maintenance closer to the source while simultaneously absolving the state of responsibility. This scenario tests the limits of local capacity towards its ultimate ending – complete self-sufficiency. It investigates what communities can do with the resources they have – natural, cultural, infrastructural - towards understanding the implications of community capacity on shrinking regions.

126

YIELD SCENARIO 3

The starting point of this scenario is reorienting the dominant paradigm in resource extraction – high volume/low value – that is failing to support livelihoods. This scenario takes a less vulnerable, more diversified position towards natural resources, flipping the conventional wisdom and exploring possibilities for low-volume/high value yield. Building on the current initiatives towards a more regional scale, multifunctional use of the landscape this scenario looks towards opportunities for ‘boutique’ development. It investigates ways to reconcile landscape traditions with economic development as a means to define new regional identities through resources. This requires doing old things in new ways and introducing new practices and people to traditional knowledge. This scenario explores the role of shrinking communities within this place-based, entrepreneurial approach.

possible futures

127

AIM OF USING SCENARIOS The first aim of using scenarios is to explore the ‘limits’ of a given approach, understood along multiple axes – ecological, economic, cultural – to test the effects that rethinking resources and rights will have on shrinking communities. Does the approach sustain rural livelihoods and way of life? Does it create opportunities for growth? Or do the prioritised objectives accept the natural decline of resource regions? The scenarios are not looking to directly comment on a current policy directions but rather to initiate or expand the discussion – making explicit the relationship between new approaches to resources and the future of shrinking regions. In this way, stability or growth is not positioned as a desirable future, but rather all possibilities on a spectrum of continued decline and disappearance to stability or growth are examined within the scenarios. The second aim of the scenarios is to identify the roles of spatial planning and design within the transforming territory. Over the last century of rapid urbanisation in North America and worldwide, spatial design theory and practice have been oriented towards and supported by growth. When faced with new realities of shrinking regions, these disciplines are forced to reconsider their historical roles. In place of spatial development as a concept linked to physical growth, the scenarios begin to address spatial development as a spectrum of change.

? ?

BUILT LANDSCAPE

demolished/recycled reused adapted new

PROPERTY RIGHTS

SCENARIO REPRESENTATION To communicate the different approaches to resources, rights and the implications for spatial development, each scenario starts by elaborating a territorial strategy. The strategies are represented using a layered approach. The intention of the strategies is to frame the scope, scale and sequence of activities and actors that would come together to achieve the different approaches. Working within the framework of the territorial strategies, the role of communities and the future of shrinking regions is considered, and tested at a smaller scale for cross comparison. Figure 5.2, which shows a typical existing condition of settlement in shrinking regions, illustrates the drawing structure used across all three scenarios to compare and explain potential changes to the spatial and institutional landscape. The scenarios also use diagrams and exploratory visualisations to communicate a range of empirical and experiential findings about the futures. typical condition resource regions

TERRITORIAL TRANSFORMATIONS

128

figure 5.2 scenario representation template

possible futures

129

This scenario looks beyond community, beyond region, beyond province. It posits that the dual aim of clean energy production and the protection of biodiversity and open space are global objectives and therefore belong to a global system. This leads to profit and protection being prioritised over rural resistance.

130

SUPPLY SCENARIO 1

possible futures

131

The starting point of this scenario is the quality of ‘expanse’; a defining characteristic of Nova Scotia’s landscape of natural resources. Building on the traditional approach to high volume resource extraction, this looks towards renewable energy as a defining feature of the future landscape. The notion of expanse is not only operational as a requirement of production in this scenario, but also as an important perceptual characteristic of the landscape. Natural resources are embraced as an opportunity to grow the provincial economy while retaining and regenerating wilderness where development once was. i. ENERGY EXPANSE Three energy zones are defined corresponding with suitable conditions for tidal, wind and bio-energy. These renewable production regions form the base layer of the strategy, covering the entire geography of the province. The most potential for tidal energy is found in the Bay of Fundy where the tidal change ranges up to 16m. There is also significant opportunity for smaller scale production along rivers. Wind is another untapped resource in Nova Scotia. The wind zones overlap both the tidal and bio-energy areas as they relate to offshore, coastal and topographical conditions. With over 80 percent provincial forest cover (44 240 km2)there is great possibility for biomass as well. There are a number of ways to get energy from biological material which allows for a return to more diversity in the forests. Also, there is the potential to scale back traditional extraction and reintroduce new species towards recovering the original characteristics of old growth forests. ii. CONNECTING BIODIVERSITY Inscribed within the zones of energy, an extensive ecological figure is defined. The aim of the biodiversity corridors is to ensure places where species and habitats can cross the landscape without encountering obstacles such as clear-cut lands or hydro-dams. The starting point for defining the ecological network is the current protected parcels mapped along with the intact forests and other unprotected ecologically significant features. To connect these ‘islands of biodiversity’, key lines are traced between and along important areas. These ‘ecological lines’ structure a new biodiversity strategy that replaces the current method of protection, done according to lot limits. The basic principle is that connections are important, but that they do not need to be static. The links can change over time, as long as they remain unbroken. This leads to a dynamic approach to ecological protection practices across both private and public property (figure 5.3). Landowners are required to respect a minimum buffer around the ‘ecological line’ and they are also required to leave a prescribed percentage of their lot undeveloped, uncultivated and physically connected to the biodiversity corridor. These guidelines ensure that connectivity is constant, but leave the form of the

132

t = 0: ecological lines

t = 1yr: 3 owners

t = 5yrs: 3 owners

t = 10yrs: 2 owners

existing property ecological property

t = 0: 3 owners

3 owner 1 owner 2

3 1

owner 3 figure 5.3 dynamic biodiversity connections

protection areas flexible and ever changing as landowners and adjacent land uses change. Targets such as the current 12 percent protection goal are dismissed in favour of an amorphous figure with a changing surface area that prioritises connectivity. This strategy also allows for increased flexibility for renewable energy production. High volume development of renewable sources can move forward without disrupting habitats and can even contribute to regenerating habitat in the wake of old forestry practices. As shown in figure 5.4, the different energy zones have different ‘vertical footprints’. This allows for integrating ecological objectives with extraction objectives at different elevations; creating interface areas that accommodate recreational paths and access to the expansive wilderness.

