A complex environment, the forest is nevertheless examined in a compartmentalized and mainly economic way. This method of forest management — and the management of nature more generally — has been the subject of strong criticism for several years, because, under this magnifying glass, too many elements become inappropriate or uninteresting: humus, dead wood , non-timber forest products, but also uses and relationships other than useful.
Collectively, we are now beginning to understand the importance of talking about the different visions of our relationship to the forest. Others have been reporting it for a long time, such as forest economics professor Luc Bouthillier, who died on July 14. He sounded the alarm, reflected and listened to other voices until the end of his life. It is to this pioneer on several fronts that we want to pay tribute, because in our view, it is more important than ever to continue on this path.
Listen to local people
People who are said to be ordinary, even if they never are, are rarely associated with the overall management and day-to-day management of the forest. However, are they not concerned? This is what Luc Bouthillier has always maintained. To do this, it has established itself firmly in the regions of Quebec.
Professor-researchers in Rimouski, we are — like many others — heirs to the vision of Luc, himself well known in Eastern Quebec. In fact, as early as the 1980s, in reaction to the work of the BAEQ1, the GRIDEQ, the flagship research group for territorial development research at UQAR, launched reflections where Luc worked in synergy with Hugues Dionne to study the change land management model and its impact on territorial differentiations (ecological, landscape, cultural, etc.).
From this period, Luc leaves behind the notion of inhabited forest (Bouthillier and Dionne, 1995), which feeds on the sense of belonging of the local populations and their understanding of the dynamics of the territory. Whether they are now called community forests or local forests, the notion is still valid. It involves considering the management of forest environments beyond woody matter and with the users of the territory, and militates for a more flexible integration of the ecological and human environment in forest plans.
Outside urban centers, but…
The Mauricie was another favorite region for Luc, where he trained many young forest engineers to get out of expert language and open up dialogue with everyone involved. This mission was close to his heart: failing to create inhabited forests everywhere, institutionalized forest management should at least consider other uses, and especially other users. It was with them that Luc discussed, exchanged and learned. It was for these people that he was doing research, and they knew it. In this so-called “peripheral” region associated with its resources, he launched an extraordinary social forestry laboratory. As such, the contribution of the Atikamekw was essential, and it was in small steps, but in a solid way, that he participated in imposing their place in the contemporary forest world.
Many other regions can be mentioned… In fact, forestry has been, and still remains, an activity carried out mainly outside the major urban centers and is described as “regional”, even “peripheral”. However, its management is carried out in the nerve centers of the market. Luc’s supreme talent as a forest economist was to explain simply how movements of capital are intertwined with work in the regions and respond to each other. Afterwards, how can one deny the need to bring social dimensions into forest management?
Pioneer of social forestry
As social scientists, we had the privilege of knowing Luc at different times in our scientific careers. At a time – not so long ago – when thinking about the forest and forestry in social terms was extremely rare on this side of the Atlantic, he was not only a pioneer, but a giant moving mountains, without shouting or raising fists. A quiet force in the social sciences of the forest, he had not yet studied in this field. But his values as well as an observation that “things are not going well” pushed him to invest himself, body and soul, in social forestry in Quebec. Without prejudice or the preconceived idea that the expert must show the way!
He has always been convinced that taking into account the complexity of the links between humans and nature was possible, and that the solution to do so would not come from institutions. He regularly came to talk and reflect with Léonard Otis, who, during his lifetime, was actively campaigning — that is to say, by gardening his forest — for forest farms that would not only make it possible to live off ligneous matter, but in harmony with other forest amenities (Otis, 1989). In these discussions, Luc and Leonard enriched each other.
Bearer of a forestry attentive to those who live there and are concerned about it, Luc has been in all the important fights, always respected, because always respectful, with this rare quality of being able to put himself in the place of the other. , whoever that other is.
At the World Forestry Congress (Quebec City, 1994), he took up his father’s maxim that “you don’t drive while looking in the rear view mirror, you look ahead! “. May he still inspire us to look ahead and act on it.