Issues of Cross Border Management of the Fraser Lowland Eco-Region

1. Issues of Cross Border Management of the Fraser Lowland Eco-Region Patrick Buckley, Western Washington University and John Belec University College of the Fraser Valley CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

2. Study Focus • Examine a recent chain of events effecting Trans Boundary Air Shed management along a part of the US-Canadian boundary for evidence of Cross Border Region [CBR] development • Specific location the A-S region -- Abbotsford, BC and the adjacent part of northern Whatcom County focused on Sumas, WA • Is there evidence of CBR activity: local cross border governance and management of jointly held resources, • Or is the border still a wall where decision making doesn’t penetrate across it and instead ultimately remains in the hands of actors residing in distant political capitals in the separate nations? CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

3. Study Focus • In short, what is the evidence of a “refiguring” of the hierarchy of scale levels, or “deterritorialization” in the Fraser Lowland resulting in a CBR? [Jessop, 2002]. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

4. Research Orientation • CBR theory implies evolutionary development of Cross Border Resource Management/Governance • Paper defines Necessary and Sufficient Conditions that should appear during evolution • Paper focuses on micro-scale evaluation as critical to this type of investigation CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

5. Preliminary Results • Events over the last several years indicate a retreat from thickening and deepening cross border relationships • Return to use of the border as a wall or shield • Necessary conditions for a CBR seem present but not Sufficient conditions CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

6. Organization • The investigative lens CBR theory • Highlighting its evolutionary nature • Critical to this discussion are necessary and sufficient conditions to further this evolutionary process. • Data Development • The geographic setting and history of events surrounding the SE2 controversy • Special emphasis on scale in decision making • Analysis of events for evidence of meeting necessary and sufficient conditions for CBR evolution • Brief conclusions CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

7. 1. CBR Theory CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

8. Cross Border Region [CBR] The era of the Cross Border Region [CBR] has arrived, where the CBR is defined to be …" a territorial unit that comprises contiguous sub-national units…" [Perkmann and Sum, 2002,3]. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

9. New Natural Unit • the national scale as the "natural" unit for planning, policy and decision making has changed as the supra national organization and the CBR at opposite ends of the spectrum have begun to supplement and also compliment it [Leresche and Saez, 2002]. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

10. Era of Multiple Scales and Re-Bordering (?) …"relativization of scale" [Jessop, 2002, 25]. Economic, political, social, and even environmental relations are no longer controlled solely at the national scale; instead a proliferation of scales has emerged causing governance to migrate to the scale most appropriate to the issues. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

11. Multiplicity of Overlapping Scales Rather than decisions being made based on a "topocratic" logic [a logic based on an authority in a single defined stable territory] Multiterritorial "adhocratic" logic has emerged “Adhocratic logics are based on reference territories of variable geometry, with vague and multiple boundaries that change according to scale on which problems are treated" [Leresche and Saez ,2002, 95]. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

12. Changed Institutional Logics Traditional affiliation logic related to identity with the traditional political territory Newly emerging efficiency based network or functional logic which can emerge from and/or helps create the CBR CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

13. Result: "multilevel governance and problem solving". New rubric the old national scale is not simply replaced or usurped by a new scale but instead coexists with a variety of new scales In a similar fashion, the new functional logic augments the affiliation logic in issues that can be "multiterritorial, multisectoral, and multi-institutional". CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

14. Adhocratic • The problem helps define the scale(s) at which it will be dealt, • Not simply the scale that defines and dictates the solution to the problem as the old national topocratic method had done. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

15. Necessary & Sufficient Conditions Assumptions CBR development is • a result of ad hoc bottom up activity • local actors on both sides of the border taking ownership over their common destiny Key to Ad Hoc activity is opportunities for communication • thus greater evidence for such activity in should be found in closer proximity to the border • Distance decay is an important consideration CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

16. Necessary Conditions Somewhat related and overlapping conditions of: 1. Size 2. Proximity CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

17. Necessary Conditions 1. Size -- each entity on opposite sides of the border must be • large enough to impact upon its counter part and • also have the potential to also mitigate impacts 2. Proximity -- Actors on each side must be close enough that their impact is of primary concern and not additional background noise to their neighbors CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

18. Sufficient Conditions • Revolve around the evolution of the understanding and relationship of actors on both sides of the border. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

19. Sufficient Conditions • Permission to deal • Confidence in relationship • Benefits greater then costs CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

20. Sufficient Conditions: Permission to Deal 1. Actors must first determine areas where they are • Free of top down, centralized control • Free to pursue their own local destiny, under the caveat that such activity does not impact national sovereignty. Thus, they give themselves permission to look across the border rather than to a state or regional capitals. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

21. Sufficient Conditions: Confidence 2. They must feel confident enough in themselves and their counterparts to be willing to place their trust in their counterparts • since they have some moral but little practical leverage over one another. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

22. Sufficient Conditions: Benefits outweigh costs 3. Finally, they must convince themselves that without such a somewhat risky new approach little or nothing will get done in regards to local issues • Thus potential benefits are perceived to far outweigh the costs of doing nothing CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

23. Sufficient Conditions • In short, meeting these sufficient conditions requires the emergence of actors ready, willing, and eager to dialogue and compromise with their cross border counterpart CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

