| United Nations | E/CN.17/IPF/1996/20 |
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
7 August 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
Third session
9-20 September 1996
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, FOREST ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF
CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT
Programme element III.1 (a): Assessment of the multiple
benefits of all types of forests
Report of the Secretary-General
SUMMARY
The present report relates to category III, Scientific research, forest
assessment and development of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest
management, of the work programme of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on
Forests (IPF). It addresses programme element III.1 (a), on assessment of the
multiple benefits of all types of forests.
The considerations of the Commission on Sustainable Development at its
third session and, more recently, of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on
Forests at its second session have served as background to a number of recent
meetings and consultations whose objectives have been to shape the next
regional and global forest resources assessments. These meetings have drawn
conclusions and identified opportunities and constraints that are summarized
below.
With regard to uses and users, increased attention should be given to
serving those users who are intermediates between the primary data and the
policy- and strategy-making level. These users would typically undertake
targeted studies such as forest sector outlook studies or carbon budget
studies and present processed information to be used in international debate.
They would need a base of well-documented and highly accessible source data
with good references to other sources.
Progress in making primary data widely accessible will also address, in
part, the topic of "more intensive use of existing information" (by external
users). Moreover, for the global assessment itself, one of the most promising
ways of generating new information lies in combining data from various sources
using geographical information systems (GIS). This tool has been applied for
the part of the global assessment covering the developing world, but its
potential is far from being fully utilized. For the global forest resources
assessment (FRA) process, it is recommended that its use be extended also to
the part of the assessment covering the industrialized world.
Country capacity-building: At national and subnational levels,
capacity-building has a key role in forest resources assessment for a number
of reasons: (a) forest management action is effected at these levels,
(b) many countries do not have the institutional capacity to design and
implement strategies for the management of their forest resources, and (c) the
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and other
international organizations concerned depend for their data collection on
information that countries have already collected for their own purposes.
Also, to be successful, data collection for global assessment has to bring
advantages to the countries and institutions involved in this undertaking.
Such advantages can consist of assistance in organizing existing information
for national planning and decision-making, various forms of capacity-building,
access to information networks, and facilitating reporting obligations on such
international programmes and agreements as Agenda 21, the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity
and the various processes regarding criteria and indicators for sustainable
forest management.
Global framework for the forest resources assessment 2000: The FAO
expert consultation on the global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 (FRA 2000),
held in Kotka, Finland, proposed that the data content of FRA 2000 be
considerably widened, compared with that of FRA 90. New information to be
included covers the availability of forests for wood supply, ownership,
"naturalness" and protection status of forests, fellings and removals, data on
forest fires and the character and importance of non-wood goods and services.
It also recommended that the remote-sensing approach and the presentation of
key information within ecofloristic zones as applied in FRA 90 for the
tropical countries be extended to all regions of the world.
Involvement of countries and partners: The plans for FRA 2000 and
beyond imply a move away from a centralized approach to considerably greater
involvement of countries and other players. Much labour-intensive support
will be required to initiate and sustain country involvement.
Implications of a broader data content: The proposals for the data
content of FRA 2000, particularly new types of data, have to be systematically
confronted with the existing limitations in available information, tools and
resources. In particular, the following will have major resource
implications:
(a) Dialogue and communication with all countries and their
institutions must be intensified;
(b) The application of sampling high-resolution satellite data and the
organization of existing information using GIS should be extended to all
regions of the world. This will involve setting up and coordinating
partnership arrangements and contracts, as well as increasing the capacity
within FAO;
(c) An ecofloristic zone map and a vegetation map covering the world
are needed tools for data capture and analysis. Source data can be made
available through partnership arrangements, and a team should be set up to
produce the maps;
(d) Common features of the activities mentioned are that they (i) are
labour-intensive and (ii) require coordination and administrative support
beyond the capacity of the existing secretariats.
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
INTRODUCTION ........................................... 1 - 7 5
I. OUTCOME OF THE DISCUSSION DURING THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE AD HOC INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS .... 8 6
II. CURRENT STATUS OF ISSUES RAISED DURING THE SECOND
SESSION OF THE PANEL ............................... 9 - 20 7
A. Current status of points highlighted by the Panel
at its second session .......................... 9 - 13 7
B. National level ................................ 14 - 18 8
C. Regional and international levels ............. 19 - 20 10
III. ASSESSMENT OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND OUTLOOK FOR THE
FUTURE ............................................ 21 - 34 10
A. Workshop on remote-sensing support for the global
Forest Resources Assessment 2000 .............. 22 - 23 11
B. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 24 - 27 11
C. Meeting of the ECE/FAO Team of Specialists on
Forest Resources Assessment for the Boreal and
Temperate Zones .................................. 28 12
D. Expert consultation on global Forest Resources
Assessment 2000 (Kotka III) ...................... 29 - 30 13
E. Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest
management ....................................... 31 - 33 15
F. More country involvement in data acquisition ..... 34 16
IV. ASSESSMENT OF OBSTACLES TO BE OVERCOME, CHALLENGES
FORESEEN ............................................. 35 - 54 17
A. Functions of forests ............................. 35 - 38 17
B. Data acquisition mechanisms ...................... 39 - 47 18
C. Resource requirements ............................ 48 - 54 21
V. CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR ACTION ................. 55 - 66 22
INTRODUCTION
1. The Commission on Sustainable Development at its third session defined
the scope of programme element III.1 as follows: to "review existing
periodic assessment of forests, including relevant socio-economic and
environmental factors, at the global level; identify shortfalls in present
assessments relative to policy considerations; and recommend practical ways
of improving such assessments. Examine ways to broaden the scientific
knowledge and the statistical database available in order to better
understand the ecological, economic, cultural and social functions
performed by all types of forests. Promote the further development of
methodologies for properly valuing the multiple benefits derived from
forests in the form of goods and services, and subsequently to consider
their inclusion within the systems of national accounting, drawing upon
work that has been already undertaken by the United Nations and other
relevant organizations". 1/
2. The work under this programme element (III.1) is guided by chapter 11
of Agenda 21 2/ and the Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement of
Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and
Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests, 3/ as well as the
decisions taken at the third session of the Commission on Sustainable
Development and further elaborated at the first and second sessions of the
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests.
