| United Nations | E/CN.17/IPF/1997/2 |
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
11 December 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel
on Forests
Fourth session
New York, 10-21 February 1997
Report of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
on its third session
(Geneva, 9-20 September 1996)
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION........................................................... 3
I. ELEMENTS FOR FURTHER NEGOTIATION AT THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE
PANEL............................................................ 6
A. Programme element I.1: Progress in national forest and land-
use plans.................................................... 6
B. Programme element I.2: Underlying causes of deforestation
and forest degradation....................................... 13
C. Programme element I.3: Traditional forest-related knowledge. 18
D. Programme element I.4: Fragile ecosystems affected by
desertification and the impact of airborne pollution on
forests...................................................... 26
E. Programme element I.5: Needs and requirements of countries
with low forest cover........................................ 32
F. Programme element II: International cooperation in financial
assistance and technology transfer........................... 36
G. Programme element III.1 (a): Assessment of the multiple
benefits of all types of forests............................. 47
H. Programme element III.1 (b): Methodologies for proper
valuation of the multiple benefits of forests................ 51
I. Programme element III.2: Criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management................................ 55
J. Programme element IV: Trade and environment in relation to
forest products and services................................. 61
K. Programme element V.1: International organizations and
multilateral institutions and instruments.................... 70
L. Programme element V.2: Contribution to consensus-building
towards the further implementation of the Forest Principles,
including appropriate legal arrangements and mechanisms
covering all types of forests................................ 74
II. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE PANEL ON ITS THIRD SESSION......... 80
III. ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS................................. 81
A. Opening and duration of the session.......................... 81
B. Election of officers......................................... 81
C. Agenda and organization of work.............................. 81
D. Attendance................................................... 82
Annexes
I. ATTENDANCE....................................................... 84
II. DOCUMENTATION BEFORE THE PANEL AT ITS THIRD SESSION.............. 88
INTRODUCTION
1. In accordance with the programme of work agreed upon at its first
session (E/CN.17/IPF/1995/3), the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests at
its third session continued its consideration of the programme elements of
categories I to IV and programme element V.1. It held an initial discussion
on programme element V.2.
2. The objective of the third session of the Panel was to produce a
document containing elements to be used by the Panel at its fourth session in
preparing its final report to the Commission on Sustainable Development. The
text of that document is contained in section I below, entitled "Elements for
further negotiation at the fourth session of the Panel". All these elements
are open for further discussion and negotiation, with a view to arriving at a
general agreement on all conclusions and proposals for action. The Panel will
submit its final report to the Commission at its fifth session, in 1997.
3. The Panel agreed that during its fourth session it would:
(a) Continue and finalize negotiations on the text of its report to the
Commission, using the elements for conclusions and proposals for action
emanating from the third session;
(b) Integrate in the text additional proposals and inputs, including the
results of inter-sessional activities that have taken place since its third
session, as well as proposals for action under programme elements V.1 and V.2;
(c) Rationalize the structure of its final report, if appropriate (i.e.,
agree on deletion of possible duplicative recommendations in various parts of
the text and find the most appropriate place to reflect such a recommendation
in the report). In this connection, the Panel requested the Co-Chairmen, in
consultation with the Bureau, to make appropriate proposals.
4. The discussions during the third session of the Panel were based on the
results of the work carried out at the second session, held at Geneva from 11
to 22 March 1996 (see E/CN.17/1996/24), reports of the Secretary-General on
all the programme elements included in the Panel's mandate and the outcome of
inter-sessional meetings and activities organized by Governments and
organizations in support of the Panel's work programme, as well as on other
inputs and submissions to the session, including those from non-governmental
organizations.
5. The Panel expressed its appreciation to the international organizations
that are members of the informal high-level Inter-Agency Task Force on
Forests, namely the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), the World Bank, the secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the International Tropical Timber
Organization (ITTO) and the United Nations Secretariat, as well as to all
other international organizations that actively contributed to the preparation
of the reports of the Secretary-General submitted to the Panel. The Panel,
however, expressed its concern that most of the reports were not available in
all official languages by the time the session opened and that some reports
were still not available in all official languages when the session closed.
6. The Panel welcomed the contribution of the Convention on Biological
Diversity to its discussions. It requested the secretariat of the Panel to
provide information on progress made by the Panel to the third meeting of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention, so as to continue the exchange of
information between the Panel and the Conference of the Parties.
7. The Panel expressed its appreciation to the organizers of various
inter-sessional meetings and activities that made a valuable contribution to
the preparation of the reports for the Panel and to the deliberations at its
third session, namely:
International Conference on Certification and Labelling of Products from
Sustainable Managed Forests, hosted by the Government of Australia
(Brisbane, Australia, 26-31 May 1996);
Workshop on Financial Mechanisms and Sources of Finance for Sustainable
Forestry, sponsored by the Governments of Denmark and South Africa and
UNDP (South Africa, 3-7 June 1996);
FAO Expert Meeting on the Preparation of Forest Resources Assessment
2000 (Kotka III), hosted by the Government of Finland (Kotka, Finland,
10-14 June 1996);
Expert Consultation on Implementing the Forest Principles: Promotion of
National Forest and Land-use Programmes, sponsored by the Government of
Germany (Feldafing, Munich, Germany, 17-21 June 1996);
International Expert Meeting on the Rehabilitation of Degraded Forest
Ecosystems, sponsored by the Governments of Cape Verde, Portugal and
Senegal, the European Community and FAO (Lisbon, 24-28 June 1996);
Meeting entitled "Overview of International Organizations, Institutions
and Instruments Related to Forests", sponsored by the Governments of
Peru and Switzerland (Geneva, 24-28 June 1996);
Expert Working Group Meeting on Trade, Labelling of Timber and
Certification of Sustainable Forest Management, sponsored by the
Governments of Germany and Indonesia (Bonn, 12-16 August 1996);
Intergovernmental Seminar on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable
Forest Management, sponsored by the Government of Finland (Helsinki,
19-22 August 1996);
Study entitled "Long-term Trends and Prospects in Supply and Demand for
Wood Products and Possible Implications for Sustainable Forest
Management", sponsored by the Government of Norway.
8. Furthermore, the Panel expressed its appreciation to those Governments
and organizations that made generous voluntary contributions to support the
work of the Panel and its secretariat, in particular to the Government of
Switzerland, whose contribution to make it possible to cover additional costs
resulting from the Panel's decision to extend the duration of its third
session and divide its work between two in-session working groups.
9. The Panel welcomed the inter-sessional meetings that were being
organized as an input to its fourth session, namely:
Expert Meeting on Sustainable Forestry and Land Use: The Process of
Consensus-building, sponsored by the Governments of Sweden and Uganda
(Stockholm, 14-18 October 1996);
International Workshop on Integrated Application of Sustainable Forest
Management Practices sponsored by the Governments of Canada, Japan,
Malaysia and Mexico, FAO and ITTO (Kochi, Japan, 22-25 November 1996);
International Meeting of Indigenous and other Forest-dependent Peoples
on the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Forests, supported by
the Governments of Colombia and Denmark (Leticia, Colombia,
9-13 December 1996);
10. The Panel, bearing in mind the amount of work that remained to be
finalized at its fourth session and the complexity of the issues it had to
address in order to reach a general agreement on the text of its final report
to the Commission, reiterated its recommendation to extend its fourth session
from one week to two weeks and to provide for additional meetings so that two
parallel working groups could be established during the session.
11. The Panel emphasized the need to ensure that all the documents for its
fourth session were available in all official languages in due time.
I. ELEMENTS FOR FURTHER NEGOTIATION AT THE FOURTH SESSION
OF THE PANEL */
(*/ Text in brackets [] is suggested for deletion or replacement. Text in
bold face is additional suggested text.)
A. Programme element I.1: Progress in national forest
and land-use plans
Mandate
1. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element I.1 is to consider actions to promote progress through
national forest and land-use plans and programmes 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 Forests (Forest Principles),1 as well as chapter 11 and other
chapters related to forests in Agenda 21,2 through an open, transparent and
participatory process involving Governments and all interested parties,
including major groups, particularly indigenous people and local communities.3
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
2. [The Panel recognized the significance of national forest programmes
(NFPs) in promoting sustainable forest development, with particular regard to
the conservation of biological diversity as well as the promotion of soil,
water and fragile ecosystems. However, it noted that NFPs should be
implemented in the context of [diverse] [each country's] socio-economic,
cultural, political and environmental situation [in various parts of the
world]. The Panel also noted that NFPs should be integrated into land-use
plans, and be related to wider programmes for integrated land-use management,
in accordance with chapters 10 to 15 of Agenda 21.]
OR
2. [The Panel recognized the significance of national forest programmes
(NFPs) in promoting sustainable forest [development.] [management (SFM) in
many countries but also recognized that other policy frameworks are relevant
in other countries.] [However,] it noted that [NFPs should] [SFM will] be
implemented in the context of diverse socio-economic, political and
environmental situations in various parts of the world. The Panel noted [that
NFPs should be related] [the relationship of NFPs] to wider programmes for
integrated land-use management, in [accordance with] chapter 10 of Agenda 21.]
3. The Panel noted that NFPs can provide an effective link between
strategic and operational planning only when forest activities and services
generate economic values and ensure benefit-sharing. It also noted that NFPs
should be specifically designed to increase effectiveness and efficiency in
the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of
forests [sustainable forest management [and development] at the country level,
with a view to attracting increased [commitments of both] domestic and
external resources].
4. [The Panel emphasized a number of specific elements needing
consideration when developing and implementing NFPs, notably the need for
appropriate participatory mechanisms to involve all interested parties, in
particular local communities and indigenous people; [decentralization and]
empowerment of regional and local government structures and decentralization
where applicable; recognition of [the rights of] [and respect for] special
groups such as indigenous peoples, local communities and other forest
dwellers, forest owners [and forest workers]; and establishment of effective
coordination mechanisms and conflict-resolution schemes.]
OR
4. [The Panel emphasized a number of specific elements [needing
consideration when] [that are relevant to] developing and implementing NFPs or
other policy frameworks, notably the need for appropriate participatory
mechanisms to involve all interested parties, [in particular local communities
and indigenous people; decentralization and empowerment of regional and local
government structures; recognition of the rights of special groups such as
forest dwellers and forest workers;] [secure land tenure arrangements;
recognition of customary and traditional rights of indigenous people]; and
establishment of effective coordination mechanisms and conflict-resolution
schemes.]
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
[The NFP concept and its basic principles]
5. [The Panel commended the concept of national forest programmes as a
generic expression for a wide range of approaches to the process of planning,
programming and implementing the management, conservation and sustainable
development of all types of forests [the sustainable development of forests]
in a given country. NFPs comprise within a broad intersectoral approach, the
planning of forest-related activities, taking into account the activities of
other sectors, such as agriculture, energy and industrial development. NFPs
[including] [include] the formulation of policies, strategies and plans of
action as well as their implementation, including monitoring and evaluation.]
OR
5. [The Panel commended the concept of national forest programmes as [a
generic expression for a wide range of approaches] [an important approach] to
the process of planning, programming and implementing the sustainable
[development] [management] of forests in countries. NFPs comprise the
planning of forest activities, including the formulation of policies,
strategies and plans of action, as well as their implementation, including
monitoring and evaluation.]
6. [The Panel emphasized the need [to adopt] [for having] a flexible
approach to NFPs and indicative land-use plans recognizing that some countries
prefer to pursue their forest policy goals by means other than [formal]
[formally binding] plans and programmes. Specific decisions in this regard
were considered a prerogative of national Governments. This flexible approach
recognizes country differences in systems of government, constitutional and
legal frameworks, subnational authorities and jurisdiction, land and resource
ownership patterns, and mechanisms for public participation. In this respect,
the Panel acknowledged the usefulness of testing and demonstrating the concept
of NFPs on an operational scale.]
OR
6. [The Panel emphasized the need [to adopt a flexible approach to NFPs]
[for flexible approaches to SFM], recognizing that some countries pursue their
forest policy goals by means other than formal plans and programmes. Specific
decisions in this regard were considered the prerogative of [national
Governments] [individual countries] based on differences in systems of
government, constitutional and legal frameworks, subnational authorities and
jurisdiction, land and resource ownership patterns and mechanisms for public
participation.]
6 bis. The Panel recognized the need for NFPs to be based on a sound economic
valuation of forest resources, including environmental services and non-timber
products, and to take into account the impact of international trade and
market forces in the implementation of NFPs.
7. Regardless of the approach adopted by individual countries, NFPs or
other relevant policy frameworks, as long-term iterative processes, should be
based on [guiding principles recognizing] the following key elements:
national sovereignty and country leadership; consistency with national
policies and international commitments; integration with the country's
sustainable development strategies; partnership and participation; [and]
holistic and intersectoral approaches that recognize forests as diverse
ecosystems; and secure land and property rights.
7 bis. The Panel also recognized the need for an external economic and
commercial environment that is supportive of NFPs and, in particular, the need
for these programmes to be supported by a market context that enhances the
economic value of forest resources and ensures adequate and remunerative
prices with respect to the sustainable use of those resources.
