| United Nations | E/CN.17/IPF/1996/2 |
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
13 February 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
Second session
11-22 March 1996
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
Programme Element I.2: Underlying causes of deforestation
and forest degradation
Report of the Secretary-General
SUMMARY
Deforestation and forest degradation pose a serious problem in some parts
of the world, but not all changes in forest cover are necessarily harmful. It
is preferable to adopt a more focused approach that concentrates on reversing
the most damaging processes and promoting the most effectively beneficial
ones. It is only possible to decide what changes are or are not harmful
against a background of national policies that make a best judgement of
optimum forest cover (how much, where and of what kind) in order to meet most
effectively diverse needs for forest goods and services. Policies for forests
(and trees outside forests) need to be consistent with overall economic, land-
use and development policies.
Current international trade apparently offers few incentives for
sustainable extraction. Moreover, there are many direct disincentives for
sustainable forest management, including economic distortions, such as the
undervaluation and underpricing of particular types of timber and of the
services provided by healthy forest ecosystems; the failure of national
institutions to exercise stewardship over their forest resources; prevailing
systems of property rights; the conditions under which concessions are awarded
and renewed; and inequities in the distribution of benefits.
The evidence available suggests that the underlying forces driving
deforestation and forest degradation are complex. Simplistic explanations
that blame deforestation on high population growth rates in developing
countries, the demand for tropical timbers in the North, or pressures to meet
debt repayments are inadequate and fail to provide conclusive answers
applicable to a range of different circumstances. In fact, effects are
synergistic and interconnected: cross-sectoral issues and the international
linkages brought about by macroeconomic policies are both important
determinants.
The links between harmful changes in forest cover and their direct and
underlying causes are very complex, vary greatly from country to country and
are not susceptible to simple explanations. There is therefore great danger
in basing policy prescriptions on generalizations. Accordingly, the present
report proposes a diagnostic tool that can enable countries to trace the
chains of causation of deforestation and degradation, can identify limiting
factors and opportunities for effective intervention, and can assist in
identifying areas in which such limiting factors and interactions have been
successful, thus enabling countries to build on their strengths and existing
achievements.
Although relatively accurate statistics about changes in forest cover are
available, there is a severe shortage of information about forest quality,
which is particularly troubling since many of the most serious unplanned
changes in forests concern quality rather than quantity.
The most appropriate action will be at any one of a number of levels,
local, national, regional or international.
The need for communication and collaboration among relevant individuals,
agencies and institutions in their different areas of operation is an
important issue that needs to be addressed in order to rationalize the
allocation of resources both nationally and internationally.
Some causes of deforestation and forest degradation lie outside the
forest sector and beyond national boundaries; it is in such areas
particularly that the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests may wish to
identify options and opportunities for international cooperation and action.
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1 - 6 3
I. GENERAL OVERVIEW ..................................... 7 - 22 5
A. Objective ........................................ 7 - 12 5
B. Definitions ...................................... 13 - 17 6
C. Forest values .................................... 18 - 22 7
II. CURRENT STATUS OF FORESTS ............................ 23 - 64 9
A. Nature and rates of change ....................... 23 - 32 9
B. Distinguishing between direct and underlying
causes of changes in forest cover ................ 33 - 64 12
III. APPROACHES TO DIAGNOSING THE CAUSES OF FOREST DAMAGE . 65 - 68 21
IV. INSTITUTIONS AND RESOURCES: EXISTING INFORMATION .... 69 - 73 26
A. Institutions and resources ....................... 69 26
B. Measurement of forest cover ...................... 70 - 73 26
V. CONCLUSIONS AND PRELIMINARY PROPOSALS FOR ACTION ..... 74 - 76 27
A. Conclusions ...................................... 74 27
B. Preliminary proposals for action ................. 75 - 76 28
Tables
1. Values, goods and services provided by trees and forests ......... 8
2. Market and non-market forest values .............................. 9
3. Annual change of forest and other wooded land, by region,
1980-1990 ........................................................ 9
4. Diagnostic framework: illustration of the relation between
selected direct and underlying causes of deforestation and forest
degradation ...................................................... 22
INTRODUCTION
1. The present report covers element I.2 of the programme of work of the
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests, "Underlying causes of deforestation
and forest degradation".
2. Preparation of the report was guided by the decisions of the Commission
on Sustainable Development taken at its third session and further elaborated
by the Panel at its first session.
3. The Commission defined programme element I.2 as a need to identify and
consider ways to address the underlying causes of deforestation, forest
degradation and the difficulties in implementing sustainable forest
management, with particular attention to cross-sectoral factors, including the
impact on and from forests, at the national and international levels, such as
consumption and production patterns, poverty, population growth, pollution,
terms of trade, discriminatory trade practices and unsustainable policies
related to such sectors as agriculture, energy, and trade.
4. Subsequently, the Panel emphasized that preparation for the discussion
of the issue would require the judicious consideration of an array of
contributing factors, many of them of a cross-sectoral nature, and recommended
that a report on the underlying causes and cross-sectoral influences on forest
degradation and deforestation, and the difficulties in implementing
sustainable forest management should be prepared, bringing together key work
in the area and identify gaps.
5. The present report was prepared by the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), as lead agency for programme element I.2, in consultation
with the secretariat of the Panel in the Division for Sustainable Development
of the Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development of the
United Nations Secretariat. The report is based on a study prepared by the
Overseas Development Agency of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland.
6. The report draws widely from a number of recent sources, including
Forest Resources Assessment 1990: tropical countries, a publication of the
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); The Forest
Resources of the Temperate Zones, a publication of the Economic Commission for
Europe (ECE) and FAO; country reports to the Commission, the India-United
Kingdom initiative; the papers and conclusions of the Intergovernmental
Working Group on Forests, which were co-sponsored by Canada and Malaysia;
various initiatives in developing criteria and indicators for sustainable
forest management, such as the Helsinki and Montreal processes; the work of
International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) in the field of sustainable
forest management; and the Bali consultation, which was co-sponsored by the
Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and the Government of
Indonesia.
I. GENERAL OVERVIEW
A. Objective
7. Many of the current changes to the world's forests are both serious and
damaging, involving a loss of both quantity and quality, and every effort
should be made to address the underlying causes to these damaging changes.
