United Nations

E/CN.17/1996/24


Economic and Social Council

 Distr. GENERAL
16 April 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH


                                                             
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Fourth session
18 April-3 May 1996
Item 6 of the provisional agenda*

     *    E/CN.17/1996/1.


                         REVIEW OF SECTORAL CLUSTERS

               Report of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on
                        Forests on its second session

                         (Geneva, 11-22 March 1996)


                                  CONTENTS

                                                              Paragraphs Page

  I.  MATTERS CALLING FOR ACTION ...........................      1       4

      Draft decision .......................................      1       4

 II.  MATTERS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION ON
      SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ..............................      2       4

      Decision .............................................      2       4

III.  INTRODUCTION .........................................    3 - 7     4

 IV.  CO-CHAIRMEN'S SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION ..............    8 - 117   5

      A.  Programme elements that were discussed 
          substantively ....................................    8 - 81    5

          1.  Underlying causes of deforestation and forest
              degradation (programme element I.2) ..........    8 - 19    5

          2.  Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification
              and the impact of airborne pollution on 
              forests (programme element I.4) ..............   20 - 30    9

          3.  Needs and requirements of countries with low
              forest cover (programme element I.5) .........   31 - 39   12

          4.  International cooperation in financial 
              assistance and technology transfer for
              sustainable forest management (programme
              element II) ..................................   40 - 60   14

          5.  Assessment of the multiple benefits of all
              types of forests (programme element III.1 (a))   61 - 72   19

          6.  Methodologies for proper valuation of the 
              multiple benefits of forests (programme
              element III.1 (b)) ...........................   73 - 81   21

      B.  Programme elements that were discussed initially .   82 - 117  22

          1.  Progress in national forest and land use plans
              (programme element I.1) ......................     82      22

          2.  Traditional forest-related knowledge 
              (programme element I.3) ......................   83 - 95   24

          3.  Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest
              management (programme element III.2) .........   96 - 102  27

          4.  Trade and environment in relation to forest
              products and services (programme element IV) .  103 - 115  29

          5.  International organizations and multilateral
              institutions and instruments, including 
              appropriate legal mechanisms (programme 
              element V.1) .................................  116 - 117  32

  V.  OTHER MATTERS ........................................  118 - 123  33

      A.  Matters relating to the third and fourth sessions
          of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests .  118 - 122  33

      B.  Additional voluntary contributions to the Ad Hoc
          Intergovernmental Panel on Forests ...............     123     34

 VI.  ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE PANEL ON ITS SECOND
      SESSION ..............................................  124 - 125  34

VII.  ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS .....................  126 - 134  34

      A.  Opening and duration of the session ..............  126 - 128  34

      B.  Election of officers .............................  129 - 131  35

      C.  Agenda and organization of work ..................  132 - 133  35

      D.  Attendance .......................................     134     36

                                   Annexes

  I.  ATTENDANCE .......................................................37

 II.  DOCUMENTATION BEFORE THE PANEL AT ITS SECOND SESSION .............41



                       I.  MATTERS CALLING FOR ACTION

                               Draft decision

1.   The Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests recommends to the
Economic and Social Council through the Commission on Sustainable
Development, the adoption of the following draft decision:


              Matters relating to the third and fourth sessions
              of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests

     The Economic and Social Council approves:

     (a)  The request of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests to
hold its third session in Geneva from 9 to 20 September 1996 and to hold
its fourth session in New York for a period of two weeks in 1997;

     (b)  The Panel's request that provision be made so that the two
sessional working groups it intends to establish during its third and
fourth sessions, as originally envisaged at its first session, can meet
simultaneously.


            II.  MATTERS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION ON
                 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

                                  Decision

2.   The following decision adopted by the Panel is brought to the
attention of the Commission on Sustainable Development:


              Additional voluntary contributions to the Ad Hoc
                     Intergovernmental Panel on Forests

     The Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests expresses its
appreciation to those Governments and organizations that made generous
voluntary contributions to support the work of the Panel and of its
secretariat and, bearing in mind the fact that its work, as envisaged by
the Commission on Sustainable Development and the Economic and Social
Council, largely depends on the provision of extrabudgetary resources,
invites all interested Governments and organizations to consider supporting
the Panel with additional voluntary contributions.


                             III.  INTRODUCTION

3.   In accordance with the programme of work agreed upon at its first
session (E/CN.17/IPF/1995/3), the Panel at its second session addressed two
types of issues.  A number of programme elements included in the Panel's
terms of reference, namely elements I.2, I.4, I.5, II, and III.1 (a) and
(b) were subject to a substantive discussion.  Other programme elements
(I.1, I.3, III.2, IV, and V.1) were subject only to an initial
consideration.

4.   The final report of the Panel, containing its recommendations and
proposals for action relating to all of the programme elements included in
its terms of reference, will be agreed at the Panel's fourth session.  This
final report will be submitted for consideration by the Commission on
Sustainable Development at its fifth session, in 1997.

     Programme elements that were discussed substantively

5.   The present report includes the Co-Chairmen's summaries of the
discussion on the elements under consideration.  These summaries have not
been subject to negotiation.  They are transitional in nature, and the
elements that have been put forward for substantive discussion at the
second session of the Panel will remain open and start to be negotiated at
the third session of the Panel.  The summaries do not fully reflect the
views of the Group of 77 and China, or, indeed, those of any other group or
delegation.

6.   Furthermore, they will be supplemented by suggestions for possible
recommendations and proposals for action under those programme elements
that are to be subject to substantive consideration during the third
session of the Panel.  This would allow the Panel at its fourth session to
consider, in an integrated manner, recommendations and proposals for action
emanating from both its second and its third session and, on that basis, to
consider programme element V.2 of its work programme, as well as to adopt
its final report.

     Programme elements that were discussed initially

7.   Provisions in this report relating to these programme elements
represent a list of the views expressed and proposals made by various
delegations during the session in connection with the preparations for a
substantive discussion of the elements during the Panel's third session.


                IV.  CO-CHAIRMEN'S SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION

          A.  Programme elements that were discussed substantively

                 1.  Underlying causes of deforestation and forest
                     degradation (programme element I.2)

8.   The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element 1.2, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/2, taking into account
the relevant paragraphs of the Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement
of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and
Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests (Forest Principles) 1/ and
chapter 11 of Agenda 21. 2/  The report provided material that could be
relevant to many of the other programme elements.

9.   The Panel noted that the causes of deforestation and forest
degradation were complex and that simplistic conclusions and
overgeneralized solutions must be avoided.  Many of the factors causing
deforestation or forest degradation interact and some are synergistic. 
Many lie outside the forest sector, while others, such as unsustainable
timber extraction, are linked to the forest sector itself.  Most of the
factors are social and economic in character.  Inappropriate policy choices
and  approaches in other sectors can influence deforestation and forest
degradation.  Poverty and consumption patterns as well as land speculation
and land markets may also have a major influence on deforestation.

10.  The Panel considered that tenure issues had an important effect on
access to, and use of, trees, forest products and forest services.  The
demand for fuelwood and charcoal to meet basic energy needs also
contributes to deforestation and forest degradation.  Grazing pressure,
unsustainable agriculture, and forest fires are important factors in many
regions.  In this context, the Panel noted that there were cases where
major land areas under forest cover lay outside the direct control of
national forest authorities.

11.  Many factors mentioned above operate at regional or wider
international levels.  The Panel felt that long-term changes in consumption
and production patterns in different parts of the world were important and
could have both positive and negative effects on the sustainable management
and use of forests.  Their forestry-specific ramifications should be
revisited at the next session in the context of the work being done by the
Commission on Sustainable Development as well as of the initiative
sponsored by Norway on long-term supply and demand for forest products.

12.  The Panel considered that international underlying causes of
deforestation and forest degradation, including transboundary economic
forces as well as transboundary pollution, were important and needed to be
further analysed.   Factors such as international trade, structural
adjustment programmes and external debt could indirectly influence
deforestation.  Market forces and relative prices, as well as
undervaluation of wood and non-wood forest products, have a direct bearing
on sustainable management of all types of forests.  Dealing with
deforestation and forest degradation therefore often requires changes in
policies and plans in other sectors.

13.  Forests are vital national resources and the Panel encouraged the
development of national forest action plans and national forest programmes,
which needed to be integrated with other national policies, plans and
programmes.  Different countries have different forest requirements,
affecting both the area and the nature of their forests, and these
requirements change over time.  The benefits and disbenefits of different
types of forest, including forest plantations, need to be appraised in
different social, cultural, economic and ecological contexts.  The Panel
emphasized that there were rational justifications for many changes in
forest structure and cover and that deforestation did not necessarily need
to be harmful if planned within national policy frameworks for sustainable
land use.  It was recognized that sustainable management and use of both
natural forests and forest plantations, as part of an integrated land-use
plan taking into account relevant environmental and socio-economic
concerns, fulfilled a valuable role in helping to meet the need for forest
products and services as well as to conserve biological diversity.  Quality
aspects are as important as quantitative measures of forest extent in
determining national forest cover.  In addition to the economic value of
wood forest products, non-wood forest products and the social, economic and
environmental services that forests provide need to be valued and
recognized as well.

14.  A diagnostic framework to assist countries in identifying the causes
of deforestation and degradation that are most significant to them would be
useful and should be developed as an aid to effective remedial action.

