| United Nations | E/CN.17/IPF/1996/8 |
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
9 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.1: Progress in national forest
and land-use plans
Report of the Secretary-General
SUMMARY
As requested by the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests at its
first session (see E/CN.17/IPF/1995/3, para. 11), the present report has been
prepared for initial discussion of element I.1 of the programme of work of the
Panel, "Progress in national forest and land-use plans". The report contains
a general overview of programme element I.1; describes the planning context
for national forestry programmes; reviews the achievements and lessons
learned; mentions the activities planned in preparation for substantive
discussion at the third session of the Panel; makes suggestions for discussion
of programme element I.1 at the second session; and provides alternatives for
action and suggested items for discussion by the Panel, including a list of 12
basic features of national forestry programmes, which is contained in the
annex.
Within the context of sustainable development and environmental
conservation, trees, forests and forestry have been ascribed a renewed and
enhanced role. In most countries, forestry is undergoing radical and complex
changes, including:
(a) Balancing increasing and more diversified demands on forest lands
and resources with the need to conserve forest ecosystems;
(b) Integrating all stakeholders, including local communities,
community-based organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private
sector in the decision-making process and in implementation;
(c) Adapting to a new balance between the roles of government
institutions and the private sector, and of central versus regional and local
institutions;
(d) Participating actively in the resolution of cross-sectoral issues,
particularly issues affecting land use, poverty, food security, energy needs
and environmental protection.
Significant progress has been made during the last five years at the
planning and policy levels. However, strategies must often undergo a
prolonged sequence of activities: first diagnosis, then planning, finally
implementation. Indeed, in many cases implementation has not yet started or
is failing, so that forest-sector activities continue as before on
unsustainable paths.
In developing countries, sectoral planning in forestry began nearly
three decades ago. It was initiated with external assistance to help national
planning authorities to assess forestry conditions and formulate long-term
strategies, primarily in relation to forest industries. Since the 1960s, the
scope of forestry-sector planning has greatly expanded, as mentioned above.
One of the strongest justifications for long-term sectoral planning was that
it was a way to establish a basis for reforming forest policies. Forestry is
currently addressed in several sectoral-level planning frameworks that have
international backing.
At present, 54 developing countries are implementing national forestry
programmes, and another 26 countries are engaged in planning processes. In
addition, three Mediterranean countries and three countries from Eastern
Europe are starting planning processes.
The analysis of the situation in the different countries embarked on
national forestry programme processes shows that much progress has been made
in many countries in the areas of new forestry policies; new legislation;
institutional reorganization; redefinition of the role of the State;
decentralization of forest-management responsibilities; transfer of
responsibility to communities and local groups; transparency of debates and
participation in the decision-making process; and coordination and
harmonization of actions within coherent, holistic and intersectoral strategic
frameworks.
The viability of these national forestry programmes is based on the
capacity of countries to commit themselves to policy and institutional reform,
as well as on the capacity of the international community to respond fully and
in a coordinated manner to their request for external assistance. The most
important objective of sector planning is to facilitate a national discussion
on the desired directions for change. Reaching consensus may take two or
three years, but the consultative and acceptance processes are at least as
essential as the technical analysis process: if planning is conducted by
external consultants in a manner not conducive to a continuing process,
national forestry programmes stand little chance of being implemented.
Concerning policy reform and intersectoral coordination, two key
constraints have been identified:
(a) Slow pace of policy and institutional reforms within the sector:
in many countries, the lack of progress and transparency of policy and
institutional reform processes has become the most important constraint to the
implementation of forestry-sector plans and programmes.
(b) Lack of intersectoral coordination: policies and policy
instruments related to land-use planning and land husbandry are still not
coordinated and working towards the common goal of sustainable development.
Effective high-level mechanisms for intersectoral coordination are more the
exception than the rule.
In industrialized countries, perspectives on forests and the perception
of their importance in urbanized societies are changing rapidly and may clash
with traditional forestry cultures. Competing ideas about the question "Trees
and forests, for whom and for what?" have greatly increased in both variety
and intensity. An increasing number of individuals and institutions contend
that the historical primacy of timber production for industries must be
replaced by a new forestry guided by ecologically sustainable development.
Planning is further complicated in countries attempting to make the
transition to a new agenda in forestry. The components of this transition can
be defined in a number of different ways but usually include enhanced efforts
in the following areas: (a) environmental management and social forestry,
(b) facilitation rather than control, (c) decentralized and participatory
management, and (d) greater attention to markets and prices. The extent to
which these emphases are actually internalized in forestry agencies is an open
question.
CONTENTS
Paragraphs
Page
INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1 - 7 5
I. THE PLANNING CONTEXT ................................. 8 - 10 6
A. Forestry planning since the 1790s ................ 8 - 9 6
B. Definitions and types of planning ................ 10 7
II. STRATEGIC PLANNING PERFORMANCE: OBSERVATIONS AND
LESSONS .............................................. 11 - 40 8
A. Forestry sector planning in developing countries . 12 - 30 8
1. Planning frameworks .......................... 12 - 15 8
2. Actual situation of national planning
processes .................................... 16 - 17 11
3. Achievements ................................. 18 - 22 13
4. Constraints and weaknesses ................... 23 - 30 13
B. Forestry planning in industrialized countries .... 31 - 34 16
C. Lessons learned .................................. 35 - 40 18
1. Key features for planning .................... 35 18
2. Institutional issues ......................... 36 - 38 19
3. Policy environments .......................... 39 - 40 21
III. PREPARATION FOR SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION ............... 41 - 42 23
IV. ALTERNATIVES FOR ACTION AND ITEMS SUGGESTED FOR
DISCUSSION BY THE PANEL .............................. 43 - 45 23
Tables
1. Perspectives on forests and forestry in the 1790s and 1990s ...... 7
2. Status of national forestry programmes processes in developing
countries and countries in transition, by region, 1996 ........... 12
3. Difficulties encountered in planning the national forests of
developed countries .............................................. 17
Annex. List of 12 basic features of national forestry programmes ...... 25
INTRODUCTION
1. Element I.1 of the programme of work of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental
Panel on Forests is guided by the decisions taken by the Commission on
Sustainable Development at its third session and further elaborated by the
Panel at its first session.