3. The Panel at its first session emphasized the need for the preparation
of two reports, one of which is the present report on programme element
III.1 (a). It is concerned with identifying ways to expand on the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Forest Resources
Assessment with regard to the qualitative and quantitative assessment of
all types of forests, including information on biological resources and
non-wood forest products and services; information on environmental and
social benefits; standardization of tropical and non-tropical data;
collection of broader types of forest statistics; coordination of forest
monitoring with remote sensing and geographical information systems; and
the continuous nature of the assessment and the accessibility of
information generated to all interested parties.
4. The report takes into consideration paragraphs 11 and 15 of the
Statement on Biodiversity and Forests from the Convention on Biological
Diversity to the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests of the
Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/9, annex).
5. At the second session of the Panel, programme element III.1 was a
topic for "substantive discussion". At the third session of the Panel, it
is scheduled for "further substantive discussion".
6. The present report has been prepared by FAO as the lead agency for
programme element III.1 (a), in consultation with the secretariat of the Ad
Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests in the Division for Sustainable
Development of the Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable
Development of the United Nations Secretariat. In addition comments and
contributions were received from the Centre for International Forestry
Research (CIFOR), the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) and the United States
Forest Service.
7. The report of the Secretary-General to the second session of the Ad
Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests on programme element III.1 (a)
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/6) was concerned with ways to expand the periodic FAO
forest resources assessments in general. This report will develop the
issue further, but also focuses more concretely on relevant recent events
and on the Forest Resources Assessment 2000 (FRA 2000), which is now in an
advanced planning stage. A FAO expert consultation on FRA 2000 (Kotka III)
was held in Kotka, Finland, in June 1996 in cooperation with ECE and UNEP,
with the support of the Government of Finland and with participants from
developed and developing countries from all regions of the world.
I. OUTCOME OF THE DISCUSSION DURING THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE AD HOC INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS
8. The discussions during the second session of the Panel, as reflected
in the Co-Chairmen's transitional summary, highlighted a number of issues
of direct significance to the planning of the forest resources assessment
2000 (FRA 2000) and to follow-up in the third session of the Panel. The
issues are briefly recalled here, while the next section will explain their
current status. It was noted that there were many shortfalls and gaps in
existing information. To improve the situation, it was recommended that:
(a) Existing information should be used more intensively;
(b) National forest assessment programmes should be transparent and
accessible to all interested parties;
(c) A study of uses and categories of users of forest resources and
related information at the international level should be required;
(d) Research on forest inventory and monitoring techniques should be
strengthened;
(e) Efforts should be made to harmonize approaches to data collection
and analysis in order to enhance comparability among countries;
(f) The current 10-year interval between global forest resources
assessments should be shortened;
(g) Capacity-building in data gathering which was called for, should
be integrated with strategic planning and decision-making. This statement
is in line with Agenda 21, chapter 11, programme area D, which puts forest
assessment in the context of strategic planning when it notes that
"assessment and systematic observations are essential components of
long-term planning, for evaluating effects, quantitatively and
qualitatively, and for rectifying inadequacies";
(h) Coordination of efforts at the international level should be
enhanced;
(i) Mobilization of necessary funding should be given due
consideration in view of the inadequate financial resources currently
available for national level forest assessments. As will be shown, this is
also true for the staff and financial resources available to the
secretariats that have the mandate to carry out regional and global
assessments and to organize capacity-building efforts;
(j) In the data dissemination work, special attention should be given
to those countries and interested parties that had difficulties in
accessing internationally available information.
II. CURRENT STATUS OF ISSUES RAISED DURING THE SECOND
SESSION OF THE PANEL
A. Current status of points highlighted by the Panel
at its second session
9. Hereunder some of the points highlighted by the Panel at its second
session and mentioned in section I are commented on as follows:
10. More intensive use of existing information. Status: the expert
consultation on FRA 2000, held in Kotka, Finland, in June 1996 (Kotka
III) recommended that, for FRA 2000, organization and integration of
existing information by means of geographical information systems
(GIS) should be extended to the industrialized countries.
11. Study of users and uses. Status: at national level users and uses
are relatively easy to identify. A cornerstone of capacity-building -
that should remain so - is the planning and execution of forest
inventories in dialogue with users and the establishment of an
information service function to (a) serve users with tailor-made
information and (b) make the data collectors aware of user needs.
At international level users and uses are far more difficult to
identify. Little progress has been made so far with user needs
studies. It can be noted that FRAs have been tailored to serve the
policy- and decision-making level directly. It is suggested that more
weight be given to the need for scientific knowledge and a base of
well-documented and accessible source data with good references to
other sources. This would lead back to the original task definition
of the Commission on Sustainable Development at its third session,
part of which is "examine ways to broaden the scientific knowledge and
the statistical database available in order to better understand the
ecological, economic, cultural and social functions performed by all
types of forests". 4/ It also opens a wide field suitable for
partnership arrangements with actors who will interpret data and put
them in specific contexts.
12. Enhance comparability among countries. Status: common definitions
and classifications of core data for global application in FRA 2000
have been agreed upon. After necessary refinement and approval in the
governing bodies of ECE/FAO and FAO, they should be widely publicized.
Countries should be prepared to adapt their own inventories, under the
condition that they remain unchanged for a long time, so that
information can be provided in a format that fits the common
standards. As an immediate step, efforts have been recommended by
Kotka III to improve the adaptation of country data to common
standards. Such an adaptation has been quite incomplete in FRA 90.
It is a technically complex task that requires special efforts,
particularly on the part of the reporting countries and intensified
interaction between secretariat and countries.
13. Coordination of efforts at international level. Status: a situation
with generally scarce resources has created a climate that is
favourable to coordination. The attention given to forest resources
assessments has helped raising interest in contributing to this
effort. Recent signs of this are (a) the fact that a "Workshop on
Remote Sensing Support for the Global Forest Resources Assessment
2000" became a reality in March 1996, that many of the important
members of the remote-sensing community participated and that a
general interest was expressed in contributing, (b) ongoing
cooperation with the TREES (Tropical Ecosystem Environment
Observations by Satellites) project of the Commission of the European
Communities (CEC), taking advantage of two parallel studies using
satellite data of different resolution, (c) ongoing cooperation with
CEC regarding a comparative study of European forest inventories, and
(d) active participation of the International Union of Forest Research
Organizations (IUFRO), the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC)
and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in Kotka III.