15.  Joint management (where applicable), participatory approaches
involving all relevant parties (especially local people) in decision-
making, benefit-sharing, and the adjustment of management processes to
reflect different economic, social and ecological circumstances can
constitute useful ingredients of national action.  Policy options for
sustainable forest management and effective implementation need to be
further defined.  The possible benefits of ecoregional approaches to land
use and forest planning should also be considered.

16.  A number of international legal instruments, inter alia, the
Convention on Biological Diversity, 3/ the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, 4/ and the United Nations Convention to
Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought
and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, 5/ address issues highly
pertinent to the management and sustainable use of forest resources. 
Coordination of the work programmes being implemented under these
conventions is essential for achieving the forest-related objectives of
Agenda 21 and the Forest Principles.

17.  In addition, the Panel recognized that actions to deal with
undesirable forms of deforestation were required at the international,
regional, national and local levels.

18.  The Panel highlighted the following points and actions:

     (a)  Developed countries should be encouraged to assist developing
countries in undertaking case-studies using the "diagnostic framework"
described in section III of the report mentioned in paragraph 8 above in
order to identify the sequence of causes contributing to changes in the
quantity and quality of their forests and to focus attention on where
action might be most effective in halting damage and promoting beneficial
change.  This could largely be based on existing information.  The main
purpose of these case-studies should be to develop a set of possible
options and approaches that might be appropriate for addressing underlying
causes, as well as to identify corrective action, and plan for the future. 
In addition, they could also serve as a means of refining the diagnostic
tool, and of achieving the sharing of experiences between countries.  In
this context, the use of ongoing arrangements, particularly at the regional
level, for sharing experiences and for providing forums for policy debate
would be useful;

     (b)  In order to evaluate the significance of changes in forest cover,
countries should be encouraged to assess the quantity and quality of forest
required to provide the full range of benefits, goods and services needed
to fulfil the needs of society now and in the future.  These will include
many different types of forest, including natural forests, plantations and
trees outside forests.  Such an analysis should involve all relevant
parties.  It  should examine both quantitative and qualitative aspects of
forest, including biological diversity, and consider forest strategies in
relation to developments in other sectors of the economy, for example,
those relating to poverty alleviation, infrastructure development,
agriculture and energy, and also take into account possible impacts on
neighbouring countries and the environment as a whole; 
     
     (c)  Accurate and updated information, including data on changes in
the quantity and quality of forest cover and land use should be collected
and synthesized.  Useful data may already exist and these should be used
where possible.  Gaps in information about qualitative aspects of forest
cover should be addressed.  The data on forest modification and replacement
should be based on databases that are easily accessible and regularly
updated;

     (d)  Capacity-building activities should be supported in terms not
only of the formulation of strategies and action plans but also of their
implementation, including the formulation and effective implementation of
codes of practice.  Special attention should also be given to rationalizing
and strengthening administrative structures and mechanisms, improving
proper planning, management and, in particular, developing and implementing
national programmes for sustainable forest management, including emerging
participatory management systems;

     (e)  Donor coordination and international collaboration should be
improved, in programmes addressing deforestation and forest degradation;

     (f)  Participatory approaches and mechanisms should be encouraged for
ensuring active involvement of all relevant parties in the review of
policies and legislation.  Consultations with actors from other economic
sectors should be encouraged as part of the process of identifying the
underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation and possible
solutions, as appropriate, in each country;

     (g)  Examples of policies and interventions that had contributed to
deforestation, as well as those that had promoted sustainable forest
management, with respect to providing specific information on what had
proved to be effective or otherwise, should be identified;

     (h)  Inappropriate policy incentives within the forest sector (and
also in some countries inappropriate policies outside the forest sector),
including land-use aspects and the need for land reform should be
corrected; 

     (i)  Adequate legislation and other measures, including environmental
impact assessments, should be promoted, as a basis for action against
uncontrolled conversion to other types of land uses.

19.  The Panel requested its secretariat, in the course of its preparations
for the discussions at the third session of the Panel as well as for the
final consideration at the Panel's fourth session, to take into account the
underlying causes of deforestation as the basis for action on each of the
other relevant programme elements of its programme of work.  Government-
sponsored initiatives under way in support of this programme element,
taking full account of paragraphs 15 and 16 of the report of the Panel on
its first session, as well as relevant activities undertaken under the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, particularly in Africa, should also be considered.


           2.  Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and
               the impact of airborne pollution on forests       
               (programme element I.4)                           

20.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element I.4 contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/3, taking into account
the relevant paragraphs of the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of Agenda
21.  That report is divided into two parts reflecting the different nature
of the issues contained in the mandate of the Commission on Sustainable
Development and the instructions provided in the report of the Panel on its
first session (E/CN.17/IPF/1995/3).  The Panel first discussed issues
related to fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and the effects
of drought followed by issues related to the impact of airborne pollution
on forests.

Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and drought

21.  The Panel emphasized that desertification and the effects of drought
are widespread phenomena affecting forests and other wooded land in arid,
semi-arid and sub-humid regions.  Desertification and drought are problems
of global dimension in that they affect all regions of the world and that
joint action of the international community is needed to combat
desertification and/or mitigate the effects of drought.

22.  The Panel felt that this programme element should be carried forward
in close relationship with existing international conventions such as the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change and, in particular, the United Nations Convention to
Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought
and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa.  The work carried out in
the conventions should not determine the work of the Ad Hoc
Intergovernmental Panel on Forests, but rather complement and enhance it in
the context of sustainable forest development.

23.  Forest-related action aimed at combating desertification and
mitigating the effects of drought should address the underlying causes of
these phenomena in an integrated manner, and consider the role of poverty,
migration, refugees, land-use planning and policies, food security, and
provision of fodder and fuelwood, among many other economic, social and
cultural causes, in a manner consistent with the United Nations Convention
to Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought
and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, and taking into account the
effects of non-sustainable production and consumption patterns as well as
those of trade and balanced trade relations.

  While recognizing that in many areas forest land rehabilitation would
be needed, and that this would require external inputs and international
assistance in support of local and national efforts, the Panel emphasized
the need for prevention rather than mitigation and restoration, with
emphasis on improved and sustainable management of the already existing
natural forest and other vegetation.  The restoration of arid, semi-arid
and dry sub-humid zones should not, however, focus narrowly on
afforestation, but should also deal with the broader issue of forest
ecosystem management, including social and economic aspects.  The Panel
identified the need to strengthen research related to the identification of
appropriate species for arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid land restoration,
the rehabilitation of existing vegetation types, and the potential of
non-timber forest products.  This could be considered by the Committee on
Science and Technology established as a subsidiary body of the Conference
of the Parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
in those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification,
particularly in Africa.

25.  The Panel should consider the merits of the application of bottom-up
approaches along with top-down approaches, involving all major concerned
groups.  It emphasized the need to draw more extensively on local and
traditional knowledge.  These approaches should be supported by an enabling
legislative and institutional framework that includes secure rights and
access to land.  Sustainable development strategies and national forest and
land use programmes should be coordinated and could be encouraged, as
appropriate.  Initiatives for action in regions affected or threatened by
desertification and the effects of drought should come from the affected
countries.

26.  The Panel emphasized the need for donors, international agencies and
recipient countries to engage in adequate consultations in order to develop
efficient and coordinated programmes of international cooperation on
forests consistent with the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification, and in accordance with the mandate of the Panel, Agenda 21
and the Forest Principles.

27.  The Panel noted that, consistent with actions and developments under
the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification: 

     (a)  An integrated approach should be adopted to the management of
existing vegetation, reforestation, afforestation and the restoration of
fragile forest ecosystems affected or threatened by desertification and/or
drought within the overall social and economic development of those areas;

     (b)  Continuing forest-related analysis and monitoring of past,
present and future experiences, including biophysical, economic, social and
ecological aspects were important for sustainable forest management. 
Developing countries should be assisted so as to increase their capacity
for these activities;

     (c)  Partnership, collaboration and sharing of responsibilities
involved among local communities, Governments, non-governmental
organizations and other interested groups should be strengthened, including
long-term institutional and legal arrangements;

     (d)  Donors, international agencies and recipient countries should
engage in consultations in order to develop efficient and coordinated
programmes of international cooperation to combat desertification
consistent with the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and
within the broader mandate of the Panel, Agenda 21 and the Forest
Principles;

     (e)  A closer relationship should be established between reforestation
and management of existing forest ecosystems, including in-depth study of
traditional agrosylvopastoral systems, for the purpose of benefiting from
existing knowledge, including greater attention to the potential of
non-timber forest products.  International cooperation is also required in
this respect.

The impact of airborne pollution on forests

28.  The Panel noted that the impact of air pollution on forest health was
a problem affecting not only parts of Europe, but also many other parts of
the world.  The need for a preventive approach to combating air pollution,
including considerations of production and consumption patterns, was
stressed.  The Panel also stressed the importance of the Convention on
Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution and welcomed the widespread and
general application of the critical loads approach adopted in the context
of this Convention.

29.  The Panel emphasized the need for continuing monitoring of the impact
of air pollution on forest health, but also stressed the need for
continuing action to reduce air pollution, including action to transfer and
supply the best available as well as future technology.  The solution to
the problem had to be based on action outside the forest.  A synthesis of
the impact of airborne pollutants on forests, in particular in Central and
Eastern Europe, and an assessment of ongoing activities and proposals for
possible future actions should be examined.