2. The Commission defined programme element I.1 as a need to consider
actions to promote progress in implementing the Non-legally Binding
Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the
Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forest
(Forest Principles), 1/ as well as chapter 11 and other forest-related
chapters of Agenda 21, 2/ by means of national forest and land-use plans and
programmes in an open, transparent and participatory process involving
Governments and all interested parties, including major groups, particularly
indigenous people and local communities.
3. At its first session, the Panel emphasized that preparatory work on
programme element I.1 should be based on the provisions of the Forest
Principles, and would benefit from consideration of regional initiatives and
regional dimensions. Such work should include the preparation of a report on
all types of forests, reviewing current approaches to national strategies and
noting links between national forest plans and sustainable development
strategies/plans, land-use plans, including ecosystems management, and
sectoral plans; the report should also contain a synthesis of lessons learned,
including lessons learned from participatory forest management approaches at
the national and field levels. Preparatory work should also include a report
assessing progress made in implementing national forest and integrated land-
use plans; should identify gaps in need of further attention; and should focus
on improved cooperation and implementation by national Governments of
bilateral and multilateral forest-related planning activities and programmes,
and on the use of national-level participatory approaches to that end. The
Panel decided to schedule programme element I.1 for initial discussion at the
current session and substantive discussion at the third session, in September
1996.
4. The present report was prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations (FAO), as lead agency for programme element I.1, in
consultation with the secretariat of the Panel in the Division for Sustainable
Development, Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development of
the United Nations Secretariat. Contributions were also received from the
Global Forestry Policy Project, the International Academy of Environment, the
International Centre for Forestry Research (CIFOR), the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), the Deutsche Gesellschaft fu"r Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), the Ministry of Cooperation of the Government of France
and the World Bank. Other major sources of information included North
Carolina State University, the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), the International Institute for
Environment and Development (IIED), the World Resources Institute (WRI), the
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the Asian Development Bank.
5. In the present report, the words "forest" and "forestry" are used in
their broadest sense. The term "forest" encompasses all components of the
forest ecosystem, including woodlots and trees in rural environments. The
term "forestry" refers to all forest and forest-related activities, including
everything to do with the growing, harvesting and processing of forest
vegetation, whether for wood (including fuelwood) or non-wood products, as
well as forest ecosystems management, the conservation of flora and fauna
found in the forests, the protection of forests, landscapes and heritage site,
watershed management, soil conservation, forest-based tourism and national
parks. Forestry is concerned with human beings, especially people living in
and around forests; therefore "forestry planning" and "national forestry
programmes/plans" are used here to denote not only the forests themselves but
also people concerned with forests and their activities.
6. The Convention on Biological Diversity, 3/ the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1 and Corr.1,
annex I), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in those
Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in
Africa (A/49/84/Add.2, annex, appendix II) and the Forest Principles, as well
as current initiatives for the formulation of criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management, all focus on an increased and expanded role for
forestry and emphasize the need for improved planning in forestry.
7. The present report analyses the planning context, planning performance
and strategic planning proposals for injecting new vitality into the
implementation process and accelerating progress. Although its subject
concerns all countries of the world, the report provides more information on
the developing countries than on the countries in transition and the developed
countries; an ongoing survey and analysis will correct this deficiency in the
next report to the Panel on programme element I.1.
I. THE PLANNING CONTEXT
A. Forestry planning since the 1790s
8. Strategic planning in forestry is not a new concept. For several
hundred years, States and communities have elaborated policies, legislation
and strategies in order to control the utilization of the products of forest
lands, protect existing forests and restore degraded ones. Many such
strategies failed because they were overcome by larger events, such as war,
colonization, revolution and land reform.
9. The development of modern planned forestry practices in Western Europe
can be traced to the late 1700s, a time of rapid population growth, expanding
urbanization, explosive scientific discovery and increasing confidence in
mankind's ability to master nature. The scope of forestry-sector planning in
the industrial world has expanded gradually to embrace deforestation, the loss
of biodiversity, food security, the inability of national forestry
administrations to enforce laws and regulations, and institutional
contradictions across sectors and strategies. Forestry planning in developing
countries has evolved very rapidly to confront the same issues; the
perspectives presented in table 1 are common to poor and rich countries alike,
despite their vastly different situations.
Table 1. Perspectives on forests and forestry
in the 1790s and 1990s
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1790s 1990s
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodities for industrial Naturalness is scarce after two
development are scarce centuries of industrial development
Forest outputs are timber, game, Outputs are many, including complex
fuelwood, and water ecosystem services and
psychophysiological values
Viewpoint: the natural world can be Viewpoint: our profound impacts on
managed and controlled the natural world are beyond
understanding and control
Forest-dependent communities are Communities are variously local,
local villages and farms regional, national, and global
Management aims to produce commodities Management aims to adapt to
changing circumstances and
to preserve future options
Management seeks to sustain harvest Management seeks to sustain the
yields holistic status and health of
the forest as a complex ecosystem
Laissez-faire: property owners do as Authorities impose increasing
they like with their forests and land restrictions on property rights
in the interest of serving the
public good
Foresters have faith in the promise Foresters apply science and
of science and technology to technology, but does it rationalize
rationalize forestry practices practices?