Moreover, guidelines for forest inventory have recently been published
by IUFRO. IUFRO is also, on behalf of FAO, undertaking a comparative
study of forest inventory terms. There are numerous other examples
where scientific expertise has contributed to the development of FRA
and to the use/interpretation of results, with partial support from
its own organizations and at marginal costs for FAO and ECE/FAO.
The challenge for FAO, in collaboration with its partners, is to
prepare a plan in which the tasks to be completed and needs for
cooperation are specified. Such a plan will be prepared in the second
half of 1996 and it will take note of the proposals made by Kotka III.
Limitations to cooperation: specifications and the integration of
inputs from other actors are technically demanding tasks and require a
strong coordinating nucleus. This nucleus is insufficient in both
secretariats involved (ECE/FAO, Geneva, and FAO, Rome).
B. National level
14. At national, subnational and local levels capacity-building is a key
objective for several reasons: (a) forest management action is effected at
these levels, (b) many countries do not have the institutional capacity to
design and to implement strategies for the management of their forest
resources, and (c) FAO and other international organizations concerned
depend for their data collection on information that countries have already
collected for their own purposes.
15. National and subnational forest inventories serve planning and
monitoring purposes at their respective levels. They are justifiable only
if the corresponding planning mechanisms are in place. Moreover, such
inventories are costly and have to defend their place in tough
prioritization processes. Therefore, funding is often a limiting factor
for forest inventories being carried out.
16. The conclusion is that the importance of capacity-building in forest
management planning on all levels, from national strategic to local
operational, can hardly be overestimated. This has been recognized by the
Panel at its second session, as can be seen under section I above.
Current status
17. Country capacity-building has been an important topic in an
auto-review undertaken in 1994, in which FAO's achievements in forest
resources assessment were reviewed and a strategy for future development
was presented. In this review, a basis for action and for funding was
developed. It was noted that capacity-building is demanding in terms of
staff resources and long-term commitment and requires conceptual and
administrative coordination. It is a complex task concerning which new
experience needs to be built up. Innovative approaches and a learning
process are required. Based on the existing experience two lead ideas were
formulated:
(a) Country commitment is a necessary condition for success;
(b) Forest assessment must be better integrated into a planning
context (national, provincial or local);
and the following elements of a strategy were identified, namely, to:
(a) Use selected field projects as vehicles for country capacity-
building because it is cost-efficient and there is a chance of obtaining
country commitment;
(b) Establish, at FAO headquarters, an institutional memory on a
country-by-country basis with follow-up of projects/programmes;
(c) Promote regional and global networks to provide cost-effective
mechanisms for cooperation among developing countries and between
industrialized and developing countries. Workshops, studies of a regional
nature and seminars can be used for both promotion and cooperation
purposes;
(d) To the extent suitable, introduce the above lead ideas
consistently in training activities;
(e) Seek sustainable benefits through cooperation with national
forest action programmes, where such programmes are long-term and have
focus, and with the National Forestry Action Plan Support Unit at FAO
headquarters.
18. Country capacity-building is considered a priority area by the donor
community, and there has already been a certain response from donors. In
chronological order, France, Sweden, India (for in-country efforts) and
Japan have provided funding for capacity-building in the amount of
US$ 3.2 million. Moreover, many donor countries have substantial capacity-
building components in their bilateral and other international development
programmes. Sweden will be providing a series of training courses
beginning in the third quarter of 1996 on "Development of national forest
policies and strategies, including acquisition and organization of forest
resources information and implementation of national forest policies and
programmes".
C. Regional and international levels
19. A global framework for FRA 2000 and core definitions and
classifications were agreed upon at Kotka III. A basis of tested methods
and data acquisition mechanisms is in place. The tools available are
assessment based on analysis of existing reliable country information
(already applied for the developing countries), sampling of high resolution
satellite data (already applied for tropical countries), organization of
existing reliable information using GIS (already applied for developing
countries), questionnaires supported by a network of country correspondents
(applied in industrialized countries), and special studies undertaken by
consultants or cooperating partners. The strength of this array of tools
is that it provides a basis of tested data acquisition approaches that, if
used more intensively and on a worldwide basis, can meet the new data
requirements contained in the agreed global framework. However, to
activate the full strength of this tool set would require a totally
different type of secretariat for the industrialized countries with new
types of partnership arrangements. For the developing countries, direct
contacts with countries will be needed on a much wider scale than hitherto,
so as to assemble within the country and extract for the global FRA new
information in a process in which various sources including expert opinions
are utilized.
20. Ongoing cooperation between FRA and the TREES project as mentioned
above aims at making the remote-sensing tools of both programmes more
cost-effective. Cooperation on the Global Land Cover Characteristics
Database (GLCCD) is envisaged (see sect. III) and is considered a condition
for the production of georeferenced data and therefore for the use of GIS
in new regions. Moreover, the use of maps based on GLCCD will considerably
improve analytical power in various steps of the data processing and the
cost efficiency of the remote- sensing component.
III. ASSESSMENT OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE
21. Important to mention are a number of expert meetings that are
milestones on the way to forming the global forest resources assessment
2000 (FRA 2000). These events culminated with the expert consultation on
global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 which was held 10-14 June 1996 in
Kotka, Finland. This consultation brought about an agreement on a global
framework specifying the content, data format, core definitions and
classifications for FRA 2000.
A. Workshop on remote-sensing support for the global
Forest Resources Assessment 2000
22. The above workshop was organized by IUFRO in cooperation with FAO,
ECE/FAO, UNEP and the Joint Research Centre of the Commission of the
European Communities, 12-14 March 1996, in Washington, D.C., United States
of America. It was hosted by the Forest Service of the United States
Department of Agriculture.