30.  The Panel noted that:

     (a)  An evaluation should be made of the experience of forest decline
world wide and of pollutant-related declines where they had occurred and
how the countries concerned addressed such decline; 

     (b)  The critical loads approach might be considered by those
countries where forests were, or might be, affected by air pollution; 

     (c)  National strategies might include prevention of damaging air
pollution and reduction of transboundary pollution; 

     (d)  The potential impact on forest health from inputs of nutrients
and pollutants from the atmosphere, acting in combination with other
processes such as natural weathering and leaching, should be recognized in
forest planning and management;

     (e)  Programmes monitoring the impact of airborne pollution on forest
health in countries of the European Union (EU) and the Economic Commission
for Europe (ECE) should continue, and be extended to other areas as
required;

     (f)  Countries should be encouraged to cooperate in activities related
to the impact of airborne pollution on forest health, including the
dissemination of information to the public and the access to existing data
of potential users including managers and policy makers;

     (g)  Specific research and field data collection should be continued
to support the above-mentioned activities, including work on ecosystem
functions where pollutant depositions threatened sustainability;

     (h)  Other material for incorporation in the report to the Panel at
its third session should include a comprehensive study on biomass,
management, regeneration and silviculture of native species of arid,
semi-arid and dry sub-humid ecosystems; information on emissions of sulphur
dioxide in a historical perspective; and acid rain.


           3.  Needs and requirements of countries with low forest
               cover (programme element I.5)                      

31.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element I.5, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/4, taking into account
the relevant paragraphs of the Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement
of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and
Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests (Forest Principles) and
chapter 11 of Agenda 21.  That report provided material that could be
relevant to many of the other programme elements.

32.  The Panel called for a working definition of low forest cover,
applicable to all countries.  A classification that also took note of the
balance between supply of, and demand for, forest goods and services might
also be developed, considering the work of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity and
the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States. 6/  Based on any definition, however, the group of
countries identified as having low forest cover are likely to be
heterogeneous.  Low forest cover has many causes, and the present situation
is constantly changing.  Some countries are actively expanding their
forest, while others are approaching qualification for entry into the low-
forest cover category. 

33.  The restricted area of forests in countries with low forest cover is
of especial importance for the production of timber and the provision of a
diversity of goods and services.  These services, including protection of
water catchments, supply of energy, maintenance of biological diversity,
contribution to food security, recreation and heath rehabilitation, need to
be properly evaluated.

34.  The conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its
components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out
of the utilization of genetic resources should be integrated into national
forest and land use plans in countries with low forest cover.  Many of the
forest types in these countries are distinctive or even rare, while the
proportion included in nationally designated protected areas is often below
average.  The possibility of networks of protected areas to be developed at
national and regional levels, linked by corridors and extended by
well-managed buffer zones, was referred to.

35.  Countries need to consider at national level what could be the optimum
level of forest cover they require.  Policy options for securing an
appropriate supply of forest goods and services need to be defined taking
into account the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and
the Convention on Biological Diversity.  The national designation of a
permanent forest estate requires that countries consider the many uses to
which it could be put.  Countries will also need to assess how far such
services could be provided outside the forest sector.  Some countries,
however, will need to import forest goods or even consider substitution,
where practicable.  The full environmental costs of such substitution
should be evaluated.  The reduction of waste and increased efficiency of
production of forest goods could make a substantial contribution to
conserving forest resources. 

36.  Additional information may be necessary as a basis for forest action
plans in countries with low forest cover, but the information already
existing should be used as efficiently as possible.  Positive, short-term
and intersectoral actions may be needed to address immediate needs both in
developed and in developing countries.  The action priorities are clearly
likely to differ among countries.

37.  The Panel noted that many of the issues highlighted under this
programme element also arose elsewhere in its agenda, including under
programme elements I.4 and III.1.  It also emphasized that actions under
this programme element needed to be coordinated with action under the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change and the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification.

  Turning to action, The Panel noted that:

     (a)  Countries with low forest cover had a particular need to ensure
security of forest goods and services through sustainable management of all
types of forests;

     (b)  Forest conservation programmes needed to be based on
considerations of quality as well as quantity, and to pay particular
attention to distinctive forest types important for biological diversity;

     (c)  Plantations should be planned and managed to enhance production
and provision of goods and services while taking into account the
conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its
components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out
of the utilization of genetic resources, using indigenous species where
possible and taking pressure off natural forests.  Forest plantations
should not be a substitute for natural ecosystems of high ecological and
cultural value;

     (d)  Participation and cooperation should be promoted at both national
and international levels.  At the national level, the participation of
forest dwellers and local people in decision-making should be enhanced
where necessary.  Cooperation for capacity-building, technology transfer
and finance should be promoted at the international level, to improve the
abilities of low-forest cover countries to make the best use of their
resources;

     (e)  Relevant and appropriate information should be collected and
disseminated where this would be done cost-effectively;

     (f)  All developed countries, in particular developed countries with
low forest cover, should not only protect their remaining forests, but also
make efforts to increase their forest cover.  Developed countries should
assist developing countries with low forest cover in protecting and
increasing their forest area.  A similar effort should be made for
developing countries that were not categorized as having a low forest
cover, when they had substantive areas with low forest cover.

39.  The Panel requested its secretariat, in the course of its preparations
for the discussions at the third session of the Panel as well as for the
final consideration at the Panel's fourth session, to take into account
current and future discussions on other relevant programme elements of its
programme of work, as well as related government-sponsored initiatives
under way, taking account of paragraphs 15 and 16 of the report of the
Panel on its first session.  The Panel also requested the Secretariat to
propose a good working definition of low forest cover, and to take into
consideration studies on ways of improving the productivity, conservation
and enhancement of low-forest cover areas at all levels. 

          4.  International cooperation in financial assistance and
              technology transfer for sustainable forest management
              (programme element II)                               

40.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element II, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/5.  The Panel emphasized
that Agenda 21, particularly chapter 11, the Forest Principles and the
relevant work of the Commission on Sustainable Development provided the
general framework for relevant deliberations in the Panel, which should
focus, however, on forest-related aspects of international cooperation in
financial assistance and technology transfer.  Furthermore, the Panel
reiterated that these cross-cutting issues were relevant to all other
programme elements within its terms of reference.

41.  It was emphasized that international cooperation in finance and
technology transfer was essential if sustainable forest management was to
be achieved.  Critical areas need to be effectively addressed, such as
those relating to the transfer and development of environmentally sound
technology on favourable terms, as mutually agreed, and the mobilization of
financial resources, including the provision of new and additional
resources, taking into account principles 10 and 11 of the Forest
Principles and the relevant chapters of Agenda 21, with a view to assisting
developing countries in pursuing policies and comprehensive strategies for
achieving sustainable forest management.  The results of the ongoing
relevant work in the Commission on Sustainable Development should also be
taken into account.  Principle 2 (a) of the Forest Principles should be
also fully recognized.  Special reference was also made to principle 1 (b)
of the Forest Principles.

42.  The Panel considered statistical data indicating some decline in
official development assistance (ODA), both as a percentage of gross
national product (GNP) and in some cases specifically as regards forest
programmes.  The Panel noted that the reliability and usefulness of the
statistics would be enhanced if the forestry components of the financial
assistance to rural development, environment and natural resource
management were taken into account.

43.  It was recognized that additional levels of funding from all sources,
including investment, were needed to bring about sustainable forest
management. Concerns were expressed regarding the lack of real progress in
the implementation of commitments accepted in chapter 33 of Agenda 21 which
made it more difficult to achieve sustainable forest management world wide. 
It was stressed, however, that new and additional funding for sustainable
forest management should not be realized at the expense of other priority
areas.  The Panel recognized the important role of ODA in financing
sustainable forest management, particularly in the least developed
countries.  ODA can also play a catalytic role in financing sustainable
forest management.  More specifically, ODA could be seen as a form of
leverage for mobilizing additional funding from all other sources.  In this
context, it was stressed that serious attempts should be made by donor
countries to raise their levels of ODA relevant to forests.    

44.  The Panel emphasized that existing financial resources, including ODA,
should be used efficiently and effectively.  This should be facilitated by
policy reforms, where appropriate, that favour sustainable forest
management.  It was also further acknowledged that efficiency could be
improved through increased absorptive capacity for financial flows in the
developing countries and countries with economies in transition, which, in
turn, might require financial support in the area of capacity-building. 
More efficient and effective programmes will help to attract greater
financial resources.  National plans and programmes for sustainable forest
management should include cost-benefit considerations.  The importance of
transparency and a participatory approach in the elaboration of
forest-related programmes was also highlighted in this context. 

45.  Concerns were expressed that multilateral financial institutions and
mechanisms had imposed conditionalities on developing countries that had
not always proved to be fully compatible with the goals of sustainable
forest management.  

46.  The Panel felt that bilateral and multilateral cooperation for
financial assistance should take fully into account national priorities
formulated under national forest plans, programmes and strategies of
recipient countries, and that consultative processes with appropriate
national authorities should be enhanced.  Better coordination, both among
donors and between donors and recipients, should be encouraged to maximize
efficiency in the use of existing resources and in technology transfer. 
Approaches such as forest partnership agreements may offer some promise in
this regard but more clarification and further understanding of the scope
and purpose of these and of national forest funds are required to avoid
confusion and duplication with respect to existing financing schemes and
funds.  The elaboration of these instruments has to involve all relevant
parties.  