Proposals for action
8. The Panel:
(a) [Urged Governments to develop, implement and monitor NFPs, which
should be developed within an intersectoral approach in accordance with their
guiding principles, as an effective means to [address] [implement] sustainable
forest management in all types of forests, thus increasing their capacity to
meet the increasingly high and conflicting demands for forest goods and
services.] [Urged countries to develop and implement NFPs or other relevant
policy frameworks;]
(a) bis. Urged Governments and relevant organizations to develop an
international consensus on the principles and content of NFPs, building on the
work done by FAO in this area, and taking full account of the important work
done by UNDP on forest partnership agreements;
(b) [Urged national authorities to integrate criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management [fully] [as appropriate] into the overall
process of the formulation [and], implementation and monitoring of NFPs, which
should also fully integrate environmental and conservation issues into wider
economic and land-use plans;]
OR
(b) [Urged [national authorities] [countries] to integrate national
level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management fully into the
overall process of the formulation and implementation of NFPs or other
relevant policy frameworks;]
(b) bis. Urged countries and local actors to adopt the concept of
land-use plans as an appropriate means to promote SFM and land-use husbandry
at the national and local levels in both developing and developed countries;
(b) ter. Called for the formulation of an internationally acceptable and
agreed set of definitions and terms used in the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all types of forests;
(b) quater. Urged countries to adequately reflect their national
priorities on forest-related issues in their negotiations and agreements on
international cooperation and to increase the emphasis on national capacity-
building within NFPs;
(b) quinquiens. Urged bilateral and multilateral organizations to use
NFPs as a framework for the support and coordination of forest-related
activities;
(b) sexiens. Urged countries to ensure broad representation of forest-
dependent groups and indigenous communities in forest planning. Planning
systems need to facilitate a process that identifies and involves community
forest-user groups in meaningful decision-making regarding protection and
management goals and operations affecting state forest lands in their
proximity.
[Financing NFPs]
9. [The Panel stressed that [dependable] funding, particularly the
provision of external resources, including private foreign investment and
official development assistance (ODA), whenever possible, depending on the
socio-political conditions of the country concerned, is greatly facilitated by
clear recipient government commitment to the implementation of national
policies and programmes in developing countries in the forest and forest-
related sectors that promote SFM.] [The Panel stressed the need for
international cooperation in the provision of new and additional financial
resources for the effective implementation of national policies and programmes
in the forest and forest-related sectors.]
10. The Panel [recognized the importance of new and innovative sources of
funding for SFM, including developing and implementing NFPs, but] stressed
that public funds in [most] [many/some] countries, particularly in developing
countries with low forest cover, will continue to be the most important source
of finance.
Proposals for action
11. The Panel:
(a) [Urged Governments to give priority to actions conducive to the
sustainable management [and development] of forests, in order to ensure that
adequate funding from [both] national [and international] sources is directed
to the formulation and implementation of NFPs;]
OR
(a) [Urged [Governments] [countries with NFPs] to give priority in
national programmes to actions conducive to the sustainable management [and
development] of their forests, in order to better attract [ensure that
adequate] funding from both national and where appropriate international
sources [is directed to the formulation and implementation of NFPs]];
(a) bis. Urged donor countries to provide new and additional resources,
including ODA, for the formulation and implementation of NFPs;
(b) Called for more efficient investment policies for the successful
implementation of NFPs.
(b) bis. Community forest management systems should be an integral part
of national forest plans. International agreements and donor programmes
supporting this sector should reflect the importance of integrating
communities into the planning process.
[Capacity-building]
12. [The Panel recognized the importance of assessing and, where necessary,
enhancing national [and international] capabilities at all levels to develop,
implement, monitor and evaluate the [conservation, management and sustainable
development of forests] [management, conservation and sustainable development
of all types of forests]. It also emphasized the need for [technology
transfer and additional resources in many] [developed countries to transfer
environmentally sound technologies and provide new and additional financial
resources to developing] countries.]
OR
12. [The Panel recognized the importance of assessing and, where necessary,
enhancing national capabilities at all levels to develop, implement, monitor
and evaluate the [conservation, management and sustainable development of
forests] [management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of
forests.] It also emphasized the need for technology transfer and additional
resources [in many] [especially in developing] countries and countries with
economies in transition.]
OR
12. [The Panel recognized the importance of assessing and, where necessary,
enhancing national and international capabilities at all levels to develop,
implement, monitor and evaluate the [conservation, management and] sustainable
[development] [management] of forests. It also emphasized the need for
[technology transfer and] additional [resources] [capacity] in many
countries.]
13. The Panel, recognizing the intersectoral nature of NFPs, advised
national authorities to look into the institutional capacity of forest-related
sectors [particularly those whose actions can hinder] [to ensure] the
successful implementation of NFPs.
Proposals for action
14. The Panel:
(a) Urged Governments, particularly of developing countries and
countries with economies in transition, to include capacity-building as an
objective of NFPs, paying particular attention to training, extension services
and technology transfer and taking into account local, traditional forest-
related knowledge;
(b) Encouraged national authorities to consider the need to enhance
capacities in all relevant sectors, including [public, private] [the public
and private sectors, indigenous peoples, local communities] and
non-governmental sectors, [effectively and in a coordinated manner,] taking
into account the role played by each of the interested parties in the
[sustainable development] [management, conservation and sustainable
development of all types] of forests, in order to achieve country-led design
and implementation of NFPs.
[Coordination]
15. The Panel acknowledged that coordination [between] [among] all
interested parties at the national and international levels is crucial for the
[conservation], management [and sustainable development] of all types of
forests. The Panel noted the input received from the Conference of the
Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity with respect to biological
diversity and forests.
Proposals for action
16. The Panel:
(a) [Urged] [Encouraged] [Governments] [countries as needed] to
establish sound national coordination mechanisms amongst all interested
parties, based on consensus-building principles, to promote SFM, including
where appropriate to oversee the smooth implementation of NFPs;
(b) [Encouraged [Governments to [support the further development and
testing of] [draw from] the concept of a forest partnership agreement, within
countries with different interest groups, as a potential instrument for]
countries to further explore the feasibility of voluntary partnerships as a
way to improve coordination and communication [and a vehicle for long-term
commitments between all national and international partners in cooperative
programmes according to mutually agreed terms] [between countries in support
of SFM];]
(b) bis. Welcomed further input from the Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on Biological Diversity, in particular with respect to
providing technical advice related to the integration of conservation measures
and sustainable use of biological diversity within national forest and
land-use plans.
[International cooperation]
17. The Panel noted the importance of improved regional and international
[cooperation] [networks] for the exchange of information [and] [,] technology
[through the establishment of appropriate networks,] [and know-how] in support
of national [forest] programmes for SFM.
Proposals for action
18. The Panel:
(a) Called for [the establishment of] improved [cooperation schemes]
[coordination] in support of sustainable forest [development] around the world
and [urged all countries to use NFPs as the basis for international
cooperation in the forestry sector] [recognized the utility of NFPs in this
regard];
(a) bis. Called for the further development of the concept of a forest
partnership agreement as a potential instrument for improved coordination and
cooperation between all national and international partners;
(b) [Called upon Governments to support the [need for the] creation of
[a consultative body as] a continuing forum for international consultations on
national forest development. */ (*/ To be reconsidered after discussions on
programme element V.1.) [Considered that ways and means to improve
international coordination in support of national priorities for SFM should be
further explored.]
B. Programme element I.2: Underlying causes of deforestation
and forest degradation
Mandate
19. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element I.2 is the need to "identify and consider ways to address
the underlying causes of deforestation, forest degradation and the
difficulties in implementing sustainable forest management, with particular
attention to cross-sectoral factors, including the impact on and from forests,
at the national and international levels, such as consumption and production
patterns, poverty, population growth, pollution, terms of trade,
discriminatory trade practices and unsustainable policies related to sectors
such as agriculture, energy and trade".4
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
20. The Panel noted the critical need to understand the underlying causes of
deforestation and forest degradation. Deforestation and forest degradation
pose a serious problem in many countries and the adoption of a more focused
approach that concentrates on reversing the most damaging processes and
promoting the most effective and beneficial measures is needed. [The causes
of deforestation and forest degradation are often country-specific, and
simplistic conclusions, overgeneralized solutions or prescriptions for policy
should be avoided.]
21. The Panel recognized the key role of economic development in reducing
pressure on forests, thereby allowing sustainable approaches to replace those
leading to deforestation and forest degradation. Each country, whether
developing or developed, will have a particular set of circumstances, in terms
of both the direct and underlying causes as well as of the scope for action in
addressing those causes. In this context, it is important to consider
historical dimensions and to learn from the experience of developed as well as
developing countries. Many of the factors causing deforestation or forest
degradation interact and some are synergistic. Although some, such as
unsustainable timber extraction, are linked to the forest sector itself,
others lie outside it. Most causes are social and economic. Inappropriate
policy choices and approaches in other sectors can influence deforestation and
forest degradation. [Poverty] [Production] and consumption patterns as well
as land speculation and land markets have a major influence on deforestation.
22. The Panel noted that land tenure issues have an important effect on
access to, and use of, trees, soil, water, and forest [products and forest]
[goods and] services. It is important to recognize the local initiatives that
counter the current trends of deforestation and forest degradation, especially
among indigenous and local communities. Illegal logging and land occupation,
illegal crops, grazing pressure, unsustainable agriculture, the demand for
fuelwood and charcoal to meet basic energy needs, refugee-related problems and
natural events [such as volcanic eruptions, weather phenomena and forest fires
are important factors, among others, in many regions.] [Many functions, for
example unsustainable agriculture, illegal logging and land occupation,
illegal crops, grazing pressure, the demand for fuelwood and charcoal to meet
basic energy needs, and natural events are important factors in many regions.]
23. [[Different countries have different requirements and these requirements
change over time and affect both the area and the nature of their forests.
[The benefits and disbenefits of different types of forest,] [The advantages
and disadvantages of different types of forest management,] [The benefits and
costs of different types of forest,] including forest plantations, need to be
appraised under different social, cultural, economic and ecological
conditions.] The Panel emphasized that there are rational justifications for
many changes in forest structure and cover including conversion of plantation
forests and that [deforestation] [such changes] need not necessarily be
[harmful] [considered undesirable] if planned within national policy
frameworks for sustainable land use. [The Panel recognized that both
sustainably managed natural forests and forest plantations have a valuable
role in meeting the need for forest [products] [goods] and services as well as
helping to conserve biological diversity] [It was recognized that sustainable
management and use of both natural forests and forest plantations, as part of
an integrated land-use plan taking into account relevant environmental and
socio-economic concerns, fulfilled a valuable role in helping to meet the need
for forest products and services as well as to conserve biological diversity
and to increase carbon storage.]
23 bis. The importance of convening an international meeting for further
analysis and discussion of the international underlying causes of
deforestation and forest degradation was noted.
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
Consumption and production patterns
24. [The Panel recognized the importance of long-term changes in consumption
and production patterns in different parts of the world and their positive and
negative effects on the sustainable management [and use] of forests. Their
implications should be reviewed in the context of the work being done by the
Commission on Sustainable Development and other relevant initiatives concerned
with the long-term supply of and demand for forest [products.] [goods and
services].]
OR
24. [The long-term outlook is for a steadily rising demand for wood and for
forest services, and a declining area of forest for their production.
Increasing pressure on wood supply from demand for non-wood goods and
services, and increasing pressure on forests from demand for land for other
uses suggest that a priority is the need to strengthen intersectoral decision-
making affecting land use. Increasingly, effective institutions for resource
management, land use, research, education and extension will be an important
part of sustainable forest management.]
25. The Panel considered that among the various international underlying
causes of deforestation and forest degradation, [transboundary economic
forces] [international trade and investment] and [transboundary] [long-range]
pollution] are [particularly] important. Factors such as discriminatory
international trade practices, structural adjustment programmes and external
debt could indirectly influence deforestation. Market forces and relative
prices, including those of agriculture commodities, as well as
[under-]valuation of wood and non-wood forest products have a direct bearing
on [the sustainable management of all types of forests.] [the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests]. Dealing
with deforestation and forest degradation, therefore, often requires changes
to polices and plans in other sectors at both the national and international
levels.
Proposals for action
26. The Panel:
(a) [Urged Governments, where relevant, with the support of
international organizations, to prepare in-depth [strategic] studies of the
implications of [present] [current] consumption and production patterns for
forest goods and services, with both market and non-market values, in
developing and developed countries, with special emphasis on their positive
and negative effects on the sustainable management and use of forests [and
paying particular attention to terms of trade, discriminatory trade practices
and unsustainable policies related to such sectors as agriculture and energy].
These studies should also analyse comprehensively the historical perspective
of the causes of deforestation and forest degradation in the world and other
international underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation,
including transboundary economic forces [as well as provide new factual
information on the significance of transboundary pollution];]
OR
(a) [Urged further study of the international underlying causes of
deforestation and forest degradation with a view to providing factual
information on the effects and the significance of transboundary pollution;]
OR
(a) [Urged countries to consider actions to ensure that wood supply and
demand expands in the context of sustainability, with special emphasis on
investments in sustainable forest management and strengthening institutions
for resource management;]
(a) bis. Urged that the role of plantation forests as an important
element of sustainable forest management, particularly in taking pressure off
natural forests, be recognized, enhanced and promoted;
(a) ter. Urged countries to convene and finance as soon as possible a
global workshop on international underlying causes of deforestation and forest
degradation.
National policy framework
27. It [is only possible] [may be helpful] to decide whether changes in
forest cover are [or are not harmful against] [beneficial or not by
considering] a background represented by a national policy framework for
[sustainable forest management] [the management, conservation and sustainable
development of all types of forests] that encompasses and harmonizes elements
pertaining to social and economic development programmes, environment plans,
land-use plans, and national biodiversity strategies and action plans. All
these national instruments, jointly and consistently, should enable countries
to [assess] [secure] the quantity and quality of forest required to provide
the full range of benefits, goods and services needed by society now and in
the future.