23. Significant elements of the outcome:
(a) The positive interest of the remote-sensing community in
contributing to FRA 2000 was noted. FAO and ECE/FAO must specify a
programme and their needs for assistance. A transparent programme
including contingency plans for alternative funding levels needed to
attract donors;
(b) As a concrete subject for cooperation, the Global Land Cover
Characteristics Database (GLCCD), which is under preparation and expected
to be completed by the end of 1997, was identified. This database can be
used for producing a global ecofloristic zone map and a global vegetation
map. Both are essential tools for FRA 2000 and in particular for progress
on broadening scope. A major interpretation and validation effort will be
needed to produce these maps. Concerns were expressed about feasibility
within the tight deadlines;
(c) Acquisition and screening of high resolution satellite data is
another area for cooperation - one that is highly complex and in which the
remote-sensing community can assist;
(d) In view of the small secretariat resources available, it was
considered important that FRA 2000 focus on core information of high
quality and not spread its efforts over too many new items.
B. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
24. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) held a workshop
on "Emissions by sources and removal by sinks of greenhouse gases from land
use changes and forestry" in Sao Jose' dos Campos, Brazil, 21-22 March
1996. It discussed in detail guidelines and data forms for country
reporting as a part of obligations to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change. 5/
25. The workshop noted, inter alia:
(a) That most developing countries would face serious problems in
providing the required information with a sufficient degree of accuracy;
(b) That there was a considerable knowledge gap on land-use change
processes, in particular on the response of tropical forests to human
interventions such as shifting cultivation, logging, fire and various
silvicultural measures.
26. In view of these facts, it was considered imperative that IPCC and FAO
should cooperate (a) to improve the guidelines and data forms in close
cooperation with selected national authorities, (b) to identify knowledge
gaps, (c) to recommend robust procedures for filling the immediate
knowledge gaps, and (d) to recommend longer-term measures to improve data
quality and completeness.
27. The workshop identified some important indicators to be included in
FRA 2000, as well as the source of information, shortcomings and
acquisition methods. It recognized that most of the information is not
available for inclusion in FRA 2000 (below-ground living material, biomass
in soils, end use of forest products), but made strong recommendations to
ensure its inclusion in future assessments.
C. Meeting of the ECE/FAO Team of Specialists on Forest Resources
Assessment for the Boreal and Temperate Zones
28. A meeting with the Team of Specialists was held 15-17 April 1996 in
Geneva, Switzerland. The meeting considered the outcome of the remote-
sensing meeting in Washington, D.C., and prepared, in part, the forthcoming
expert consultation in Kotka, Finland. In particular, it contributed to a
draft global framework for FRA 2000 that was under preparation and covered
data content, definitions and classifications. With regard to the
proposals for FRA 2000 that were being formulated, the meeting noted in
particular the following:
(a) Reporting intervals shorter than 10 years: difficult to justify
vis-a`-vis countries, since practically no country had inventory intervals
shorter than 10 years. In the intervening period, updating at the
international level could be made on the basis of (i) those
national/subnational inventories that had produced reports since the latest
occasion and (ii) international remote-sensing activities (that so far were
in place only for tropical countries). Updating using the first method
mentioned was taking place currently for the report to the FAO Committee on
Forests on the state of the world's forests;
(b) There was a need to confront the demand for new information with
technical and resource limitations. Cost-benefit analyses were required;
(c) Showing data by ecofloristic zone in industrialized countries
required (i) an ecofloristic zone map that needed to be agreed upon and
prepared, (ii) data by province, and (iii) GIS facilities, all having major
resource implications;
(d) The Helsinki criteria of sustainable forest management were
helpful in summarizing main issues to be addressed at the international
level, but there were considerable difficulties in regard to collecting
data on many of the specified indicators. Data collection should be
designed to contribute to the overall issues;
(e) There were good opportunities to tap the wealth of information
available in countries, but there was a major constraint at the level of
the ECE/FAO secretariat's capacity to coordinate and administer data
collection and to analyse, validate and integrate the data received. There
was therefore a danger that only a fraction of the great potential of the
FRA 2000 would be realized because of a lack of the relatively small amount
of secretariat resources that could also ensure that the much larger
resources being contributed in kind by countries were used to the full.
D. Expert consultation on global Forest Resources
Assessment 2000 (Kotka III)
29. The above consultation, held 10-14 June 1996 in Kotka, Finland, was
organized by FAO in cooperation with ECE/FAO and UNEP and sponsored by the
Government of Finland. Forty experts from 29 countries in all parts of the
world and from four non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations
participated, together with secretariat staff from FAO, ECE/FAO, UNEP and
the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests. The objective of the
consultation was to agree on a global framework specifying content, the
data acquisition process, data format, core definitions and
classifications. Most of the objectives were achieved, but due to time
limitations the topic of the data acquisition process was covered only
superficially. Consequently, the proposals for data content, in particular
new types of data, have yet to be systematically confronted with the
existing limitations in available information, tools and resources. Some
of the proposals may later be found difficult to achieve.