But while the terms "deforestation" and "forest degradation" have been useful
in drawing attention to the gravity of the situation, there is a danger in
overemphasizing such terms, for they are value-loaded. By implication, they
suggest that all replacement of forest by other uses is necessarily harmful
and all reforestation is necessarily beneficial. They therefore tend to
divert attention from a more focused approach, which would concentrate on
reversing the most damaging processes and promoting those that would be most
beneficial.
8. The emphasis of the present report will therefore be slightly different.
It will describe the kinds of change that are now affecting the quantity and
condition of all types of forests; it will seek to identify the causes of any
detrimental changes; it will try to analyse why it is so difficult to
implement sustainable forest management; and it will recommend ways in which
all these may be improved. The report will also highlight the need to
concentrate on keeping or developing forests in the right places for the right
reasons. It is recognized that different sectors of global society have
different needs and expectations for the use of forest land, and that such
needs and expectations have changed in the past and will certainly alter
further as development proceeds.
9. It would be much easier to work towards the better use of the world's
forests if there were general agreement on the optimal extent and type of
forest in different situations. While this consensus is being reached, there
are in the meantime some difficult yet fundamental questions that could be
raised by each country and which each could try to address by itself:
(a) How much forest should it retain for present and future needs?
(b) Of what kinds, and where?
(c) For what purposes should these forests be managed and for the
benefit of whom?
(d) Are these decisions made on national grounds and in broad conformity
with reasonable international responsibilities and obligations?
10. There is a corresponding and more difficult question to be answered at
the regional level and by the international community, namely "Does the sum of
national decisions make sense in global terms?"
11. If some reasonable consensus could be reached along these lines, it
would then be possible to assess changes in forest quantity and quality, both
nationally and internationally, against some yardsticks that make ecological,
economic and social sense (see box 1).
12. Many of the issues raised in the present report will be addressed and
deliberated on in detail by the Panel under other programme elements; thus,
the outcome of other discussions is likely to have a direct influence on the
development of the final recommendations of the Panel on programme
element I.2.
*****
Box 1. Assessing the consequences of forest change
While the extent and condition of a forest are ideally matters for
accurate measurement, the assessment of whether any change in either quantity
or condition is beneficial or harmful is largely a political judgement related
to the circumstances of a particular time and place.
Nevertheless, there is some consensus that some changes are almost always
harmful, such as severe pollution, serious soil erosion or loss of fertility,
the elimination of key species and, generally, the replacement of a
sustainable form of utilization by one that is unsustainable. In all such
instances, the cost of restoration has been shown to be many times greater
than the cost of prevention; indeed, it may often be technically impossible.
Moreover, some of the goods and services provided by forests are
replaceable, while others are not. The functions of timber from natural
forest can be performed by timber grown in plantations or by materials
substituted for timber. Tree crops or grassland may, in some instances,
provide as good catchment protection as forest. But the role of a particular
forest in providing the living space and livelihood for an indigenous
community or the biological diversity that it contains are not replaceable;
such features are sometimes known as "critical natural capital".
*****
B. Definitions
13. While several definitions are used, the most widely quoted and most
authoritative figures on deforestation are contained in (a) the FAO
publication Forest resources assessment 1990: tropical countries and (b) the
ECE/FAO publication The Forest Resources of the Temperate Zones.
14. The definitions in these two sources differ. Publication (a) gives the
following definitions:
(a) Forests are defined as ecosystems with a minimum of 10 per cent
crown cover of trees and/or bamboos, generally associated with wild flora,
fauna and natural soil conditions, and not subject to agricultural practices.
(b) Deforestation refers to change of land use with depletion of tree
crown cover to less than 10 per cent. Changes within the forest class (from
closed to open forest) which negatively affect the stand or site and, in
particular, lower the production capacity, are termed forest degradation.
Degradation is not reflected in the estimates.
15. Publication (b) gives the following definition:
(a) Forest is defined as land with tree crown cover (stand density) of
more than 20 per cent of the area. Continuous forest with trees usually
growing to more than 7 metres in height and able to produce wood. This
includes both closed forest formations where trees of various storeys and
undergrowth cover a high proportion of the ground and open forest formations
with a continuous grass layer in which tree synusia cover at least 10 per cent
of the ground.
16. These definitions have proved valuable in the assembly of standardized
global statistics about changes in forest cover but are not so helpful for
examining the nature and causes of change. For the purposes of the present
analysis, therefore, the report employs the more neutral terms "replacement"
and "modification" in place of "deforestation" and "degradation", except where
the latter are clearly meant. These are defined as follows:
(a) Replacement: replacement of natural forest or other wooded land by
another land use;
(b) Modification: forest modification, which may be regressive
(degradation), or progressive (recovery or enhancement). Extreme degradation
can of course lead to total forest loss.
17. For sustainable forest management, the Helsinki definition is used,
namely:
"Sustainable management means the stewardship and use of forests and
forest lands in such a way and at such a rate that maintains their
biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their
potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological,
economic and social functions at local, national and global levels and
that does not cause damage to other ecosystems."
C. Forest values
18. The topic of forest valuation will be discussed in detail under
programme element III.1, also scheduled for substantive discussion at the
current session of the Panel (see E/CN.3/IPF/1996/6). However, it will be
briefly discussed here because of its importance to the topic of the present
report.
19. Trees and forests provide a range of benefits in the form of goods and
services that arise from both direct and indirect uses of forest resources
(see table 1). Direct uses include the extraction of useful products, such as
timber, food and medicines, as well as non-extractive uses, such as recreation
and tourism. Indirect uses include ecological and environmental services. In
addition, the maintenance of healthy forests provides insurance by conserving
the species that they contain and the goods and services that they can
provide. These are sometimes referred to as option values, and they also
reflect the future benefits that may accrue from the resources associated with
forests and their uses.