47.  The Panel emphasized that forest-related projects that had global
environmental benefits should be supported through Global Environment
Facility (GEF) programmes relevant to biological diversity, climate change
and international waters.  Therefore, it was felt that, at this point, a
separate window for forests in GEF need not be created.  Concerns were also
expressed regarding the overall inadequacy of funds in GEF.  Furthermore,
the need for GEF forest-related projects to meet the existing eligibility
criteria, as well as the need to take into account the guidance provided by
the conferences of the parties to relevant conventions, was highlighted.   


48.  It was also noted that domestic sources of finance needed to be
identified and mobilized and that a more conducive environment for viable
and profitable forestry business should be created in recipient countries
in order to complement ODA and to enhance the predictability and continuity
of financing for sustainable forest management.

49.  The Panel considered various means for mobilizing additional resources
internally, including through such means as rent capture, unimpeded
markets, transferable licences/concessions, removal of damaging subsidies,
reduction of illegal logging and better valuation of forest products, goods
and services.

50.  The Panel recognized the potential for generating additional revenues
through various innovative mechanisms such as joint ventures and
debt-for-nature swaps.  The Panel felt that further analysis of these
mechanisms was still required.  Reservations were expressed in connection
with carbon offsets, tradable permits and debt-for-policy-reform swaps.  It
was noted that some of these mechanisms were already being addressed in
other forums such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change, and the Convention on Biological Diversity and that the Panel
should take into full account the outcomes of discussions in those forums. 
Furthermore, the Panel should take into account the relevant work
undertaken by the Commission on Sustainable Development. 

51.  The Panel considered that the level of financial assistance for
capacity-building, including education, should be increased.  In so far as
infrastructure development for small- and medium-sized enterprises should
be increased as well, it was stressed that the private sector had an
important role to play in funding these activities.  

52.  There is a need to encourage stronger participation and investment by
the private sector to attain the sustainable development of forest
resources.  At present, however, the objectives of the private sector do
not necessarily support the promotion of sustainable forest management.  
While the need is recognized for formulating attractive incentives for
private sector investments, enabling conditions in developing countries and
countries with economies in transition are equally important with respect
to attracting these investments.  The possibility of elaborating codes of
conduct applicable to forestry activities carried out through joint
ventures and by the private sector, perhaps initially at the national
level, was suggested in this regard.

53.  Forest plantations should be given due recognition in view of the role
they can play in reducing pressure on natural forests and contributing to
sustainable development.  Policy frameworks and regulations should be
designed in such a way as to ensure that private investment in forest
industry contributes to sustainable development, including enhanced
protection and conservation of forest resources.

54.  The Panel recognized that sustainable management of forests could be
greatly supported through establishing, in a cooperative endeavour between
developed and developing countries, institutional and administrative
frameworks conducive to foreign investment and the reinvestment of revenues
derived from forest activities, as well as to the transfer of technology.

55.  Calculation of net investment cost at the national level should be
based on priority activities, including development projects, in national
forest plans and programmes or other national-level policies.  While
considering the possibility that deforestation could lead to disinvestment,
the Panel recognized that assumptions and methodologies used to estimate
net investment had to be clarified.
 
56.  While recognizing that additional information on investment in
forestry was desirable and should be pursued, the Panel requested that
procedures for data collection should be kept simple.  There was also a
need to avoid duplication of existing activities.  In this regard, the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), in cooperation
with other relevant agencies and organizations, was requested to continue
gathering and collating relevant information, as well as increasing the
accessibility of that information to all interested parties.

57.  The Panel felt that more emphasis should be given to the formulation
of recommendations and options for action on technology transfer.  It also
highlighted the need to further strengthen North-South and South-South
cooperation in technology transfer (including between three or several
countries).  Moreover, the Panel agreed that technologies in the public
domain, which constituted the majority of technologies relevant to
sustainable forest management, should be made more easily accessible
through greater transparency and broader dissemination of information. 
Furthermore, transfer of relevant privately owned technologies should be
encouraged.  The private sector in developed and developing countries
should also be encouraged to invest in scientific and technological
development activities through joint ventures so as to complement current
joint ventures in manufacturing.  The Panel also stressed the need for
greater reliance on national-level expertise.

58.  The Panel considered that priority in technology transfer and
capacity-building should be given to the following areas:  information
dissemination to improve land-use planning and improvement of forest
yields; technology and methods that could reduce environmental damages due
to current forestry practices; species research for tree improvement for
rehabilitation, reforestation and nursery development; technology and
methods for retaining forest values, including biological diversity;
incorporation of indigenous knowledge in plant utilization; new and
renewable sources of energy; environmentally sound logging technologies;
and development and implementation of national forest strategies.

59.  The Panel noted that the workshop on financing for sustainable forest
management, jointly sponsored by the Governments of Denmark, South Africa
and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), could provide a
valuable input into the formulation of concrete recommendations by the
Panel to advance the deliberations on issues relevant to financing.

60.  The Panel requested that the relevant report of the Secretary-General
to be prepared as material for the Panel's deliberations at the third
session of the Panel should place greater emphasis on international aspects
of financing and technology transfer, and should address, in particular,
the following issues:

     (a)  Financial resources:

     (i)  Analysis of mechanisms and policy options, including the role of
          actual and potential international and national financial sources
          for sustainable forest management;

    (ii)  Suggestions on possible criteria and indicators for monitoring
          financial flows for achieving sustainable forest management, as
          well as relevant social and economic dimensions, such as market
          forces and consumption patterns;

   (iii)  Funding for relevant capacity-building programmes;

    (iv)  Roles and scopes of national environmental funds;

     (v)  Matters relating to pricing, subsidies and deforestation charges;
          

    (vi)  The relevant role of the private sector, including external trade
          and investment, as well as analysis of feasibility and
          desirability of codes of conduct for the private sector in the
          context of sustainable forest management;

   (vii)  Role of innovative funding sources and mechanisms;

  (viii)  Coordination and synergy between funding sources and
          organizations;

     (b)  Transfer of technology:

     (i)  Assessment of progress achieved since Rio;

    (ii)  Ways and means for: 

          a.   Promoting more effective transfer of technology, in both the
               public and the private domains, including identification of
               suitable existing and potential mechanisms;

          b.   Strengthening North-South and South-South cooperation;

          c.   Increasing the role of research institutions; 

          d.   Attracting private sector funding in the development of
               environmentally sound technologies, including through joint
               ventures.


              5.  Assessment of the multiple benefits of all types
                  of forests (programme element III.1 (a))

61.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element III.1 (a), contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/6, taking into
account the relevant paragraphs of the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of
Agenda 21.

62.  The Panel emphasized that assessment of the actual and potential
conditions of all types of forests was an essential basis for sustainable
forest management, and for a wide range of considerations related to
forests at the local, national, regional and global level.  The importance
of national inventories was underlined.

63.  The Panel noted that there were many shortfalls and gaps in existing
information.  The database regarding both developed and developing
countries is uneven.  Much attention is still given to timber and forest
cover, whereas other goods and services provided by forests such as
fuelwood, the sustainable use, conservation and equitable sharing of
benefits of biological diversity, soil and water conservation, carbon
sequestration and other social, cultural and economic aspects are rarely
covered and will need more attention.

64.  The Panel stressed that forest assessments should adopt a holistic
approach and be user-oriented and demand-driven.  There was general
agreement on the priority to be given to meeting the needs of forest
managers.  However, further study would be needed to define the levels of
precision required and the specific needs of different users.  The need to
fully utilize the data already collected was stressed.

65.  The Panel further noted that capacity-building at national and local
levels was crucial, and should involve all interested parties, including
non-governmental organizations, local communities, indigenous people and
other major groups.  Forest assessment should be multidisciplinary and
involve data collection and analysis by local, national and possibly
regional as well as international institutions.

66.  The Panel emphasized that national forest assessments should use
nationally accepted criteria and indicators for sustainable forest
management.  The need to include qualitative as well as quantitative
information on forest goods and services was stressed.

67.  While recognizing the widespread application of remote sensing
techniques and geographical information systems for forest assessments, the
Panel noted the need for ground surveys for some parameters.  The Panel
also noted that assessments represented a significant financial burden, in
particular for developing countries, and that they should therefore be
carried out in the most cost-effective manner.  In some cases, reallocation
of financial resources may be required to support effective forest
assessment programmes.

68.  National forest assessment programmes should be transparent and
accessible to all interested parties.  Efforts should be made to harmonize
approaches to data collection and analysis in order to enhance
comparability among countries.

69.  The Panel recognized that inadequate assessment of the contribution of
forests to the national GNP had in some cases led to underinvestment in
forest management.

70.  The current 10-year interval between global forest resources
assessments was considered to be too long.  Shorter intervals could be
considered together with the possibility of continuous updating of data,
taking into account the financial implications, that is, the costs of
meeting such requirements, for FAO and the developing countries.

71.  Concerning international cooperation, the Panel agreed that much work
needed to be done on defining the scale, scope, content, frequency,
dissemination and availability of data.  FAO, in partnership with other
international organizations, national institutions and non-governmental
organizations, should contribute towards coordinating international efforts
on forest assessment.  The Panel also agreed that coordination was needed
between forest and other related information systems, and stressed the need
for South-South cooperation, as well as cooperation at the national level
among all interested parties both within and outside the forest sector.