The forester is an expert and a The "public" is the decision-maker
decision-maker. through democratic processes; the
forester is a technical advisor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: J. G. Laarman, "Forestry planning: new challenges after two
centuries", paper presented at a workshop on forestry-sector planning
(Anchorage, Alaska, 18-22 September 1994); the workshop was jointly organized
by FAO and the Canadian Forestry Service.
B. Definitions and types of planning
10. In broad terms, planning in forestry should (a) facilitate the
articulation of attitudes, values and expectations regarding forestry in the
broadest sense; (b) raise questions about the information required to protect
and manage trees and forests; (c) define strategies to resolve conflicts or
potential conflicts in forest use; and (d) specify the inputs and resources
needed by programmes to move in the directions indicated by planning. Forest-
sector, land-use and forest-management planning may be described as follows:
(a) Forestry-sector planning covers all the linkages between a country's
forests (or total tree cover) and the aggregate of its human institutions.
The forestry sector is defined in relation to owners, managers and users of
trees and forests. Context is critical, because the boundaries of forest
ownership, management, and use vary from local to global. Sectoral planning
in forestry considers the different ways in which owners, managers and users
will gain or lose under alternative options for forest protection and
management;
(b) Land-use planning deals with the nature and value of land, and how
the latter determine its suitability for different purposes. Land-use
planning occurs at different levels and scales, from continental to local.
Planning indicates the advantages and disadvantages of imposing a specific use
on a particular unit of land from physical, economic and social standpoints;
(c) Forest-management planning aims to identify and choose among
alternative production and use combinations for specific forest units and
aggregations, which are defined by physical, legal or ecosystem boundaries.
The planning scope is defined by the resources and decision authority under
the control of the manager, which can be an individual or an entire
organization, depending on the context.
II. STRATEGIC PLANNING PERFORMANCE: OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS
11. The earliest forestry planning in the 1700s was largely a technical
exercise of estimating forest growth rates and computing allowable cuts.
Today's context is totally different, encompassing not only alternative
production possibilities but also implications for social welfare; two key
priorities are public participation and sustainability. The success of
forestry planning in meeting the contemporary demands placed on it is
considered here in two different contexts: (a) sector planning in developing
countries; and (b) forest-management planning in industrialized countries.
A. Forestry sector planning in developing countries
1. Planning frameworks
12. In developing countries, sectoral planning in forestry began nearly
three decades ago. It was initiated with external assistance to help national
planning authorities assess forestry conditions and formulate long-term
strategies, primarily in relation to forest industries. Since the 1960s, the
scope of forestry-sector planning has greatly expanded, as mentioned above.
One of the strongest justifications for long-term sectoral planning was that
it was a way to establish a basis for reforming forest policies. At present,
forestry is addressed in several sectoral-level planning frameworks that have
international backing, as follows:
(a) Master plans for forestry development (MPFD): they date from the
Finnish experience in the 1960s, followed by similar planning experience in
Chile, Nigeria and other countries in the 1970s. The early MPFDs were
industrial in outlook. Recent master planning in Asian countries has
attempted to become broader in scope and philosophy. In 1992, there was
agreement at a national forestry action programmes (NFAP)/MPFD coordinator
meeting in Indonesia that MPFDs and NFAPs would follow the same principles and
operational guidelines;
(b) Tropical Forests Action Plan (Programme) (TFAP): launched in 1985,
the initial goal of TFAP was to curb tropical deforestation while meeting
local and national forest-related needs. Since its revision in 1991, TFAP has
become essentially a framework for strategic planning in forestry through the
launching of NFAPs, as well as an entry point for raising awareness on forest-
related issues, preparing or updating forest policies, preparing specific
action programmes and projects, and stimulating financial and political
support to implement such initiatives;
(c) World Bank forestry sector reviews (FSRs): like the MPFD approach
in the 1970s, FSRs were considered part of TFAP from 1985 to 1990. Today they
are often integrated into rural development strategies;
(d) National environmental action plans (NEAPs): introduced in 1987 by
the World Bank, NEAPs focus mainly on least developed countries. The scope of
NEAPs covers all environmental issues in addition to forests and forestry.
The intent is to lay out a comprehensive strategy to deal with environmental
management and provide a specific plan for action. NEAPs do not generally
include all aspects of forestry;
(e) Other planning frameworks: first proposed in 1980, national
conservation strategies have been put forward through the joint efforts of
UCN, WWP and UNDP. UNCED also called for the preparation of national
sustainable development strategies.
13. These planning exercises are often pursued separately, although they
have much in common: each emphasizes the integration of sectoral planning
with national-level planning; each aims to strengthen legal systems and
institutions as a requirement for improved policy-making; each promotes
multisectoral and multidisciplinary planning to better formulate coordinated
programmes and projects; each advocates the use of planning as a means of
building national consensus on broad goals and programme directions; and
finally, each stresses public and non-governmental organizations'
participation in the planning process. The differences that remain are mainly
differences of scope and institutional composition.
14. The presence of multiple planning frameworks raises questions about
achieving planning coordination. The ideal is complementarity; as stated in
one of the NFAP operating principles, by complementing and reinforcing
existing and planned national and international initiatives, NFAPs will
contribute to effective, comprehensive and coordinated action.
15. Many Governments, however, have started different planning frameworks
for the environment and natural resources at different times or
simultaneously. Multiple frameworks generate confusion at both political and
administrative levels about which frameworks prevail over others; often
compete for the small pool of highly qualified national personnel available to
direct and implement the planning exercises; and raise expectations about
sectoral planning that are not achievable except through persistent commitment
at the national and international levels.
