College of Forest Resources Scientific Basis of Sustainability DRAFT Prepared by: Dean B. Bruce Bare

The College of Forest Resources is committed to international leadership in providing knowledge and solutions for environmental and natural resources issues. This vision is effectuated through two themes: 1) sustainable forest enterprises and 2) land and ecosystem management in an urbanizing world. Sustainability is the key integrating cornerstone. While no single word can capture all we do (or may do in the future), the concept of sustainability guides our educational, research, outreach and development programs.

Sustainability may be defined as a rational and dynamic continuation of a set of activities or processes that produce desired products and services over long periods of time. It requires an interdisciplinary systems approach that integrates the social, ecological and economic sciences to understand, actively and passively manage, and use the products and services of managed forests, natural wild lands and urban and suburban ecosystems so that they remain productive over the long term. Designing, understanding and managing these systems on a sustainable basis over an entire life cycle is a challenge facing society. The concept of sustainability captures the essence of contemporary and evolving societal demands and is the proper focus for the College's programs.

The Role of the College

Although the challenges to sustainably manage our renewable natural resources and environmental systems are formidable, they are not insurmountable. The College of Forest Resources aspires to be a leader in providing knowledge and solutions for environmental and natural resources issues by adopting the theme of sustainability. To achieve this vision the College will continue to enhance its traditional mono-disciplinary research programs which rely on the ecological, economic and social sciences. This will involve all of the basic and applied scientific fields related to urban and forest ecosystems as well as sustainable forest enterprises. Additionally, the College will embark on an increased effort to support inter- and trans-disciplinary research with other campus units. We will collaborate with our many stake holders throughout the State and region to identify, solve and implement solutions to natural resource and environmental problems. Programs to enhance our capabilities to synthesize knowledge by modeling the ecological, economic and social behavior of our renewable natural resource and environmental systems will be re-energized. This integrated systems approach will draw on the information and the decision sciences in an effort to better understand the trade-offs inherent in achieving the sustainable use of our renewable natural resources. We expect that as we move forward with our research programs, several new and presently unforeseen interactions will likely occur at the intersection of our traditional disciplinary-based sciences. It was just such an intersection that led to the birth of the new field of ecological-economics in the late 1980's. The College believes that new undergraduate and graduate curricula can be crafted in support of this vision. If successful, these new programs will position the College as the leader for other forest and natural resource schools around the world to emulate.

The UW Seattle campus will greatly benefit by having a strong College of Forest Resources. As a leader in natural resource sustainability, the College will continue its outstanding tradition of providing national leadership in the dynamic fields of natural resource management and environmental science. This will help ensure that our faculty continue to successfully compete for national research grants and that colleagues from other campuses will seek to join our faculty in collaborative efforts. Our students will benefit from being part of a leading College and will receive a first-rate education that will prepare them for a successful career in renewable resources science and environmental management. Students from other campus units will benefit by taking our courses, interacting with our faculty and becoming more knowledgeable about the natural world within which they live. Our goal is to be the recognized leader in education, research and outreach activities related to the sustainable management of all urban and forest lands and associated natural resources in Washington State. We intend to achieve this goal by focusing our energy on providing a quality educational experience for our students, a quality work environment for our staff and a quality intellectual environment for our faculty.

Foundations of Sustainability

Societal expectations for both commodities and services from managed forests, natural wild lands, and urban and suburban landscapes have dramatically shifted in recent years. Rapidly increasing human populations, the growth of economic prosperity, mobility, and technology, as well as a continuing evolution from an industrial to an information-based society, have accelerated the shift. Humans continue to need and consume products and amenities of forests and other wild land ecosystems. However, society's perception and understanding of these consumption patterns continually evolve. People now demand that both producers and consumers eliminate negative effects generated by their respective activities. This has led to an increasing demand for the use of environmentally friendly technologies, sustainable production processes and the protection and restoration of ecological functions and services so that future generations may enjoy the same products and services that now exist.

The College's vision and priorities are consistent with the shift towards a sustainable society. We must anticipate the future so that we can provide teaching and learning opportunities that enable resource professionals, scientists, decision-makers and informed citizens to take leadership roles and use the best, most appropriate science, to solve future problems. We must partner with society to define and initiate new academic, research and outreach programs, modify existing programs and discontinue programs that do not effectively respond to the new challenges bestowed upon us.