72.  The Panel highlighted the following points and actions:

     (a)  Intensified use should be made of assessment data and remote
sensing public domain technology and data already available, all of which
should be more widely disseminated.  The use of existing FAO data, in
combination with other data sets, offers a rich potential for addressing
urgent questions in a cost-effective manner.  Data interpretation in
response to user needs is necessary;

     (b)  A study of uses and categories of users of forest resources and
related information at the international level was required.  This would be
particularly important when discussing new types of information to be
included in the global forest resources assessment;

     (c)  National-level indicators for sustainable forest management
should be integrated into forest assessment.  This should be done in a way
that is cost-effective and scientifically sound, while recognizing
differences in economies and cultures of countries.  While some indicators
are quantitative, those of some other important goods and services are
qualitative but should still be included;

     (d)  Research on forest inventory and monitoring techniques should be
strengthened with a view to expanding the scope of forest assessments to
respond to the demand for new information in a cost-effective manner;

     (e)  The lack of basic information called for capacity-building in
data gathering, which should be integrated with strategic planning and
decision-making.  National institutions for forest assessment should be
strengthened as a basic element of action towards sustainable forest
management;

     (f)  Mobilization of necessary funding should be given due
consideration in view of the inadequate financial resources currently
available for national-level forest assessments;

     (g)  Coordination of efforts at international level should be
enhanced.  FAO should act in partnership with other international
organizations, national institutions and non-governmental organizations,
and ensure better coordination and avoid overlap between forest and other
related information systems;

     (h)  Interpretation and dissemination of information, including
dissemination through electronic means of national-level information,
should be ensured for those countries and interested parties that had
difficulties in accessing internationally available information.


         6.  Methodologies for proper valuation of the multiple benefits
             of forests (programme element III.1 (b))

73.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element III.1 (b) contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/7, taking into
account the relevant paragraphs of the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of
Agenda 21.

74.  The Panel stressed that forests provided a wide range of benefits,
some of which were easy to quantify or describe in qualitative terms, while
others were more difficult to measure.  The close relationship with
programme element III.1 (a), (forest assessment) was underlined.

75.  The Panel noted that several methodologies for the valuation of forest
goods and services were still in the early stages of development and had
many limitations.  Valuation is often site- and time-specific.

76.  The Panel emphasized that economic valuation was only one of many
considerations for decision-making, and could not become a substitute for
the process of political decision-making on forests, which included wide-
ranging aspects such as environmental, socio-economic, ethical, cultural
and religious considerations.  The risk associated with the disappearance
of forests, especially with respect to biological diversity, is not
adequately covered by present methodologies.

77.  The Panel noted that expensive valuation exercises should not be
performed at the expense of more pressing basic needs, such as the
development and application of reliable data systems, and the development
of strategies and mechanisms to make sustainable forest management a
politically achievable objective.  A step-by-step process should be
implemented to address the various needs in a progressive manner.

78.  The Panel recognized that the results of valuation, when applied as a
neutral tool, had an important potential, as a source of information to all
interested parties, and for increasing public awareness, particularly on
non-marketable forest goods and services.

79.  Although the potential usefulness of forest valuation methodologies
was recognized by the Panel, it felt that their complexity and the costs
involved might limit their widespread application.  Innovative and simple
scientific valuation methods were needed.

80.  The Panel noted that activities related to the valuation of forest
goods and services provided new opportunities for international cooperation
and generation of awareness.  This could include training of staff as well
as decision makers and work on ways and means to include forest goods and
services in national accounts.  The need to exchange existing experiences
in a number of countries, as well as to establish pilot studies and
schemes, was emphasized by the Panel.

81.  The Panel highlighted the following points and actions:

     (a)  Research should be promoted in order to further develop forest
valuation methodologies.  This should include the exploration of innovative
and simple methodologies for collective decision-making on forests that
involved various interested parties, such as local communities, and
indigenous people;

     (b)  New forest valuation methodologies should take into account the
following criteria:  practical applicability, simplicity and clarity,
multidisciplinarity, cost-effectiveness, orientation towards non-marketable
goods and non-quantifiable services, neutrality and scientific validity. 
This process should remain country-driven and country-specific, and involve
sharing of information and experiences between countries;

     (c)  New research programmes should fully recognize the ecological,
social, cultural and religious values of forests, and pay particular
attention to global dimensions of climate change, and the sustainable use,
conservation and equitable sharing of the benefits of biological diversity;

     (d)  Further research might need to be undertaken on policy issues
related to forest values.  In particular, approaches to the inclusion of
forest valuation in national resource accounts might be further explored;

     (e)  A matrix showing the application, geographical scale and data
sets required for different forest valuation methods might be prepared.


            B.  Programme elements that were discussed initially

                    1.  Progress in national forest and land
                        use plans (programme element I.1)

82.  The Panel took note of the progress report of the Secretary-General on
programme element I.1 (document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/8) and requested that the
following points be taken into account in preparation for substantive
discussion of this issue during the third session of the Panel:

     (a)  Terms like "forestry", "forest plans", "forest programmes" and
"forest strategies" should be defined properly and used consistently;

     (b)  Consideration should be given to all types of forests and
utilization patterns in developing as well as developed countries, and
countries with economies in transition;

     (c)  Some countries might prefer to pursue their forest policy goals
by other means than formal plans and programmes.  Specific decisions in
this regard were a prerogative of national Governments;

     (d)  International guidelines for national forest programmes should be
developed;

     (e)  Actions being undertaken by the Panel in relation to this
programme element should take into account those under existing instruments
such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change and the United Nations Convention to
Combat Desertification, in accordance with the Forest Principles and
chapter 11 of Agenda 21;

     (f)  The Panel considered the workshops on "Promotion of national
forest and land use programmes" sponsored by Germany and "Sustainable
forestry and land use:  the process of consensus-building" sponsored by
Sweden and Uganda, to be held in June 1996 and October 1996 respectively,
to be inputs into the preparations for the substantive discussion on this
programme element;

     (g)  The interface between forests and other land uses must be
examined, and national forest plans and programmes must be integrated with
wider land use plans in the context of chapter 10 of Agenda 21, as well as
socio-economic policies.  They must be adopted at a high level in national
Government;

     (h)  Forest plans and programmes should have a long-term approach and
be based on the sustainable management of all forest values;

     (i)  Forest plans and programmes should be country-driven and make
maximum use of national expertise, in particular in international
cooperation programmes;

     (j)  It was recognized that, in many countries, Government had the
central responsibility for the custodianship and the sustainable management
of the forest estate.  However, an open, decentralized and participatory
process involving local communities and other relevant interested parties,
including non-governmental organizations and the private sector, will often
enhance effective implementation.  National, subnational and local planning
systems should be designed to strategically identify priority areas for
participatory planning and management systems;

     (k)  The scientific foundation for forest plans and programmes should
be strong and appropriate criteria and indicators could play an important
role in this respect;

     (l)  Forest plans and programmes should be based on sound economic
valuation of forest resources, including environmental services and
non-timber forest products;

     (m)  The key role of the forest owner should be recognized.  Account
must be taken of jurisdiction at various levels within the country;

     (n)  The rights and interests of forest dwellers and indigenous
people, as well as their religious and cultural values, must be recognized
and provided for, in the context of national laws;

     (o)  Forest plans and programmes should provide opportunities to
reconcile conflicting interests;

     (p)  Forest plans and programmes should take into account the impact
of international trade and market forces on the national forest sector, in
terms of transparent and non-discriminatory market access;

     (q)  Capacity-building, the strengthening of institutions, and
training could be a key to the achievement of national plans;

     (r)  Poor donor coordination at national and international levels was
another impediment that must be considered.  An explanation of the current
mechanisms in this area should be included in the document for substantive
discussion at the third session of the Panel;

     (s)  Specific mechanisms for the implementation of actions suggested
by the Panel should be considered.


      2.  Traditional forest-related knowledge (programme element I.3)

83.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element I.3, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/9 and Corr.1, prepared
for its initial discussion, taking into account the relevant paragraphs of
the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of Agenda 21.

84.  The Panel emphasized that the substantive discussion should focus
principally on the terms of reference for this programme element as
determined by the Commission on Sustainable Development at its third
session and the Panel at its first session with reference to principles 4
and 5 (a) of the Forest Principles.  The Panel recognized that those terms
of reference included considerations of how traditional knowledge and
practices in their broadest sense could be applied to sustainable forest
management.  The Panel took note of the statement on biodiversity and
forests from the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity as annexed to the report of the Secretary-General mentioned in
paragraph 83 and its relevance for work under different Panel programme
elements.  The Panel also noted that it would need to take into account the
outcome of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity at its third session in relation to indigenous knowledge.

85.  The Panel recognized that traditional forest-related knowledge,
innovations and practices, especially as they related to sustainable forest
management and the use of non-timber forest products, constituted an
important body of experience that was relevant for the fulfilment of its
mandate.  This experience embraces time-tested, site-specific and socially
relevant practices, as well as the innovations and practices of indigenous
people, forest dwellers and other local communities, drawn from forestry,
agroforestry and agricultural traditions.

86.  The Panel noted the need to address the relationship between
traditional forest-related knowledge and biological diversity, and to take
account of other relevant intergovernmental processes, in particular the
Convention on Biological Diversity, so as to avoid duplication or overlap.