Proposals for action
28. The Panel:
(a) [Urged [donor] [all] countries [and international organizations,
including regional development banks, to assist and finance] [to undertake]
research, technology transfer, case studies and capacity-building activities
in [developing countries] to allow an integrated approach towards:]
(i) [[The formulation and [application] [implementation] of [Urged
countries to formulate and [apply] [implement]] national strategies,
through an open and [inclusive] [participatory] process, for
addressing the underlying causes of deforestation and defining
policy options for desirable forest cover, as inputs to the
implementation of the national forest programmes or other relevant
policy frameworks recommended in programme element I.1];
OR
(i) [The promotion of open and participatory processes for the
formulation and implementation of national forest programmes, taking
into account the underlying causes of deforestation and the need to
define policy options for desirable forest cover;]
(ii) [[The development of] [To develop] mechanisms, including
environmental impact assessment (EIA), through an open and
[inclusive] [participatory] process, to improve policy formulation
and coordination, as well as planning, management and implementation
of relevant national programmes for achieving [sustainable forest
management;] [the management, conservation, and sustainable
development of all types of forests;]]
OR
(ii) [The formulation of mechanisms aimed at the equitable sharing of the
benefits of the forests;]
(ii) bis. The formulation of a policy of securing land tenure for local
communities and indigenous peoples;
(ii) ter. [Conducting] [The conduct] of strategic analysis of policies
that have contributed to forest degradation and deforestation
as well as those that have had a positive effect;
(b) [Requested donor countries and international organizations to assist
developing countries in financing research, technology transfer, case-studies
and capacity-building activities to allow an integrated approach towards the
formulation and application of a national policy framework and in conducting a
strategic analysis of relevant political, legal and institutional frameworks
that have policies that have contributed to forest degradation and
deforestation as well as of those that have had a positive effect;]
(b) bis. Recommended that the provision of timely, reliable and accurate
information on the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation,
as well as on the multiple roles of forests, which is essential for public
understanding and informed decision-making, should be assured;
(b) ter. Urged donor countries, multilateral and international
organizations, including regional development banks, to assist and finance all
the above activities in developing countries and countries with economies in
transition.
Application of the diagnostic framework
29. In many countries there is a need for further analysis of the sequence
of causes contributing to changes in the quantity and quality of forests,
focusing attention on the action that might be most effective in halting
damage and promoting beneficial change. This analysis would be facilitated by
the use of a comprehensive diagnostic framework, elements of which have been
elaborated in reports of the Secretary-General submitted to the Panel.
30. This diagnostic framework not only would serve as a useful tool in both
developing and developed countries for analysing deforestation and forest
degradation but also, in adapted forms, could be invaluable in setting the
objectives of national forest policies; introducing a historical perspective
into the analysis of causes; identifying causes originating from national and
international consumption and production patterns affecting deforestation in a
particular country; exploring the effects of policies in other sectors on
deforestation and forest degradation and the ways in which modification of
such policies might promote [sustainable forest management] [the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forest]; using and
refining criteria and indicators and methods of valuation; locating
deficiencies in capacity (for example, in management and supervision,
information, research or education); relating to national action plans for
other international agreements and conventions; and generally, as a powerful
management tool, in furthering the implementation of [sustainable forest
management] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests].
31. The main function of the diagnostic framework should be constructive,
corrective and forward-looking. It would complement and strengthen other
existing planning exercises and should also be used, together with criteria
and indicators (programme element III.2), as a tool for the periodic
assessment of progress (programme element III.1 (a)). As a management tool,
it should be developed voluntarily [and not used as a basis for conditionality
in ODA.] [The need for] [A comprehensive diagnostic framework [must not delay
action] [is not needed] in countries where major direct or indirect causes
have been identified, well understood and documented or where deforestation is
not viewed as a problem at the national level.
Proposals for action
32. The Panel:
(a) Encouraged [developed countries] [the international community] [all
countries] to assist developing countries [in undertaking] [to undertake] case
studies using the diagnostic framework [described in the report of the
Secretary-General (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/15)] in order to develop and test its
usefulness as a positive management tool to identify the underlying causes of
[forest destruction and degradation] [deforestation and forest degradation],
[prepare] [consider] corrective action and plan for the future;
(b) Urged that the results of such case studies and proposals for
refinement of the diagnostic framework be communicated widely;
(b) bis. Urged Governments to continue to take prompt action when direct
or indirect causes have already been identified and to use the diagnostic
framework as an analytical tool in assessing options for utilization of
forests and forest lands;
(b) ter. Urged developed countries and multilateral and international
organizations, including regional development banks, to assist developing
countries and countries with economies in transition in the application of the
diagnostic framework.
C. Programme element I.3: Traditional forest-related knowledge
Mandate
33. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element I.3 is to encourage countries, consistent with the terms of
the Convention on Biological Diversity, to consider ways and means for the
effective protection and use of traditional forest-related knowledge,
innovations and practices of forest dwellers, indigenous people and other
local communities, as well as fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising
from such knowledge, innovations and practices.5
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
34. The Panel noted the statement of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity6 and its relevance for work under the
different elements of the Panel's programme of work. [The Panel recognized
that those aspects [related] [relevant] to the conservation and sustainable
use of biodiversity and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the
[commercial use] [utilization] of biological resources [identified by means of
traditional forest-related knowledge (TFRK)] fall, inter alia, within the
purview of the Convention on Biological Diversity, [since TFRK is a subset of
the "knowledge, innovations and practices" referred to in article 8 (j) of the
Convention and the genetic resources of forest ecosystems are a subset of the
genetic resources referred to in article 15.]] [The Panel recognized that the
Convention on Biological Diversity contains several provisions, including
articles 8 (j) and 10 (c), relevant to TFRK of the conservation and
sustainable use of biodiversity. The Convention does not address all TFRK; it
addresses only TFRK that relates to the conservation and sustainable use of
biodiversity. Therefore, the work carried out under the Convention should
complement rather than determine the work of the Panel, which focuses on
issues of sustainable forest management.] The Panel also noted that, at its
fourth session, it would need to take into account, as appropriate, the
outcome of the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity (Buenos Aires, 4-15 November 1996) in
relation to indigenous knowledge.
34 bis. The Panel noted the importance of TFRK for the development of
national policies and strategies on sustainable forest management. It
stressed the need to reflect the issue of TFRK and its relevant potential for
action in national forest programmes.
35. [The Panel [was concerned] [seeks] to avoid duplication or overlap with]
[The Panel noted the interlinkages with a number of] other relevant
intergovernmental processes, in particular with those of the Convention on
Biological Diversity. It paid due attention to the terms of the United
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing
Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and ILO Convention (No. 169)
concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries as well as
the Agreement on Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) under the
World Trade Organization. The Panel [also] noted the ongoing consideration of
relevant matters within the United Nations [system] [the Commission on Human
Rights and the United Nations convention on the rights of indigenous peoples,
as well as the negotiations taking place in the Commission on Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture of FAO]. The Panel noted that existing
instruments and agreements should be implemented and developed with the aim of
making them mutually supportive while, at the same time, avoiding unnecessary
duplication of work.
35 bis. The Panel also noted that an inter-sessional meeting on indigenous
people was scheduled to take place at Leticia, Colombia, from 9 to
13 December 1996. The Panel recognized the possible relevance of the outcome
of the meeting for the deliberations at its fourth session.
36. The Panel recognized that TFRK constitutes an important body of
knowledge and experience relevant to many aspects of the Panel's mandate,
especially to sustainable forest management, the use of [timber and non-timber
forest products] [forest products and services] and the establishment of
relevant values. TFRK should be [considered as an integral part of the
information base for sustainable forest management] [broadly defined to
include institutional, authority and governance structures, cultural belief
and value systems, land and resource use systems, and conflict resolution as
well as mediation processes, all of which are integral parts of sustainable
forest management] and its cross-sectoral linkages. [The Panel also
recognized the great complexity of the issues surrounding the meaning of TFRK,
which includes intellectual property rights, patents, customary law,
indigenous legal systems and traditions relating to access and utilization as
well as to knowledge of the resources themselves.] The Panel further
recognized the various roles of different partners and the great complexity of
the issues surrounding discussion of TFRK, which can include property rights,
customary law, indigenous legal systems and traditions relating to access and
utilization as well as to knowledge of the resources themselves.] [The Panel
recognized that the application of TFRK to sustainable forest management may
present complex issues.] In some countries, forest owners will also have a
role to play in the use of TFRK.
37. [As a result of inadequate measures for conservation and sustainable
use, accelerated loss of forests is undermining and destroying communities
with sustainable lifestyles and TFRK.] [The introduction of new techniques,
equipment and/or economic opportunities can accelerate forest loss and
undermine or destroy forest-dwelling communities with sustainable lifestyles
and TFRK.] [As a result of inadequate measures for conservation and
sustainable use of forests, communities with sustainable lifestyles have been
affected.] [As a result of inadequate measures for conservation and
sustainable use, as well as changing living conditions, accelerated loss of
forests is undermining and destroying communities with a sustainable lifestyle
and dependent on TFRK.] The Panel recommended that indigenous people, forest
owners, forest dwellers and local communities should be enabled to play a
[key] role in [defining] participatory [approaches to forest and land-use
management] [approaches to sustainable forest management and land-use
planning] [with the involvement of] [together with] all interested relevant
parties from both public and private sectors, and with greater focus on
resource management, land-use systems and conflict resolution.
38. At the international level there is a need to promote the [establishment
of mechanisms for the] exchange of national experiences [and for mechanisms,
including financial investment,] to stimulate programmes for sustainable
forest management [and the development of products derived from TFRK,
including the appropriate involvement of the private sector.] [On the basis
of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, the Panel
noted that developed countries [bear a special responsibility] [provide
effective support] in facilitating the necessary conditions for the
conservation and sustainable use of forest biological diversity. This implies
a constructive approach to the transfer of technologies and financial
resources to strengthen the capabilities of indigenous peoples, forest
dwellers and local communities for sustainable forest management.] [The
conservation and sustainable use of forest biological diversity requires
constructive approaches to the transfer and equitable sharing of technologies
and financial resources to strengthen the capabilities of indigenous peoples,
forest dwellers and local communities for sustainable forest management.]
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
Meaning of traditional forest-related knowledge and
property rights
39. TFRK can provide a strong basis for sustainable forest management and is
relevant to most of the other programme elements. The Panel, however,
recognized that the international and national communities are still at an
early stage of identifying ways and means for the effective protection and use
of TFRK [(and of exploring the relationships between TFRK and sustainable
forest management).] The complex nature of this cross-cutting relationship
involves natural and social sciences, culture, tradition and the environment.
[In this context the Panel agreed that TFRK is indeed useful in locating
valuable new products, and that accessing these on fair and equitable terms
can only benefit each country and its indigenous and local communities in its
efforts to achieve sustainable development.]
40. [[Governments and others who wish to use such knowledge should
acknowledge that TFRK cannot be taken from people without [observing the
principle of prior informed consent] [their consent.]] [The Panel concluded
that ways and means to ensure effective protection of indigenous rights [and
payment of royalty on intellectual property rights] should be identified in
the context of national and international legislation, customary law and
indigenous legal systems, to ensure the fair and equitable sharing of benefits
among all interested parties including indigenous populations, forests
dwellers and local communities.] [The Panel concluded that the effective
protection of indigenous rights requires the fair and equitable sharing of
benefits among all interested parties, including indigenous populations,
forest dwellers, forest owners and local communities, in accordance with
article 8 (j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity.]]
OR
40. [International cooperation on TFRK and rights related to it must be
consistent with obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and
other relevant instruments.]
OR
40. [Governments and others who wish to promote or engage in the wider
application of TFRK should encourage the approval and involvement of the
holders of such knowledge. The Panel concluded that ways and means to ensure
the preservation and application of TFRK to sustainable forest management
should be identified in the context of national legislation, including
relevant indigenous legal systems.]
Proposals for action
41. The Panel:
(a) [Invited Governments to explore further at the national and
international levels the policy, institutional and legal frameworks required
to support the possible applications of sui generis intellectual property
rights and protection regimes to TFRK;
(b) Encouraged Governments and TFRK-holding groups to consider entering
into [sui generis] formal agreements by which TFRK can be accessed;]
OR
(b) [Urged Governments, in implementing their forest programmes, to take
measures to protect TFRK, taking account of the outcome of the third meeting
of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity,
(Buenos Aires, 4-15 November 1996), in relation to indigenous populations.]
[Invited Governments to explore further at the national level policy,
institutional or legal frameworks for TFRK that would facilitate formal
agreements by which TFRK can be accessed;]
(b) bis. Invited the World Intellectual Property Organization together
with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development to undertake a
study aimed at advancing international understanding on the relationship
between intellectual property and TFRK, and to propose possible ways and means
to ensure effective protection of TFRK and the equitable sharing of benefits
arising from such knowledge;
(b) ter. Requested the Secretariat to produce a compilation of
international instruments and national legislation, including draft
legislation, pertaining to the protection and use of TFRK and the equitable
sharing of benefits arising from such knowledge; and encouraged countries to
exchange information on national experiences in this field;
(b) quater. Encouraged Governments to consider, inter alia, the
possible use of partnership agreements by which TFRK can be accessed;
(b) quinquiens. Invited Governments and relevant international
organizations to explore different options for developing sui generis regimes
for the protection and equitable sharing of benefits arising from indigenous
and local knowledge, including TFRK;
(b) sexiens. Urged national Governments and relevant international
organizations to implement and further develop instruments and agreements with
relevance to TFRK with a view to making such instruments and agreements fully
mutually supportive;
(b) septiens. Invited Governments to identify knowledge, innovations
and practices that are relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity and to identify customary use compatible with
conservation or sustainable use requirements.