Table 1. Values, goods and services provided by trees and forests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use values Non-use values Option values
Direct Uses Indirect uses Existence values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extractive
Timber Nutrient cycling Threatened habitats Future values of
all use and
non-use values
Genetic Micro-climate Endangered species
resources
Plant Sink-filter for Charismatic
medicines air pollution species
emissions
Non-timber Watershed
products protection
Non-extractive
Human habitat Carbon storage
Ecotourism
Recreation
Education
Scientific/
Research
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. The goods and services that forests may provide can be distinguished by
the type of benefit that they produce (direct or indirect) or in terms of the
distribution of the benefits (local, national, regional or global) and whether
they pass through markets (see table 2).
21. There are two important characteristics to note about the goods and
services and different uses of forests outlined here. First, in different
types of forest some values will be more important than others; for example,
some types of forest are especially valuable for the timber they produce,
whereas others may yield important non-timber products. Second, there may be
trade-offs or even conflicts between different uses; for example, a forest
exploited for its timber may not have a high value for recreation or in an
aesthetic sense.
22. The value and relative importance of the goods and services may also
change both over time and in accordance with the different needs and
development paths of countries and the emphasis that their Governments choose
to put on the role of forests in the national economy.
Table 2. Market and non-market forest values
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values Market Non-market
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Locally sold Non-commercial
forest products forest products
National Tourism revenues Tourism benefits
Watershed
protection
International and global Genetic resources Carbon
presently used sequestration
Future genetic
resource use
Tourism benefits
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. CURRENT STATUS OF FORESTS
A. Nature and rates of change
23. Much has been written about changes in forest cover. The most
authoritative recent statements are contained in the above-mentioned FAO and
ECE/FAO publications on forest resources assessment. These are generally
accepted and their details will not be repeated here; however, a recent
aggregation of annual changes in forest cover by region from 1980 to 1990 is
contained in table 3.
Table 3. Annual change of forest and other
wooded land, by region, 1980-1990
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region Annual change 1980-1990 Percentage of
(thousands of hectares) total cover
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Africa -2 828.0 -0.3
Asia and the Pacific -999.0 -0.6
Latin America and the Caribbean -6 047.0 -0.5
Europe 190.8 0.13
Former USSR 51.3 0.01
North America -316.5 -0.11
Developed Asia/Oceania -4.2 0
Total -9 952.6 -0.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: FAO, "Forest resource assessment 1990: a global synthesis",
FAO Forestry Paper, No. 124 (Rome, 1995).
24. Regarding the above-mentioned standard assessments, however, it should
be noted that:
(a) First, neither assessment includes any detail about the quality
condition of forests;
(b) Second, the importance of broader forest functions is being
increasingly appreciated;
(c) Third, the FAO assessment emphasises that the great majority of
tropical countries have insufficient institutional capacity to collect and
analyse data on a continuous basis.
1. Forest replacement
25. Forests in the form of ecosystems largely dominated by woody species can
occur in any part of the world where the temperature and rainfall are
suitable; there is little doubt that they once covered all areas that were not
either too cold, dry or windy for tree growth. Forests have been removed and
altered since the early days of human history, certainly since the Neolithic
period.
26. The greatest replacement of forest for other uses occurred in parts of
the world where organized agriculture was possible and that were agreeable and
healthy for human settlement. In many of these, the forest has been severely
diminished, notably in the Mediterranean, semi-arid, temperate and subtropical
climates; in the steppe and prairie regions, the natural vegetation replaced
was not forests but grassland. In equatorial climates, forest clearing was
most marked on rich volcanic or alluvial soils with possibilities for
irrigation. It is thus no accident that the largest areas of forest remaining
at the beginning of this century were in the boreal regions and on the
relatively infertile soils of the humid tropics.
27. In the last half century, this process of forest removal has accelerated
in the humid tropics, largely due to the introduction of new technologies for
land clearance and agriculture and to the suppression of disease. In almost
all instances, forest clearing for agriculture has been deliberate and has
been looked upon as advancing possibilities for development, either by
increasing food security or providing cash crops to fuel economic development.
In many cases, such expectations have been realized, but there have also been
many cases in which the forest was removed in exchange for a form of land use
that has proved unsustainable or disastrous. Until very recently, no
consideration was given to the conservation of genetic diversity in land to be
transformed for agriculture, human settlement or major works of
infrastructure, and surprisingly little consideration was given even to the
conservation of soil and water.
28. In historical terms, much of this forest replacement has proved socially
and economically beneficial; equally, much has proved unwise and harmful. In
hindsight, much might have been carried out in different places, in different
ways and for different purposes. In some parts of the world, forests are
returning. In the eastern United States of America and parts of the
Mediterranean, for example, natural secondary forest is returning
spontaneously, mainly as economically marginal agricultural and grazing land
is abandoned, and as the social priorities of the inhabitants change. In
other parts of the world, tree cover (though not natural forest) is being
deliberately introduced in the form of forest plantations, plantations of tree
cash crops, such as rubber, oil palm and fruit trees, and farm gardens. These
are often productive and make effective use of land, but some are criticized
because they replace other ecosystems of high ecological or social value. As
indicated above, the arguments surrounding deforestation and reforestation are
not simple; the questions are not about whether they take place but about
their details: where, how fast and for what purpose. The conclusion is
clear: forest replacement should be deliberate and controlled. It is
possible, though unlikely, that unplanned replacement might not be harmful
under certain circumstances, but this is a risk that no country can now afford
to take, which emphasizes the necessity and benefits of developing national
forest and land-use strategies.
29. Different countries have very different forest endowments and
potentialities. Some occupy soils that are inherently very fertile and have
high agricultural potential; others do not. Some forest types are of much
greater relative importance for the biodiversity they contain; others are not.
Some countries have large areas of erodible or fragile soils; others do not.
No overall generalizations can be made about the best allocation of forest
lands for the long-term optimum provision of goods and services.
2. Forest modification
30. The human modification of forest and other ecosystems has taken place
during the whole of human history and prehistory. It has taken several forms:
the careful enrichment of natural ecosystems to provide greater human benefit;
their sustainable management to provide a continuous flow of benefits; the
short-term overexploitation of certain products leading to the long-term
depletion of the ecosystem; a fluctuation between these, and especially
between overexploitation and neglect; and, more recently, the damage caused by
pollution. Although exact quantitative evidence is difficult to collect,
there seems no doubt that large areas of forest and woody ecosystems are
currently being degraded (according to all the identified criteria for
sustainability) by various combinations of cutting, grazing, collecting,
hunting, fire and injudicious cultivation.