possible futures

133

SCENARIO 1 APPROACH ENERGY ZONES

ECOLOGICAL LINES

BIODIVERSITY

tidal

ecological lines

tidal & wind

dynamic corridors

wind wind & biomass biomass INTACT FORESTS

PROTECTED AREAS

ECOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT

turbine height

80m

ENERGY ZONES

tree canopy

40m BIOMASS 0m

WIND

tidal range

-16m

turbine depth

TIDAL -45m

100km

figure 5.4 scenario 1 approach 134

possible futures

135

iii. TWO TYPES OF TOWNS Within the transforming expanses of energy and ecological protection, the role of shrinking communities also changes. A handful of shrinking towns turn around; those with existing research and development capacity or with strategic advantage for energy development, such as a deep harbour. With help from government and private investment, these ‘tech towns’ become important nodes in the new energy landscape, locally and globally. Outside of these development hubs, livelihoods become increasingly disconnected from the landscape. In the short term, construction jobs will be created to accommodate new infrastructure projects. While some forestry jobs will remain for biomass harvesting, the restructuring of the resource economy will ultimately increase high tech jobs while decreasing seasonal labour employment. Two types of towns are differentiated, a new minority of ‘tech towns’ surrounded by a growing sea of abandoned settlements. SPATIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN ROLES There are two main phases to this scenario, each defining different roles for planning and design. In the initial phase, as towns unwind, there is a role for spatial design in the process of transitioning; facilitating a shift away from permanent settlement through the use of temporary infrastructural provision. At the same time, as the industrial exploitation of resources ramps up, there will be substantial development, both primary infrastructure such as wind turbines, tidal turbines and co-gen facilities as well as many supporting projects such as roads and harbours. Along the ‘ecological lines’, there will be a need to design the landscape of energy; not simply to accommodate the new ecological objectives but further to explore opportunities for productive synergies that reveal new programs, such as recreational uses of the territory, through design. In the second phase, as infrastructures are up and running and towns are emptying out, an opposite process will require design efforts. What can be done with the built relics and land patterns after shrinking has run its course in resource regions? Some options are explored in this scenario that could engage designers in rethinking the landscape. Without intervention, the landscape will be left to wilderness, as shown in figure 5.6.2. Other possibilities include a combination of demolishing and retrofitting in which the new energy regimes claim leftover structures and adapt them for new operations (figure 5.6.3). Those structures that are not useful could be torn down and recycled, another short term employment opportunity. A different approach entails leaving the structures and having them become part of a network of vacant buildings for camping use. Taken to the extreme, these buildings could be left free for squatters, clustered in buffer zones at the interface of productive lots (figure 5.6.4).

136

vacant camping cluster

recycled energy source

dynamic ecological corridor buffer from previous corridor existing property lines

biomass 1

energy zone boundary ecological property line wind 1

biomass 2

tidal 1 wind 2

biomass wind tidal

figure 5.5 supply scenario

possible futures

137

figure 5.6.1 existing condition

this photograph represents a typical lot development along coastal areas. The lot extends much deeper than the cleared area, including the densely forested area depicted in the background of the photo

figure 5.6.2 return of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;wildernessâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

this image imagines what might become of the landscape if shrinking processes lead to settlement abandonment

138

possible futures

139

figure 5.6.3 industrial adaptation

this image shows the potential for new industrial uses, such as biomass storage and processing to reinhabit left over built form

figure 5.6.4 vacant network

this image shows the possibility for vacant buildings to become a province wide resource, allowing for unserviced or minimally serviced outposts for wilderness recreation and camping

140

possible futures

141

EXISTING CONDITION

SUPPLY SCENARIO

figure 5.7 changing property rights scenario 1

private private industrial crown (leasable) crown protected consolidated crown (leasable) & private industrial for energy production consolidated private for energy production large crown (leasable energy jurisdictions) settlement

142

100km

There is a central role for the provincial government in initiating the transition away from old forestry and fisheries practices towards new uses of the woods and waters. Putting in place the new ecological structure will require a strong coordinated effort. With protection happening in spite of property rights, crown land holdings will be developed for energy production. Close partnerships with large scale resource developers and foreign investors will require that the province takes a position regarding land ownership. Either, they can decide to help facilitate new companies in purchasing large holdings from forestry companies or the province can move in the direction of the other Canadian province, purchasing as much land as possible and controlling renewable energy production through leases. Either way, it will be the role of the government to facilitate the structured depopulation of coastal communities through the buying and consolidating of private lots for energy production.

possible futures

143

As some communities stabilise, and others recede, all become more insular. Over time, unlikely geographic connections emerge as local products are exchanged both within the province and on the international market. What remains is a dotted landscape of communities, interested primarily in their own survival and living day to day in a world increasingly polarised from the growing centre of Halifax, only hours away.