Establishing partnerships
42. [In the context of national legislation, certain conditions, [in
particular prior informed consent,] will need to be met if indigenous people,
their communities and other local communities and forest dwellers are to
participate fully in partnership agreements and to offer their TFRK for the
benefit of other interested parties. Holders of TFRK will need to be
represented by their own representatives; to feel secure in their land tenure
arrangements; to be reassured that they have been accorded status equal to
that of the other members of the partnerships; and to be convinced of a common
purpose compatible with their cultural and ecological values.]
OR
42. [In the context of national legislation, the Panel stressed the need for
prior informed consent. Holders of TFRK will need to be represented to feel
secure in their land tenure arrangements; to be reassured that they have been
accorded appropriate status, and to be convinced of a common purpose
compatible with their cultural values.]
OR
42. [Subject to national legislation, Governments should encourage the full
participation of all stakeholders, including indigenous people, their
communities and other local communities and forest dwellers, in partnership
agreements.]
Proposals for action
43. The Panel [urged Governments, with the assistance of international
organizations, to support capacity-building activities for creating
partnership agreements for sustainable forest management with indigenous
people, forest dwellers and local communities.] [Urged Governments, where
necessary with the assistance of international organizations, to seek to
promote the creation of partnership agreements among interested parties.]
Participatory approaches [and management of traditional forest-related
knowledge]
44. Indigenous people, forest dwellers and local communities [must] [should]
play a [key] role in [defining] [developing] participatory approaches to
forest and land management, which include [community forest management
systems, resource management institutions, land-use systems and conflict
resolution.] [community forest management, land-use resource management,
research, training and extension, the formulation of criteria and indicators,
and conflict resolution.] These approaches will be of paramount importance
for the successful implementation of future activities relating to most of the
programme elements.
Proposals for action
45. The Panel:
(a) Urged Governments to incorporate participatory processes in national
forest programmes in order to promote and provide the opportunities for the
full participation of indigenous people, forest dwellers, forest owners and
local communities [in forest and land management,] in public lands [in the
formulation of forest and land-use programmes at the national, regional and
local levels;] consistent with principles 2 (d) and 5 (a) of the Forest
Principles;
OR
(a) [Urged Governments to promote and provide the opportunities for the
participation of indigenous people, forest dwellers and local communities in
the development, implementation and planning of national forest policies,
consistent with principles 2 (d) and 5 (a) of the Forest Principles;]
(b) Urged Governments, with the support of international organizations
such as [ITTO, UNEP, UNDP, the World Bank and FAO, to assist national and
local governments in the preparation of technical guidelines on TFRK
application, bringing together knowledge and experience on the approaches that
work in practice;] [FAO, UNEP, UNDP, ITTO, the World Bank and others to assist
governments in the preparation of technical guidelines for participatory
approaches to TFRK applications;]
OR
(b) [Urged Governments, with the support of international organizations,
to work with all interested parties in the preparations for TFRK applications,
bringing together knowledge and experience on the approaches that work in
practice;]
(c) [Encouraged Governments in the context of their national laws and
legislation to support local efforts that can play a facilitator role to
build-up the [negotiation] capacity of indigenous people, forest owners,
forest dwellers and local communities to participate as full partners,
[rightholders and stakeholders in sustainable forest management schemes;] [in
their management, protection and use of TFRK;]
(d) Invited Governments to organize a series of national, regional and
international consultations for promoting the establishment of TFRK
partnerships and the application of participatory planning methodologies;]
OR
(d) [Encouraged Governments to organize national, regional and
international consultations to support efforts, including legal efforts, that
can play a facilitator role to increase the capacity of indigenous people,
forest dwellers and local communities to participate as partners, rightholders
or stakeholders in participatory planning methodologies and in sustainable
forest management schemes on public lands;]
(d) bis. Encouraged Governments to recognize and support traditional
resources use systems incorporating TFRK through the development of new
instruments and mechanisms that enhance the security of forest-dependent
groups;
(d) ter. Urged Governments to work with communities and build on their
knowledge to establish stronger linkages between traditional and emerging
national forest management systems.
[Management] [Protection] of traditional forest-related knowledge
46. There are difficulties surrounding the acquisition, storage, retrieval
and dissemination of TFRK outside its place of origin. These difficulties
arise in the absence of [sui generis] effective [management] [protection] of
TFRK and the nature of TFRK, which is often [overwhelmingly] site- and
culture-specific [, and because to a great extent TFRK is often not amenable
to being digitized, stored in databases or accessed through clearing-house
mechanisms]. The Panel recommended further exploration of the feasibility and
modalities of exchanges in this area.
Proposals for action
47. The Panel:
(a) [Encouraged countries to identify ways to inventory, store, catalog
and retrieve TFRK and to promote its effective preservation and application,
including developing forest-dweller capacity, and to examine opportunities to
apply more widely TFRK about the management of particular types of forests to
other forests with similar ecosystems by:]
(i) [Urging Governments and international organizations to support
regional and national institutions to undertake research on TFRK
with the full involvement of the holders of that knowledge;]
OR
(a) bis. [Urged] [(ii) Urging] Governments, national institutions and
academic centres to incorporate TFRK in [standard] forest management training
as a way to sensitize forest managers to the importance of respect for and
protection of TFRK when accessing it; to the need to observe the principle of
fair and equitable sharing of benefits; and to the advantages of using it and
the disadvantages of ignoring it. They should also emphasize the importance
of recognizing TFRK in developing [national criteria and indicators within the
context of national forest programmes (programme elements III.2 and I.1) for
sustainable forest management] [and in defining certification schemes for]
sustainable forest management (programme element IV);] [criteria and
indicators (programme element III.2) within the context of national forest
programmes (programme element I.1) and in defining certification schemes for
sustainable forest management (programme element IV);]
(b) [Encouraged] [(iii) Encouraging] Governments with the support of
donors and international organizations to assist [financially and otherwise]
existing networks promoting the sharing of TFRK [as well as on mutually agreed
terms of technology and profits from biotechnology products derived from these
resources] among concerned groups and institutions in collaboration with
involved forest dwellers, indigenous people and local communities;
(c) [Urged] [(iv) Urging] Governments to promote digital mapping (using
geographical information systems (GIS) and global positioning systems (GPS)
combined with social mapping for establishing forest holdings and values;
assisting planning and management partnerships; and assisting in the [location
of cultural and] [storage of] geographical information required to support
[sustainable forest management schemes;] [the management, protection and use
of TFRK];
(d) Encouraged Governments to identify ways to inventory, store,
catalog, protect and retrieve TFRK, [guaranteeing its effective protection,
and] including developing local and indigenous capacity, and to examine
opportunities to apply traditional knowledge about the management of
particular types of forest ecosystems to other similar forest ecosystems;
(d) bis. Urged international organizations and Governments to ensure the
protection of TFRK, by providing all the support necessary to keep this
knowledge alive;
(e) Urged [donors and international organizations] [Governments and
multilateral and international organizations] to support [the establishment]
[capacity-building] of regional and national institutions dedicated to
undertaking research on TFRK with the full involvement of the holders of that
knowledge and to promote its wide understanding and use.
D. Programme element I.4: Fragile ecosystems affected by
desertification and the impact of airborne pollution
on forests
Mandate
48. As defined by Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element I.4 is to monitor actions to support afforestation,
reforestation and the restoration of forest systems, where appropriate,
particularly in countries with fragile ecosystems and affected by
desertification and/or drought, particularly in Africa and, in this context,
to consider specific actions in countries whose forests are affected by
pollution, particularly those with economies in transition in Central and
Eastern Europe.7
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and/or drought
49. The Panel emphasized that desertification and the effects of drought are
widespread phenomena affecting forests and other wooded land in arid,
semi-arid and dry sub-humid regions. These problems are of global dimensions
in that they affect [all] [many] regions of the world and require collective
action of the international community to combat desertification and to
mitigate the effects of drought.
50. The Panel felt that this programme element should be carried forward in
close relationship with existing international conventions such as the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change and, in particular, the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, particularly in Africa. [The work carried out under those
conventions [should not determine the] [and the] work of the panel [but should
complement and enhance it in the context of sustainable forest development]
[should be complementary to each other].] [The panel should not duplicate the
work carried out under these conventions but seek ways to complement the work
of these conventions in the specific context of sustainable forest
management.]
51. Forest-related action aimed at combating desertification and mitigating
the effects of drought [should address the underlying causes of these
phenomena in an integrated manner, [and should consider the role of poverty,]
[in which the role of poverty should be considered,] along with migration,
refugees, land-use planning and policies, food security, and provision of
fodder and fuelwood, among many other economic, social and cultural causes,
including the effects of non-sustainable production and consumption patterns
as well as of trade and balanced trade relations, should be considered in a
manner consistent with the Convention to Combat Desertification] [should be
determined in the context of national forest programmes, taking into account
the underlying causes of these phenomena and the relevant conceptual
considerations outlined under programme elements I.1 and I.2, in accordance
with the Convention to Combat Desertification].
52. The Panel emphasized the need for cross-sectoral action at the political
and policy-making levels to improve legislation and to accelerate
implementation within the context of national forest programmes and national
action [plans to combat desertification] [programmes, consistent with article
10 of the Convention to Combat Desertification]. Closer collaboration was
needed between forest and agriculture institutions, including support for
farmers and herders.
53. While recognizing that forest land rehabilitation would be required in
many areas and that this would need external [inputs] [financial resources,
technology transfer] and international assistance to support local and
national efforts, the Panel emphasized the need for prevention rather than
mitigation and restoration, with emphasis on improved and sustainable
management of the already existing natural forest and other vegetation. The
restoration of arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid zones should not, however,
focus narrowly on afforestation, but also deal with the broader issue of
forest ecosystem management, including social and economic aspects. The Panel
identified the need to strengthen research, including support for regional
research networks, related to the identification of appropriate species for
arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid land restoration, the rehabilitation of
existing vegetation types and the potential of non-timber forest products.
[This could be considered by the Committee on Science and Technology of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention to Combat Desertification.]
54. The Panel, while considering the merits of the application of bottom-up
approaches along with top-down approaches, involving all major groups
concerned with the issues, emphasized the need for national action programmes
to draw more extensively on local and traditional knowledge and
agro-sylvopastoral systems, in accordance with guiding principles as outlined
in programme element I.3. These approaches should be supported by an enabling
legislative and institutional framework that includes secure rights and access
to land. Sustainable development strategies and national forest and land-use
programmes should be encouraged and coordinated, as appropriate. Countries in
regions affected or threatened by desertification and the effects of drought
should [propose initiatives and establish priorities for action] [be
encouraged to undertake the obligations contained in article 5 of the
Convention to Combat Desertification].
55. The Panel emphasized the need for donors, international organizations
and recipient countries [to engage in [adequate] consultations in order] to
develop efficient and coordinated programmes of international cooperation on
forests [that are consistent with] [in the context of] the Convention to
Combat Desertification, the Convention on Biological Diversity [and in
accordance with the Panel's mandate, the Forest Principles and Agenda 21].
56. The Panel noted that forest fires have continuing devastating effects on
some forest ecosystems [, in particular in countries south of the Sahara, and
those countries with dry forests in the Mediterranean zones,] although in
[other] [specific] areas they may have positive effects on the vitality and
renewal of forest ecosystems.
57. The Panel noted that the trend of expanding forest cover in some
countries had been or was being achieved as a result of popular movements in
conjunction with political and Government support. In many cases, plantations
of fast-growing trees have had good and cost-effective results in terms of
soil protection.
57 bis. Education, training and extension systems addressed to specific
groups can also play an important role in preventing deforestation and/or
desertification.
Impact of airborne pollution on forests
58. The Panel noted that the impact of air pollution on forest health is a
problem affecting not only parts of Europe, but also many other parts of the
world. The need for a preventive approach to combating, rather than
accommodating air pollution, including considerations of production and
consumption patterns, was stressed. The Panel also stressed the importance of
the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution and welcomed the
widespread and general application of the critical loads approach adopted in
the context of that Convention.
59. The Panel emphasized the need to continue monitoring the impact of air
pollution on forest health, but also stressed the need for continuing action
to reduce air pollution, including action to transfer and supply the best
available, as well as future, technologies. The solution to the problem had
to be based on action outside the forest. [A synthesis of the impact of
airborne pollutants on forests, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe,
and an assessment of ongoing remedial activities and proposals for possible
future actions should be prepared and evaluated.]
2. [Specific conclusions]
[Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and/or drought]
60. [An integrated approach should be adopted to the management of existing
vegetation, reforestation, afforestation and the restoration of fragile forest
ecosystems affected or threatened by desertification and/or drought within the
overall social and economic development of those areas.]
61. [A closer relationship should be established between reforestation and
the management of existing forest ecosystems, including an in-depth analysis
of traditional agro-sylvopastoral systems, [for the purpose of benefiting
from] [drawing on] existing knowledge, and devoting greater attention to the
potential of non-timber forest products. International cooperation is
essential in this respect.]
61 bis. Where appropriate, and as soon as possible, protected areas must be
supported for those fragile and endangered ecosystems affected by drought and
desertification, as part of conservation in situ strategies.
Impact of airborne pollution on forests
62. Further monitoring and evaluation should be [carried out] [continued] of
the experience of pollution-related forest decline worldwide, [of pollutant-
related declines] where they have occurred and of how the respective countries
addressed such decline.
63. The critical loads approach may be considered by those countries where
forests are, or may be, affected by air pollution.
64. The potential impact on forest health of inputs of nutrients and
airborne pollutants, acting in combination with other processes such as
natural weathering and leaching, should be recognized in forest planning and
management.