***************************
Box 1. National forestry planning processes
Many names are utilized to designate national forestry processes, such as
"forestry master plan", "national forestry action programme or plan",
"national forestry development plan", "forestry agenda" and "forestry
programme framework". In addition, multisectoral strategies for environment
and strategies for natural resources management have promoted "national
conservation strategies", "national environmental action plans", "green
plans", "national natural resources management programmes", "programmes de
gestion des terroirs villageois", "national plans to combat desertification"
and "integrated Conservation and development Programmes". All these
multisectoral strategies include some but generally not all forestry
components.
The many frameworks supported by international governmental or
non-governmental organizations create confusion and overlap, waste energy and
money, and often do not improve institutional conflicts at either the national
or international levels.
Curtailing this proliferation of planning frameworks should be one of the
main objectives of the international community. Although it is the
responsibility of each country to integrate all plans and programmes in one
unified national plan/programme, it is also the obligation of the
international community to coordinate efforts rather than follow its own
objectives and priorities without consultation and collaboration. Several
developing countries have recently succeeded in integrating or internalizing
all such plans and programmes; this type of evolution must be encouraged and a
national forestry programme suited to the needs of each country must be
promoted and supported.
***************************
***************************
Box 2. Improving planning frameworks
The shortcomings of some planning efforts are well known. Many national
strategies, plans and programmes have been prepared by foreign consultants
with minimal national participation. One of the main early criticisms of TFAP
concerned the insufficient participation of the people whose livelihoods
depend on forests, in particular indigenous people. Other criticisms include
the following:
(a) TFAP focused heavily on industrial utilization and plantation
development to the detriment of other objectives, such as the management of
protected areas;
(b) Its top-down approach failed to stimulate a consultative and
interactive dialogue on issues;
(c) It did not pay sufficient attention to the macroeconomic and
sectoral policies that contribute to deforestation and forest degradation.
These and related concerns have prompted adjustments to make planning
frameworks more country-driven and process-oriented, rather than donor-driven
and project-oriented. Other adjustments in goals and objectives include
increased emphasis on (a) participatory planning and implementation,
(b) multidisciplinary and multisectoral depth and breadth, (c) policy reforms
both inside and outside forestry sectors, (d) forest protection and
sustainability, (e) coordinating with other planning and policy initiatives,
and (f) strengthening the institutional setting in which forestry operates.
All these adjustments are well reflected in various recommended
principles and guidelines that have been developed by a wide range of
institutions, including FAO, UNDP, the World Bank, regional development banks,
IUCN, IIED and WRI.
***************************
2. Actual situation of national planning processes
16. The NFAP Update, published by the FAO Forestry Department, reports on
all national-level strategic planning processes for the forestry sector,
regardless of title or framework followed. The July 1995 issue covers
98 countries, including two from Eastern Europe and two from the
Mediterranean. NEAPs and other national conservation strategies are not
considered separately but are analysed in relation to forestry planning.
17. An overview of the progress made by these countries in the elaboration
and implementation of national forestry programmes is provided in table 2; it
should be noted that 15 of the countries implementing national forestry
programmes are now in the process of revising their initial programmes and
formulating revised action plans.
Table 2. Status of national forestry programmes processes in
developing countries and countries in transition,
by region, 1996
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of countries per region
-------------------------------------------------
Africa Asia and Latin Mediter- Eastern
Status in 1996 Pacific America/ ranean Europe
Caribbean countries and CIS a/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Formulated before UNCED:
in revision process 4 5 6 0 0
Formulated before UNCED:
in implementation 5 5 5 0 0
Formulated since UNCED:
in implementation 3 1 12 0 0
Formulated since UNCED:
ready to be implemented 4 3 1 0 0
Sub-total (formulated) 16 14 24 0 0
Planning process under
way 6 4 2 0 0
Planning process initial
stage 7 6 1 3 3
Sub-total (in planning
process) 13 10 3 3 3
Sub-total (process
ongoing) 29 24 27 3 3
Process stopped at
implementation phase b/ 4 0 3 0 0
Process stopped at
planning phase b/ 5 0 2 0 0
Sub-total (process
stopped) 9 0 5 0 0
Process not yet started 10 1 2 14 18
Total Countries 48 25 34 17 21
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
a/ Commonwealth of Independent States.
b/ Political instability and discontinuity, wars and local conflicts
are the major causes of the interruption of planning and implementation
processes.
3. Achievements
18. At present, 54 developing countries are implementing national forestry
programmes, and another 26 countries are engaged in planning processes. In
addition, 3 Mediterranean countries and 3 countries from Eastern Europe
and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) are starting planning
processes.
19. The analysis of the situation in the different countries embarked on
national forestry programme processes shows that much progress has been made
in many countries regarding new forestry policies; new legislation;
institutional reorganization; the redefinition of the role of the State; the
decentralization of forest-management responsibilities; the transfer of
responsibility to communities and local groups; the transparency of debates
and participation in the decision-making process; and the coordination and
harmonization of actions within coherent, holistic and intersectoral strategic
frameworks.
20. National forestry programmes have permitted countries to advance towards
medium and long-term planning in the forestry sector. Many countries have
identified the main forestry problems and their effects, as well as the
sector's opportunities and the constraints hindering its development, the main
actors and their responsibilities, and the options for the sector to
contribute to regional and national development.
21. In many countries, there have been positive effects on national
planning, such as the integration of forestry in national sustainable
development plans; the upgrading of forestry institutions; the creation of
environmental committees or commissions; the promulgation of laws
strengthening forest and environmental management; and the implementation of
important projects. There has also been some positive impact on the
mobilization of national and international financial resources for the sector
(see E/CN.17/IPF/1996/5).