30. Significant elements of the outcome:
(a) A global framework for FRA 2000 was agreed upon. This implies
several novel steps at the global level:
(i) A breakdown of forest into the categories "available" and
"not available" for wood supply;
(ii) The above categories to be shown within three ownership classes;
(iii) Key information to be shown within ecofloristic zones worldwide;
(iv) A breakdown of forest by "naturalness";
(v) A breakdown of forest by protection status (legally protected/
not protected);
(vi) Changes over time for naturalness, availability for wood supply
and protection status;
(vii) A change matrix showing the flow of area among the categories
forest, other wooded land and other land;
(viii) Growing stock and biomass to be broken down by three species
groups (coniferous, broadleaved, others);
(ix) Fellings and removals to be shown in total and for forest
available for wood supply;
(x) Number of forest fires and area burnt;
(xi) Information on the character and importance of non-wood goods and
services;
(b) As on previous occasions, there will be regional assessments for
the industrialized and for the developing countries that will, for the
respective region, expand the data content so that the content covers
region-specific information needs;
(c) Definitions and classifications for the parameters to be included
were agreed upon. Of particular interest is the fact that a common
definition for core terms such as forest was accepted. Details will still
have to be worked out by the secretariats;
(d) Among the criteria for the selection of parameters to be included
in the framework, there should be one determining that the information
requested is useful at the global level, and measurable, and can be
assessed with the available tools at acceptable cost;
(e) Concern was expressed that, despite far-reaching demands for
information, there were few signs that FRA information presented had
received attention or exerted influence at the decision-making level. The
secretariats were urged to raise the political and media profile of the FRA
process;
(f) FRA 90 had weaknesses owing to lack of comparability between
countries and regions and varying quality of data received by means of
questionnaires (industrialized countries). In particular, there were many
gaps and inconsistencies. Means to overcome these weaknesses were
discussed by the meeting and the following recommendations made:
(i) The approach used so far in the tropics of reporting core data by
ecofloristic zone and using ecofloristic zones in the analysis,
having been found very meaningful, should be expanded to all
regions of the world;
(ii) There should be an evaluation of whether the sampling of high
resolution satellite data which had been applied in the tropical
countries in FRA 90 could be extended to cover all regions. This
would allow consistent and detailed change monitoring and
validation of the results received by other means, as already
demonstrated for the tropical region;
(iii) As organizing existing information with the help of GIS was a
powerful tool applied in the assessment for developing countries,
its use should be extended to the industrialized countries;
(iv) For developing countries, the network of regional and national
correspondents used in FRA 90 should be re-established to collect
data that were available in countries and to associate those
countries in the assessment process. That network needed to be
much intensified so as to collect a range of new data that could
not be retrieved with the mechanisms used so far;
(v) Comparability would be improved with the introduction of common
definitions in the FRA for all regions of the world. However,
strong limitations to such improvement were recognized. Above
all, vegetation and climate were fundamentally different in
different parts of the world, implying that forests would never
be fully comparable between regions. Second, a condition for
improved comparability was that country data could be adapted to
the common definition. Such adaptation was a technically complex
task and required resources. In the past, it had been quite
incomplete. Significant progress was possible, but required much
intensified interaction between secretariat and countries;
(vi) Gaps and inconsistencies were problems linked with the
questionnaire approach (used in industrialized countries). It
was understood that most data requested were available in
countries, although in some cases only as expert estimates. Much
intensified interaction between secretariat and country
correspondents must be established to ensure retrieval of more
complete and consistent data. However, two kinds of obstacles
had been identified: (a) full and correct reporting was a costly
exercise for countries and (b) some of the data required could
not be found in official national statistics. Unofficial sources
and expert opinions were required. This would meet with
difficulties in some countries that had a very rigid data
dissemination policy.
E. Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management
31. In preparation for Kotka III, an attempt was made to match the
information that had been collected at global level by FRA 90 and proposed
for collection by FRA 2000 against the indicators of sustainable forest
management identified by the ongoing international processes concerned with
this subject. Results are shown in the table below, whose arrangement
required some arbitrary judgement. Indicators such as "area and change
of ..." are given a half-score if area only is being assessed.
32. The table shows, for example, that for the Helsinki process,
information on 5 of 27 indicators are proposed for collection in FRA 2000,
compared with only 1.5 in FRA 90. Additional coverage exists through other
sources such as economic statistics. Some indicators that will not be
assessed globally are assessed in the region to which a given process
refers, as is the case, for example, with defoliation (Helsinki process) in
Europe. It should be kept in mind that most of the indicators have their
significance at the management unit or national and subnational levels.
Considerably more information is usually available at these levels.
FRA 1990 and FRA 2000 coverage of indicators
identified by international processes
Total number of Number f indicators covered by
national-level
indicators
Process identified FRA 1990 FRA 2000
Helsinki 27 1.5 5
Montreal 67 1 5
Dry Africa 47 2.5 4.5
Tarapoto 47 2 2.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. An inquiry circulated by the Helsinki process to 39 countries in 1994
was returned by 31 countries. Serious difficulties at the national level
were encountered with 6 of the 27 indicators. Twenty-seven countries (of
39) provided forest area change data. In its own way, this highlights the
difficulties for FRA in providing even core information with no gaps.
F. More country involvement in data acquisition
34. The basic mechanisms for data acquisition that are available have been
presented in section II.C. One mechanism not mentioned therein is the data
validation round, in which source data available in the ECE/FAO and FAO
secretariats as well as the derived standardized data for common reference
years are distributed to countries for validation. This mechanism is
intended to be used in a modified way that suggests, in part, one element
of a new strategy by which the role of countries in the future FRA
processes can be strengthened and made more active. The following steps
are involved, namely, to:
(a) Store all relevant data that are internationally available in a
statistical/geographical database linked to spatial entities such as
countries, districts, forest stands, national parks, ecofloristic zones,
and so on;
(b) Disseminate to each country, after proper presentation and
promotion, the statistical/geographical information pertinent to that
country, accompanied by a questionnaire;
(c) Explain in the dispatch the FRA 2000 approach and the utilization
of information to be provided by the country;
(d) Illustrate the current status of information from the individual
country;
(e) Link to each thematic map a questionnaire requesting updating;
(f) Highlight the fact that FRA 2000 results will consist of similar
data sets for each country after updating by the country and FAO with
partners;
(g) Follow up with subregional and regional efforts (dialogue,
communication, workshops, visits) to the greatest possible extent.
IV. ASSESSMENT OF OBSTACLES TO BE OVERCOME, CHALLENGES FORESEEN
A. Functions of forests
35. The task statement made by the Commission on Sustainable Development
at its third session for programme element III.1 of the Panel's programme
of work called for an examination of "ways to broaden the scientific
knowledge and the statistical database available in order to better
understand the ecological, economic, cultural and social functions
performed by all types of forests". 4/
36. It can be noted in retrospect that FAO's FRA has been focused so far
on ecological aspects, while few parameters cover the economic, cultural
and social functions of forests. In FAO's Global Fibre Supply Study and
Sector Outlook Study for Asia-Pacific, both of which are in progress, it
has been found that the information provided by FRA is insufficient for
these purposes. Cultural and social functions of forests are only
marginally covered. However, the change matrices of FRA 90 for tropical
countries, which show the destination of land cover changes, allow
conclusions on the influence of cultural and social factors on
deforestation and forest degradation.
37. Kotka III in its proposed global framework attempted to cover more
fully the breadth of information required for the international debate on
forestry. This resulted in a number of new parameters being proposed for
inclusion in the global framework. These parameters have a bearing in
particular on the economic function (for example, ownership, available/not
available for wood supply). However, it was also found that many
parameters discussed were not relevant at the global level, not
consistently quantifiable or not assessable with available tools.