Proposals for action
Fragile ecosystems affected by desertification and/or drought
65. [While] emphasizing the need [for consistency] [to be consistent with
and avoiding duplication] with actions and developments under the Convention
to Combat Desertification, the Panel:
(a) Encouraged [Governments] [countries] to continue forest-related
analysis and [monitoring of past, present and future experiences] [evaluation
of past and present experiences and monitoring of future developments],
including biophysical, economic, social and ecological aspects and
institutional and land tenure reform, which are important for sustainable
forest management. Developing countries should be assisted so as to increase
their capacity for these activities;
(b) [Urged [Governments] [countries], with the support of donors and
international organizations, to strengthen partnerships, collaboration and
sharing of responsibilities between local communities, Governments,
non-governmental organizations and other [interested] [major] groups,
including long-term institutional and legal arrangements;]
OR
(b) [Urged Governments, donors and international organizations to
strengthen and further develop partnerships, shared responsibilities and
collective action through concerted support of national forest and land-use
programmes in accordance with the general considerations as outlined in
programme element I.1;]
(c) [Stressed the need for collective action to address the complex
issues related to dry-land forest ecosystems and [particularly urged the donor
countries to strengthen cooperation with [less developed] [developing]
countries] [invited Parties to the Convention to Combat Desertification to
give this high priority];]
(d) [Urged donors, international agencies and recipient Governments to
engage [in consultations in order to develop] [effectively in developing]
efficient and coordinated programmes of international cooperation [to combat
desertification] [on forests] [consistent with] [within the context of] the
Convention to Combat Desertification and within the broader mandate of the
panel, the Forest Principles and Agenda 21;]
OR
(d) [Urged Governments, donors and international organizations to take
the necessary steps, where relevant, to coordinate and harmonize national
forest and land-use programmes at the regional level;]
(d) bis. Encouraged Governments to express political commitment in
addressing dry-land issues, by considering them in NFPs and in other explicit
national forest policies, as well as by promoting education and training of
stakeholders in national resource management of dry lands;
(d) ter. Invited the Committee on Science and Technology of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention to Combat Desertification to
undertake the identification of appropriate tree species for arid, semi-arid
and dry sub-humid land restoration and consider the rehabilitation of existing
vegetation and the potential for non-wood timber products;
(d) quater. Urged the promotion of protected areas where ecosystems
still exist in arid and semi-arid regions, including the preservation of their
water resources, as well as their historical and traditional uses.
Impact of airborne pollution on forests
66. The Panel:
(a) [Encouraged [Governments] [countries] to include prevention of
damaging air pollution and reduction of [transboundary] [long-range] pollution
in national sustainable development strategies;]
OR
(a) [Encouraged Governments to adopt a preventive approach for reducing
transboundary air pollution in the context of national sustainable development
strategies;]
(b) Recommended that existing regional programmes monitoring the impact
of airborne pollution on forest health in affected countries should continue
and be extended to other [areas] [regions] as [required] [needed];
(c) Encouraged [Governments] [countries] to cooperate in activities
related to the impact of airborne pollutants on forest health, including the
dissemination of information to the public and the provision of access to
existing data by potential users, including managers and policy makers;
(d) [Encouraged Governments in other regions to enter into binding
agreements, [as appropriate] on the reduction of the impact of airborne
pollutants;]
(e) Urged [Governments] [countries] and international agencies to
continue specific research [and field data collection] related to the
socio-economic and environmental impact of airborne pollutants on forests,
including work on ecosystem functions where pollutant depositions threaten
sustainability. In this context, attention should also be given to promoting
technical cooperation, including exchange of information and technical
assistance in order to help capacity-building on research concerning the
impact of airborne pollution on forests;
(e) bis. Encouraged further work under existing monitoring systems on
how to assess and monitor national level criteria and indicators regarding the
impact of airborne pollutants on sustainable forest management.
E. Programme element I.5: Needs and requirements of countries
with low forest cover
Mandate
67. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element I.5 is to "propose measures to address the needs and
requirements of developing countries and other countries with low forest cover
in order to promote the activities aimed at conserving the existing coverage,
with particular attention to the unique types of forests".8
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
68. The Panel recognized that there are both developed and developing
countries with low forest cover. Low forest cover [is due to] [can arise as a
result of] natural ecological conditions as well as to human activities, and
the situation is constantly changing. Some countries are actively expanding
their forest cover, while others are approaching qualification for entry into
the low forest cover category. The Panel also recognized that due to economic
factors and circumstances, the extent of the problem in developing countries
is much more severe than in developed countries.
69. In some countries, economic development has been historically associated
with the significant loss of forests, leading to disturbing consequences for
[present-day economic systems] in terms of land degradation and social,
cultural and economic hardship. The restricted area of forests in countries
with low forest cover results in reduced capacity for the production of timber
and the provision of goods and services, including the protection of
watersheds, the supply of fuelwood, the maintenance of biological diversity,
the loss of endemic species and the loss of recreation and amenity. Moreover,
many of the forest types in these countries are distinctive or even rare, and
require national as well as international protective measures, while the
proportion included in nationally designated protected areas is often below
average.
70. [The Panel stressed that special attention should be given to the needs
and requirements of countries with low forest cover, particularly developing
countries and countries with economies in transition, in addressing the
management, conservation and sustainable development of their forest
resources.] [The Panel stressed that in addressing, at both the national and
international levels, the management, conservation and sustainable development
of forest resources of countries with low forest cover, particularly
developing countries, the specific needs and requirements of those countries
should be fully taken into account.]
71. The Panel noted that many of the issues arising under this programme
element also arose elsewhere on its agenda, notably under programme elements
I.1 to I.4 and III.1. It also emphasized that actions under this programme
element needed to be [coordinated with] [supportive of] actions, inter alia,
under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, and the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, particularly in Africa.
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
[Definition of low forest cover]
72. The Panel recognized the seriousness of problems faced by both
developing and developed countries with low forest cover in satisfying their
needs for forest goods and services. [The Panel felt that there was a need
for a more precise identification of countries categorized as countries with
low forest cover. [The existing definitions of forest cover (for example,
those used by the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment) namely, areas with
20 per cent of minimum crown cover, for developed countries, and 10 per cent
of minimum crown cover, for developing countries, do not have any scientific
foundation, nor do they allow for the comparability of data on a worldwide
basis.]]
72 bis. The Panel felt that there was a need for a more precise
identification of countries categorized as countries with low forest cover.
The definition of forest used by the Panel following the FAO Global Forest
Resources Assessment, is that it includes vegetation with 20 per cent and
10 per cent minimum tree crown cover for developed and developing countries,
respectively. This does not have a strong scientific foundation, nor does it
allow for the comparability of data on a worldwide basis. Furthermore, there
is no consistent way of classifying countries by the extent of forest, however
defined, into those with low forest cover and those with high forest cover.
Proposals for action
73. The Panel called upon FAO, in consultation with relevant organizations
and countries, as appropriate, to develop a [scientifically based] definition
of low forest cover, applicable to all countries, which would also be useful
in relation to the work on the Forest Resources Assessment, 2000.
[National forest programmes]
74. The Panel recognized that the needs of low- and [high-] [middle-] income
countries with low forest cover are likely to differ from those of high-income
countries and, consequently, different sets of actions to address these needs
will apply. The Panel stressed that this categorization should not result in
the underestimation and undervaluation of the problem. The Panel noted,
however, that national forest programmes (NFPs), [or other national forest
plans and strategies], are a good vehicle to partially address the needs and
requirements of countries with low forest cover.
75. The Panel recognized that the participatory and cross-sectoral nature of
NFPs may provide low forest cover countries with the possibility of analysing
and considering [all available] alternatives to satisfy diverse demands for
forest goods and services within and outside the forest sector.
76. [The Panel recognized that additional information may be necessary as a
basis for NFPs in countries with low forest cover, but this should not prevent
the preparation of interim plans based on information already available.]
Proposals for action
77. The Panel urged [Governments in] countries with low forest cover:
(a) To seek to ensure long-term security of forest goods and services
through the development of national forest programmes for the sustainable
management of all types of forests in accordance with the guiding principles
outlined under programme element I.1. [These programmes should address
production and conservation needs, using cross-sectoral and participatory
approaches, involving all interested parties, and taking into account the
subsistence and specific cultural needs and traditional rights of indigenous
[peoples] [people], forest dwellers and [other] local communities. Efficient
coordination mechanisms involving all interested parties should be developed
to ensure full participation in, and effective implementation of, NFPs;]
(b) [To define, as far as possible within the framework of the NFP
process [their national requirements for] a permanent forest estate (PFE), in
those countries that may have a need to define a PFE as a policy goal, taking
into account [of the many uses to which it would be put,] [the] current and
future needs for forest goods and services, the quantity as well as the
quality of existing forest ecosystems, availability of plantable land, systems
of land tenure and resource ownership [and the fair and equitable sharing of
benefits arising from the utilization of biological resources.] In defining
and deciding how best to establish and maintain a PFE, including the need for
forest plantations, substitutes and importation, countries should take into
account the subsistence and specific cultural needs of indigenous people,
local communities and forest dwellers;]
(c) [[When embarking on the enlargement of their forest estate by means]
[To consider the benefits] of forest plantations, [to plan and manage these]
to enhance production and provision of goods and services, while paying due
attention to all relevant social, cultural, economic and environmental
considerations in the selection of species, areas and silviculture systems
[and using]. N[n]ative species should be preferred where appropriate [where
feasible]. Special care should be taken to avoid replacing natural ecosystems
of high ecological and cultural values with forest plantations, [particularly
monocultures];]
(c) bis. To emphasize the natural regeneration of degraded forest areas
by involving communities and indigenous people in their protection and
management;
(d) [When considering non-wood substitutes or imports of forest
products, to fully analyse and take into account the related social, economic
and environmental implications and costs of such measures;]
(e) To [give special attention to the critical need to] establish [or
increase] networks of protected areas, buffer zones and [biological]
[ecological] corridors in order to conserve biodiversity, particularly in
unique types of forests. Close liaison with activities within the framework
of the Convention on Biological Diversity should be encouraged;
(f) [Particularly in developing countries and countries with economies
in transition,] to embark on capacity-building programmes based on the
analysis of institutions at all levels [to ensure efficiency and effective
participation in decision-making throughout the planning and implementation
processes, and] taking full advantage of the wealth of traditional knowledge
available in the country;
(g) To develop adequate research and information systems, including the
use of national level criteria and indicators. These activities should be
based on reliable evaluations and periodic assessments as well as sectoral and
cross-sectoral mechanisms for information exchange, in order to allow for
timely decisions related to national forest policies and programmes;
(h) [[In need of development assistance] [Urged Governments and donor
organizations] to further develop and test the concept of a forest partnership
agreement as a means to secure long-term commitments [between Governments and
international institutions.] [at the national and international levels.]
[International cooperation]
78. The Panel [noted] [emphasized] the importance of international
cooperation to address the sustainable management, conservation and
development of forests in low-income countries with low forest cover,
particularly developing countries, through financial assistance and the
transfer of technology as well as through the establishment of appropriate
research and information networks.
79. The Panel [noted [with concern]] [expressed concern] [that [currently
decreasing]] [the current] levels of official development assistance [and the
[increasing] focus of private investments in countries with abundant forest
resources, render] [have rendered] forest ecosystems in developing countries
with low forest cover [particularly vulnerable. In those countries] with low
forest cover, official development assistance [is and] will continue to be
[the most] [an] important source of funding, [and national forest programmes
should be considered the main vehicle to channel and secure the effectiveness
of the required financial and technical assistance.]
Proposals for action
80. The Panel:
(a) [Urged international organizations, in cooperation with national
Governments and international organizations, to [develop] [consider] efficient
[mechanisms] [ways] for international cooperation [in] [to] support [of] the
sustainable [development] [management] of forests in countries with low forest
cover, particularly through the exchange of information and transfer of
technology, and the sharing of successful experiences in increasing forest
cover;]
OR
(a) [Urged Governments as well as international organizations to
[develop efficient] [improve] mechanisms for international cooperation in
support of the sustainable development of forests in countries with low forest
cover, particularly through financial assistance, the transfer of technology
and know-how, as well as the exchange of information [and transfer of
technology], and the sharing of successful experiences in increasing forest
cover. The Panel also urged Governments to take into consideration the
provisions of the Convention to Combat Desertification;]
(b) Urged donor countries to [place greater emphasis on [supporting]
[support] developing countries and countries with economies in transition with
low forest cover, through ODA, provision of new and additional resources and
facilitating transfer of technology, in order to [ensure the conservation,]
[promote sustainable] management [and sustainable development] of their
forests;
(b) bis. Urged Governments and donor organizations to further develop
and test the concept of a forest partnership agreement as a means to secure
long-term commitments at the national and international levels;
(b) ter. Urged developed countries with low forest cover and endowed
with suitable land and climate conditions to take a firm lead in efforts
towards the greening of the world, in accordance with principle 8 (a) of the
Forest Principles, and urged developed countries with low forest cover, but
with limited land and unsuitable climatic conditions, to assist developing
countries through adequate and appropriate transfer of technology and
financial resources. Special efforts should be made in this regard towards
the provision of new and additional financial resources and technology
transfer for the substitution of wood-related products as a source of energy;
(b) quater. Urged donor countries as well as multilateral and
international organizations, to assist developing countries in their data
gathering and analysis activities, aimed at monitoring their forest resources.