144

SUSTAIN SCENARIO 2

possible futures

145

SCENARIO 2 APPROACH The traditionally embedded notion of ‘harvesting’, a thoughtful, balanced practice of using nature’s resources within ecological limits, underpins this scenario. Following current tendencies in policy, the provincial government provides instruments for rural communities to develop local capacity to manage their own resources. In doing so, this scenario tests the limits of self-sufficiency based on a reorientation towards a subsistence relationship with resources. Two geographically distinct economies develop in parallel: a subsistence economy oriented towards rural self sufficiency and driven by local trade amongst communities alongside an enclave economy, outside of the state influence of resource industries, where autonomous communities continue to provide speciality products in abundance, such as lobster, to a global market. i. RESOURCE DIVERSIFICATION The starting point of this strategy is assessing the productive capacity of the natural landscape in a given community. The agricultural suitability is mapped along with all other potential food and energy sources, creating a baseline map that identifies the carrying capacity of the landscape in relation to self sufficiency. The natural inheritance differs widely across communities, primarily between those areas with farming potential and those areas with groundfish resources (figure 5.8). The capacity of the found natural resources to sustain communities reintroduces a quantifiable connection between people and the landscape. This form of multiple resource use for subsistence marked centuries of coastal inhabitance in Nova Scotia and is reinvented in this scenario. The base line map provides a starting point for communities to define their geographic and demographic limits. ii. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE Infrastructure development has always been important for production in resource regions; both enabling extraction and processing but also shaping community form. To maximise the productive potential mapped in the landscape suitability assessments, and without the provision of centralised services, innovation in infrastructure becomes a main objective. This leads to a reinvention of the typical nineteenth century hamlets in which ‘the harbour, the pit head, wash house and company store or mill’ was the formal centre of a community (Ennals & Holdsworth 1988). These technologies both permitted the harvesting of resources for livelihood, but also fostered community culture. A provincially funded program for multifunctional infrastructure development creates opportunities for communities to participate in the definition of off-the-grid community infrastructures that become new social and economic centres. These infrastructures become important resources in their own right, maintaining and regulating ecological stability in relation to cultivation and resource harvesting.

AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY

GROUNDFISH STOCK

RESETTLING

INFRA: dykes, tidal turbines

INFRA: wind turbines, wharf

ENERGY: tidal, bioenergy from reeds/trees

ENERGY: wind, bioenergy: forests

FOOD: farming, marshes, mudflats, orchards

FOOD: oceans, mudflats orchards

AREA 1

AREA 2

figure 5.8 scenario 2 approach 146

possible futures

147

community land trust

iii. RE-SETTLING The main principle guiding this scenario is the objective of living within the limits of the landscape. Taken to the extreme, this requires new productive relationships with natural resources as well as new spatial structures to optimise the natural potential of a place. As governments scale back service provisions, towns are aided in a process of spatial restructuring. The existing dispersed settlement form that characterises so many resource regions is inefficient both for the provision of infrastructure and for maximising food and energy production. Taking the landscape suitability mapping as a base layer, communities are forced to ‘re-settle.’ They start by looking at their

148

farmstead greenhouse figure 5.9. re-settling

(top left) existing condition, (bottom left) this image shows the potential to cluster development to maximise service provision while allowing for large contiguous land trusts for mixed farming, (top right) another configuration where farming is less suitable requires that new cultivation zones fill in linearly between existing lots, (bottom right) this image illustrates the introduction of green houses, necessary for food production along the atlantic coast where the soil conditions do not support agricultural production.

rethinking resources

149

SPATIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN ROLES This scenario makes explicit the roles of spatial planning and design in moving towards a more community oriented management of resource regions. While total self-sufficiency is evoked in this scenario to establish the absolute limits of living off the landscape, lesser forms of subsistence living would still require a significant amount of territorial restructuring. Firstly, looking to the communities themselves, a concerted design effort would be required by determine the best balance between ecological capacity and social preferences in implementing this radical approach to re-settling rural areas. As figure 5.12 illustrates, interventions would have to consider adapting and reusing existing structures; layering programs and productivity. Different levels of communal living could be accommodated within the same consolidated lot structure, providing options and opportunities for change in relation to demographic dynamics (figure 5.10). The landscape qualities would change as well as, for instance, the coastline would become more infrastructural in places to accommodate dykelands, fish farming and energy production. Coupled with more extensive land clearing for increased agricultural production, these changes would have to be integrated through design to enhance existing features rather than negate them. The process of re-settling would also require strategic phasing, both within a given community and in relation to provincial infrastructure.

re-settling adapted for community infrastructure

outside of community capacity existing property lines land trust boundary waste/water/power lines land trust 2: dykelands grazing

land trust 3: nearshore groundfish

land trust 1: community aquaculture

land trust 5: mixed farming land trust 4: blueberry brush

community capacity

landholdings ‘communally’. Guided by standards provided by the provincial government, communities assess possible arrangements to consolidate land holdings towards restructuring the territory through building concentration. Tools such as the Community Land Trust recently introduced by the Department of Natural Resources help communities in gaining full legal rights over their resources. This tool would be made available to help communities purchase lands, primarily forested lands and intertidal areas, opened up by large industrial sales, to gain more control over land and resource practices best suited to their specific needs. These lands would be owned and managed as commons, transforming the diffuse footprint of rural regions through new processes of lot division and amalgamation. The result is a diversification of the now ubiquitous linear coastal development pattern in which the local scale natural features inform spatial development differently across transforming communities. Figure 5.9 tests configurations in areas with farming capacity and without, to illustrate the spatial implications of prioritising different property conditions in the process of transitioning.

figure 5.11 sustain scenario

150

possible futures

151

figure 5.12 community infrastructure

this image shows the infrastructural adaptation of the community wharf. This traditional resource access point is laminated with new productive activities. Cranberry cultivation, aquaculture, marshland hay, wind and tidal energy as well as a community market and collective grey water filtration plant define the new community centre in this re-settled scenario.

152

possible futures

153

EXISTING CONDITION

SUSTAIN SCENARIO

figure 5.13.1 changing property rights scenario 2

This scenario assumes a strong, up-front presence of the government, through financial and capacity investments to start up the re-settling process. This aid would be provided over a short term to kick start communities who would then be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of their waste, water and energy infrastructure. Beyond the formal role of government sectors in enacting this version of the future, the different outcomes across regions are highly dependent on participation and engagement within and between communities. The communities that survive will have to embrace change, rather than resist it in favour of a nostalgic rural ideal. Nova Scotia has a strong history of community action, most notably in the more heterogeneous towns, that mix old and new, local and immigrant residents (Graham 2012, personal communication). These are the communities that would be mobilised in this scenario.

private private industrial crown (leasable) crown protected community land trust 1 community land trust 2 0

100km

settlement figure 5.13.2 changing property rights scenario 2

154

possible futures

155

In this scenario, the unique inheritance of natural resources plays a strong role in the regionalising process, allowing populations to remain stable or even grow. Reinvented â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;resource regionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; replace the existing monoculture of forestry with a more variegated and less vulnerable set of enterprises.