31. Several points need to be made at this juncture:
(a) Ecosystems can recover from most kinds of modification, provided
that such modification has not been too extreme (irreversible) and they are
given time for recovery free from further disturbance;
(b) Such recovery is a rare occurrence because in most parts of the
world opposing pressures of every kind are increasing inexorably;
(c) However good the management, it is not possible to maximize all
benefits to society all the time: choices must be made;
(d) The degradation of forest ecosystems invariably leads to a loss of
potential, and in extreme instances is tantamount to deforestation.
3. Shifting agriculture
32. Intermediate between "modification" and "replacement" are shifting and
migratory cultivation; they are sometimes one, sometimes the other and
sometimes a combination of both. Their effect depends on the detail and
sequence of the practices adopted. At best, they can lead to a sustainable
form of forest management involving a rotational succession of vegetation that
includes secondary forest enriched with many useful species and supports local
human requirements. At worst, such practices can lead to extreme degradation
and loss of values at all levels.
B. Distinguishing between direct and underlying causes
of changes in forest cover
33. Deforestation and forest degradation can be attributed to many different
causes. Some causes operate directly on the forest itself and are often
easily recognizable in the field: these are referred to as "direct causes".
Behind these direct causes, however, may lie a whole sequence of causes, each
more indirect or remote than the one which precedes it; these are referred to
as "underlying causes". Some underlying causes can be clearly demonstrated
to have some influence on the direct causes; in others the influence is less
immediate. Even further removed from underlying causes are the prevailing
conditions that may make it more likely for deforestation and forest
degradation to occur; these are much more difficult to identify with
certainty, and often interact and reinforce each other. For example, the
removal of an excessive number of trees (the direct cause) may be caused by
illegal logging; the illegal logging may be due in turn to ineffective control
by a forest department, itself caused by an inadequate budget; finally,
predisposing conditions, if any, might be a combination of poor economic
growth, civil unrest, lack of employment opportunities etc. These are all
underlying causes, some occurring earlier in the chain of causation than
others (see boxes 2, 3 and 4).
34. In some instances, it may prove possible to trace a reliable chain of
causation, although this becomes increasingly complicated and difficult the
further one moves away from direct causes.
35. There are analogies with human health that are useful when it comes to
considering treatment: the symptoms of an infectious disease may be easy to
identify, and once they are identified, it is often possible to prescribe a
precise treatment to effect a cure or at least a temporary respite. But the
underlying causes may be, for example, bad hygiene, malnutrition or
overcrowding, which require much more general and long-term measures, or they
may be institutional, such as poor health services or the ineffective
distribution of drugs etc. In such complicated situations, it is important to
focus attention on the factors that are truly limiting and that will respond
well to treatment.
*****
Box 2. Some examples illustrating the difference
between direct and underlying causes of
deforestation and forest degradation. a/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Causes Underlying Causes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAND USE CONVERSION TO POPULATION INCREASE
Subsistence agriculture Underlying, natural increases
Cash crop/plantation agriculture Migration, resettlement
Cattle ranching
Other developments such as POVERTY
mining and dams
Urban development INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS
Infrastructure Debt and macroeconomic adjustment
Profit seeking/"free riding"
OVER-EXPLOITATION OF FORESTS
Timber POLICY FAILURES
Fuelwood Roads
Non-wood forest products Subsidies for land use
conversion or
ENVIRONMENTAL (NATURAL AND competing land uses
ANTHROPOGENIC) Migration and colonisation
Climate extremes (hurricanes, Underpriced forest goods
dought, fire etc.)
Floods, landslides MARKET FAILURES
Pollution Failure to capture "public
Pests good" aspects of forests
CIVIL UNREST
Destruction of vegetation
Refugees and social upheaval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
a/ No order of importance is implied, since this varies with different
circumstances.
*****
1. Direct causes
36. The direct causes for the replacement of forests by non-forests are
primarily the clearing of land for other uses, such as agriculture or
construction, and naturally occurring extreme events, such as flooding,
landslides and fires. Forest can also be replaced by non-forests if forest
modification is carried to such extremes that forest regeneration becomes
impossible.
37. There are many direct causes of modifications that can be accurately
described as forest degradation, such as:
(a) Harvesting of timber, fuelwood or game above the capacity of the
forest ecosystem to replace the quantities extracted;
(b) Excessive selectivity of species, sizes and form cut;
(c) Overgrazing;
(d) Air pollution;
(e) Pollution of forest watercourses;
(f) Soil erosion within the forest;
(g) Anthropogenic fires;
(h) Depletion of biodiversity;
(i) Introduced disease or pest species.
38. It is a combination of the frequency and intensity of human intervention
that determines how seriously the forest is modified. Repeated low-level
harvesting of certain types of game may lead to no significant harm, but
successive timber harvesting at short intervals in tropical moist forest will
modify the forest significantly, even if the harvesting is at low intensity,
because of excessive canopy opening and site damage during felling and
extraction. Even the overcutting of a forest for timber may do no lasting
damage if it is followed by a sufficiently long period of recovery. Similar
considerations apply to most forms of degradation. Occasional misuse may
cause no permanent damage; continued misuse most certainly does and may be
irreversible, leading to total forest loss.
2. Underlying causes
39. Underlying causes close to direct causes may be fairly easy to recognize,
but each direct cause is more often than not linked to several underlying
causes that are often interrelated. Examples of such causes are:
(a) National policies;
(b) Failures of policy or planning;
(c) Insecurity of tenure;
(d) Absence of alternative sources of forest goods and services or
substitutes for them;
(e) Failure of regulation or control;
(f) Land speculation;
(g) The temptation of a profitable market;
(h) Absence of employment;
(i) Land hunger;
(j) Displacement of populations;
(k) Farming failure;
(l) Improved accessibility;
(m) Displacement of populations by other land uses;
(n) Burning for cultivation or improved grazing;
(o) Development pressures;
(p) Greed and corruption;
(q) Availability of new technologies;
(r) Unwise intensification of land use;
(s) Introduction of new species;
(t) Poor plant quarantine;
(u) Lack of information, or ignorance.