Forestry, fisheries, wildlife and other renewable natural resource sciences have a long tradition based on the concept of sustainable resource use and conservation. However, the traditional concepts are too narrow and simplistic to serve as valid models for the future sustainable management of our renewable natural resources. First, in forestry, fisheries and wildlife, the concept of sustainable resource use has been synonymous with maximum biological sustained yield. However, even this limited interpretation of the concept breaks down when we consider multiple species, outputs, or age (size) classes; large unpredictable variations due to natural and man-caused disturbances; shifts in technology and the consideration of variable geographical scales. Second, a century of economic research has failed to convince most renewable resource managers to consider sustained economic efficiency on par with maximum physical productivity. Thus, even today, the concept is largely understood to be one of maximum biological yield. Third, the traditional model of maximum sustained yield possesses no inherent measures of equity - economically or socially. Ill-fated attempts to socially engineer communities through a federal policy of community stability are legion throughout the western United States and concerns of intergenerational equity are largely absent from the traditional model. Fourth, the model provides no guidance during the transition stage as renewable resource stocks are replenished or drawn down to perceived sustainable levels. Further, owing to the dismissal of economic efficiency as a guiding principle, these sustainable levels are largely determined by the inherent physical carrying capacity of the land. Again, when multiple forest outputs and services are considered this simplistic concept breaks down. Thus, it is clear that even though we have a long tradition of thinking about sustained yield, it is not sufficient to rely on this interpretation when addressing the new challenges we face.

Closely paralleling the historic use of sustained yield is the concept of multiple use. While not directly linked to the concept of sustainability, similarities exist in that resource sustainability and multiple use share the common theme that multiple forest outputs and services are the norm rather than the exception. Although historically used as a policy instrument for rationalizing uses across a landscape, the multiple use concept is largely normative and not prescriptive. And, since it is closely tied to forest outputs instead of the achievement of desired future states, its use must be modified to meet the changing demands of society. As we manage our forests to achieve and maintain certain forest functions, environmental services or other ecological processes, a new paradigm that extends our traditional reliance on multiple outputs is needed. Multiple use may continue to play an important role, but only if we extend its meaning within this broader context.

The current use of the concept of sustainability is much broader than the twin concepts of sustained yield and multiple use. Today, it implies an explicit consideration of ecological, economic and social factors. While it incorporates components related to economic efficiency, ecological carrying capacity and social justice and acceptability, it also conveys a measure of intergenerational equity as well as the distribution of rights to use environmental services contained within the global ecosystem. Exactly how forests, fisheries, wildlife and water resources (as well as other renewable natural resources) in our urban and rural areas are to managed in a sustainable manner is a tremendous challenge -- one that the College of Forest Resources is eager to meet.

Economic Sustainability

Whether it is to maintain or to improve existing lifestyles, society must ultimately make investments and associated technological improvements to foster sustainable resource use. Thus, economic sustainability is a key component of the three-legged stool of sustainability. Economists use prices (not the condition of the physical ecosystem) to allocate scare resources over time. The basic idea is to determine the maximum level of consumption by current generations such that capital (natural or man-made) accumulates to permit future generations to enjoy the same opportunities. Implied is the notion that some capital stock is maintained indefinitely in order to perpetuate future levels of consumption. Further, economic sustainability is blind to the physical state of the ecosystem and does not directly consider equity considerations. In addition, the treatment of common property resources, externalities and resources without market prices is a vexing problem for economists. Thus, achieving economic sustainability is not sufficient to ensure sustainability.