156

YIELD SCENARIO 3

possible futures

157

This scenario takes a ‘place based’ approach to resource use, focusing on the attributes that make communities and the natural landscapes that they are connected to, diverse and unique. This scenario understands that ‘natural resources in general are increasingly viewed as local assets that may be used as vehicles for economic diversification’ (Markey et al. 2008:410). The driving idea behind this scenario is to reorient the dominant attitude in current resource development as defined by ‘high volume/low value’ production. Flipping this approach, the new landscape of resources aims to capitalise socially, economically and ecologically on the latent properties of the existing natural and cultural landscape through ‘low volume/ high value’ production. Through the creation of ‘boutique’ regions, this scenario looks to the landscape and the inherent opportunities it presents to develop niche regions for food production and other speciality products, fostering local entrepreneurship and development. i. PRODUCTIVE REGIONS The starting point is to establish production regions that value the landscape according to opportunities to diversify resource yield, but also along other ecosystem services ranging from extreme recreation to carbon sequestration. These are captured in zones that are overlapping both in plan and section (figure 5.16). This three dimensional reading of the landscape highlights opportunities for a diversification of production. It integrates both the inherent natural conditions of a specific location along with the potential mutually beneficial relationships with adjacent land uses. Along these designations, speciality regions emerge that look to the unique products of the place, such as maple sugar or dulse, and consider the traditional knowledge and production methods as value added. ii. ‘GROW’ BELT The main structuring layer of this scenario is the articulation of a resource belt that draws a line across the increasingly diversified provincial landscape DNA. This loop is both a physical form – evenly distributing mobility across regions – as well as a planning instrument. It takes as a starting point two existing lines of transportation infrastructure: the secondary old coastal road and the extensive abandoned rail network. The area bounded by these two traces inscribes a new figure in the territory that physically and conceptually unifies the province. Practically speaking, infrastructural upgrades are required along this route to ensure equal accessibility throughout. Furthermore, possibilities to reopen rail lines are considered, reconnecting outlying towns to the central node of Halifax. This ‘grow’ belt also acts to strengthen the linear character of settlement, requiring that future development, both residential and commercial or recreational happen along its length. It

158

figure 5.14 historic natural resources and transportation map (1924) overlaid with ‘grow belt’

provides a flexible spine that allows for entrepreneurship to organically emerge and ‘plug in’ without biasing areas that are already growing economically. The loop also begins to layer natural infrastructures along the transport corridors. It creates a continuous recreational circuit that passes through a diversity of natural conditions. It also fosters opportunities for experimentation and innovation with large scale green technologies for regional water and waste management, such as the construction of a comprehensive network of swales for natural purification. iii. URBAN-RURAL INTEGRATION In this scenario, the current rural urban dynamic is seen as an opportunity for resource regions to benefit from the growth of nearby Halifax. The horizontality of the existing dispersed pattern of settlements is seen as an asset, an ‘unfinished’ urbanism waiting to be thinned in some places and filled in others depending on growing niches. Growth is encouraged outside of Halifax in the form of tourism and second home development, guided by the access belt, and new provincial standards are put in place to ensure environmental compatibility. Previously shrinking regions start to cater to the urban market. Tourism, both locally and eventually internationally, becomes a key economic driver.

possible futures

159

SCENARIO 3 APPROACH grow belt abandoned rail lines

shelfish - tidal power

MARINE

GROW BELT

overlapping assets

MARSHES

mixed - hay - livestock

rockweed - sediment

INTERTIDAL

RAIL & ROAD

blueberry brush

FORESTS

LANDSCAPE SUITABILITY ZONES:

FIELDS

LANDSCAPE ASSETS 0

100km

figure 5.15 scenario 3 approach 160

possible futures

161

boutique enterprise construction

(1) hardwoods bush(2) sugar blueberry brush (3) mixed farming (4) hay marshes (5) clams (6) haddock (7)

(1) new residential construction

(3)

grow belt infrastructure & enterprise

(6)

(2) (5)

(4)

existing property lines landscape suitability rail lines

(7) figure 5.16 example of overlapping landscape suitability areas

SPATIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN ROLES The new landscape can be read on many scales, from a single productive fabric that spans the entire province to an aggregation of overlapping development nested within a diversity of ecological conditions. This leads to a diversity of roles for spatial planning and design at multiple scales. Flexibility is a key driver of this scenario. At the provincial scale, the role of spatial planning is in layering physical, natural and social infrastructures to allow change to happen organically, but within a set spatial and organisational structure. Much of the initial work is in understanding the potential of ‘place’ and devising guidelines that achieve a high level of openness to new development but without compromising ecological integrity. Within regions, as resource industries diversify, there will be many opportunities for designers to take inventory of the leftover footprint of old industries which in themselves could become a valuable resource for start up businesses to re-inhabit. At a local scale, there could be opportunities for very small scale landscape interventions to define moments along the loop. Certain roads in Nova Scotia are already named as tourism routes, such as the Lighthouse route or the Evangeline trail. The routes are occasionally marked by roadside lookoffs and resting areas. This concept could be expanded to the grow belt, inviting punctuated interventions that reveal and enhance the changing landscape along its length and help to signal speciality regions, giving a presence to enterprises that may be isolated more deeply in the hinterland.

162

grow belt

figure 5.17 yield scenario

possible futures

163

figure 5.18.1,5.18.2 landscape index

the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;grow beltâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; starts by acting as an index of the existing landscape conditions. From the outset, through small interventions such as pathways, lookoffs and even signage, this new provincial wide infrastructure identifies natural assets. These local scale initiatives are the first step towards engaging the natural potential of resource regions and enabling new enterprises.