40. It is at this level that the most obvious limiting factors are often
found. This is often, therefore, the level at which action is likely to be
most effective (see sect. III below for illustrations).
41. Underlying causes are far more complex and controversial than direct
causes. Population growth, macroeconomic factors (such as indebtedness),
international trade and exchange rates, and government policies and
microeconomic factors are all being blamed to some degree for the excessive
rates of deforestation now being experienced in many countries. Many studies
have examined the impacts of particular factors on the exploitation of forests
in individual countries; when the interactions between different factors are
tested across a range of countries to try to identify causal relationships,
however, the picture becomes far less clear.
Population
42. Increase in human population is often cited as a major underlying cause
of deforestation. The interactions between population and agriculture are
certainly crucial in this respect and will continue to be so in the future
with world population projected to increase from 5.7 billion in 1995 to 9.8
billion in 2050. However, it should be recognized that growing numbers of
people also place increasing demands upon all the other goods and services
provided by forests. Population and consumption patterns in the richer
countries with low forest cover also create higher demands and affect markets
for forest products from the forest-rich countries. The implication of
changing consumption patterns of forest products for forest replacement and
modification, as well as the level of implementation of sustainable forest
management, is an important issue that is under review in a study that was
proposed by the Government of Norway at the first session of the Panel on the
subject "Long-term trends and prospects in supply and demand for wood
products, and possible implications for sustainable forest management"; the
study will be before the Panel at its third session. Increased economic
development in some parts of the world will undoubtedly lead to higher
consumption of forest products and services. It will be crucial from a
resource-supply-planning point of view to develop forest and land-use
strategies based on projections that are as reliable as possible. In contrast
to agriculture, timber requires long lead times - sometimes a number of
generations - to increase supply.
43. The relationship between population and the expansion or intensification
of agriculture is very complex, and varies with time and circumstance.
Although agricultural expansion may be the initial response to population
pressure, intensification occurs if access to land becomes more difficult or
only very marginal areas remain. Both processes can happen, perhaps even
simultaneously, and it is not fully understood what factors determine which
response in any given circumstances. For example, if global figures on the
yield and area of cereal cultivation are examined in relationship to
population, then both processes are evident. In those parts of the world that
still have large reserves of land and low population density, a big share of
the increase in food production since 1961 is due to expansion of the area of
cultivation, by no less than 51 per cent in Africa. But in regions with the
smallest land reserves and highest population densities, most of the increased
production over that period came from yield increases. According to
observations, growth in the area of cereal cultivation tends to be fastest in
areas of fastest population growth; by contrast, growth in yields is slowest
where population growth is fastest, and fastest where population growth is
slowest. Thus, population growth does not stimulate yield increase until land
shortages begin to develop and accessible forest is cleared.
44. The next phase, however, may be an increase in tree cover, which may take
place in one of two ways: either as a result of deliberate reforestation
(establishing trees where required in appropriate places in a more densely
populated landscape), or through the recolonization by trees of land left
empty as people migrate to urban centres. Examples of the former are the
recent history of northern Europe and of China, examples of the latter that of
the United States and certain parts of the Mediterranean. This process is
also under way in certain parts of Kenya, a relatively densely populated
developing country.
45. In general then, the evidence linking overall increases in the human
population and the rate of deforestation is mixed, and although it would seem
reasonable to expect that as more people require more food the requirement for
more land results in less forest, this is not always the case. A number of
studies have tested various different indicators of population, such as growth
rates and rural population density, and the results across countries are by no
means conclusive. Population pressure is certainly one factor in the
deforestation equation but its effects differ in different circumstances and
in response to other factors. For example, if combined with open access,
asymmetric tenure and commercialization linked to increasing international
demands, population growth leads to considerably faster, even accelerating
deforestation compared with population growth alone, whereas population linked
to the creation of wealth or to increasing urbanization may produce the
opposite effect.
Economic, market and intervention distortions
46. Conventional economic approaches to the economic valuation of forests
fail to account for the role played by non-timber forest products and services
in decisions about forest management and investment. In many cases, the only
product of tropical forests that is considered of economic value is the timber
produced, whereas a whole range of non-timber forest products, including
fruits, latex and fibres, as well as environmental and ecological services and
functions, such as soil protection, water cycling and carbon storage, are not
valued (see table 1).
47. Economic distortions have been used to explain excessively high rates of
forest destruction. Three types can be distinguished: local market failure,
global appropriation failure and intervention failure.
48. Local market failure is the classic economic case of underinvestment, in
which market forces are not able to secure the economically correct balance of
land conversion and forest conservation. An underlying assumption, of course,
is that there is an economically optimum rate of deforestation, which is not
zero. Local market failure arises because those who convert the land do not
have to compensate those who suffer the social and environmental consequences
of that conversion, such as increased pollution and sedimentation of waters
caused by deforestation. Possible solutions are well known and include such
measures as enacting a tax on land conversion, zoning to restrict detrimental
land uses and establishing environmental standards.
49. The rate of return of forest conservation is distorted by what economists
call "missing markets". What this means in the tropical forest context is
that systems of habitat and species are serving valuable functions that are
not marketed. Effectively, then, no one values such functions because there
is no obvious mechanism for capturing their values. Local market failure
describes this phenomenon within the context of the country or local area, but
there are missing global markets as well, illustrated by the example of the
value of carbon storage by forests.
50. Intervention failure or ill-conceived deliberate intervention by
Governments in the workings of market forces, with disastrous effects on a
particular sector of the economy, can coexist with market failure. Examples
of intervention that have in some cases had detrimental implications for
sustainable forest management are:
(a) Subsidies to forest conversion for agriculture and livestock
production;
(b) Insufficient tax levels for logging companies, thus giving them an
incentive to expand their activities even further;
(c) Encouragement (such as by subsidies or trade protectionism) of
inefficient domestic wood-processing industries, which effectively raises the
ratio of logs and hence deforestation to wood product, and so on.