38. The situation is different at the regional and in particular the
national level, where a number of significant studies can be mentioned, as
follows:
(a) Two recent assessments for industrialized countries have included
specified functions such as recreation, conservation, protection, hunting
and grazing, and for each have shown the total forest area broken down into
importance classes - high, medium and low. It has also given a verbal
account of "hot" political issues. The challenge is to produce a
meaningful summary of such rather heterogeneous information.
Theoretically, the character of this type of information is right, but
there have been doubts about its practical usefulness;
(b) Work is under way on economic, cultural and social functions of
forests through the FAO-supported International Forestry Resources and
Institutions (IFRI) research programme. IFRI is a global network of
collaborating research centres, in Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, India,
Mali, Nepal and Uganda, that focuses on the interactions between local
communities and the forest resources they use. Through the application of
a relational and multidisciplinary database, a selection of economic,
cultural and social variables is linked to the biophysical condition of
forest resources in selected sites at the local level where periodic
assessments are conducted to also observe the dynamics of change. The
prospect of combining this type of micro-level study with national and
regional studies is currently being explored by FAO;
(c) At the national level, one can find a few yearbooks of forest
statistics that give a wealth of information regarding economic, cultural
and social functions. Examples are accounts of objectives and tools in
forest policy, institutions and their role, research and education, legal
regulations, the structure of wood transport, production, consumption and
stocks of forest products, costs, prices, investments, profitability,
trade, employment, quantities of non-wood products, recreation and hunting.
It may be worth discussing whether the few cases where such rich
information is made available can be used at the supranational level.
There may, however, be no point in international aggregation, since it is
hardly conceivable that such broad information can ever be sufficiently
standardized for international comparison. However, there exists the
challenge of demonstrating to wider groups of countries the possibilities
for collecting and making available at the national level broad information
related to the various functions of forests. In this context, it may be
meaningful to use the examples as case-studies.
B. Data acquisition mechanisms
1. General
39. Kotka III proposed, for the global framework of FRA 2000, a
considerable increase of data content, compared with that of FRA 90.
Comparability of information between countries and regions should be
improved and gaps and inconsistencies in the information be
removed/reduced. To make such broadening and improvements possible, it
recommended that mechanisms for data acquisition and analysis that had been
previously used in some part of the world should be used worldwide. To
follow these recommendations implies a major challenge for the two
secretariats involved in FRA, as will be outlined below.
40. Some specific obstacles to data acquisition for global studies were
noted, and are given below:
(a) The plans for FRA 2000 and beyond imply a move away from a
centralized approach to considerably greater involvement of countries.
This process will not come of itself. Countries are sovereign and have
priorities other than reporting information to international forest
assessment activities. A condition for successful international data
exchange is that the information be useful for the network of participating
countries. Even forest inventory for merely national or subnational
purposes often has low priority. For these reasons much labour-intensive
support is required to initiate and sustain country involvement. Capacity-
building will be part of the effort, but will produce results only in the
long run;
(b) Time and equipment for collection and exchange of data must be
available, as well as funding of travel to, for example, subregional
workshops and exchange of experience. The mere lack of a computer with
e-mail connection can be the limiting factor.
2. ECE/FAO secretariat in Geneva
41. This secretariat has the mandate to carry out periodic forest
resources assessments for the industrialized countries. The linkage with
ECE renders possible the involvement in the FRA process of Belarus, the
Russian Federation and Ukraine, which are States Members of the United
Nations, but not of FAO. To fulfil its mandate, ECE/FAO uses a
questionnaire and a network of country correspondents. The European Forest
Institute has helped by incorporating data into a database. Neither
remote-sensing nor GIS facilities and experience are available at the
secretariat. The professional staff resources available for FRA correspond
to half-time of one person. The traditional approach to funding ECE/FAO
work on temperate and boreal forest resource assessment has been a
cooperative approach in which member countries and certain organizations
have provided major contributions, mostly in kind, and a very small
secretariat team has played a coordinating and assembling role with a
limited amount of analytical and validation work; this is a natural and
justified approach in a region where most counties have rather well-
developed forest inventory capacity. However, in view of the new
challenges it is not sufficient anymore. The global framework for FRA 2000
which was agreed upon at Kotka III, as well as the regional framework for
the industrialized countries, requires new data acquisition tools, a much
intensified interaction between secretariat and national correspondents,
and the development of new partnership arrangements.
42. The proposals for FRA 2000 imply that multisource data analysis with
the help of GIS is a necessity. Sampling of high resolution satellite
data, according to Kotka III, "should be evaluated". If introduced, a
fully staffed remote-sensing and GIS laboratory is required. A
facilitating factor is that techniques and equipment that have been tested
and have proved useful for the developing countries, are available in the
Rome secretariat.
43. The proposals necessitate a considerably enhanced interaction between
secretariat and country correspondents in order to avoid gaps and
inconsistencies. A new activity requiring particularly intensive
cooperation will be adjustment of country data to common standards. It has
been noted that, in FRA 90, such adjustment has been made by a few
countries only.
44. At the level of the ECE/FAO secretariat, the following obstacles have
to be considered:
(a) Preparation of an ecofloristic zone map and a vegetation map for
the industrialized countries. It is envisaged that the maps can be derived
from the Global Land Cover Characteristics Database (GLCCD) which is
expected to be completed by the Earth Resources Observation System (EROS)
Data Center by the end of 1997;
(b) Georeferencing: multisource data analysis with the help of GIS
requires that the statistical data on forests provided by countries become
georeferenced. Such georeferencing is possible, based on the
above-mentioned or other existing vegetation maps, but the work requires
staff resources;
(c) Funding of all activities including coordination and
administration of the network of country correspondents and of partnership
arrangements;
(d) National sensitivity towards providing data, in particular
unofficial data and expert estimates;
(e) National sensitivity towards the adjustment of country data to
common standards;
(f) Funding: two experienced full-time persons and one assistant
with computer skills may be required as a coordinating nucleus. This
assumes that remote-sensing and GIS activities are funded separately;
(g) Training of staff for communication with country correspondents
and offices and with cooperating partners.