22. The viability of these national forestry programmes is based on the
capacity of countries to commit themselves to policy and institutional
reforms, and the capacity of the international community to respond fully and
in a coordinated manner to their request for external assistance. The most
important objective of sector planning is to facilitate a national discussion
on the desired directions for change. Reaching consensus may take two or
three years, and the consultative and acceptance process are at least as
essential as the technical analysis. If planning is conducted by external
consultants in a manner not conducive to a continuing process, national
forestry programmes stand little chance of being implemented.
4. Constraints and weaknesses
23. The key constraints to the effective and efficient implementation of
national forestry programmes have been reviewed in several studies.
(a) Policy reform and intersectoral coordination
24. Two key constraints have been identified:
(a) Slow pace of policy and institutional reforms within the sector: in
many countries, the lack of progress and transparency in the policy and
institutional reform processes has become the most important constraint to the
implementation of forestry-sector plans and programmes;
(b) Lack of intersectoral coordination: policies and policy instruments
related to land-use planning and land husbandry are still not coordinated and
working towards the common goal of sustainable development. Effective
high-level mechanisms for intersectoral coordination are more the exception
than the rule (see box 3).
25. These constraints, which in many countries are becoming the biggest
hindrance to the effectiveness of forestry action plans and programmes,
including international financing, are symptoms of a more fundamental problem
that is often labelled a lack of political commitment, reflecting conflicts of
interest between various interest groups and between national and
international priorities. The sources of such constraints are essentially
political: land tenure and use is a divisive issue, related to regional,
ethnic, cultural and social conflicts of interest, among others. In addition,
the political realities of many countries, such as the need to balance the
budget or to satisfy the demands of certain key constituencies, make
Governments forgo long-term benefits for short-term gains, regardless of their
social and environmental consequences.
26. In many developing countries, forests are cleared to relieve the
demographic pressure on existing agricultural land. Deforestation is
therefore closely related to how the use of the national land resources of the
country is organized (see E/CN.17/IPF/1996/2). It is naive to believe that a
programme dealing with a marginal sector like forestry, often representing
only a few per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP), can have a major
impact on such macrolevel issues. The most effective policy measures related
to deforestation usually fall outside the forestry sector and concern
population and human development policies, land distribution and tenure,
industrial development, trade etc.
27. If a national forestry programme is to have an impact on the above-
mentioned constraints, it needs to be adopted as an important instrument at
the highest political level, and must be linked to a broader and higher-level
development planning exercise. Politicians must be involved in its
formulation; politically compelling arguments for forest conservation and
sustainable forestry development must be found; and a critical mass of well-
informed and motivated key decision makers committed to the plan or programme
must be created. Experience in many countries indicates that politicians are
receptive to such instruments, particularly in areas where concerns about the
environment and forests are becoming widely recognized. In addition, the role
of the media is essential in raising awareness.
***************************
Box 3. National forestry planning and national
land-use planning
Forests are only one among many options for the use of land. A dynamic
situation exists regarding the relative importance of land uses in the world.
In developing countries, 720 million hectares (ha) of land are under crops
(29 per cent of the total area suitable for agriculture); by the year 2010,
that figure is expected to increase to 850 million ha, a gain of
130 million ha, with much of the additional area to come from land now covered
with forests. In developed countries, the situation is the opposite. Efforts
are now under way (for example, in the European Union) to reduce agricultural
surpluses by releasing land from farming. Returning such land to forestry is
among the options being considered.
Sustainable forest management needs to be practised within the framework
of an effective land-use planning process that defines the place of trees and
forests in overall land use within a dynamic context.
The objective of chapter 10 of Agenda 21 is to facilitate the allocation
of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits, and to
promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land
resources. To that end, environmental, social and economic issues should be
considered, in particular the rights of individuals and groups, such as
indigenous people and women.
However, as previously stated in the report of the Secretary-General on
an integrated approach to the planning and management of land resources
(E/CN.17/1995/2), there is still a lack of sufficiently detailed information
on land resources at the national level. As a result, very few countries have
developed national land-use policies and plans, and there is still little
development of the procedures and institutional structures necessary to enable
integrated and logical action.
In the absence of national land-use policies and plans, each sector tries
to develop its own strategy, thus creating the greatest constraint to the
development of a more productive and sustainable use of land, which is
precisely this fragmented and sector-oriented approach to the matching of land
resources and human needs.
***************************
(b) Planning and implementation strategies
28. The major weaknesses in the planning and implementation of forestry
development at the national level include:
(a) Prevalence of top-down planning and implementation: despite a
common understanding that successful forestry interventions are demand-driven
(i.e., based on local problems, priorities, resources, knowledge and
traditions), too little has been achieved in making bottom-up planning and
implementation concepts operational. At the project level, grass-roots
participation is increasingly applied, but such experience has not been
effectively transferred to the national level;
(b) Lack of clearly defined priorities for implementation: many
forestry action plans and programmes remain long shopping lists of projects
without clearly defined priorities among or within the various development
programmes. Linkages between programmes and programme components are not
recognized;
(c) Lack of national capacity: national capacity for the planning and
implementation of forestry programmes is not adequate for the sustainability
of the proposed policy and institutional reforms and development programmes.
(c) Funding and coordination with and between donors
29. The funding and coordination of sources - private and public, domestic
and international - are obviously critical concepts for national forestry
programmes (for detailed consideration of these issues, see
E/CN.17/IPF/1996/5). Project funding often does not result in comprehensive
effective programmes and progress towards national development objectives.
The World Bank and other development banks have suggested adopting a broad
sectoral approach to investment funding. A sector investment programme would
be based on a sector strategy such as a national forestry programme. This
would help avoid shifting priorities, and would ensure mutual understanding of
objectives, commitments and responsibilities. It would also improve inter-
agency cooperation and coordination.