164

possible futures

165

EXISTING CONDITION

YIELD SCENARIO

figure 5.19 changing property rights scenario 3

private private industrial crown (leasable) crown protected crown managed grow belt â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;entrepreneurial easementsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; â&#x20AC;&#x201C; leases and licences across crown and private lands settlement

166

100km

This scenario requires that the provincial government takes a much stronger regulatory role in governing the province as a unified, regional system. This represents a change in the established position of minimal interference in rural local affairs. The crown has already purchased many of the abandoned rail lines which are being used as wilderness trails. One option to facilitate this scenario could be for the province to start accumulating land holdings within the loop. This would allow for greater coordination for regional scale initiatives that require connectivity, such as a waste water system. It could also allow for a reinterpretation of the current crown leasing system towards developing new instruments to help local enterprises start up without having to invest in land. Production regions could become viable governance boundaries, replacing the less functional municipal boundaries with more logical ecological borders.

possible futures

167

6 NEW DIRECTIONS

According to Mulvihill and Kramkowski (2010) one of the problems of using scenarios is the lack of accessibility which makes it difficult to communicate their results. ‘Even when scenario exercises unfold smoothly, the internal choices that are made in the process may lack transparency; external audiences may not understand or appreciate the collective thought processes that are applied to discussion of drivers, trends and uncertainties, and ultimately to the scenarios that are developed.’ The aim of this final chapter is to reflect on the scenario process, articulating ways in which it contributes to the discussion surrounding shrinking. To do this, I compare the scenarios along the different transformations of the natural and institutional landscape of resources. I look to the different ways that settlement in shrinking regions responds to these changes and over what time period these dynamics play out. This better understanding of the complimentary and mutually exclusive activities across the scenarios supports the two main objectives of using scenarios – to expand the limits of the current discussion on shrinking, and to identify the contribution of spatial designers in addressing this emerging form of urbanism. SCENARIO CONTRIBUTIONS The analysis presented throughout this research clearly establishes that the problems facing resource regions are understood by governments and communities alike as significant; change is necessary. Many transformations are occurring, mostly changes to property rights, for which the territorial consequences are uncertain or unconsidered. The scenarios were used to illustrate the spatial implications of shifting approaches to resource management by drawing out changes to the built landscape. In this way, the scenarios act as a communication tool. While the options explored in the scenarios may not be desirable or even probable, they force the discussion to confront the realities of, for example, a return to wilderness as in scenario 1 or a more developed coastline as in scenario 3. Imaging futures that are markedly different from the present is a difficult but necessary task when confronting new forms of spatial development. In Nova Scotia especially, but in rural regions in general, there is often a resistance to change, where

168

new directions

169

0yr

SUPPLY SCENARIO 1

50yrs

20yrs

100yrs

investment in tech towns

employment through infrastructure projects structured depopulation

0 SUSTAIN SCENARIO 2 The different scenarios are not intended to be seen as alternatives, but rather as a field of possibilities in which the implications of actions in the present are tested in the future. The outcomes for shrinking regions vary across the scenarios creating a spectrum of possible future settlement forms that frame a spectrum of directions for spatial design intervention. Each of the population graphs (right) depicts future dynamics of currently shrinking regions. All the lines taken together represent the total amount of communities that are shrinking. When the initial line splits, this means that some communities are growing while others are declining. The thickness of the lines represents the portion of the total population of all communities. For example, in scenario 1, the majority of communities will eventually decrease to a population of zero, while a handful of communities will actually increase their current populations.

+ local trade

global trade

resettling process

0 YIELD SCENARIO 3

local & global tourism

grow belt investment

regional fluctuations

figure 6.1 comparing population dynamics across scenarios

170

new directions

171

traditional relationships with the landscape of natural resources have remained stable for centuries. For this reason, many of the ideas brought forth by the scenarios will not sit well with communities or government sectors. And this is precisely what makes scenarios such a useful tool. The ‘future’ is on everyone’s mind; defined by uncertainty, trepidation, hopelessness and in a few instances, optimism – underpinned by a denial of the real urgencies that shrinking presents. This narrow understanding of the long term colours the way that decisions are made in the present; a missed opportunity to integrate spatial development strategies in shrinking regions that the scenarios brought to light. Within the different scenarios, different transformations of the physical environment are identified along with new directions for spatial planning in guiding these transformations. The scenarios explore a range of possible roles for design, in transitioning infrastructure, the built form of communities and landscape structure. Across shrinking regions, planning and design needs to shift from a focus on ‘growing’ territories to what Laursen (2008) refers to as the ‘unwinding’ of the rural landscape. Each scenario explores a different way of relating to resources, built on a ‘rethinking’ of the current relationships between resource, rights and spatial development. Changes to the institutional environment are also explored in the different scenarios, seeking to understand the necessary shifts in property rights to support the transforming physical landscape. The outcome of each approach, which defines new roles for government, communities and resource industries, is a spectrum of future population dynamics and changing settlement form (figure 6.1). The supply scenario highlights the need to think about the leftover infrastructure and built form as communities recede towards possible abandonment. It explores a number of possibilities, focused on adapting old structures to new uses or recycling built material as part of the emerging energy economy (figure 6.2). This involves very localised interventions – innovation in recycling and adaptive reuse technologies. It also involves coordination at a regional scale – programming the territory with minimal infrastructures that allow users to invent new programs for old buildings. The introduction of ecological property divisions, inscribed within the existing lot structure creates interesting interfaces that offer design potential to change the way that the landscape is viewed and used for industrial extraction. This dynamic, provincial wide structure reorients the dominant paradigm in environmental protection planning by which areas are fenced off and human activities are limited. This scenario posits an active role for ecological processes in solving competition over land uses by encouraging new shapes and spaces to emerge over time. The sustain scenario considers a very different scale than scenario 1. It