F. Programme element II: International cooperation in financial
assistance and technology transfer
Mandate
81. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element II is to "explore ways of improving the efficiency and
coordination of bilateral and multilateral assistance; and consider ways to
address the critical areas relating to the transfer and development of
environmentally sound technology on favourable terms as mutually agreed and
the mobilization of financial resources, including the provision of new and
additional resources with a view to assisting developing countries to pursue
policies and comprehensive strategies for achieving sustainable forest
management, recalling principles 10 and 11 of the Non-legally Binding
Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the
Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of all Types of Forests,
and the Rome Statement on Forestry agreed by Ministers responsible for Forests
in March 1995".9
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
82. The Panel emphasized that the issues of financial [assistance]
[resources] and transfer of technology are cross-cutting, interlinked and
essential for the achievement of [the management, conservation and sustainable
development of all types of forests] [sustainable forest management (SFM)],
particularly for developing countries and countries with economies in
transition. The Panel reiterated that these cross-cutting issues are critical
to progress in all other programme elements within its terms of reference.
Efforts to mobilize financial resources [from all sources, public and private,
domestic and external] [including the provision of new and additional
resources] should therefore be intensified.
82 bis. The Panel recognized that in developing countries domestic resources
for the financing, management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forest are scarce and international financial sources remain vital.
83. In proposing measures to address these issues, the Panel emphasized the
need to take into account principles 7, 8 (c), 9 (a), 10, 11 and 12 (a) to (c)
of the Forest Principles and relevant chapters of Agenda 21. The Panel
[[confirmed] [noted] that [a large] [there is an] [investment] gap between
existing resources and those necessary to achieve [sustainable forest
management (SFM)] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of
all types of forests] still remains for all types of finance and that these
gaps will need to be clarified.] [recognized that there is a need for greater
financial investments from all sources to achieve SFM, as well as a need to
improve the absorptive capacity of recipient countries to use financial
resources].
84. The Panel recognized that disinvestment continues on a huge scale so
that forest resources are being lost without being replaced and without an
adequate return to the forest sector. The Panel recognized that there is a
need to promote new and innovative forms of finance and [combine] [complement]
[facilitate] all forms of finance, at the public, private, international,
domestic and local levels and to combine them with existing ones, as well as
to ensure the predictability and continuity of flow of financial resources.
There is an important potential in innovative financial packages and new types
of public-private partnerships. [Recognizing the importance of all these,
however, does not in any way diminish the importance of international public
finance and existing commitments to it.] The financing needs of SFM at the
global and national levels must mainly be met by the revenue generated by the
forest sector itself, be it the public or private sector. Some countries with
valuable forest estates and stronger economies have a much greater potential
for generating private sector and domestic [public] investment than others.
The catalytic and leveraging roles of international public funding remain
essential for developing countries. The Panel also recognized that more
effective use of available finance is conducive to attracting additional
resources.
84 bis. The Panel recognized the central role that NFPs play as a policy tool
and as a means of promoting, prioritizing and coordinating financial
investments, both public and private.
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
Public finance
85. The provision to the developing countries of effective means, inter
alia, financial resources and technology, to achieve the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests should be
pursued in compliance with Agenda 21. In this respect, predictable levels of
funding to support long-term objectives in the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all types of forests, and the provision to
developing countries of substantial new and additional financial resources are
necessary.
86. ODA is a main source of external funding. The Panel recognized that the
principal aim of ODA funds is to alleviate poverty and that poverty as a main
cause of deforestation. [The Panel, however, expressed its concern that [ODA
levels] [funding levels including ODA] for SFM */ (*/ While some
delegations suggested replacing "SFM" by "the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all types of forests" throughout the text, other
delegations felt that this issue should be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
The inclusion of the appropriate wording is pending resolution of this problem
by the Panel.) [and conservation] are insufficient and declining.] [The
Panel expressed its concern that the level of ODA has been insufficient to
achieve SFM] [The Panel expressed its concern that SFM is not given sufficient
priority in ODA]. It stressed that efforts towards fulfilment of [all]
financial commitments [of Agenda 21, especially those contained in chapter 33]
[contained in chapter 33 of Agenda 21], is important for achieving SFM
worldwide and for protecting [strategic] [representative] forest ecosystems.
The continuing challenge to ensure that ODA is deployed [more efficiently and
effectively] is independent of trends in international public sector
financing. [ODA will continue to play an important role in supporting forest-
related activities in developing countries especially for activities for which
it is difficult to attract financing from other sources.] Given the
increasing demands on ODA, it is important that ODA funds for the forest
sector are used as efficiently as possible.
87. Efforts in developing countries aimed at raising [additional] financial
resources at the domestic level need to be strengthened and should also be
supported and supplemented from international sources, particularly in the
least developed countries and countries with low forest cover, as well as in
countries with significant forest areas. External sources of public funds,
particularly through international financial institutions and ODA, are
therefore [essential] [important] to finance forest activities including
capacity-building, as well as to leverage private-sector investment.
[Forest-related projects which have global environmental benefits should also
be supported through programmes of the Global Environment Facility (GEF)
relevant to biodiversity, climate change and international waters, as well as
other international financing sources.] [The Panel recognized that forest-
related projects to be supported through GEF programmes relevant to
biodiversity, climate change and international waters, are done under the
guidance provided by the conferences of the parties to international
instruments on those subjects.]
87 bis. It is relevant to examine different possibilities to enhance
international cooperation in the field of financing the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests. In this
respect, the Panel stressed the need for the developing countries to find
durable solutions to the debt problems of low- and middle-income developing
countries in order to provide them with the needed means for the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests. Other forms
of innovative financing should also be explored.
88. [Economic instruments (EIs)] [Market-based instruments (MBIs)] such as
taxes, levies, user fees and domestic public investments could generate
additional financial resources to support activities for sustainable forest
management and conservation. A whole range of options for [EIs] [MBIs]
relevant to specific national conditions warrants further examination.
Adequately valuing forest resources [and markets that reward SFM will promote
SFM] [will promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of
all types of forests] and generate needed public resources.
Proposals for action
89. The Panel:
(a) [Urged donor countries to increase the proportion of their ODA
contribution in support of programmes in both the forest and forest-related
sectors for [conservation,] SFM, and [forest-related industrial development to
increase the share of domestic resources allocated to SFM] [community-based
enterprises] and urged [recipient countries] [to prioritize forests] [to raise
the priority of forests] [to give priority to SFM] in programming the ODA
available to them;]
OR
(a) [Urged donor countries to increase the proportion of their ODA
contribution supporting programmes for the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all types of forests, including afforestation,
reforestation especially native species and related research, and the
promotion of non-wood forest products, especially in developing countries
where private investment has remained insufficient. The Panel also urged
recipient countries to prioritize forest activities or national resources
development strategies that favoured the management, conservation and
sustainable development of all types of forests in programming the ODA
available to them;]
(a) bis. Requested relevant United Nations organizations to clarify the
gap between existing resources and those necessary to achieve the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests, including
ODA resources;
(b) Urged Governments, [through their representatives in governing
bodies] [through the appropriate channels], to support, where appropriate,
increased and improved programmes for SFM [and conservation] in multilateral
organizations, [particularly] [including] the multilateral development banks,
whose programmes [should] include concessional loans;
(c) Called for greater emphasis on national capacity-building [and] [in]
the development of comprehensive national programmes and in international
cooperation programmes;
(c) bis. Urged donor agencies to finance national initiatives aimed at
developing NFPs in developing countries;
(d) Encouraged countries in a position to do so to continue introducing
and employing appropriate [economic] [market-based] instruments and incentives
from a range of options such as user fees, increased rent capture and levies,
as tools to mobilize [domestic] financial resources in support of SFM, as well
to reduce social costs and negative environmental impacts due to unsustainable
forest[ry] and land management practices;
(e) Invited [[UNDP and the World Bank to take the lead] [the Bretton
Woods institutions], together with other] relevant international
organizations, to further explore [innovative ways to use existing financial
mechanisms more effectively and] [possibilities] to generate additional
forest-specific public and private financial resources at [the domestic as
well as at] the international level.
Private sector investment
90. The Panel noted that, in general, private capital flows are growing and
are increasingly greater than relatively constant public funding, taking into
account their uneven distribution among developing countries. [This trend is
also visible in the case of private investment in forests.] The Panel
recognized, therefore, that it is critical for countries to take the necessary
measures to introduce appropriate policies and create an enabling environment
to attract private sector investment and to ensure that this investment
contributes to [SFM [including protection and conservation of forest
resources]] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests]. In addition, policies that encourage local community
investment in [SFM] [the management, conservation and sustainable development
of all types of forests] in particular those relating to long-term land tenure
and usufruct rights could mobilize significant local financing. Measures that
encourage private sector activities towards [SFM] [the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests] include
[[voluntary] codes of conduct for SFM,] strengthening national regulations and
enforcement, full pricing */ (*/ United States of America; Group of 77.)
of renewable resources, and various incentives for better forest management
practices. The potential of voluntary codes of conduct should be explored in
this regard. Policies and regulations should also be carefully evaluated
before implementation to avoid negative social and environmental impacts and
market distortions. At the sectoral level, market failures create
disincentives for investments. Priority in policy design should be given to
the correction of these failures, including those outside the forest sector.
Proposals for action
91. The Panel:
(a) [Encouraged all countries to formulate policies, regulations and
incentives that favour forestry practices that are consistent with [SFM] [the
management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of
forests], **/ (**/ United States of America; Group of 77.) including
strengthening national regulations and enforcement to attract private sector
investments.] [Encouraged countries to promote full pricing of renewable
resources and to formulate policies and incentives as well as to strengthen
and enforce national regulations that favour forestry practices that are
consistent with SFM]. [Formulation of [voluntary] codes of conduct [in
cooperation with or] by the private sector should be further examined] [In
this context, voluntary codes of sustainable forest management to guide
investments, concessions and forest management should be developed in
cooperation with the private sector and all other major groups, including
indigenous people and local communities;]
(b) Invited developing countries [to adjust their policies and
regulations] to create a favourable environment to attract domestic and
foreign private sector, as well as local community, investments for SFM, and
to attract environmentally sound forest-based industries, reforestation and
non-wood forest product industries [as well as] for the conservation and
protection of forests;
(c) [[Called upon] [Invited] developed countries to [consider]
formulate[ing] and create[ing] incentives, including [tax breaks,] loan and
investment guarantees, to encourage their private sector to act consistently
with best practices and invest in sustainable management [and utilization] of
all types of forests in developing countries as well as countries with
economies in transition.]
Community sector investment
92. Community financing is an important element in enhancing the sustained
productivity of forest resources. With appropriate policy changes there is a
real potential for gaining financial contributions from local communities.
Experience suggests that despite their low level of income, many forest-
dependent communities can mobilize substantial labour, materials and capital
resources for forest development.
Proposals for action
93. The Panel encouraged countries to emphasize community financing as a
fundamental strategy to respond to the need for sustainable resource
mobilization to enhance forest productivity and to establish supportive policy
and programmatic mechanisms and instruments to enable local investments, in
cash or kind, in forest development.
Technology transfer
94. The Panel stressed that [technology transfer, development and exchange]
[transfer of environmentally sound technology], [as a component of public and
private investments,] plays an important role in the forest sector and as a
part of strategies for enabling countries to [manage, conserve and]
sustainably [develop] [manage] their forests through the application of
appropriate environmentally sound ["hard and soft"] technologies, and should
take into account principle 11 of the Forest Principles.
95. The Panel noted that there is an unprecedented accumulation of
technological capability in the world today, including for forestry. However,
much of it, including those technologies in the public domain, remains largely
unrecognized, underutilized and inadequately [shared] [disseminated].
[Nevertheless, technological innovations are critical for the sustainable
management [and utilization as well as conservation] of forests in the context
of present and future challenges facing forests, and ever-increasing diverse
demands placed on forests.]
96. The Panel noted that a technology needs assessment, [as one of many
tools for assessing technologies, which could facilitate technology transfer,
requires] [undertaken in] consultation with all interested parties involved in
SFM [such as government, non-governmental organizations, the private sector,
scientists, and local communities, and] could be [employed] [a useful tool] to
identify appropriate environmentally sound technologies that are required for
the sustainable [development], management, [utilization and conservation] of
forests.
97. [Owing to similarity in terms of forest types, institutions and culture,
there is a considerable potential for South-South cooperation [in conjunction
with, and as a complement to North-South cooperation] in technology
transfer].] [As technology mainly resides in the North, in particular
technologies in the private domain, there is considerable potential for
North-South cooperation in technology transfer, under favourable conditions,
including on concessional and preferential terms for developing countries.]
98. Strengthening national research and training institutions at the
national and international levels, and improving knowledge sharing and
extension mechanisms [is a] are critical [prerequisites] with respect to
increasing absorptive capacity for technology transfer and ensuring adequate
capability to adapt these technologies to local conditions. Forest-related
research should be followed up by appropriate extension activities.
Proposals for action
99. The Panel:
(a) Requested that developed countries, the international organizations
and multilateral donors facilitate [and catalyse] [public and private] forest-
related technology transfer [by public and private means];
(b) [Urged] [Encouraged] countries to assess and explicitly identify
technological requirements of their countries in order to achieve sustainable
management, [conservation and sustainable development] of their forests. The
assessment and identification of specific technology needs should be
consistent with recognized priorities within national forest programmes, and
other national policy frameworks;
(c) Called upon countries to formulate policies and incentives and
create an enabling environment that encourage [the private sector] [all
concerned] to develop and use environmentally sound technologies;
(d) Called for the promotion of [North-South, South-South as well as
trilateral North-South-South] cooperation in forest-related technology
transfer through public and private sector [investment,] joint ventures,
exchange of information and greater networking among forest-related
institutions. Consideration should be given to related work being conducted
in other international forums, notably the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity;
(e) [Agreed that priority in technology transfer and capacity-building
should be established and continually reviewed [given to the following areas]
[and could include]: valuation of forest services, information dissemination
to improve forest and land-use planning and improvement of forest yields;
technology and methods that reduce environmental damage due to current
forestry practices; conservation and protection; species research, including
biotechnology, for tree improvement for rehabilitation, reforestation and
nursery development, and native species research; technology and methods for
enhancing forest values, including biological diversity; incorporation of
indigenous knowledge in forest management, utilization, rehabilitation and
regeneration; new and renewable sources of energy, in particular fuelwood and
its appropriate substitutes; environmentally sound [logging] [forest
harvesting] technologies; enhancement of technologies regarding wood
processing; development of new non-wood and wood forest products; promotion of
techniques and design so as to add more aggregate value to forest products;
and development and implementation of national forest strategies; */ (*/ The
Panel is invited to add new elements to this list.)