3. FAO secretariat in Rome
45. This secretariat is charged with periodic forest resources assessments
for the developing countries and with a global synthesis. It has developed
and implemented a two-pronged approach for FRA 90. One approach was based
on the analysis of existing reliable country reports and the other on
sampling of high resolution satellite data. A network of cooperating
institutions and individuals has been used extensively and has played a
decisive role in all phases of the assessment. Where it has been possible
to combine global assessment with country capacity-building, this has been
beneficial to both activities.
46. Secretariat activities are funded from two sources, the Regular
Programme of FAO and external funds in the form of a multi-donor Trust
Fund. In recent years, FAO has made efforts to increase the Regular
Programme contribution and the number of professional staff, despite severe
budget restrictions. Despite these efforts the staffing still falls short
of what is needed. Therefore, major parts of the assessment will continue
to depend on external funding which is by its nature uncertain, variable in
size and short-term.
47. Obstacles to consider:
(a) A number of the new parameters require a new kind of interaction
with countries. Examples are information on non-wood goods and services
and state and change with regard to the degree of human intervention in
forests and to the availability of forests for wood supply. Ways have to
be found to demonstrate the usefulness of these data for the countries
themselves. A new type of interaction with countries will be needed to
retrieve such information, and combination with capacity-building is likely
to be valuable in this context;
(b) Preparation of an ecofloristic zone map outside the tropical belt
and of a vegetation map for all developing countries is the same obstacle
as that identified above for the ECE/FAO secretariat;
(c) It has been shown that interaction with a network of cooperating
institutions and individuals has played an important role in FRA 90. With
the new information requirements, a considerably greater number of such
interactions will be needed.
C. Resource requirements
48. The proposed global framework for FRA 2000 contains many novel
features that require, above all, an intensification and extension to new
regions of data acquisition tools already tested. It is not possible at
this time to "present the bill" for the proposed broadening of FRA. A plan
to be developed in the latter part of 1996 will serve as the basis for
this. However, some major budget items are evident:
(a) Interaction with countries must be significantly intensified;
(b) Partnership arrangements must be made for the execution of
specific tasks;
(c) Secretariats need to follow more intensively related activities
in data collection, data analysis, data dissemination and research, and to
integrate them into FRA;
(d) Use of remote sensing and GIS should be expanded to new regions.
49. Item (a) calls for particular attention. A communication capacity is
required that exceeds by far that of the present ECE/FAO and FAO
secretariats. FAO support staff will need to visit the major forested
countries for direct interaction with national offices and project staff,
and national correspondents will need to travel to workshops and meetings.
A particular challenge is the fact that practically all countries must be
reached, including those where communication facilities pose serious
problems. A communication task of such dimensions cannot possibly be
handled centrally. Decentralization to regional offices and to subregional
actors is called for.
50. With regard to item (b), it must be understood that partnership
arrangements and consultancies require solid preparation and monitoring by
a competent secretariat as well as follow-up work to integrate the results.
51. Item (c) requires monitoring of activities and scientific
publications, as well as maintaining of contacts beyond what is possible
with present staffing.
52. Options should be investigated for the realization of item (d). In
any case, it appears inadvisable to build up a new remote-sensing and GIS
laboratory at ECE/FAO, Geneva.
53. In conclusion, it already appears necessary, before a detailed plan is
in hand, to increase the size of the coordinating FRA nucleus by several
full-time professionals and support staff so as to make use of existing
opportunities of collaboration with countries and with scientific
institutions. Young professional officers should be placed in the regional
offices of FAO and equipped with travel funds (as was already practised on
a small scale in FRA 90).
54. At the time of writing, the work needed for FRA 2000 is largely
unfunded. US$ 3.2 million has been pledged by three donor countries for
capacity-building and for its coordination. One donor has provided
US$ 0.75 million for cooperation on methodology development for the remote-
sensing component. Two associate professional officers have been provided
for headquarters activities. FAO and the ECE are giving priority to these
activities within their regular programmes but, in their present difficult
budget situation, together cannot fund more than US$ 0.6 million per year.
Major resource mobilization efforts are therefore needed to secure funding
for most of the activities of the global forest resources assessment
programme.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR ACTION
55. Since the time of the first United Nations Conference on the Human
Environment in Stockholm in 1972, demands on national, regional and global
forest resources assessments have increased continuously. Their scope has
grown to cover the environmental functions of forests with implications for
inventory techniques and cross-sectoral approaches. Economic, social and
cultural factors are closely linked to this. In the context of sustainable
development and global change studies, systematic observations over time
have gained importance, leading to a new focus on change estimation in the
assessment activities of many actors, for example, in the global FRA of
1980. In more recent years an increased interest has been noted in true
global issues such as the carbon budget and biological diversity, leading
to demands for a globally integrated picture of relevant parameters.
56. These developments have had fundamental consequences for the
scientific, technical and administrative complexity of forest resources
assessments at all levels. A move can be noted from pure tables to
organized information systems and within this to geographical information
systems with their new potential to integrate information from different
sources. Finally, there is an increased interest in process monitoring,
for example, in the form of change matrices showing the direction of
changes taking place. To cope with these developments, the volume of
dialogue and communication is expanding into new dimensions not experienced
before. It may also be noted that consistency and continuity of assessment
have implications for continuity of institutions at the national and global
levels. It is in the context described above that the following proposals
for action should be seen.
57. The attention of the Panel is drawn to the need to address the medium-
and long-term issues related to the assessment of the multiple benefits of
all types of forests, as well as to the need for immediate action required
for the implementation of FRA 2000.
58. Resource mobilization. An ever-increasing global interest in forest
resources assessment is noted. This has resulted in a considerable
broadening of the scope of FRA 2000, with consequent cost implications. It
also implies that many potential cooperating partners show an interest in
contributing to the assessment process. What can be achieved by the FRA in
cooperation with other partners depends to a large extent on the resources
that can be mobilized for this purpose.
Proposal for action: The Panel may wish to bring the funding question
to the attention of the user community and of countries. This can be
initiated before more detailed cost estimates have been made. FAO
will, in the latter part of 1996, prepare a plan for FRA 2000 that
specifies (a) work to be done, (b) the work process including
opportunities for partnership arrangements, and (c) resource needs.
