Whose expertise counts? Assisted migration and the politics of knowledge

• Main Author: Pelai, Ricardo Antonio
• Format: Text
• Language: English
• Published: University of British Columbia 2019
• Subjects: First Nations
• Online Access: https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0387349; https://doi.library.ubc.ca/10.14288/1.0387349

The effects of climate change increasingly threaten forests; as a result, tree seed transfer actions - including controversial interventions like assisted migration (AM) - have adapted to facilitate trees’ adaptation to future climates. In this thesis, I explore seed transfer and AM governance in British Columbia (BC) using qualitative methods. First, I present a historical profile of BC’s seed transfer governance landscape, tracing decision-makers, policy instruments, rationales for seed transfer changes, risks, and knowledge used to inform policy from 1940 to 2019 based on document analysis and semi-structured interviews with key informants. Three insights relevant to understanding contemporary AM policies emerged from this analysis: i) through the opening of a policy window, a paradigmatic shift in seed transfer policy occurred with the establishment of a climate-based seed transfer system; ii) genetic knowledge produced within government ministries has been the dominant form of evidence used to inform seed transfer policy over time; and iii) governance processes, such as the disproportionately influential role of the forest industry in seed transfer policy-making, remained relatively unchanged in practice. Second, I offer a closer examination of the risks associated with and the types of knowledge that inform contemporary AM actions in BC. Based on 27 semi-structured interviews with government officials and forest industry professionals, I find that i) the type of knowledge deemed credible to inform contemporary AM decision-making is restricted to biophysical, model-based, scientific knowledge; ii) the primarily biophysical framing of AM shapes particular ways of understanding AM risks and solutions to address them; and iii) while decision-makers recognize the need to engage industry, First Nations and the general public, these groups are characterized as knowledge receivers. Interviewees also hold the view that the provision of science to different publics will prevent AM controversy. This research highlights the urgent need to meaningfully and respectfully include First Nations in AM decision-making. Overall, this thesis concludes that patrolling the types of AM expertise in informing seed transfer and AM actions serves to exclude other forms of knowledge and possibilities for shaping future forests.