172

figure 6.2 reconsidering the built footprint

figure 6.2 adapting the leftover built landscape

figure 6.3 making

infrastructure multifunctional

looks closely at the built footprint in relation to the productive capacity and ecological limits of a given area. In doing so, it recognises the environmental incompatibilities in the current diffuse settlement pattern towards stewarding natural resources for a more even distribution of benefits (figure 6.3). This scenario looks to design as a central tool in questioning how much or how little of the existing fabric can support the productive needs of a community without compromising the integrity of the environment and the embedded cultural preferences towards open space, privacy and individual ownership. Multifunctional infrastructures develop and become resources in their own right, defining the ‘community capacity’ (figure 6.4). As communities move closer to self-sufficiency, their landscapes diversify considerably across the province. New structures emerge that build in opportunities for change – growth and decline – within the new community layout. The final scenario, yield, takes a similar approach to diversification of resource production, but does so at the scale of the region and with economic development as an underlying principle. The ‘grow’ belt becomes a new provincial scale spatial and institutional space that integrates rural and urban along a common landscape connection. On the one hand, this scenario has the most conventional roles for design. It encourages new development as a way to unlock both the productive and profitable assets of the landscape. However, given the current lack of land use planning across most of the province, the main challenge in this scenario is to develop guidelines for development that are underpinned by landscape suitability and climate resilience. This requires a design effort that fluidly considers province, region and site as interconnected territories of design. FUTURES IN COMMON? To conclude the scenario research, it is important to clarify the ways in which the scenarios can be seen as alternatives and the ways in which they offer compatible directions for the future of resource regions. The first scenario, supply, continues to see the vast, undeveloped nature in Nova Scotia as a large scale resource. The expanse of the landscape is valued for extraction processes that require economies of scale. Spatially, the footprint of existing settlement is very small compared to the overall provincial area. So this scenario could easily continue to accommodate settlement without compromising new production. The actions in scenario 1 are not inherently contradictory to the approach to resources tested in scenario 2, sustain. Given the relatively low population for the land area of Nova Scotia, communities could move towards a more direct relationship with resource harvesting at the small scale alongside an emerging energy economy, because the food footprint of towns would still remain small enough as to not take away significant space for energy production. In fact, many efforts

new directions

173

are already being made to help communities in becoming small scale energy producers. The reason that these initiatives are failing is not a matter of conflict over land, a commodity that is not in short supply. It is a matter of making decisions about investment. The sustain scenario would require considerable up-front investment by the provincial government, the return being that the province would no longer need to spend on services outside of the stable, urban areas. This scenario leaves communities very vulnerable. However, it also lets communities builds on the diversity found throughout the province, in which some communities will embrace the chance to manage their own resources and eventually have the potential to prosper, perhaps to a greater degree than when livelihoods were more connected with an industrial economy. While scenario 1 looks almost exclusively towards industry to develop the territory and scenario 2 gives community’s tools to develop outside of government assistance, both are founded on an idea that after initial support, the government will not need to take an active central role. The ecological planning proposed in scenario 1 would require a province effort, but once in place, the investment would recede. The third scenario requires a more sustained provincial role, developing infrastructure at multiple scales to allow for an even distribution of services across the province. Low maintenance green infrastructures could absorb some of the burden, but a move towards an artisan scale resource economy would take a long time to regain the traditional economic place of the industrial economy. Investment in mobility and other servicing infrastructure along the ‘grow’ belt would require a massive funding program and would need to be completed in its entirety in order for the objective of even access to occur. This decision would limit the opportunity to invest in distributed infrastructures at the community scale, making it more difficult for a self- sustaining model as explored in scenario 2. However, the increased accessibility could prove advantageous in attracting energy developers, such as outlined in scenario 1, whose operations would require less up front infrastructural investment. As all the directions explored in the scenarios are based in current thinking, it is likely that elements of all the scenarios will unfold along with unforeseen future developments. In this way, the scenarios identify landmarks, moments where intervention could have a significant impact on future spatial patterns; opportunities that require design to be actualised.

figure 6.5 new directions 174

new directions

175

7 CONCLUSIONS

The starting point of this research was recognising that resource dependent regions, both in Nova Scotia and internationally, are facing a host of challenges that are threatening the viability of livelihood production from natural resources and consequently the rural way of life. Depopulation defines these shrinking regions, linked to an array of associated problems. To understand the implications of shrinking, it was first necessary to frame the territory at risk. I established that both the natural and institutional landscape of resources and rights have been influential in shaping patterns of spatial development. Taking this reading of the territory as foundational, I was able to explain the shape of shrinking in resource regions in Nova Scotia. The research revealed that shrinking is more accurately understood as a process of transformation. In Nova Scotia, many of the changes occurring in relation to shrinking are still operating within the field of property rights. Through the spatial analyses and scenarios I speculated on the physical and ecological consequences of these changing rights to resources, addressing the central aim of the research: to explore the role of spatial design and planning in addressing the emerging condition of shrinking in resource regions. The research took a multidimensional approach to unpacking the shape of shrinking; working across scales, time horizons and methods to spatialise the types of transformation processes underway. By drawing out the underlying changes in rights to resources and nature’s values, I gave form to shrinking by grounding it in the landscape. In declining territories the built structures are weakened and the landscape seems to have a prevailing position instead. Therefore, it could be interesting to use the landscape in the transformation process as a characteristic structure, instead of just letting it take over, and in this regard it seems useful to focus more on the development of the landscape and exploiting its potentials and resources in the development of declining territories - Laursen 2008 I have argued throughout this research that in resource regions, for better or for worse, the landscape has always been a structuring device, influencing spatial development. However, this relationship has rarely been made explicit and even more rarely understood as a starting point for design