51. Intervention distorts the competitive playing field; Governments
effectively subsidize the rate of return of land conversion or bad forestry
practice, tilting the economic balance against conservation and the
sustainable use of forests.
Macroeconomic policies: debt and structural adjustment
52. It is often postulated that the huge level of external debt that has
burdened many developing countries since the mid-1970s has contributed to
decisions to replace forests.
53. The mechanisms by which this is said to occur are:
(a) In creating high domestic demand for foreign exchange to pay back
debt, which is satisfied through the export of timber and other
internationally tradeable products;
(b) In creating a macroeconomic environment that is generally
unfavourable to economic growth, thus forcing people into the extensive use of
marginal lands;
(c) By forcing Governments into a position in which they reduce
expenditure, especially on environmental protection and other services.
54. Such mechanisms are by no means straightforward, however, and any simple
correlation between indebtedness and deforestation rates is spurious, due to
the effects of scale. For example, some countries have high levels of both
debt and deforestation; yet when these variables are standardized and measured
on a per capita basis, there is no correlation across countries between debt
and deforestation.
55. Confronted with falling living standards, an indebted nation may find it
preferable to release resources that were previously devoted to environmental
protection for the purpose of boosting production. Debt may therefore have a
primarily indirect effect on rates of deforestation by encouraging so-called
myopic behaviour, in which deforestation accelerates beyond an optimal level
to generate income in order to meet short-term needs at the expense of future
consumption.
56. An alternative explanation, however, is that debt and deforestation are
symptoms of the same myopia, with political instability as a probable source;
again, studies present contradictory results. The role of structural
adjustment programmes (SAPs) in accelerating deforestation has been
questioned. The empirical evidence for this is mixed, however, and the
effects of policies depend on the exact package of measures adopted. For
example, policies that remove subsidies from farm inputs, such as pesticides
and fertilizers, or that tax inputs may encourage the expansion rather than
the intensification of land use. This issue highlights how policies designed
to improve economic performance in one sector of the economy (for example,
smallholder production of export crops) may have unwelcome side-effects in
another (deforestation). While conventional wisdom and proponents of SAPs
maintain that stabilization and adjustment programmes can also benefit
environmental management in so far as they improve macroeconomic stability,
lengthen planning horizons and improve the workings of the price mechanism,
experience to date is more varied: in many cases, their effects on forest
management have proved negative. Much criticism of SAPs has also focused on
their effects on income distribution and the poorer sections of the population
in developing countries, effects that are also likely to bring about
deforestation through links with poverty and landlessness. There is evidently
a need for complimentary policies to deal with such side-effects.
Poverty
57. Poverty is often blamed as a blanket underlying cause for the
unsustainable management of forests and trees, as well as of other natural
resources. The impact of poverty is felt at a number of different levels,
individually and locally, collectively, and nationally and regionally.
However, the over- generalization of poverty as an underlying cause of
unsustainable exploitation does not hold true, particularly since not all
changes occur in poor countries, nor are poor people the main agents of
change. Poverty is manifest in many different ways and has a number of
different dimensions. At the macroeconomic level, the relative wealth of
countries is conventionally measured in gross national product (GNP) or gross
domestic product (GDP), but there is little consistent correlation
demonstrated between GNP and rate of forest conversion.
58. Within countries, per capita GNP or GDP is often used as a proxy or
measure of comparative wealth. In this respect, evidence suggests that
increases in per capita income have two opposing effects on deforestation.
First, they lead to rises in per capita food consumption and demand for traded
food, which increases deforestation rates because of agricultural land
expansion. Second, they also improve the ability to invest in intensive
permanent agriculture that is capable of larger yields per hectare, which may
offset the first effect. In reality, what often happens is that within the
same country different regions may experience these effects differentially, so
that within one country the two effects will occur simultaneously. There are
a number of difficulties in using per capita income as a proxy for poverty,
however, especially when it is also influenced by such important issues as
access and rights to resources, such as forests and trees, and to
distributional resources.
59. Impoverished people may rely directly on forests and trees to support
their livelihoods; the direct uses identified in table 1 may be particularly
important for poor people in poor countries. Forests may provide vital
resources for people who are landless or displaced, especially in times of
contingency or in a difficult season. The way in which people manage these
resources will have much to do with their access and property rights, as well
as the distribution of the benefits of resource utilization, all of which
constitute other dimensions of poverty. Poverty in this context is perhaps
best viewed as a shortage of options that may force people into managing
natural resources, including forests, in less than optimal ways, often to
provide for short-term needs rather than more long-term and sustainable
options.
The timber trade and the industrial use of wood
60. The issue of timber trade will be discussed in detail under programme
element IV (see E/CN.17/IPF/1996/11); it is also briefly discussed here in the
context of its influence on the rate of timber extraction for industrial
purposes and on other direct and underlying causes of deforestation and
degradation.
61. International trade in timber is often cited as an underlying cause of
deforestation and forest degradation, especially in the humid tropical and
boreal regions. The extraction of timber is certainly a direct cause of
forest modification and, when conducted badly or to excess, can be a cause of
forest degradation. Indeed, the existence of profitable timber markets may
provide both a temptation for such overexploitation and the conditions in
which it can take place.
62. But timber is an important raw material based on an essentially renewable
resources; therefore, timber trade can make a contribution to sustainable
development. It can be argued that the world's requirements for timber could
be met from a very much smaller area of forest plantations, thus leaving
natural forests unexploited. This is theoretically true, and there is
undoubtedly a case for meeting some of these requirements from well-sited and
well-planned plantations. Trees outside forests and farm forestry can also
make a contribution. In any case, the management of natural forest for
timber, if carried out sustainably, can make an important lasting contribution
to both national economies and local livelihoods, and can provide a direct
financial incentive to stem deforestation and forest degradation.
63. If current developments to encourage a market in sustainably produced
timber are successful, international trade in timber could become a powerful
deterrent to forest degradation or injudicious deforestation.
Civil unrest
64. Civil unrest may be either a direct or an underlying cause of the
destruction and degradation of forest. It may affect forests in a number of
ways, through the direct destruction of vegetation, trees and ground cover; as
a result of mass movements of people, either as refugees fleeing conflict, or
due to forced migration or resettlement; as a result of general lawlessness
and unregulated exploitation of resources; and through the massive use of
timber. Such effects operate at local or regional levels and may also occur
across country boundaries, especially when people flee from one country to
another.