87.  The Panel recognized the need for its deliberations to focus on
traditional forest-related knowledge as it related to sustainable forest
management practices, with particular reference to principle 12 (d) of the
Forest Principles (concerning appropriate indigenous capacity and local
knowledge regarding the conservation and sustainable development of
forests).  In this context, it requested that, for substantive discussion
at its third session, the report contain well-defined proposals for
national action, including an exploration of the need for and the
feasibility of mechanisms for considering ways and means as regards the
effective recognition, protection and equitable sharing of benefits arising
from the use of traditional forest-related knowledge related to forest
management practices.

88.  The Panel agreed that the following issue merited further development: 
providing technical, technological and scientific advice on traditional
knowledge, innovations and practices of forest use and conservation,
including:
     
     (a)  Development of methods for the acquisition, evaluation and
analysis of traditional technologies;

     (b)  Procedures for the storage, retrieval and dissemination of
information;

     (c)  Identification of constituents, interested relevant parties,
users and/or beneficiaries;

     (d)  Development of tools and mechanisms for protection and benefit-
sharing;

     (e)  Identification and application of methodologies for the
appropriate utilization of indigenous and local community ethno-ecological
concepts, and establishment of criteria for identification, monitoring and
environmental impact assessment, as well as enhanced public education and
awareness.

89.  The Panel further agreed that the following matters should be
addressed during substantive discussion:

     (a)  Recognition of the key role played by indigenous people, forest
dwellers and local communities in defining participatory approaches to
forest and land management, with the involvement of all interested relevant
parties from both the public and private sectors, and with greater focus on
resource management institutions, land-use systems and conflict resolution;

     (b)  The complexity of the issues surrounding traditional
forest-related knowledge, including traditions relating to access and
utilization, as well as to knowledge of the resources themselves;

     (c)  The need for action to study, develop and apply such knowledge
for the development of new sustainable forest management approaches;

     (d)  Options to inventory, document, categorize, protect, store and
retrieve traditional forest-related knowledge, including that related to
medicinal plants and other non-wood forest products, including the need to
protect the information so generated;

     (e)  Opportunities for the wider application of traditional
forest-related knowledge;

     (f)  Ways and means to ensure effective protection of indigenous
rights and payment of royalties on intellectual property rights in the
context of national legislation, and to ensure the fair and equitable
sharing of benefits, involving local communities and forests dwellers,
including ways to determine clearly which individuals belonged to which
group;

     (g)  Approaches to fostering further analysis involving, inter alia,
research institutions, indigenous people and non-governmental
organizations;

     (h)  Mechanisms for the exchange of national experiences;

     (i)  Mechanisms to stimulate programmes for the development of
products derived from traditional knowledge, including the involvement of
the private sector and financial investments as appropriate.

90.  The Panel considered that no application, utilization, study or
systematization of traditional forest-related knowledge should take place
in a way that could undermine the effective protection of indigenous
rights, or the need to ensure the equitable sharing of benefits.

91.  The Panel emphasized the need for capacity-building, especially at the
local level, as an essential component of all elements of paragraphs 88 and
89 above (in the development of approaches for the use of traditional
forest-related knowledge).

92.  The Panel felt that the substantive discussion of this programme
element would require careful attention's being paid to the financial
implications of the proposals to be considered.

93.  The Panel agreed that Governments, relevant international
organizations, non-governmental organizations and indigenous and local
communities should be encouraged to contribute to the preparation of
documentation for the third session of the Panel.

94.  On the basis of the principle of common but differentiated
responsibilities, the Panel noted that developed countries bore a special
responsibility in regard to facilitating the necessary conditions for the
conservation and sustainable use of forest biological diversity.  This
implies a constructive approach to the transfer of technologies and
financial resources.

95.  Within the context of international cooperation, the Panel suggested:

     (a)  The consideration of other points including "clearing-house
mechanisms", the repatriation of information, and biosafety developments;

     (b)  Support for joint ventures focused upon the management and
development of enterprises in the field of forest-related biotechnology.


               3.  Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest
                   management (programme element III.2)

96.  The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General on programme
element III.2, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/10, taking into
account the relevant paragraphs of the Forest Principles and chapter 11 of
Agenda 21, and requested that the following points be taken into account in
preparation for substantive discussion during the third session of the
Panel.

97.  Concerning suggestions for items for discussion contained in paragraph
60 of the report on programme element III.2, the Panel expressed support
for examining the possibilities for developing a global consensus on
concepts, terms and definitions concerned with sustainable forest
management, as well as for promoting ways and means to further expand and
intensify activities in the identification of socio-economically,
environmentally, biologically and institutionally relevant criteria and
indicators for sustainable forest management, with special reference to
promoting national initiatives in those ecological and geographical regions
or subregions that were currently not covered by, or participating in,
ongoing international initiatives.  This would include special ways and
means to assist those developing countries in which forests and woodlands
were essential in meeting basic subsistence needs of rural populations and
forest-dwelling peoples.

98.  Reservations were expressed regarding the concept of linking
ecological zones in different geographical regions of the world (for
example, dry zones in Africa, the Near East, Asia, tropical/subtropical
America and the Caribbean) as a first step towards achieving
internationally compatible criteria and indicators of sustainable
management of all types of forests.

99.  The Panel also expressed reservations with respect to its position
concerning the development of methodologies to quantify indicators
currently recorded as qualitative and descriptive, as well as mechanisms to
promote cross-sectoral linkages.  However, clarification of links between
national-level and forest management unit-level activities needs further
examination.

100. Some support was expressed for the promotion of ways and means to
maximize the exchange of information, experiences and know-how at global
level in all issues related to the criteria and indicators for sustainable
forest management.

101. In addition, the following specific points were raised:

     (a)  Criteria and indicators were not an end in themselves, but should
be considered tools for achieving sustainable forest management.  Criteria
assist in characterizing sustainable forest management, whereas
quantitative and qualitative indicators provide the basis for assessing
progress towards sustainable forest management.  Criteria and indicators
for sustainable forest management can play an important role in ensuring
the scientific foundation for forest plans (related to programme element
I.1);

     (b)  There was a need for a broad spectrum of indicators, considering
social, cultural, economic, ecological, legal and policy aspects.  Not all
aspects are quantifiable.  However, this does not make qualitative aspects
less important.  In many national and regional initiatives, both
quantitative and qualitative indicators have already been established;

     (c)  Criteria and indicators should contribute to improving the scope
of forest assessment in terms of social, economic, cultural, religious and
environmental values and benefits;

     (d)  Possibilities and constraints for developing consensus on
concepts, terms and definitions concerned with sustainable forest
management should be explored;

     (e)  There should be an analysis of the implications of the
proliferation of initiatives for the development of criteria and indicators
for sustainable forest management of all types of forests.  The extent of
convergence among national-level criteria and indicators at the regional
level should be analysed;

     (f)  Development of criteria and indicators for application at
regional level, in addition to national level, should be considered.  An
analysis should be made of the degree of comparability among ongoing
initiatives, as well as the degree of compatibility and the appropriateness
of convergence among international initiatives;

     (g)  Experiences at national level should be revised, and engagement
of regions/countries not yet participating in any of the ongoing
initiatives should be sought;

     (h)  Development of national-level criteria and indicators should be a
gradual process, to be based on national policies for sustainable forest
management;

     (i)  Countries might develop indicators at the national, local and
management unit level according to their own needs;

     (j)  The possibility of forging closer links between ongoing
international initiatives, including the International Tropical Timber
Organization (ITTO) Objective Year 2000 and the work of other international
institutions, as well as of providing support to research through relevant
entities should be pursued;

     (k)  The process of development of criteria and indicators at national
level should be simple and transparent and scientifically based, and
reflect, inter alia, economic, social and ecological differences;

     (l)  Criteria and indicators for application at the national level
should be developed through a process involving all relevant parties
including native forest dwellers and non-governmental organizations;

     (m)  Field testing and the application of national-level criteria and
indicators were an important aspect for further development;

     (n)  Criteria and indicators might assist in clarifying issues related
to certification of forest products.  Attention should be given to the link
between national-, subnational- and forest management unit-level
activities;

     (o)  Development of criteria and indicators should not constitute a
restriction to trade in a sustainable development framework; 

     (p)  Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management should
not be applied so as to restrict the status of a country in relation to
ODA.

102. The Panel considered the International Seminar of Experts on Criteria
and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management sponsored by Finland, and
to be held in Helsinki from 19 to 22 August 1996, to be an important input
into the preparations for the substantive discussion of this programme
element at the Panel's third session.


          4.  Trade and environment in relation to forest products
              and services (programme element IV)                 

103. The Panel considered the report of the Secretary-General contained in
document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/11.  It considered that the preparations for
substantive discussion at the third session of the Panel should take into
account the following points.

104. The important role of international trade in forest products in
promoting sustainable forest management was recognized.  However, it was
also recognized that trade policies could also have adverse impacts on the
conservation, use and sustainable development of forests.

105. While debates on trade, environment and sustainable development were
under way in other intergovernmental forums, the Panel deliberations should
focus on forests and forest products, in accordance with the Panel's
mandate and taking into account chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and relevant
paragraphs of the Forest Principles adopted at the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development.

106. In view of the wide range and complexity of the issues involved in the
question of trade and environment in relation to forest products and
services, the need to draw on the expertise and relevant work being done
elsewhere, in particular by the World Trade Organization, the United
Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), FAO, the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), ITTO and the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), was noted.

107. The following specific points should be taken into account in
preparing various sections of the report of the Secretary-General for
substantive discussion at the third session of the Panel:

Scope of analysis
          
108. The scope of analysis should include:

     (a)  Wood and non-wood products as well as forest-related services
from all types of forests;

     (b)  Domestic trade in forest products;

     (c)  Promotion of sustainable forest management through mutually
supportive roles of trade and environmental policies.