OR
(e) [Agreed that bilateral and multilateral donors should give priority
in financing technology development, exchange and transfer to the assessments
made by countries of their technological requirements for achieving SFM;]
Research **/
(**/ It was suggested that paragraphs 16 (f) to (i), together with other
research-related paragraphs, could constitute a separate section in the final
report of the Panel.)
(f) [Agreed on the need for a more [comprehensive] [focused] approach in
research to support SFM and conservation, and that urgent research priorities
include: development of criteria and indicators for SFM, including their
testing as well as field level, pilot-scale implementation; integrated
site-specific socio-economic and biophysical studies to understand the
relationship between human development and forests; periodic assessment of
forests; examination of trends of supply of and demand for forest products;
forest policy at the national, regional and global levels; environmentally
sound technologies of forest-based industries; consideration of the impacts of
pervasive external stresses such as climate change, ozone depletion and air
pollution on long-term health, productivity and biodiversity of forests;
forest assessment and valuation; community participation; forest conservation;
research on the human impact on protected forest areas and cost-effective
processing techniques;]
(g) [Called upon countries, research institutions and agencies to make
use of participatory rural appraisal and other participatory techniques to
determine research and technology development agendas for increasing
productivity appropriate to community-level needs;]
(h) [Requested the Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR),
the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF), the
International Union of Forestry Research Organizations (IUFRO), FAO, the
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
ITTO and the International Boreal Forest-Research Association (IBFRA), in
consultation with a group of internationally recognized experts, to propose
measures to overcome inadequate research capacity in the developing countries
and to develop and adapt technologies for SFM. Measures to be considered
could include strengthening existing national research institutions and
subregional and regional networks; joint research ventures; approaches to
enhancing and strengthening the effectiveness of the participation of existing
international, regional, subregional and national forest research institutions
in an international network dedicated to the conservation, sustainable
development, management and utilization of forests and forest policy research;
and creation of appropriate mechanisms that enable research findings to reach
policy and field levels more effectively for concrete action;]
OR replace subparagraphs (f), (g) and (h) with the following text:
[Agreed on the need for a more comprehensive approach in research to
support the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types
of forests, including, inter alia, the strengthening of existing national
research institutions, subregional and regional networks; joint research
ventures; approaches to enhancing and strengthening the participation of
existing international, regional, subregional and national forest research
institutions in an international network dedicated to the conservation,
sustainable development, management and utilization of forests and forest
policy research; and creation of appropriate mechanisms that enable research
findings to reach policy and field levels more effectively for concrete
action;]
(i) [Called for a comprehensive intergovernmental-level examination of
issues concerning forest-related technology transfer and research priorities.]
[Coordination] [Cooperation]
100. The Panel emphasized that in-country coordination and cooperation among
donors are crucial [in view of [limited financial resources] and the need] to
optimize [the use of existing] available funds. National forest programmes
(NFPs) [provide a good basis in many countries for setting priorities on
international cooperation including] [should provide the basic framework for
national and international cooperation including setting priorities] for
financial assistance and technology transfer between recipient countries and
donors.
Proposals for action
101. [For national-level coordination in recipient countries the Panel] [At
the national level the Panel]:
(a) [Invited] [Urged] countries to identify a national authority to be
responsible for in-country coordination, with the option of seeking assistance
from external sources;
(b) [Invited] [Encouraged] countries to establish country-driven NFPs
that include priority needs and that serve as a process and [framework for]
[overall framework for forest-related policies and actions including]
coordination of [financing and] international cooperation;
(c) [Invited countries to select an external agency to [support] [assist
Governments with] in-country donor coordination;]
(c) bis. Invited countries to give priority to SFM in programming the
ODA available to them;
(d) Encouraged decentralized planning and implementation of
[development] [SFM] activities [, wherever possible,] at [the district or
other] appropriate [local] [sub-national] levels, involving incentives to the
private sector, non-governmental organizations and community-based
organizations;
(e) Encouraged all concerned national bodies including [finance
ministries,] the private sector, national and commercial banks, environmental
and forestry funds, grass-roots lending associations, forest industries,
forest owners, sectoral authorities at the national and subnational levels and
external funding organizations to be involved in the planning, implementation
and monitoring processes;
(f) [Called for] [Encouraged] the pooling of national resources
including funds, technologies and scientific and human resources, where
appropriate and applicable as a means of improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of resources.
102. [For] [At the] international level [coordination] the Panel:
(a) Called for enhanced coordination, collaboration and complementarity
of activities among bilateral and multilateral donors as well as international
instruments related to forests, notably the Convention on Biological Diversity
and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, including
through the establishment of a continuing forum for forest policy
discussion; */ (*/ To be considered under category V.)
(a) bis. Called on Governments, international organizations and donor
countries to develop a shared vision of SFM, in order to provide common
objectives for coordination;
(b) Called for the provision of a better flow, to both the policy and
operational levels, of [synthesized] information on programme progress, policy
development, best practices and lending strategies, including through the
establishment of specialized databases;
(c) [[Called for] [Considered that] the development of appropriate
indicators for monitoring and evaluating the adequacy and the effectiveness of
programmes and projects supported by international cooperation [in financial
assistance and technology transfer] [should be explored] as a priority
activity;]
(d) Encouraged [countries to explore] [exploration of] the feasibility
of innovative financial packages, such as [special] [voluntary] [partnerships
for forests] [partnerships for SFM], [based on pooled resources] [supporting
[comprehensive forest programmes] [national forest programmes]], through
further study and national pilot programmes;
(e) [Called for the establishment of mandatory coordination (in-country
and at the international level) among intergovernmental organizations within
the United Nations system.]
Information systems
103. The Panel emphasized the need to review and improve existing information
systems. Attention should be given to worldwide access and information
systems that encourage the effective implementation of national forest
programmes, increased private sector investment, efficient development and
transfer of appropriate technologies, and improved [coordination]
[cooperation]. [Internet-based information systems would allow easy access
and information-sharing among multilateral agencies, country institutions,
non-governmental organizations and other interested parties.]
Proposals for action
104. The Panel invited relevant multilateral [forest] agencies and
international organizations to review and initiate the development of improved
information systems that support activities for [sustainable forest
management] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests], [particularly so as] [in particular] to encourage effective
implementation of national forest programmes, increased private sector
investment and improved cooperation, efficient development and transfer of
appropriate technologies [, and improved coordination] [as well as the
provision of new and additional financial resources] and data sharing among
interested parties. In particular the Panel invited FAO to develop a global
"depository box" type of information system, available technologies and
potential funding sources for SFM, using, inter alia, the databases and
experiences of CIFOR, ICRAF, IBFRA and other relevant research institutions.
G. Programme element III.1 (a): Assessment of the multiple
benefits of all types of forests
Mandate
105. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element III.1 (a) [and (b)] is 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].10
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
106. The Panel emphasized that assessment of the actual and potential
conditions of all types of forests is an [essential] [important] basis for
sustainable forest management, and for a wide range of considerations related
to forests [and forest ecosystems] at the local, national, regional and global
levels. The importance of national inventories [in] [for effective] national
forest programmes was stressed.
107. The Panel noted that there were many [shortfalls and] gaps in existing
information on various forest types. The database regarding both developed
and developing countries is uneven. Much attention is still given to timber
and forest cover, whereas other goods and services provided by forests such as
fuelwood, [the sustainable use, conservation and equitable sharing of benefits
of] biological diversity, soil and water conservation protection functions,
carbon sequestration and other social, cultural and economic aspects are
rarely covered and will need more attention. The Panel emphasized that
international and national forest assessments should take full account of
internationally agreed, and use national [ly accepted] [level], criteria and
indicators for sustainable forest management, where appropriate. The need to
include qualitative as well as quantitative information on forest goods and
services was stressed. The Panel agreed on the need to include new parameters
as well as the need to develop techniques to accomplish this. However,
priority should be given to the provision of reliable core data [of high
quality].
108. The Panel expressed strong support for the global Forest Resources
Assessment (FRA) 2000 and the arrangements being made following the
recommendations of the FAO Expert Consultation on Global Forest Resources
Assessment, held at Kotka, Finland in June 1996 (Kotka III), [and urged FAO]
[The Panel urged FAO, in consultation with countries and interested
organizations, to prepare a strategic plan for assessing global forest
resources, and] to prepare a detailed strategic plan for [its] [the]
implementation of the global FRA 2000, including detailed cost and funding
options and target dates. [The Panel noted the importance of ecofloristic
zone and vegetation maps as an essential tool for the FRA 2000 process.] [The
Panel noted that ecofloristic zone and vegetation maps and qualitative
parameters could provide an additional tool for the global FRA 2000 process.]
[The Panel noted that ecofloristic zone and vegetation maps are essential
tools for the FRA 2000 process, as well as the inclusion of appropriate
criteria and indicators from the Helsinki Process, the Montreal Process, the
Dry Zone of Africa initiative, the Tarapoto Proposal and ITTO in the FRA 2000
process.]
109. The Panel took note of the recommendation of Kotka III to maintain the
current 10-year interval between global forest resources assessments.
However, the possibility of [five-year intervals as well as] rolling
assessments by region could also be considered, together with the possibility
of [continuous updating of data, taking into account the financial
implications for FAO and [the] [in particular in] developing countries of
meeting the costs of such requirements] [updating data at regular intervals,
taking into account the financial and resource implications for FAO and the
developing and developed countries of meeting such requirements].
110. Concerning international cooperation, the Panel stressed that the global
FRA 2000 [is] [should be] a partnership exercise involving [ECE, the UNEP
Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS), the Global Resources
Information and Data System (GRID), the World Bank, national institutions,
NGOs and others] [United Nations organizations, national institutions and
other interested parties, including relevant major groups]. FAO should be
seen as the facilitator of this wider effort involving also national
institutions and [NGOs] [interested parties, including relevant major groups].
The Panel also agreed that coordination was needed between forest and other
related information systems, and stressed the need for [South-South
cooperation in addition to North-South cooperation] [North-South cooperation
in addition to South-South cooperation] as well as cooperation at the national
level between all interested parties both within and outside the forest
sector.
111. Resources available for the global FRA 2000 in the regular budget of FAO
and at the national level are [so] limited [that this aspect severely hampers
the exercise. The Panel stressed the need for and] [urgency of identifying]
[urgency of reallocating resources within FAO or if possible identifying]
[additional resources]. [Consideration should be given to establishing
methods by which users would provide resources for data collection.] [The
Panel stressed the need to identify new and additional financial resources for
the assessment of the multiple benefits of forests at the national and local
levels, both supporting FRA 2000.]
112. The Panel stressed that forest assessments at the national level should
adopt an integrated and holistic multidisciplinary approach and be
user-oriented and [demand-driven] [market-driven]. Such assessment programmes
should be transparent and accessible to all interested parties. [There was
general agreement on the priority to be given to meeting the needs of forest
managers.] [However, further study would be needed to define the levels of
precision required and the specific needs of different users, including forest
managers. The need to utilize fully the data already collected was stressed.]
Forest assessment programmes should fully utilize the data already collected
and analyses already carried out by local, national, regional and
international institutions. Efforts should be made to harmonize approaches to
data collection and analysis in order to enhance comparability.
113. The Panel further noted that capacity-building at the national and local
levels was crucial and should involve all interested parties, including
[NGOs,] [relevant major groups,] forest owners, local communities, indigenous
peoples [and other major groups]. Forest assessments should be
multidisciplinary and involve data collection and analysis by local and
national [and, possibly, regional as well as international] institutions.
Enhanced national capacity was considered essential for high quality national
inputs to the global FRA 2000.
113 bis. The Panel was informed of the recommendations on priorities for
scientific research on biological diversity and forests made at the second
meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological
Advice of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Panel instructed its
secretariat to liaise with the secretariat of the Convention to ensure that
any such work carried out under the Convention addresses gaps in existing
knowledge identified by the Panel as effectively as possible.
114. While recognizing the [widespread] [need for increased] application of
remote-sensing techniques and geographical information systems for forest
assessments, the Panel noted the need for ground surveys for some parameters.
The Panel also noted that assessments represented a significant financial and
technical burden, in particular for developing countries, and that they should
[therefore be carried out in the most cost-effective manner] [be assisted by
developed countries and international organizations in terms of financial
resources and technological transfer]. In some cases reallocation of
financial resources may be required to support effective forest assessment
programmes.
115. [The Panel recognized that national forest assessment programmes should
be transparent and accessible to all interested parties. Efforts should be
made to harmonize approaches to data collection and analysis in order to
enhance comparability among countries.]
116. The Panel recognized that inadequate recognition of the contribution of
forests to [gross national product] [national economies] had in [some] [many]
cases led to deforestation, forest degradation and under-investment in forest
management.
2. Specific conclusions
117. The Panel recognized the need for intensified use and dissemination of
assessment data in the public domain, including remote-sensing technology in
the public domain, as well as of other data already available. The Panel
emphasized that the use of existing FAO data, in combination with other data
sets, offers a rich potential to address urgent questions in a cost-effective
manner.
