Final report - Integrated Land Management Bureau

Given that the method is already being used in the North Coast area by SNDS to collect
economic data, it is not realistic to conduct a parallel census process on the North Coast
to gather data on HWB indicators because community members would be surveyed
twice. It may be possible to coordinate with (or hire) Skeena to expand their survey to
include HWB-related questions.
While the method is relatively expensive compared with other social data collection
methods, it may be the only realistic method for gathering HWB information in the
remote communities of the North and Central Coast. Once a decision is made to use this
methodology, it can be used to gather a range of community-based information of interest
to community organizations.
9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The set of indicators outlined for Schedule C and G are intended to provide one
defensible way to measure changes in the human condition on the North and Central
Coast over time that meets the intent of Schedule C and G and addresses the full range of
the dimensions of human well-being. It is an ambitious set of literature-driven indicators;
it will need to be vetted and refined through budgetary and community input processes in
the next phases of operationalization.
There are many ways to define human well-being, and indicators differ by author and
academic world view. There is no single “perfect” framework, and no one “perfect” set of
indicators. The existing data appropriate for the unique character of the North and Central
Coast are limited, and the set of indicators recommended represents a compromise
between theory and practicality. The unique boundaries of the LRMP areas, coupled with
the small populations that make census-based data problematic makes the prospect of
doing community-based data collection the most viable option. This list represents a
plan-area scale set of indicators. It can provide a template or menu for local communities
within the plan area who wish to create their own localized set based on local priorities
and circumstances.
It is our hope that when they are refined and finalized, these indicators can help serve as a
kind of human well-being “scorecard” for the North and Central Coast. We envision a list
of indicators posted on office bulletin boards of people such as planners, decision makers,
health workers, and community development specialists throughout the North and
Central coast, as it can be used as a tool to help guide strategies and aid in grant writing
and give the communities in the plan areas a common focus. While this set of indicators
is imperfect and burdened with limitations, we believe they offer a one way to gather a
“snapshot in time” of the story of the human condition on the North and Central Coast at
the plan area scale.
83