Market access and trade barriers

109. Factors relating to improving market access and dismantling tariff and
non-tariff trade barriers that affect exports from both developing and
developed countries should encompass:

     (a)  Findings from case-studies on import and export restrictions
imposed by countries on raw and processed forest products;

     (b)  Tariff escalation and subsidies that distort trade in forest
products and negatively affect sustainable forest management;

     (c)  Findings from case-studies on the relative competitiveness of
forest products exports including their value-added products vis-a`-vis
substitutes and their impacts on sustainable forest management;

     (d)  Ways and means of eliminating discriminatory trade practices
including unilateral restrictions or bans on imports of forest products, in
particular from tropical countries.

Certification and labelling

110. Certification and labelling should include:

     (a)  Link and potential role of voluntary certification in promoting
sustainable forest management of all type of forests in a
non-discriminatory, science-based, transparent, participatory and
cost-effective manner, taking into account the interest of all relevant
parties;

     (b)  Clarification of issues related to certification including its
purposes, levels of application, implications for market and trade,
governance, and benefits and costs, as a basis for a framework of
international understanding on forest products certification;

     (c)  With regard to the potential costs and benefits of certification,
factors related to the competitiveness of forest products and substitutes.

Full-cost internalization

111. Full-cost internalization should include the following items and
actions:

     (a)  In assessing the means to promote the development of the
methodology for a full evaluation of forest goods and services, account
should be taken of work being carried out under programme element III.1 (b)
(methodologies for proper valuation of the multiple benefits of forests)
and III.2 (criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, in
particular at the management unit level);

     (b)  The feasibility and potential costs and benefits of extending
cost internalization to both forest products and their substitutes.

Market transparency
     
112. Market transparency should encompass:

     (a)  Means to strengthen current reporting and capacity-building
activities of ITTO, the International Trade Centre (ITC), UNCTAD/GATT and
FAO to increase transparency in markets for forest products from all types
of forests;

     (b)  Proposals on how market transparency could be used as an
instrument for identifying key market characteristics having the potential
to affect trade and forest management decisions such as trade flows,
pricing, market structures, transportation and distribution channels.  This
would also help focus attention on adverse forest practices such as illegal
logging.  Improvements in market transparency may also improve competition
and efficiency in marketing and trade.

Promotion of lesser-used species (LUS)

113. This should include ways and means to further promote the
marketability of lesser-used species (LUS) through increased investment and
research and development (R and D), taking into account existing work done
in ITTO and elsewhere.  In this context, it should reflect a balance among
economic, environmental (including biological diversity-related) and social
considerations.

Financing and technology

114. This should include ways and means of attracting increased investment
in value-added downstream processing and identifying technological needs
focus to promote efficiency in productivity and quality of forest products,
in particular in the developing countries.

115. The Panel noted that two country initiatives, namely, the Australian
Conference on Labelling of Products from Sustainable Forest Management, and
the German/Indonesian Expert Workshop on Certification and Labelling, as
well as the workshop on certification organized by the University of
British Colombia, Canada, and the University of Agriculture, Malaysia,
could provide useful inputs into the discussions on programme element IV.


           5.  International organizations and multilateral institutions
               and instruments, including appropriate legal mechanisms  
               (programme element V.1)                                  

116. For its initial discussion of this programme element the Panel
considered the report of the Secretary-General contained in document
E/CN.17/IPF/1996/12. It considered that the preparations for substantive
discussion at the third session of the Panel should take into account the
following points, actions and items:

     (a)  The framework of the analysis should be the Panel's mandate, the
Forest Principles, and relevant chapters of Agenda 21, in particular
chapter 11, as well as relevant decisions of the Commission on Sustainable
Development, keeping in mind the dynamic nature of the forest debate which
reflected the national as well as the transboundary, regional and global
importance of all types of forests;

     (b)  The ongoing discussions on broader institutional reform within
the United Nations system;

     (c)  The importance of obtaining a clear view of the forest-related
work relevant to programme elements I-IV undertaken by organizations,
institutions and instruments, and relevant to the final recommendations of
the Panel;

     (d)  In-depth descriptions of activities carried out by international
organizations, and multilateral and research institutions at different
geographical levels; the necessity of including elements that could ensure
as comprehensive and rigorous an evaluation as possible, making full use of
existing evaluations; and an assessment of their comparative strengths and
gaps, and of the prioritization of areas requiring enhancement, as well as
of their current and potential available resources including financial
resources related to projects and programmes supportive of sustainable
forest management;

     (e)  The inclusion of descriptions of existing legal instruments
related to forests, and recommendations on their coordinated forest-related
implementation;

     (f)  The need to avoid duplication of work with respect to the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification;

     (g)  The existing institutional linkages, accompanied by an analysis
of their effectiveness, efficiency and adequacy for meeting current and
future demands on the forest sector;

     (h)  The options for achieving better cooperation and coordination,
and for maximizing efficiency and effectiveness, among forest-related
international and regional institutions, as well as, if appropriate, for
the reorganization of existing structures of governance of those
institutions, in order to maximize coordination and the mobilization of
their comparative advantages;

     (i)  The institutional arrangements in other sectors as possible
models for developing innovative approaches for adaptation to the forest
sector, with a view to identifying future enhanced and better-coordinated
institutional arrangements and activities in the forest sector which could
provide a clear division of responsibilities accompanied by a clear view of
the joint and complementary competence of these organizations with respect
to addressing complex forest-related issues;

     (j)  The options for ensuring enhanced coordination among bilateral
and multilateral institutions in order to use available resources for
country-driven sustainable forest management strategies in the most
efficient and effective manner, keeping in mind in particular the
discussions under programme elements I.1 and II;

     (k)  The linkages and institutional relationships among other
organizations such as those involved in research, as well as
intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, and the ways, means
and mechanisms to ensure that they contribute effectively to the activities
of United Nations organizations engaged in forest-related activities, and
suggest possible options for complementarity of activities;

     (l)  The analysis and recommendations resulting from the Swiss-
Peruvian Initiative in support of the preparations for the substantive
discussion of this programme element, as well as the results of the meeting
of national forestry action plan coordinators, held in The Hague in
February 1995.

117. Preparations should also take into account any specific proposals
under programme elements I-IV, relevant to programme element V.1.


                              V.  OTHER MATTERS

          A.  Matters relating to the third and fourth sessions of
              the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests       

118. At the 18th meeting, on 22 March 1996, the Panel had before it a draft
decision (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/L.2) entitled "Matters relating to the third and
fourth sessions of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests".

119. At the same meeting, the representative of Colombia made a statement.

120. The Panel was informed that UNEP wished to withdraw its offer to host
the third session of the Panel in Nairobi.  The representative of UNEP
thanked the Panel for giving UNEP the opportunity to participate in the
Panel process and expressed the hope that in the future UNEP would have the
opportunity to offer its facilities to the Panel.

121. The representative of Switzerland announced that the Government of
Switzerland would make a financial contribution, the level of which should
be determined jointly with the Secretariat, to cover the possible programme
budget implications of holding the third session of the Panel in Geneva
instead of New York.  The purpose of such a contribution would be to
facilitate the work of the Panel and possibly to provide for an extra team
of interpreters to allow two working groups to meet simultaneously.

122. At the same meeting, the Panel decided to recommend to the Economic
and Social Council, through the Commission on Sustainable Development, the
adoption of the draft decision as orally amended (see chap. I).


            B.  Additional voluntary contributions to the Ad Hoc
                Intergovernmental Panel on Forests              

123. At the 19th meeting, on 22 March 1996, the Co-Chairman read out a
draft decision concerning voluntary contributions, which the Panel adopted
(see chap. II).


       VI.  ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE PANEL ON ITS SECOND SESSION

124. At the 19th meeting, on 22 March 1996, the Panel had before it the
draft report on its second session (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/L.1), as well as an
informal paper containing introductory paragraphs to the report and a
number of Co-Chairmen's summaries.

125. At the same meeting, after statements by the representatives of the
United States of America, Japan, the Philippines, Italy (on behalf of the
States Members of the United Nations that are members of the European
Union), Canada, Australia and Papua New Guinea, as well as by the observer
for Costa Rica (on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that
are members of the Group of 77 and China), the Panel took note of the
introductory paragraphs and of the Co-Chairmen's summaries and adopted the
report.


                   VII.  ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS

                   A.  Opening and duration of the session

126. The Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests of the Commission on
Sustainable Development held its second session from 11 to 22 March 1996,
in accordance with Economic and Social Council decision 1995/318.  The
Panel held 19 meetings (1st to 19th meetings).

127. The session was opened by the Co-Chairman, Mr. N. R. Krishnan (India).

128. The Director of the Division for Sustainable Development made an
introductory statement.


                          B.  Election of officers

129. At the first meeting, on 11 March 1996, the Panel elected
Mr. Manuel Rodriguez (Colombia) to the vacant post of Vice-Chairman.

130. At the same meeting, the Panel agreed that Mr. Juste Boussienguet
(Gabon) would serve also as Rapporteur.

131. The Bureau of the Panel comprised the following officers:

     Co-Chairmen:  Sir Martin Holdgate (United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
                        Northern Ireland)

                   N. R. Krishnan (India)

     Vice-Chairmen:  Juste Boussienguet (Gabon)

                     Anatoliy I. Pisarenko (Russian Federation)

                     Manuel Rodriguez (Colombia)


                     C.  Agenda and organization of work

132. At the first meeting, on 11 March 1996, the Panel adopted its
provisional agenda, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/1, which read as
follows:

     1.   Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.