III. APPROACHES
65. This section attempts to develop a diagnostic framework for assisting
countries in diagnosing the causes of damage to their own forests at any
particular time. The first stage in this process is the identification of
direct causes of actual phenomena in the field.
66. Once the direct causes have been identified, the next stage is to try to
follow the chain of causation further. The aim of such analysis should be to
detect, in the chain of causation, the factors that are most significantly
limiting progress towards the optimum, and to direct attention towards them.
These may prove to be at any point on the chain, from a very direct cause to
one of the more remote underlying causes, and they may operate at various
levels, local, national, regional or international. Unless a specific
analysis of this kind is carried out, conclusions are likely to be spurious;
the more remote the cause, the greater the danger of drawing false conclusions
about it, as may be seen from the above discussion of underlying causes.
67. The first stage in such a process is to link direct with underlying
causes, as illustrated in table 4, in which many of the direct causes of
deforestation and forest degradation are identified and are linked to a
selection of the recognized underlying causes that have been identified in
various parts of the world. Table 4 is only intended to provide an
illustration of the kind of analysis that could be prepared in any country in
an attempt to diagnose the reasons for forest decline; the analysis of any
given country would contain fewer positive relationships, since many of these
are highly site-specific. The more linkages between direct and underlying
causes, the more useful the analysis. For example, timber harvesting damage
might be linked to the following underlying causes: harvesting beyond annual
allowable cut; high-grading; re-entry; illegal logging; bad road planning and
construction; mismanaged extraction; overhunting; local pollution; and genetic
erosion (for a more complete list of underlying causes, see para. 39 above).
Table 4. Diagnostic framework: illustration of
the relation between selected direct
and underlying causes of deforestation
and forest degradation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Underlying causes
----------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
----------------------------------------
Direct causes
Replacement
By commercial plantations X X X
Planned agricultural expansion X X X X
Pasture expansion X X X
Spontaneous colonization X X X X X X
New infrastructure X
Shifting agriculture X X X
Modification
Timber harvesting damage X X X X
Overgrazing X X
Overcutting for fuel X X
Excessive burning X X
Pests or diseases X
Industrial pollution X X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key
1 Economic and market distortions
2 Policy distortions, particularly inducements for unsustainable exploitation
and land speculation
3 Insecurity of tenure or lack of clear property rights
4 Lack of livelihood opportunities
5 Government failures or deficiencies in intervention or enforcement
6 Infrastructural, industrial or communications developments
7 New technologies
8 Population pressures causing land hunger
68. Boxes 3 and 4 show how this kind of analysis can be applied in some
hypothetical examples of countries with different forest conditions. Although
the direct causes and successive groups of underlying causes of changes in
forest cover are shown as a simple succession, the situation is rarely as
straightforward as this; there are many interrelationships and mutual
influences. It should be apparent from these examples that the differences
among countries are at least as significant as the similarities.
*****
Box 3. Illustrations of analysis of direct and underlying
causes of changes in forest cover, shown in simple
succession
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Country A Country B
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symptoms: Extensive reduction Symptoms: Increase in area of
in area of forest forested land and reversal of
degradation (woody cover
Direct cause: extending into previously
Planned transference of grazed and cultivated lands)
large areas to tree
crops Direct causes:
Reduced grazing
Underlying causes: Retreat of cultivation
Provision of Reduced demand for fuel wood
disposable income
to rural population Underlying causes:
Cash crops for Consistent forest
export in order to policy with strong
fuel development conservation bias
** related to ** Strong professional
Market pull for department
both cash crops and ** related to **
timber Concentrated on high-value
Deliberate, planned agricultural crops
government policy Use of kerosene,
to industrialise electrification
solar energy
Strong public support for
conservation forestry
Good fire control
** related to **
Advanced irrigation
systems
Deliberate energy
policy
Alternative employment
Higher disposable
incomes
** related to **
Good agricultural
markets
Revenue from tourism
*****
*****
Box 4: Further illustrations of analysis of direct and
underlying causes of changes in forest cover, shown
in simple succession
Country C Country D
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symptoms: Pronounced forest Symptoms: Reduction in area of forest
degradation (reduced
productivity, extensive logging Direct causes:
damage, sever erosion, social Expansion of industrial
stress and considerable agriculture for cash
reduction of biological crops (soya, sugar)
diversity) Expansion of 'colonisation'
into forest areas
Direct cause: Excessive and
careless extraction of timber Underlying causes:
Policy of agricultural
Underlying causes: expansion (some good,
Lack of regulation some bad)
and control Policy of giving titles
Nature of concession after land clearing
policy Policy of resettlement
Lack of consultation Spontaneous migration
with local people ** related to **
Delays in Agricultural development
establishing for national development
permanent forest Deficient land-use
estate and protected policies
areas Settlement after land
** related to ** reform
Political nature of Search for income and
concessions food security
Shortage of Alternatives of coca
professional staff cultivation
Little consideration for ** related to **
local sensibilities Rural poverty
Inadequate use of Undervaluation of the
research findings forest resource
** related to ** Collapse of mining
Politics and International pressure
personalities about drugs
Official man-power Land speculation
ceiling Shortage of alternative
Shortage of employment
government finance ** related to **
Agricultural and Lack of finance
resettlement Legislative vacuum
policies Shortage of policy
** related to ** and of administrative
Federal-State structures
relations Weakness of education
Strong market pull and research
Timber used as springboard
for development
Provision of employment
*****
IV. INSTITUTIONS AND RESOURCES: EXISTING INFORMATION
A. Institutions and resources
69. The present report has highlighted a number of difficulties in making an
effective diagnosis of the causes of damaging changes to the world's forest
cover. First, in order to decide whether the replacement or modification of
forest is or is not acceptable, it is necessary to have policies in place that
define how a country wishes to optimize the use of its forests. Second, each
country needs to have institutions that are able to judge when management
diverges from such policies and are capable of taking appropriate corrective
steps. This leads to the further difficulty that the connections between
direct and underlying causes of changes in forest cover are not
straightforward, suggesting that corrective action may lie outside the
conventional remit of existing institutions.