Ecological Sustainability

Ecological sustainability is the commonly held notion that society must preserve its life-support systems in order to sustain life on Earth. This concept is based on the premise that there is an inherent carrying capacity that can not be exceeded without catastrophic or irreversible results to the biophysical world. The twin concepts of ecosystem stability and resilience to perturbation are key to this interpretation. Some scientists argue that man's use of the Earth's biophysical resources must be constrained so that these two conditions are first satisfied. This, of course, eliminates any trade-off between ecological protection and economic uses of the biophysical resources and leads to a sub-optimal allocation of resources. Closely aligned with ecological sustainability is the idea that society wishes to enhance the biodiversity of the species that inhabit the Earth. This relatively new idea also ignores the economic system although it has not been shown that losses in biodiversity will lead to catastrophic or irreversible results to the biophysical world. Lastly, some argue that the current generation must leave the Earth's biophysical systems in better condition than they inherited in order for future generations to enjoy a better life. Ecological sustainability is not sufficient to ensure sustainability because it does not directly incorporate human needs, equity considerations or preferences for the various goods and services provided by an ecosystem.

Social Sustainability

The third set of factors inherent in resource and environmental sustainability are those related to social sustainability. These factors relate to the distribution of wealth within and between generations (i.e., intra- and intergenerational equity) as well as the distribution of rights to use environmental services contained within a given ecosystem. In addition, are legal issues pertaining to property rights, the treatment of common law resources, and the need to consider externalities. Societal views related to the distribution of wealth across various economic classes, whether regional or global in scale, also exert a great influence on efforts to achieve sustainable resource use. Achieving social sustainability is not sufficient to ensure sustainability as neither the biophysical or economic dimensions are directed considered.

By focusing on these three factors of sustainability , the College believes it will be able to provide the leadership and knowledge required to identify and solve environmental and natural resource issues in the coming years.

References

The following books and articles were consulted in preparing the above statement. Most of the ideas expressed above are contained in one or more of these references - implying that none of the ideas are original with the author.

Aplet, G. H., N. Johnson, J. T. Olson and V. A. Sample. (Eds.) 1993. Defining Sustainable Forestry. Island Press, Covelo, CA.

Bottom, D. L., G. H. Reeves and M. H. Brookes. (Eds.) 1996. Sustainability Issues for Resource Managers. USDA Forest Service. GTR-PNW-370.

Clark, C. W. 1990. Mathematical Bioeconomics: The Optimal Management of Renewable Resources. 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons. NY.

Common, M. and Ch. Perrings. 1992. Towards an Ecological Economics of Sustainability. Ecological Modelling 6(1):7-34.

Costanza, R. and H. E. Daly. 1987. Toward an Ecological Economics. Ecological Modelling 38(1-2):1-7.

Costanza, R. (Ed.) 1991. Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. Columbia University Press, NY.

Dale, A. and J. B. Robinson. (Eds.) 1996. Achieving Sustainable Development. UBC Press. Vancouver.

Ecological Society of America. 1996. The Report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management. Ecological Applications 6(3):665-691.

Franklin, J. F. 1997. Ecosystem Management: An Overview. In: Ecosystem Management. (M. A. Boyce and A. Haney, Eds.). Yale University Press. New Haven. pp. 21-53.

Franklin, J. F. 1995. Sustainability of Managed Temperate Forest Ecosystems. In: Defining and Measuring Sustainability: The Biogeophysical Foundations. (M. Munasinghe and W. Shearer, Eds.). The World Bank. Wash D. C.

Jakeman, A. J., M. B. Beck, and M. J. McAleer. (Eds.) 1993. Modelling Change in Environmental Systems. John Wiley and Sons. NY.

Krutilla, J. V. and A. C. Fisher. 1985. The Economics of Natural Environments: Studies in the Valuation of Commodity and Amenity Resources. 2nd edition. Resources for the Future. Wash D. C.

Lippke, B. R. and J. T. Bishop. 1999. The Economic Perspective. In: Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. pp. 597-638.

Mahendrarajah, S., Jakeman, A. J., and M. McAleer. (Eds.) 1999. Modelling Change in Integrated Economic and Environmental Systems. Wiley and Sons. NY.

Solow, R. 1992. An Almost Practical Step toward Sustainability. Invited Lecture on the Occasion of the 40th Anniversary of Resources for the Future. Was D. C.

Toman, M. A. 1994. Economics and Sustainability: Balancing Trade-offs and Imperatives. Land Economics 70(4):399-413.

WCED. 1987. Our Common Future. The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

March 31, 2002 (Revised: April 14, 2002)