     2.   Implementation of forest-related decisions of the United Nations
          Conference on Environment and Development at the national and
          international levels, including an examination of sectoral and
          cross-sectoral linkages.

     3.   International cooperation in financial assistance and technology
          transfer.

     4.   Scientific research, forest assessment and development of
          criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management.

     5.   Trade and environment in relation to forest products and
services.

     6.   International organizations and multilateral institutions and
          instruments, including appropriate legal mechanisms.

     7.   Other matters.

     8.   Adoption of the report of the Panel on its second session.

133. At the same meeting, the Panel approved its organization of work.


                               D.  Attendance

134. The session was attended by representatives of 36 States members of
the Commission on Sustainable Development.  Observers for other States
Members of the United Nations and for non-member States, representatives of
organizations of the United Nations system and observers for
intergovernmental, non-governmental and other organizations also attended. 
A list of participants is contained in annex I to the present report.


                                    Notes

     1/   Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions Adopted by
the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8 and
corrigendum), resolution 1, annex III.

     2/   Ibid., annex II.

     3/   See United Nations Environment Programme, Convention on
Biological Diversity (Environmental Law and Institutions Programme Activity
Centre), June 1992.

     4/   A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1 and Corr.1, annex I.

     5/   A/49/84/Add.2, annex, appendix II.

     6/   Report of the Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of
Small Island Developing States, Bridgetown, Barbados, 25 April-6 May 1994
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.94.I.18 and corrigendum), chap. I,
resolution 1, annex II.

                                   Annex I

                                 ATTENDANCE


                                            Members                        

Antigua and Barbuda

Australia                      Roderick Holesgrove, Gary Dolman, Frank
                               Mcinnell, Peter Lawrence
Bahamas

Bangladesh

Barbados

Belarus                        Mikhail Kuzmyankou

Belgium

Benin

Bolivia

Brazil                         Celso Lafer, Guido da Silva Soares,
                               Antonio Fernando Cruz de Mello,
                               Antonio Otavio Sa Ricarte,
                               Antonio Carlos do Prado,
                               Raimundo Deusdarah Filho,
                               Rubens Cristiano Damas Garlipp,
                               Maria Cristina Weyland Vieira

Bulgaria                       Zvetolyub Basmajiev

Canada                         David Drake, Ralph Roberts, Jacques Carette,
                               Denyse Rousseau, Rosalie McConnell,
                               Jennifer Irish, Frank Ruddock,
                               Victoria Berry, Jean-Pierre Martel,
                               Martin von Mirbach

Central African Republic       

China                          Qu Guilin, Zheng Rui, Zhou Guolin,
                               Zhang Zhiqin

Colombia                       Manuel Rodriguez, Carmen Silva Pinzon,
                               Edgar Otavo Rodriguez, Maria Fernanda
                               Acosta, Juan Carlos Espinosa

Finland                        Birgitta Stenius-Mladenov, Pekka Patosaari,
                               Elias La"hdesma"ki, Leena Karjalainen-Balk,
                               Markku Aho, Heikki Granholm

France                         Bernard Chevalier

Gabon                          Juste Boussienguet, Andre'-Jules Madingou

Germany                        Ulrich Hoenisch, Hagen Frost,
                               Eberhard von Schubert, Peter Franz,
                               Peter Fahrenholtz, Dieter Speidel,
                               Christian Mersmann

Ghana                          Edward Dwumfour

Guinea

Guyana                         M. Khalawan

Hungary

India                          N. R. Krishnan, S. K. Pande

Iran (Islamic Republic of)     Mostafa Jafari, Hossein Moeini,
                               Hossein Fadaei

Italy                          Filippo Anfuso, Filippo Menzinger,
                               Silvano Salvatici, Alfredo Guillet

Japan                          Takao Shibata, Harumitsu Hida, Takeshi Goto,
                               Atsuo Ida, Hidenao Sawayama, Hiroaki
                               Shinohara, Kiyohito Onuma, Yutaka Tsunetomi,
                               Kenji Jamigawara

Malaysia                       Amha Buang, Thang Hooi Chiew,
                               Abdul Rahim Nik, Hayati Ismail

Mexico                         Diana Ponce Lucero Nava, Miguel Antonio
                               Cuesta, Dolores Jime'nez Herna'ndez

Morocco                        Mohamed Bentaja

Mozambique

Netherlands                    H. S. B. M. van Asperen,
                               A. P. M. van der Zon, P. R. Schu"tz,
                               A. Berghuizen, A. D. Adema

Pakistan

Papua New Guinea               Dike ari, Edward Nir, Adam Jai Delaney

Peru                           Augusto Freyre, Eduardo Pe'rez del Solar,
                               Amalia Torres

Philippines                    Jose D. Malvas, Jr., Bernarditas C. Muller,
                               Ma. Theresa P. Lazaro

Poland                         Edward Lenart, Kazimierz Rykowski

Russian Federation             Anatoliy I. Pisarenko

Saudi Arabia

Senegal

Spain

Sweden                         Astrid Bergquist, Michael Odevall,
                               Svante Lundqvist, Ulrika Winroth,
                               Reidar Persson, Christer Hermansson,
                               Ulf Svensson, Jan Sandstro"m, Stefan Wirte'n

Switzerland                    Philippe Roch, Monika Linn Locher,
                               Heinz Wandeler, Andrea Semadeni,
                               Pierre Muehlemann, Liliane Ortega,
                               Norert Ledergerber, Claude-Georges Ducret,
                               Pascale Morand Francis, Werner Hunziker,
                               Theo Wiederkehr, Andri Bisaz,
                               Manuela Jost Ernst, Franz Schmithuesen,
                               Bernardo Zentilli, Urs Amstutz

Thailand                       Sa-nguan Kakhong

Uganda                         J. R. Kamugisha

Ukraine                        Tatiana Hardashuk

United Kingdom of              Martin Holdgate, David Bills,
                               Andrew Bennett,
Great Britain and              Willie Sheridan, Mike Dudley, Bridget
                               Campbell,
Northern Ireland               John Hudson, Anthony Smith, Dawn Bentley,
                               Elizabeth Jones, Robin Mortimer

United Republic of Tanzania    B. S. Kessy

United States of America       Mark G. Hambley, Stephanie Caswell,
                               Mary J. Coulombe, Doug Kneeland,
                               Franklin Moore, Robert McSwain,
                               John Heissenbuttel, Harlan Cohen

Venezuela                      Io'le Touron Lugo

Zimbabwe                       P. C. Gondo


           Non-member States and entities represented by observers

     Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Greece,
Honduras, Indonesia, Ireland, Kenya, Mauritania, Monaco, New Zealand,
Norway, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Turkey, Uruguay, Zambia, European
Commission


                               United Nations

     United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations
Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, Economic
Commission for Europe


                            Specialized agencies

     International Labour Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, World Meteorological Organization


                       Intergovernmental organizations

     Agency for Cultural and Technical Cooperation, Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development


                       Non-governmental organizations

Category I                International Council of Women, World Wide Fund
                          for Nature International

Category II               Greenpeace International, International Committee
                          for European Security and Cooperation,
                          International Union for Conservation of Nature
                          and Natural Resources (IUCN), National Wildlife
                          Federation

Roster or accredited      Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, Caribbean
to the Commission on      Conservation Association, Centre for
Sustainable Development   International Environmental Law, Centre for
                          International Forestry Research (CIFOR),
                          Citizens' Alliance for Saving the Atmosphere and
                          the Earth (CASA), Deutsche Naturschutzring (DNR),
                          Environmental and Energy Study Institute, Friends
                          of the Earth (FOE), Fundacio'n Natura, Fundacio'n
                          Peruana para la Conservacio'n de la Naturaleza,
                          Green Earth Organization, Institut de recherche
                          pour l'e'nergie, l'environnement et la
                          construction, Instituto Sul-Mineiro de Estudios e
                          de Conservc'ao de Natureza, International
                          Institute for Sustainable Development, 
                          Netherlands National Committee for IUCN, Sierra
                          Club, United Nations Association of Sweden in
                          Stockholm, UNED-United Kingdom (UN Environment
                          and Development-United Kingdom)


                                  Annex II

            DOCUMENTATION BEFORE THE PANEL AT ITS SECOND SESSION


     The Panel had before it the following documents:

     (a)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.2: 
Underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/2);

     (b)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.4: 
Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification, and the impact of airborne
pollution on forests (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/3);

     (c)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.5:  Needs
and requirements of countries with low forest cover (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/4);

     (d)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element II
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/5);

     (e)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.1 (a): 
Assessment of the multiple benefits of all types of forests
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/6);

     (f)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.1 (b): 
Methodologies for proper valuation of the multiple benefits of forests
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/7);

     (g)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.1: 
Progress in national forest and land-use plans (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/8);

     (h)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.3: 
Traditional forest-related knowledge (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/9 and Corr.1);

     (i)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.2: 
Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/10);

     (j)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element IV
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/11);

     (k)  Report of the Secretary-General on programme element V.1
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/12).


                                    -----

    

 


This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.

Date last posted: 7 December 1999 12:45:30
Comments and suggestions: DESA/DSD