176

conclusions

177

interventions. The scenarios explored these latent relationships between resources, rights and spatial development as opportunities; opening up a discussion about transformations in resource regions in particular, but also larger issues of landscape, value and resources that are becoming increasingly important across the globe. As explained through the situations and scenarios put forth in this research, the implicit and explicit territorial transformations underway in Nova Scotia are both a response to the unique natural and institutional landscape of resources and a manifestation of larger global issues. This was emphasised through the case study analysis, revealing that there is much diversity between communities in resource regions. Even in communities that are experiencing the same rates of depopulation and reliance on natural resource industries, the experience of shrinking can be markedly different. This highlights the importance of considering multiple scales when approaching shrinking; connecting the specificities of place with the larger structural processes of global economic and ecological change. The shrinking and even disappearance of entire regions is a widespread phenomenon. To different degrees and for different reasons, more and more areas around the world are facing the reality that planning and designing in support of growth is misaligned with the ways in which territories are actually transforming. Understanding shrinking as a new form of urbanism can offer spatial planners and designers the chance to rethink current practices. Resource regions, with their embedded link to the landscape offer a testing ground towards reconciling nature as partner and property and better negotiating the place of human occupation within this balance. These are necessary new directions in spatial development, from which rural and urban, profit and protection and landscape livelihoods and way of life can all benefit.

source: (top) ‘fishing fundy’s waters’ <http://www.gov.ns.ca/nsarm/virtual/fundy/>, 2006 178

conclusions

179

REFERENCES Beauregard, R. (2003) Aberrant Cities: Urban Population Loss in the United States, 1820-1930, Urban Geography. vol:24, no. 8: 672-690. Berge, E. (2002) Varieties of property rights to nature. Some observations on landholding and resource ownership in Norway and England. In: Forest Law and Environmental Legislation. Contributions of the IUFRO Research Group 6.13 Proceedings VII Forstwissenschaftliche Beitrage. ETHZ, Zurich. Berge, E. (2007) Protected Areas and Traditional Commons: Values and Institutions, Norwegian Journal of Geography. vol. 60, no. 1: 65-76. Bird, J.B. (1955) Settlement Patterns in Maritime Canada: 1687-1786. American Geographical Society. vol. 45, no. 3: 385-404. Blake, R. (2003) Regional and Rural Development Strategies in Canada: The Search for Solutions, Report for Newfoundland and Labradour Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada. < http://www.exec.gov.nl.ca/ royalcomm/default.html >. Bromley, D. (1992) The Commons, Common Property, and Environmental Policy, Environmental and Resource Economics. vol. 2:1-17 (CCN) Coastal Communities Network (2004) Between the Land and the Sea - The Social and Economic Importance of Wharves and Harbours in Nova Scotia. Coastal Communities Network, Pictou, Nova Scotia. Davis, A. and Wagner J. (2006) A Right to Fish for a Living? The Case for Coastal Fishing People’s Determination of Access and Participation. Ocean & Coastal Management. vol. 49: 476-497. Ennals, P. and Holdsworth D. (1988) The Cultural Landscape of the Maritime Provinces. In: Day, D. ed., Geographical Perspectives on the Maritime Provinces. Halifax: Saint Mary’s University. (ERDT) Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism (2010) jobs Here: the plan to grow our economy, Nova Scotia Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism. Fernow, B. (1912) Forest Conditions of Nova Scotia, Ottawa: Commission of Conservation. Godet, M. (2000) The Art of Scenarios and Strategic Planning: Tools and Pitfalls, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. vol. 65:3-22. Godet, M. and Roubelat, F. (1996) Creating the Future: The Use and Misuse of

Scenarios, Long Range Planning. vol. 29, no. 2: 164 to 171. Hamin, E.M. and Marcucci, D.J.(2008) Ad hoc rural regionalism, Journal of Rural Studies. vol 2: 467-477. Hanna, S., Folke, C. and Maler, KG. eds. (1996) Rights to Nature: Ecological, Economic, Cultural and Political Principles of Institutions for the Environment. Washington: Island Press. Hollander, J., Pallagst, K., Schwarz, T. and Popper, F. (2009) Planning Shrinking Cities, Progress in Planning. vol. 72, no. 4: 223-23. Leadbeater, D. (2009) Single-industry Resource Communities, ‘Shrinking,’ and the New Crisis of Hinterland Economic Development. In: The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Pallagst, K. et al. Eds. Monograph 2009-01. Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Planning, University of California Berkeley. Leadbeater, D. ed. (2008) Mining Town Crisis: Globalization, Labor and Resistance in Sudbury, Canada. Halifax: Fernwood. Laursen, H. L. (2008) Shrinking Cities or Urban Transformation! Ph. D. Aalborg University. Laursen, H. L. And Anderson, L. (2011) Differentiated decline in Danish outskirt areas, Danish Journal of Geoinformatics and Land Management. vol.46, no.1: 96113. Markey, S. Halseth, G. and Manson, D. (2008) Challenging the inevitability of rural decline: Advancing the policy of place in northern British Columbia, Journal of Rural Studies. vol. 24: 409-421. Martinez-Fernandez, C. (2009) Shrinking Cities: A Global Overview and Concerns about Australian Mining Cities Cases, in The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context. California: Institute of Urban and Regional development.

Mercer Clarke, C. (2010) Rethinking Responses to Coastal Problems: An Analysis for the Opportunitities and constraints for Canada. Ph. D. Dalhousie University. Millward, H. (2005) Rural population change in Nova Scotia, 1991–2001: bivariate and multivariate analysis of key drivers, Canadian Geographer. vol. 49, no. 2: 180-197. Mulvihill, P.R. and Kramkowski, V. (2010) Extending the Influence of Scenario Development in Sustainable Planning and Strategy, Sustainability. no.2: 2449-2466. Myers, D. and Kitsuse, A. (2000) Constructing the Future in Planning: A Survey of Theories and Tools, Journal of Planning Education and Research. vol. 19: 221 Neumann, R. (2011) Political Ecology III: Theorizing Landscape, Progress in Human Geography. vol. 35, no. 6: 843-850. Nagendra, H. And Ostrom, E. (2008) Governing the commons in the new millennium: A diversity of institutions for natural resource management. In Encyclopedia of Earth. ed. C.J. Cleveland. Washington DC. <http://www.eoearth.org/article/ Governing_the_commons_in_the_new_millennium:_A_diversity _of_institutions_for_natural_resource_management>. (NSDA) Department of Agriculture (2010) Homegrown Success: a 10-year plan for agriculture, Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture. (NSDFA) Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture (2009) Our Coast – Live, Work, Play, Protect: The 2009 State of Nova Scotia’s Coast Technical Report. <http://www.gov.ns.ca/coast/state-of-the-coast.asp>. (NSDFL) Department of Lands and Forests (1973) Historical Highlights: Nova Scotia Crown Lands 1603-1972, Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forests. (NSDNR) Department Natural Resources (2011) From Strategy to Action, An Action Plan for the Path We Share, A Natural Resources Strategy for Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources.