30. Based on the principles of the broad sector approach UNDP has developed
a concept of forest partnership agreements between a country and donor
community to coalesce national commitments and donor support for national
forestry programmes. Such programmes would focus on countries with a strong
national commitment to control deforestation, and would also target the
underlying causes of deforestation.
B. Forestry planning in industrialized countries
31. In industrialized countries, perspectives on forests and the perception
of their importance in urbanized societies are changing rapidly and may clash
with traditional forestry cultures. Competing ideas regarding the question
"Trees and forests, for whom and for what?" have greatly increased in both
variety and intensity. An increasing number of individuals and institutions
contend that the historical primacy of timber production for industries must
be replaced by a new forestry guided by ecologically sustainable development.
32. The proposed reform of forestry concepts gives priority to an ecosystems
approach, nature conservation, the maintenance of biodiversity and non-timber
amenities, and also raises questions about public control over private
forests. But although social perceptions about forests and forestry have been
changing rapidly, planning and practices on the part of forest owners,
including Governments, have been slower to adjust, which partly explains the
serious criticisms that now seem to paralyse various public forestry agencies.
Table 3. Difficulties encountered in planning the national
forests of developed countries
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Consequences
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Planning relies on a complex Forest plans are so technical that
computer model. opportunities for public participation
are limited. Only a few experts can
understand the technical trade-offs. The
planning model does not adequately
capture the aesthetic and spiritual
values often very important to citizens.
Planning compares alternative Key policy issues are omitted from the
output combinations but avoids planning framework.
discussing practices
(e.g., clear-cutting).
Plans are presented in long Reports frustrate attempts to understand
reports, bureaucratic language the substance of the issues.
and many large data tables.
Planners use passive and The approach omits wider conservation and
selective approaches to solicit environmental interests, which later
public participation (mainly of respond with criticisms.
local and regional commodity
interests).
Public participation is invited, This makes the plan vulnerable to
if at all, only at a late stage unanticipated objections when it is
in the planning process. finally released to the public.
Planning relies mainly on Outside interests develop their own
one-way communications; it vision of what forest plans should
does not seek interactive include without consulting with the
discussion. forest service.
Contentious issues are obscured Failure to explicitly recognize disputes
in plans in an attempt to avoid results in plans being contested in the
confrontation. courts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Same as table 1, adapted from C. V. Barber, N. C. Johnson and
E. Hafild, Breaking the Logjam: Obstacles to Forest Policy Reform in
Indonesia and the United States (Washington, D.C., World Resources Institute,
1994).
33. In principle, planning for publicly owned forests takes place in a
shared-power setting of different stakeholders who legitimately claim and
defend different interests. Planning is expected to mediate among these
diverse interests by choosing among different forest management options.
34. However, current planning frameworks do not necessarily achieve this.
The cases of national forests in the United States of America and in France
are instructive, because they illustrate that forest management plans may be
sharply criticized even after substantial technical/scientific efforts have
been devoted to planning. As indicated in table 3, such problems are mainly
institutional in nature. Planning may produce results that are not
transparent to the public or even to foresters; the situation may be further
exacerbated by the release of written plans that are long, complex and
difficult to understand.
C. Lessons learned
1. Key features for planning
35. The preceding performance review in two different contexts of forestry
planning suggests a number of lessons common to both developing and
industrialized countries, the most important being:
(a) Planning is vision: success in planning requires the establishment
of a shared vision of the future and the creation of the will and capacity to
move towards that vision;
(b) Planning is a participatory process: virtually all observers of the
subject believe that planning works best when it is participatory from
beginning to end. Interaction must be deliberately created and facilitated,
not left to chance (see box 4);
(c) Planning is about sociopolitical differences: it is less about
technical forestry alternatives than about how to lessen and accommodate
competing sociopolitical claims on forests;
(d) Planning begins with social and cultural values: such values, along
with the provision of basic needs, weigh heavily in what people think about
forests;
(e) Planning must be incremental and flexible: public participation,
shared communications and information feedback enable planners to periodically
redirect planning as realities change. Planning must be designed as an
exercise in learning;
(f) Planning relies on the centrality of process, the quality of
participation and the facilitation of the best possible relationships among
stakeholders;
(g) Tremendous capacity-building efforts will be necessary in developing
countries to achieve participatory planning through overcoming obstacles
related to communication, transportation, language and culture, and
institutional decrepitude.
2. Institutional issues
36. Because complexity and a certain amount of confrontational behaviour are
inevitable in forestry planning, the quality of the institutional environment
makes a substantial difference for planning success or failure. Equally
important is the quality of linkages with other units of government, the
general public and its special interests, and non-governmental organizations.
Many public forestry administrations struggle with inadequate institutional
capacity, often despite many years of faltering efforts to grow stronger.
37. Planning is further complicated in countries attempting to make the
transition to a new agenda in forestry. The components of this transition can
be defined in a number of different ways, but usually include enhanced efforts
to establish (a) environmental management and social forestry, (b)
facilitation rather than control, (c) decentralized and participatory
management, and (d) greater attention to markets and prices. The extent to
which such emphases are truly internalized in forestry agencies is an open
question. Progress towards implementing the new agenda depends on a number of
capacities:
(a) Capacity to visualize and propose forward-looking plans, policies
and strategies for forestry in national development programmes (i.e., planning
how to plan);
(b) Capacity to obtain and utilize a strong information base (statistics
and data) to support decision-making in the forestry sector;
(c) Capacity to obtain and utilize the participation of a variety of
clients (i.e., special interests) in setting agendas and policy-making;
(d) Capacity to coordinate with other governmental agencies in land-use
planning, development policy and other intersectoral questions;
(e) Capacity to develop and implement sound pricing policies, tax
policies, subsidies, credits and other economic instruments in forestry;
(f) Capacity to carry out activities at the regional and local levels,
such as activities related to personnel numbers and qualifications, management
structures, reporting and communications, and physical infrastructure;
(g) Capacity for budgeting, accounting and handling funds;
(h) Capacity to develop and utilize managerial experience;
(i) Capacity to positively affect public opinion about forestry policies
and programmes through news media, public relations departments and other
means.