24. Evolutionary Aspect As Necessary and Sufficient conditions are met CBR development proceeds through a series of regimes: • Government Regime • Crisis of Governability • Governance Regime CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

25. Three Eras of Frontier or Governmentality Regimes • Government Regime • Old Topocratic, Centralized decision making for border regions • Cold War approach • Crisis of Governability • Period of crisis, conflict and change • Transition period • Local scale only begun to exert itself • National scale not able to address all issues CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

26. Three Eras of Frontier or Governmentality Regimes • Governance Regime • emergence of governing cooperation and coordination networks across borders. • Leresche and Saez define the underlying operational logic as synapsis, • "'very fine communication between neighboring cells through small networks in a membrane' [Dictionary Robert, reported in Leresche and Saez, 2002, 88]. • Basically the functionality of public and/or private action relationships located on a network, CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

27. Summary • CBRs both institutional and spatial as a global phenomena provide important tools to investigate the Fraser Lowland • both as: • a larger CBR – entire Lowland or even “Cascadia” • and a local level CBR-- Abbotsford—Sumas in regards to SE2 CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

28. 2. Case Study Abbotsford-Sumas And the SE2 Controversy CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

29. Fraser Lowland and SE2 Controversy • Geography • History • SE2 Timeline • Summary CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

30. Geography of Fraser Lowland CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

31. Fraser Lowland Unified bio-region Divided between • Whatcom County, Washington • Fraser River delta and valley of British Columbia International Border Divides • Air shed, Aquifer, Ecosystems… CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

32. Issue: Fraser Lowland Air Shed • Closed and Stressed • Upper Fraser Valley – very high incident of childhood asthma (among highest in Canada) • Current Canadian Pressure • Automobiles • Dairy Farming • Current American Pressure • Whatcom County Industry CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

33. Fraser Lowland International Border challenges development of consistent and effective cross border environmental resource management No established cross-border institutional structures for air quality control Air-shed issue has evolved in an apparently makeshift and somewhat chaotic manner. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

34. Example of recent challenge: SE2 [Sumas Electrical 2] Power Plant Example of recent challenge: • recent impasse over a proposed power plant on the US side fueled by Canadian natural gas (SE2) • main stumbling block is expected trans-border air-shed stress levels Map of proposed SE2 Power Plant CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

35. Recent Challenge cont. • Power plant planned right next to Border • Economic benefits mainly realized by US side • Canadian side mainly impacted by pollution CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

36. Historical Background • Early Years: Sumas & Huntingdon developed as twin towns and shared economies • Border represents contact point • Coming of Trans-Canada Rail Line • Huntingdon replaced by Abbotsford 4 miles north • Abbotsford thrives with links with the Canadian East-West Core • Sumas withers on the US Northern Periphery • Border emerges as shield/barrier CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

37. Today Abbotsford • 110,000 population • West Coast and Pacific Rim Boom Town • Growth to continue at explosive rate over near term • Largest concentration of East Indians in Canada Sumas • 960 population • Distressed Cross Border Boom-Bust Shopping Town • Seeking Recovery & Stable Tax Base • Turn to industrial development CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

38. Cross Border Relationship • 1990s • Sumas and Abbotsford worked jointly on: • Waste water treatment • Aquifer protection • Flood control • 1999 • Sumas and Abbotsford City Council’s both favor SE2 plant CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

39. CRISIS in Cross Border Relationship • 2000 • Grassroots opposition to SE2 begins • City Governments in both places faced with strong opposition • Mayor removed in Abbotsford • Mayor remains in Sumas but only after devise election • Failure of local authorities to prevent SE2 causes retreat into Topocratic logic CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

40. CRISIS in Cross Border Relationship • 2001/2002 • Appeals to State and Provincial Institutions to prevent SE2 • Mixed results • 2003/2004/2005 • Appeals to National Institutions to prevent SE2 • Current situation deadlocked • Canadian National Institutions oppose • US State and National Institutions approve CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

41. Table of Events Follows • Note evolution of problem from local issue to State/Provincial and finally National Issue • Failure of local institutions to solve issue quite clear CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

42. SE2 Timeline CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

43. SE2 Timeline cont. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

44. SE2 Timeline cont. CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

45. Summary • What started as a win-win situation became: • Scramble for the Commons • Clear feeling of winners and losers – Zero Sum Game • Appeal to more distant and higher levels of government • Border becomes a shield rather than contact point? CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

46. 3. Analysis of Abbotsford-Sumas as a CBR CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

47. Necessary Conditions • Size – Despite the great variation in town sizes, actors on both sides of border have great potential for impacting their neighbors • Proximity – The immediacy of SE2 to the border creates a situation of primary concern despite other nearby sources of stress CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

48. Sufficient Conditions Permission to Deal • During the 1990s the neighbors cut deals on water issues • SE2 Originally seen as win-win by City Governments • However as debate proceed a distinct lack of common destiny emerged CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

49. Confidence in relationship • As the process proceeded a distinct lack of confidence emerged • Rather than a search for common ground a retreat to like minded allies and creation of separate camps • A retreat to higher more distant scales and institutions • The border became a barrier with two separate sets of rules with opponents and proponents appealing to the set that favored their position CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006

50. Benefits greater then costs • Benefits were not considered to be a Cross Border entity • The Costs associated with forging a Cross Border agreement/compromise were seen as too great CBR and SE2 Egeo421 2006