It will also develop options for various funding levels and
demonstrate what can be achieved at these levels. Moreover, it should
consider the question of institutional memory, which is linked with
the duration of funding.
59. Capacity-building. The key role of capacity-building is confirmed and
so is the need to focus on strengthening the capability at the national
level to develop national policies and strategies for the sustainable
management of forests and related resources. A network of regional (or
subregional) lead centres should be established that will play a key role
in country capacity-building.
Proposal for action: Capacity-building in forest inventory should
ensure:
(a) Integration of efforts into a well-adapted institutional
framework and proper interaction with the user community, in
particular at the policy-making level;
(b) A Regular Programme responsibility for guiding and
supporting country capacity-building to be established at FAO
headquarters;
(c) Additional resources to be obtained for long-term capacity-
building activities in countries such as global and regional support
networks, workshops and training courses;
(d) That, in a situation with insufficient funding, the
provision of core data of high quality is given priority over
assessing the largest possible number of requested information
elements. In this context, core information is understood to be
concerned with the state and change of forest cover worldwide,
including destination of change and biomass estimation. Next in
priority would be to show information within ecofloristic zones and to
distinguish between forests available and those not available for wood
production. "High quality" would mean "complete" (no gaps),
"comparable" (between countries and regions) and "reliable"
(inter alia, verified and adapted to common definitions).
60. Access to information. While there is general acceptance of
transparency and accessibility as desirable characteristics of forest
inventory, experience has demonstrated is that a number of countries treat
the findings of national forest inventories as confidential information
that is to be accessible to government users only.
Proposal for action: Raise awareness about the usefulness of making
forest resources information widely available, and encourage,
inter alia:
(a) Countries to contribute to periodic forest resources
assessments by (i) nominating a focal point for cooperation with the
FRA secretariats and (ii) providing, on a continuing basis, the
information needed for the regional and global forest resources
assessments, irrespective of whether it originates from official or
unofficial (expert estimates) sources;
(b) FRA secretariats to derive, from the data received,
standardized information in a transparent process and in cooperation
with the reporting countries;
(c) FRA secretariats to make source data as well as derived data
accessible to countries and the user community at large, thus
facilitating the widest possible use of available information.
61. Usefulness of international data collection at the national level.
International data collection will be facilitated if the usefulness of the
information is appreciated by the reporting countries. That time and
equipment for data collection are available must also be ensured.
Proposal for action: Assistance should be provided to national
offices in organizing existing information for national planning and
decision-making purposes. For example, this may include, as a
catalytic factor, installation of computers with an e-mail connection.
62. Uses and users. It appears that assessment data are not frequently
used directly in political decision-making. More commonly, this political
level is reached in an indirect way. The "intermediates" may be studies
targeted towards political issues such as analyses of the consequences of
strategies, sector outlook studies and carbon budget studies. Other
intermediates are the scientific community, directly or through the media,
and non-governmental organizations that use FRA data to make their point.
Proposal for action: While keeping in mind the information needs at
the decision-making level, the new line to be followed would give more
weight to providing a base of well-documented and accessible source
data with good references to other sources. This would include making
statistical and georeferenced databases accessible to users, and would
also imply increased attention to keeping a reference library of
national reports.
63. Regionalization. Intensive dialogue and communication are among the
essential tools for FRA, and virtually all countries of the world must
become involved. A number of factors make it necessary to decentralize the
communication task to regional offices and subregional actors, as indicated
below:
(a) The mere volume makes the work unmanageable for one or two
central secretariats;
(b) Knowledge of institutions, persons and physical conditions are
important for the success of the dialogue;
(c) For national collaborators, travel to a neighbouring country is
often simple to arrange, while travel to FAO headquarters or even to a FAO
regional office often creates unsurmountable difficulties;
(d) Communication via e-mail and telefax is unavailable or most
unreliable in significant parts of the world.
Proposal for action: Ongoing subregional and national activities
should be used as a basis for exchange of information and technical
experience as well as adaptation of national information formats to
common standards. Young professional officers should be placed in FAO
regional offices to facilitate the process. There is already some
experience of such arrangements.
64. Production of ecofloristic zone and vegetation maps. These map types
have been found essential for the process of FRA 2000. The Global Land
Cover Characteristics Database (GLCCD) being produced at the EROS Data
Center in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, United States, has been identified as
a suitable basis from which to develop such maps. Specifications for the
vegetation map are in place.
Proposal for action: Ecofloristic zones for new regions need to be
specified. A mapping team should be placed at the EROS Data Center to
develop the maps for different regions of the world from GLCCD.
65. Data interpretation and dissemination. Three types of action are
called for:
(a) Special attention should be given to those countries and
interested parties that have difficulties in accessing internationally
available information;
(b) Secretariats should "raise the political and media profile" so as
to increase the impact of the information collected;
(c) Source as well as processed data should be made accessible to the
various potential users in the least aggregated form possible.
Proposal for action: Professional information staff should be
involved with the FRA team to deal with ordinary information services
and with the three types of action identified.
66. Issues not well covered. The global framework proposed for FRA 2000
implies a broadening into new types of information. Yet much requested
information is not included. Examples are the quality of forest management
and the social and cultural functions of forests. Reasons for this may be
that information that is not available in countries cannot be assessed
globally (unless it can be detected by remote sensing) and that suitable
mechanisms and methods are conceivable but have not yet been developed. In
spite of these limitations, some progress is possible in certain cases
through the use of special studies. Such studies can shed light on a topic
although the information produced does not cover all countries and is not
necessarily fully compatible with the core data.
Proposal for action: There is a need for identifying suitable topics
for special studies and specifying those studies, as well as for
advertising such a need.
Notes
1/ See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1995,
Supplement No. 12 (E/1995/32), chap. I, sect. D, annex I, sect. III.
2/ 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.
3/ Ibid., annex II.
4/ See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1995,
Supplement No. 12 (E/1995/32), chap. I, sect. D, annex I, sect. III.
5/ A/AC.237/18 (part II)/Add.1 and Corr.1, annex I.
-----
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