***************************
Box 4. Strategic options for developing a full
representative and supportive role for
non-governmental organizations in
planning processes
Options are listed in order of a possible sequence in the development of
a planning process:
1. Independent capacity needs assessment/national inventory of
non-governmental organizations, with information on strengths,
weaknesses, problems, resources and perceived needs of each
organization.
2. Full disclosure of information, and development and implementation
of an information and communication strategy, based where possible
on a non-governmental organizations coalition.
3. Non-governmental organizations as people's representatives in the
steering committee and other formal institutional mechanisms.
4. National workshop(s) to develop a strategy for participation in the
planning process with the non-governmental organizations
represented.
5. Development of criteria for determining who should participate in
order to ensure that all interests are represented in the planning
process.
6. Rights and responsibilities of the non-governmental organizations-
Government relationship defined through consensus, and formalized
in writing and/or actions. Development of a procedure for
reconciling possible points of disagreement in the pursuit of
common goals.
7. Indicators of development, participation and capacity developed
with non-governmental organizations.
8. Preliminary issues paper identifying key information needs to
ensure participation, prepared with strong non-governmental
organization input.
9. Training in participatory techniques and approaches for national
non-governmental organizations.
10. Programme to strengthen non-governmental organizations, including
support for a national coalition, training opportunities and core
support for the organizations directly involved in assisting
participatory local studies, microplanning and participatory
evaluation.
11. Participatory local studies (stemming from the needs identified in
the issues paper, see option 8 above) facilitated by
non-governmental organizations.
12. Non-governmental organizations as people's representatives in round
table of donors discussing financial requirements.
13. Participatory environmental projects, developed and implemented by
local communities, facilitated by non-governmental organizations.
14. Microplanning of projects with involvement of local communities,
facilitated by non-governmental organizations.
15. Participatory evaluation of projects and regular review of the
planning process with non-governmental organizations.
***************************
38. Several variants of capacity-building along these lines are under way.
The drive and approach to augment these capacities must develop internally and
cannot be imposed from the top or outside. Marginalizing key players, such as
forestry agencies, can be counter-productive. Moreover, prospects for
transition to a new forestry agenda depend on a realistic assessment of the
starting-point. Planning cannot neglect the many small steps necessary for
genuine progress.
3. Policy environments
39. Forestry planning finds itself embroiled in volatile controversies over
the wide choice of available policy strategies. Traditionally, forestry has
relied heavily on command-and-control laws, regulations, and penalties; such
an approach does not correct problems but creates new ones. Free-market
strategies also fail, because forestry produces an abundance of non-market
goods, services and values.
40. If neither laissez-faire nor control approaches promote social welfare,
what are the alternatives? This question has not been adequately debated, and
requires far more discussion at all levels of forestry planning. Most
resource economists argue for a third path of economic incentives, but it is
not clear whether forestry planners and policy makers subscribe to this
doctrine. Command-and-control methods remain popular for reasons of
self-interest.
***************************
Box 5. National forestry planning and indigenous people
Chapter 26 of Agenda 21, "Recognizing and strengthening the role of
indigenous people and their communities", concentrates on the improvement,
protection and recognition of the rights of indigenous people, stating that
they should be involved at the national and local levels in resource
management and conservation strategies, such as those suggested in other
programme areas of Agenda 21 (para. 26.3 (c)).
The Forest Principles recognize the importance of this involvement for
all forest people, stating that Governments should promote and provide
opportunities for the participation of interested parties, including local
communities and indigenous people, in the development, implementation and
planning of national forest policies. They also state that appropriate
indigenous capacity and local knowledge regarding the conservation and
sustainable development of forests should be recognized, respected, recorded,
developed and, as appropriate, introduced in the implementation of programmes,
and that any the benefits should be equitably shared with them. Articles 8
and 10 of the Convention on Biological Diversity support this principle in
legal terms.
Until the beginning of the 1990s, very few planning processes promoted
the participation of indigenous people in policy programmes and projects
formulation. These people felt marginalized and ignored because their
political institutions were not recognized, and they suffered from the
development directed from above. During the last five years, some progress
has been observed, in particular due to the creation and action of national
and international alliances of indigenous people. In some cases, specific
action programmes have been developed by them. The following initiatives are
suggested:
(a) National forestry strategies should be developed with the full
participation of local and indigenous people in order to enhance
environmental, political, economic and social assessments, and proposals for
agrarian reform, and in order to secure the rights of indigenous and local
communities to their lands, resources and cultures;
(b) Responsible logging and other exploring activities in forests should
take full account of the social, economic and political aspects of
development. This orientation will involve cross-sectoral planning that
enhances sustainable development and embraces both the production and
livelihood of local people, so that development builds up from the forest
floor and is not imposed from above;
(c) The political and social problems facing local people need to be
resolved in favour of the poor and marginalized, in terms of not only their
rights but also their empowerment.
***************************
III. PREPARATION FOR SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION
41. For the third session of the Panel, the Secretary-General will prepare a
report on programme element I.1 containing further proposals for action guided
by the initial discussion of the Panel at its second session. During the
first session, the Government of Germany made a proposal to sponsor an expert
consultation on implementing the Forest Principles on the theme "Promotion of
national forest and land-use programmes". The main expert consultation will
be held in Munich from 16 to 21 June 1996. In preparation for the
consultation, the Forestry Advisers Group, in cooperation with the respective
bilateral and multilateral organizations, will support developing countries
engaging in consultations on the promotion of national forest and land-use
programmes. The consultation is intended to contribute to programme elements
I.1 and II (International cooperation in financial assistance and technology
transfer).