B. Measurement of forest cover
70. The issue of assessment and criteria and indicators will be part of the
discussions under element III.1 of the programme of work of the Panel, which
is scheduled for substantive discussion at its current session (see
E/CN.17/IPF/1996/6), and of element III.2, which is scheduled for substantive
discussion at its third session.
71. FAO studies have shown that forest replacement is in principle
measurable, especially given recent technological developments. Improvements
now being considered will enhance completeness, comparability and reliability.
Degradation, on the other hand, cannot yet be measured with any precision.
The various criteria and indicators that are being identified and refined in
the Montreal and Helsinki processes mark an attempt to come to grips with this
problem, as does the approach to forest resource accounting that was developed
by IIED for ITTO and is now being implemented or considered in some countries.
Ideally, it will eventually be possible to measure progress towards or decline
away from sustainable forest management. Essential criteria common to all
definitions (even if expressed in different terms) are: biological diversity;
the productive capacity of forest ecosystems; forest ecosystem health and
vitality; soil and water resources; the forest contribution to global carbon
cycles; and long-term multiple socio-economic benefits.
72. However, one conclusion that has emerged from the international
discussion to date on this topic is that although the same criteria can be
applied to all types of forest, this is not the case for indicators: their
choice will certainly have to be specific to the type of forest and the local
conditions of land use and forest management. As a result, it will be
extremely difficult to make global generalizations about the extent and rate
at which forests are being modified, which partly explains why, although many
attempts have been made to analyse the causes of deforestation, especially in
the tropics, such attempts have not been altogether successful.
73. Good decisions depend upon reliable information in a number of fields,
but such information is often lacking. There is a need for timely and
accurate information which is strictly relevant to the decisions that must be
taken.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND PRELIMINARY PROPOSALS FOR ACTION
A. Conclusions
74. The analysis conducted in the present report leads to the following
conclusions:
(a) Deforestation and forest degradation pose a serious problem in some
parts of the world, but not all changes in forest cover are necessarily
harmful. It is preferable to adopt a more focused approach that concentrates
on reversing the most damaging processes and promoting the most effectively
beneficial ones;
(b) Although there are relatively accurate statistics about changes in
forest cover, there is a severe lack of information about forest quality,
which is particularly troubling since many of the most serious unplanned
changes in forests concern quality rather than quantity;
(c) The values given to goods and services provided by forest are
characterized by the following:
(i) Their importance will vary depending on forest type;
(ii) There will be trade-offs or even conflicts between how such goods
and services could be used;
(iii) They will change over time and with the needs and development paths
of countries;
(iv) They depend on the emphasis that Governments give to the role of
forest in the national economy;
(v) The methodologies used for local and national level valuation are
highly dependent on accurate assessment and data;
(d) It is only possible to decide what changes are or are not harmful
against a background of national policies that make a best judgement of
optimum forest cover (how much, where and of what kind) in order to meet most
effectively diverse needs for forest goods and services. Policies for forests
(and trees outside forests) need to be consistent with overall national
economic, land use and sustainable development policies;
(e) There are many discouragements to sustainable forest management,
including economic distortions, such as the undervaluation and underpricing of
particular types of timber and of the services provided by healthy forest
ecosystems; the failure of national institutions to exercise stewardship over
their forest resources; prevailing systems of property rights; the conditions
under which concessions are awarded and renewed; and inequities in the
distribution of benefits. Cross-sectoral issues and the international
linkages brought about by macroeconomic policies are both important;
(f) Examples of corrective measures to inhibit deforestation and
degradation are enacting a tax on land conversion, zoning to restrict
detrimental land uses and establishing higher environmental standards;
(g) The links between harmful changes in forest cover and their direct
and underlying causes are very complex. Even if there are global dimensions
to this problem, they vary greatly from country to country and are not
susceptible to simple generalization. There are therefore great dangers in
basing policy prescriptions on such generalizations;
(h) Instead of attempting generalizations, therefore, the proposed
diagnostic tool can enable countries to trace the chains of causation that
affect them, can identify limiting factors and opportunities for effective
intervention, and can help them to identify areas in which such limiting
factors and interventions have been successful, thus enabling countries to
build on their strengths and existing achievements;
(i) It may be found that the most appropriate action will be at any one
of a number or levels, i.e., local, national, regional or global;
(j) An important issue is the need for communication and collaboration
among relevant individuals, agencies and institutions in their different areas
of operation. This should lead to a clearer allocation of resources both
nationally and internationally;
(k) Some causes of deforestation and forest degradation lie outside the
forest sector and beyond national boundaries. The final recommendations of
the Panel could be particularly useful and effective in addressing such
causes.
B. Preliminary proposals for action
75. The Panel may wish to note the following areas that require priority
attention:
(a) Inclusion in national forest and land-use plans of targets on the
optimum forest cover and utilization - how much, where, what kind and for
what - that reflect the whole range of functions that forest perform;
(b) The desirability of plans for forest replacement to be deliberate
and controlled;
(c) Review of the policies and interventions that have proven
detrimental to, as well as those policies that have proven to work in favour
of, the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests;
(d) The need for a set of national case studies illustrating the use of
the diagnostic tool so as to enhance the understanding of the underlying
causes of deforestation and forest degradation;
(e) The need to include information on forest-quality changes in forest
assessments;
(f) The need for open access to timely and reliable databases on forest
replacement and modification;
(g) The need for increased human and institutional capacity for forest
policy analysis and formulation, forest assessment, monitoring and valuation
as well as for the collection and dissemination of information;
(h) Enhanced communication and collaboration among individuals, agencies
and institutions at all levels - local, national, regional and global - in
order to achieve a clearer national and international allocation of resources.
76. The Panel may wish to request its secretariat to take into account
current and future discussions on other relevant elements of its programme of
work, in particular elements I.1, III.1, III.2 and IV, as well as government-
sponsored initiatives under way in support of element I.2, while preparing for
discussion of the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation at
its third session and final consideration at its fourth session.
-----
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