Martinez-Fernandez, C., Audriac, I., Fol, S. and Cunningham-Sabot, E. (2012) Shrinking Cities: Urban Challenges of Globalization, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. vol. 36.2: 213–25.

(NSDNR) Department Natural Resources (2009) Our Common Ground: The Future of nova Scotia’s natural resources, citizen’s engagement committee, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources.

Matthews, R. (1993) Controlling common property. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge (United Kingdom): Cambridge University Press.

McKean, M. (2000) Common Property: What Is It, What Is It Good for, and What Makes It Work? In: People and Forests: Communities, Institutions, and Governance, Gibson, C.C., McKean, M. and Ostrom, E. eds. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Peasrse, P. (1988) Property Rights and the Development of Natural Resource Policies in Canada, Canadian Public Policy, vol. 14, no. 3: 307-320.

McLeod,H. (1995) Past Nature: Public Accounts of Nova Scotia’s Landscape 16001900, Ph. D. Saint Mary’s University.

Pinkerton, E. and Silver, J. (2011) Cadastralizing or coordinating the clam commons: Can competing community and government visions of wild and farmed fisheries be reconciled? Marine Policy. vol. 35: 63-72.

Randall, J. and Ironside, R.G. (1996) Communities on the edge: An economic geography of resource-dependent communities in Canada, Canadian Geographer. vol. 40, no. 1: 17-35.

fuse city, Giannotti, E. and Vigano, P. eds. Milan: et al. edizioni. Von Benda-Beckmann, K., Von Benda-Beckmann, F. and Wiber, M. (2006) Changing properties of property. Berghahn Books.

Rotmans, J., van Asselt, M., Anastasi, C., Greeuw, S., Mellors, J., Peters, S., Rothman, D. and Rijkens, N. (2007) Visions for a sustainable Europe. Futures 2000, vol. 32: 809-831.

Young, N. and Matthews, R. (2010) The Aquaculture Controversy in Canada: Activism, Policy, and Contested Science. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Sacouman, R. J. (1980) Semi-proletarianization and rural underdevelopment in the Maritimes, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology. vol. 13, no. 3: 233-242.

INTERVIEWS*

Sandberg, A. (2003) Commons for whom? New Coastal Commons on NorthNorweigian Coasts. In: Landscape, Law and Justice, Proceedings from a workshop on old and new commons, Centre for Advanced Study, Oslo, 11-13 March 2003. Sandberg, A. (2007) Property rights and ecosystem properties, Land Use and Policy. vol. 24: 613-623. Sandberg, A.L. and Clancy, P. (1996) Property Rights, Small Woodlot Owners and Forest Management in Nova Scotia, Journal of Canadian Studies. vol. 31, no. 1: 25-47. Schlager, E. and Ostrom, E. (1992) Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis, Land Economics. vol. 68, no. 3:249-262. Tietjen, A. (2008) Polarised territories and new spatial prototypes, The European Tradition in Urbanism - and its Future in Delft University of Technology, September 24-26, 2007. Tietjen, A. and Laursen, L. H. (2008) Urbanity without growth - Planning and urban design principles in shrinking Danish territories, working paper submitted for European Planning Studies Tietjen, A. (2006), Imagineering urban identity for a shrinking Danish region, In: Modernization & Regionalism – Re-inventing the Urban Identity, vol. 2, Wang, C.Y., Sheng, Q. and Sezer, C. eds., Delft : International Forum on Urbanism: 183-191. Wiber, M., Rudd, M., Pinkerton, E., Charles, A. and Bull, A. (2010) Coastal management challenges from a community perspective: The problem of ‘stealth privatization’ in a Canadian fishery, Marine Policy. 34: 598–605.

Bull, A. (2012, March 29) Founder of Bay of Fundy Marine Resource Center, and Senior Corporate Policy Analyst, Office of Policy and Priorities, Government of Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia, Canada. Daniels, D. (2012, March 30) Director, Science and Technology, Investment Attraction Division, Nova Scotia Business Inc. Nova Scotia, Canada. Graham, J. (2012, March 30) Coastal Coordinator, Ecology Action Centre. Nova Scotia, Canada. Kahn, D. and Barrett, N (2012, April 12) Project Manager and Analyst, Land Asset Management Project, Lands Services Branch, Department of Natural Resources, Government of Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia, Canada. Oland, B. (2012, March 27) Planning and development officer, Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, Government of Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia, Canada. Parlee, C. (2012, April 07) Researcher, Coastal (CURA) Community University Research Alliance, and PhD Candidate, University of New Brunswick. Nova Scotia, Canada. Plourde, R. (2012, March 30) Wilderness Coordinator, Ecology Action Centre. Nova Scotia, Canada. Polkhamp, G. (2012, April 04) Executive Director, Lands Services Branch, Department of Natural Resources, Government of Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia, Canada. White, R. (2012, April 02) Forester and son of Russel White, Russel White Mill. Nova Scotia, Canada.

Wiber, M., Pinkerton, E. and Parlee, C. (2011) Stinting the Intertidal Zone: the many dimensions of privatizing a commons, Conference of the International Association for Study of the Commons (IASC) in Hyderabad, India, January 11-14, 2011.

* Informal communication with many people that I met during my field work has not been listed here.

Wynn, G. (1987) A Province Too Much Dependent on New England, The Canadian Geographer. vol. 31, no. 2: 98-113.

IMAGE CREDITS

Vigano, P. (2012) Situations, scenarios. In: Our Common Risk: Scenarios for the dif-

Unless otherwise stated, all image are credited to Lauren Abrahams, 2012.