42. The results are expected to include suggestions for discussion by the
Panel of:
(a) Integration of forestry-sector planning with national planning
cycles;
(b) Coordination of various internationally initiated planning
frameworks;
(c) Coherence of national forest policy and programmes with the various
international agreements and United Nations resolutions;
(d) Efficient and effective use of existing international technical and
financial mechanisms, and their comparative advantages for different key
issues and subsectors in forestry at the national level.
IV. ALTERNATIVES FOR ACTION AND ITEMS SUGGESTED FOR DISCUSSION
BY THE PANEL
43. Sustainable forest management requires looking ahead over long time
horizons. Yet contemporary opinion leaders have introduced new concepts and
priorities into discussions of the question "Trees and forests, for whom and
for what?". In part, this reflects increased sensitivity and sometimes alarm
about perceived threats to nature, such as worries about forest health and
deforestation. This is joined by increasing sociopolitical interest in the
rights of indigenous peoples and the rural poor to maintain and improve their
forest uses. The biological basis of forest management remains largely
unchanged, but its social and political settings are vastly different from
those of even 10 or 20 years ago. This new context demands a rethinking of
planning priorities, tools and processes.
44. Allowing reasonable latitude for cultural differences, the following
concentration areas are widely relevant:
(a) Public participation: whether in industrialized or developing
countries, and at multiple planning levels, forestry planning is expected to
be highly participatory so as to fairly address the question "Trees and
forests, for whom and for what?". Planners need strategies to seek the views
of groups and individuals that would otherwise be underrepresented, such as
those disadvantaged in terms of communications or sociopolitical power;
(b) Conflict management: wide participation in planning invites
inevitable conflicts. From its inception, planning must anticipate how
conflicts will be lessened and negotiated;
(c) Non-market and non-use values: the issue here is how to broaden the
scope of forestry planning to address the management of the total natural
environment. Leading themes include ecosystems approaches, long-term
sustainability, the preservation of future options and policies that account
for indirect (mainly ecological) and intrinsic values;
(d) Socio-economic performance: forestry controls and incentives must
be consistent with a definition of efficiency. In addition, groups and
individuals who receive forest benefits should pay the cost of providing them;
(e) Multilevel coordination: sectoral planning sets strategic
directions and targets. Area, project, forest management and enterprise
planning define opportunities at lower levels. How can top-down and bottom-up
planning be connected to make each complement the other?
45. Some of the basic features of national forestry programmes are listed in
the annex. The Panel may wish to provide guidance to the further conceptual
development of such programmes, as well as to the activities to be carried out
in preparation for its third session.
Notes
1/ Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions Adopted by
the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8 and
corrigenda), resolution 1, annex III.
2/ Ibid., annex II.
3/ See United Nations Environment Programme, Convention on Biological
Diversity (Environmental Law and Institutions Programme Activity Centre),
June 1992.
Annex
LIST OF 12 BASIC FEATURES OF NATIONAL FORESTRY PROGRAMMES
1. Sustainability of forest development. The essence and main purpose of a
national forestry programme are to ensure the conservation, management and
sustainable development of forest resources.
2. National sovereignty and country leadership. National forestry
programmes are national initiatives for which the country must assume full
leadership and responsibility.
3. Partnership. National forestry programmes strive to bring together all
stakeholders in a process for which they will feel concerned and committed.
The strength of this partnership will depend on its ability to draw upon the
specific capacities of individual partners.
4. Participation. In a national forestry programme, issues, options and
the resulting policies, strategies and programmes are agreed upon through
participatory decision-making and consensus-building among all interested
partners. Transparency and sharing of information are essential for
consensus-building.
5. Holistic and intersectoral approach. National forestry programmes
approach forests as diverse ecosystems comprising many interdependent elements
in dynamic equilibrium, producing a variety of goods and services. Forestry
includes trees in rural areas, and is practised within the context of
sustainable land management, environmental stability and social and economic
development. Forest dwellers are also part of this ecosystem.
6. A long-term iterative process. A national forestry programme is a
cyclic process comprising planning as well as implementation, monitoring and
evaluation activities. It is also an ongoing process that continuously
reflects changes in the environment and the acquisition of new knowledge, even
during implementation. Concrete targets and timetables are required, as well
as periodic independent review and reporting.
7. Capacity-building. An essential element of a national forestry
programme. Throughout the process, actions are taken to develop the planning
and implementation capacity of the national institutions and other key actors
with a view to decreasing dependence on external assistance, when necessary.
8. Policy and institutional reforms. One of the priorities of national
forestry programmes is to ensure that the policy and institutional framework
is conducive to sustainable forestry development. Programmes must address
policy and institutional issues in a comprehensive manner that recognizes the
interdependencies and interlinkages among sectors.
9. Consistency with the national policy framework and global initiatives.
A national forestry programme must link national sustainable development plans
with regional and local strategies. They should be integrated in land-use
planning that is realized at the national and local levels, as well as in
programmes that are broader in scope, such as environmental action plans and
actions to implement Agenda 21 and related conventions and initiatives.
10. Raising awareness. A national forestry programme must raise the
visibility of the forestry sector and its priority in national agendas. The
full value of forests and trees must be recognized, as well as their
contribution to social, economic and environmental well-being.
11. National policy commitment. A national forestry programme must be
backed by the long-term commitment of all national actors, particularly at
political and decision-making levels.
12. International commitment. It is essential to ensure the long-term
commitment of the international community and its institutions, which should
respect the policies, strategies and programmes approved by countries and
should adjust their own priorities accordingly.
-----
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