118. The Panel also recognized that data interpretation in response to user
needs is necessary. Consequently, a study of uses and categories of users of
forest resources and related information at the international, regional,
national and local levels is required. This would be particularly important
when discussing new types of information to be included in the global Forest
Resources Assessment.
Proposals for action
119. The Panel:
(a) Encouraged [Governments] [countries] as well as FAO to integrate
national level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in
forest assessment, where appropriate. This should be done in a way that is
cost-effective and scientifically sound, while recognizing differences in
economies and cultures of countries. While some indicators are quantitative,
those for some other important goods, services and cultural values are
qualitative but should still be included;
(b) Urged [Governments] [countries] [donor countries and multilateral
organizations] and users to mobilize the necessary funding [in view of the
inadequate financial resources currently available] for national level forest
assessments;
(c) Urged [Governments and international] [countries, universities and
other relevant] organizations and major groups to strengthen research on
forest inventory and monitoring techniques with a view to expanding the scope
as well as to improving the quality of existing parameters of forest
assessments to respond to the demand for new and better information in a
cost-effective manner;
(c) bis. Requested FAO and FRA 2000 to include non-wood forest products
in their evaluation;
(c) ter. Requested FAO to endeavour to include a broad range of forest
values, including non-timber values, in the global FRA 2000;
(d) Requested FAO, in consultation with Governments and relevant
organizations, to prepare and to distribute a detailed strategic plan for
implementation of the global Forest Resources Assessment 2000, including
detailed cost and funding options associated with potential new parameters,
actions, targets and responsibilities for carrying out the assessment, in
accordance with the recommendations of the Kotka III meeting and with due
regard to the requirements arising from internationally agreed criteria and
indicators for SFM;
(d) bis. Requested the formulation of an internationally acceptable and
agreed set of definitions on key terms in forest resources assessment of all
types of forests;
(e) [Called upon] [Urged] donor countries and multilateral
organizations to support capacity-building [in data gathering] as part of
national forest programmes [to overcome the lack of basic information,] in
forest resources assessments which should be integrated with strategic
planning and decision-making. National institutions for forest assessment
should be strengthened as a basic element of action towards sustainable forest
management;
(e) bis. Requested the Secretariat to conduct a study of users and
categories of forest resources and related information at the international,
regional, national and local levels to better assess the requirements of
information;
(f) [Requested that, in order to enhance coordination efforts at the
international level, FAO, in partnership with other international
organizations, national institutions and NGOs, ensure better coordination and
avoid overlap between forest and other related information systems;]
[Requested that, in order to enhance coordination efforts and increase
effective use of resources at the international level, FAO, in partnership
with other international organizations, the Intersecretariat Working Group on
Forest Statistics, national institutions and non-governmental organizations,
enhance coordination and avoid overlap between forest and other related
information systems, and also update and prioritize data requirements to avoid
collection of non-priority information;]
(g) [Urged the establishment of mechanisms for the interpretation and
dissemination of information to those countries and interested parties that
have difficulties in accessing internationally available information,
including dissemination through electronic means of national level
information.] [Urged FAO to consult with countries and interested
institutions on ways to improve access to and dissemination of information
that is relevant to SFM.]
H. Programme element III.1 (b): Methodologies for proper
valuation of the multiple benefits of forests
Mandate (III.1 (a) and III.1 (b))
120. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element III.1 (a) and (b) is 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".10
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
121. The Panel stressed that forests provide a wide range of benefits, some
of which are easy to quantify or describe in qualitative terms, while others
are more difficult to quantify. The close relationship with forest
assessment, programme element III.1 (a), was emphasized. The costs associated
[with the disappearance of forests] [deforestation and forest degradation] and
changes in forest quality, [especially] [for example] with respect to
biological diversity, biological functions, social considerations and
environmental impacts, are not adequately covered by present methodologies [.
However, this shortcoming is due as much to] [, in part because of]
[uncertainty about] [the inability to assess] the nature and significance of
[biophysical] [ecological] [and social] [social, economic, cultural and
ecological] impacts resulting from forest loss [as to uncertainty about how to
assess the costs of these impacts].
122. The Panel recognized that undervaluation of forest goods and services,
as well as of other forest attributes, including non-market benefits, [makes]
[contributes to] unsustainable forest management [more probable]. It also
recognized the difference between value and price, and noted that market
mechanisms were not always appropriate or available to give [financial]
[monetary] expression to key forest values, which may lead to the
misconception that sustainable forest management is expensive and not
cost-effective.
123. The Panel recognized the importance of the [global] services provided by
forests relating to, for example, biological diversity and climate [change]
[regulation], and the potential for developing mechanisms to translate these
values into [financial support] [monetary terms] to encourage forest [owners]
[dwellers, indigenous populations and local communities] to [conserve and]
sustainably manage forests. However, it noted that further discussion on
these issues should [follow closely the outcome] [take place in the context]
of the deliberations [in the Conference of the Parties] of the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change.
124. It was noted that [economists and other social scientists have
developed] a variety of methodologies to aid in the valuation of forest
benefits that were previously considered intangible and not amenable to
measurement [have been developed]. While there are many limitations
associated with these methodologies, they could help improve decision-making
by defining more clearly the costs and benefits associated with different
patterns of forest use, and by indicating the scope for applying various
measures to internalize environmental and social costs. These methodologies
can be used in all types of forests to improve the description of a wide range
of social, cultural and environmental benefits, including those associated
with hydrological functions, amenity, biological diversity and soil
conservation. The results of this valuation [when applied as a neutral tool]
are an important potential source of information to all interested parties and
for increasing public awareness, particularly about currently non-marketable
forest [goods and services] [benefits].
125. The Panel emphasized that the economic value of forests depends on the
[biophysical] [ecological] characteristics of particular forest areas and
their locational relationships with people and markets. These characteristics
vary both spatially and in time and, as a result, forest valuation estimates
are usually site- and time-specific. Nevertheless, there is considerable
benefit in different countries sharing experiences with the application of
particular valuation techniques and different instruments to capture a higher
share of benefits for forest owners and forest dwelling people.
126. Although the potential usefulness of forest valuation methodologies was
recognized by the Panel, it felt that their complexity and the costs involved
may limit their widespread application. The Panel emphasized that innovative
and simple [scientific] valuation methods were needed especially those related
to criteria and indicators and national forest programmes. Expensive
valuation exercises should not be performed at the expense of more pressing
basic needs, such as the development and application of reliable data systems
and the development of strategies and mechanisms to [make] [achieve]
sustainable forest management [a politically achievable objective]. [A step-
by-step process should be implemented to address the various needs in a
progressive manner.]
127. The Panel noted that economic valuation is only one of many
considerations for decision-making on forests, and that it cannot become a
substitute for the process of political decision, which includes consideration
of wide-ranging environmental, socio-economic, ethical, cultural and religious
considerations.
128. [While Governments are not able to set prices in a free market
situation, they are frequently in a position to influence the distribution of
economic rents generated from the sale of particular forest goods or services
between the various participants in the chain from production to final
consumption. Governments can exert this influence through the setting of
royalties, taxation levies and other instruments, particularly when they
themselves are the legal owners of a substantial proportion of national forest
resources.]
129. The Panel expressed support for national forest resource accounting as a
means of [creating awareness of the value of forest goods and services]
[providing strategic information for forest policy and management at the
national and subnational levels] [, for helping to define the proper
collection of economic rent and for seeking fair prices for non-timber forest
products, in particular those related to pharmaceutical products.]
130. The Panel noted the need for international cooperation in the
development of methodologies for the valuation of forest goods and services.
This could include training for staff as well as decision makers and work on
ways and means to further develop methodologies to include forest goods and
services in national accounts and to promote public awareness. The need to
exchange experience, as well as to establish pilot studies and schemes was
emphasized.
130 bis. The Panel noted the input received from the Conference of the
Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity with respect to the need to
develop methodologies for valuing forest biodiversity.
2. [Specific conclusions]
131. New forest valuation methodologies should take into account the
following criteria: practical applicability, simplicity and clarity,
multidisciplinarity, cost-effectiveness, orientation towards currently
non-marketable goods and difficult to quantify services, sensitivity to the
values of forest dwellers, indigenous people, forest owners and local
communities [, neutrality and scientific validity].
132. Further research may need to be undertaken on policy issues related to
forest values. In particular, approaches to the use of forest valuation in
national resource accounts may be further explored.
133. [A matrix showing the application, geographical scale and data sets
required for different forest valuation methods would be useful.] [A matrix
showing the application and data sets required for different methods of
valuation of forest goods and services, in particular those goods and services
that are not traded in the market place, at the local, national, regional and
international levels would be useful.]
Proposals for action
134. The Panel:
(a) Encouraged [Governments] [countries] and international agencies to
make use of available methodologies to provide improved estimates of the value
of all forest goods and services and allow for more informed decision-making
about the implications of suggested patterns of investment for sustainable
forest management [forest conservation and use] [forest conservation and
sustainable use, and to take such implications into account in the development
of national forest programmes and land-use plans];
(b) [Encouraged Governments to use] [Encouraged Governments to develop
appropriate methodologies taking into account], as appropriate to their legal
and economic circumstances, mechanisms such as the setting of area fees,
royalties and taxation to ensure that an appropriate proportion of the
economic rent is available after deduction of the costs of production and an
appropriate level of [private sector] profit. [The net economic rent should
be used to improve the sustainable management of forests and provide benefits
to people living in or near them;] [The net economic rent could be used to
improve the sustainable management of forests in a step-by-step process
involving training, capacity-building and industrial reconversion, and to
provide benefits to people living in or who are dependent on forests];
(b) bis. Requested that a matrix be prepared matching the available
forest valuation methods and data set required for the evaluation of goods and
services, in particular those goods and services that are not traded in the
market place, at the local, national, regional and international levels;
(c) Encouraged [Governments] [countries], international agencies and
relevant institutions to promote research to further develop forest valuation
methodologies in particular those related to degradation and deforestation and
criteria and indicators. These should fully recognize the ecological, social,
cultural and [religious] [spiritual] values of forests [and pay particular
attention to global dimensions of climate change and the sustainable use,
conservation and equitable sharing of the benefits of biological diversity.]
[The methodologies should support] innovative and simple methodologies for
collective decision-making on forests that involve various interested parties,
such as local communities, indigenous people and forest owners;
(c) bis. Welcomed further input from the Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on Biological Diversity, to be considered at the Panel's fourth
session, in particular with respect to providing technical advice related to
the appropriate valuation of forest biodiversity.
I. Programme element III.2: Criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management
Mandate
135. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element III.2 is to "encourage national implementation of criteria
and indicators for sustainable forest management and study the feasibility of
further developing internationally agreed upon criteria and indicators against
which progress towards sustainable management of all types of forests could be
measured, taking into account the specific regional and subregional conditions
of forests and the diversity of economic, social and cultural environments.
Within this context, facilitate the engagement of regions and countries not
yet involved in developing criteria and indicators of sustainable forest
management; share experiences in testing and implementing them; and examine
the need to promote comparability and the appropriateness of convergence among
international initiatives in this regard".11
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
136. The Panel noted the widespread international interest in, and support
for, the development and implementation of criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management [at the national level.] It emphasized that
development and implementation of criteria and indicators is a dynamic process
and that the present momentum of action must be sustained.
137. The Panel recognized that criteria and indicators are [not an end in
themselves, but should be considered as] [important and useful] tools [for
[achieving sustainable] [assessing trends in forest conditions and] forest
management] [to reach progress in sustainable forest management]. [Criteria
define the essential elements of sustainable forest management] [against which
the present state of forests and their management [can] [could] be assessed]
and [quantitative and qualitative indicators provide a basis for [measuring]
[assessing] progress towards sustainable forest management. Criteria and
indicators can play an important role in defining the goals of national forest
programmes and evaluating the effectiveness with which they are implemented.]
137 bis. Criteria and quantitative, qualitative and descriptive indicators
for sustainable forest management provide a conceptual framework for policy
formulation and a basis for periodic assessment of and reporting on the state
of forests and forest management.
138. The Panel accepted the fact that [because] criteria and indicators
[specify the essential] at the forest management unit level reflect components
of sustainable forest management [they collectively provide an implicit
definition for the current concept of sustainable forest management itself]
[and collectively could contribute to the development of the concept of
sustainable forest management itself]. The Panel stressed the need for
further efforts to reach [a [global] [broad] consensus] [an internationally
acceptable and agreed definition] on key concepts, terms, definitions and
methodologies for data collection used and definitions used in criteria and
indicators for sustainable forest management and the need [to link this
terminology to that] [for these terminologies to be compatible with the
terminology] used in other related fields, [notably] [such as] inventory,
assessment and valuation, environmental assessments, NFPs, land-use plans and
trade-related forest issues.
139. The Panel noted that a number of countries are participating actively in
international [and regional] initiatives [at the regional level] aimed at
defining and implementing national level criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management. This cooperation has enabled countries to
benefit from the experience of others and at the same time to bring new
dimensions and ideas into the international processes. The Panel urged
continuing efforts to involve those countries and regions that are not yet
participating in those initiatives. It placed particular emphasis on the need
to involve regions and subregions with distinctive ecological and geographical
characteristics and countries with low forest cover.
140. There is need for a broad spectrum of indicators covering social,
cultural, economic and ecological aspects, the institutional framework,
including issues of land tenure, and legal and policy aspects. Aspects of
forests and woodlands that are essential to meeting the basic subsistence
needs of indigenous people, forest dwellers and other local communities and
forest owners [need special definition] [require special attention] in some
countries. The Panel recognized that not all essential attributes of forests
can be defined in quantitative terms, but that this does not diminish the
importance of qualitative characterizations. In many [national]
[international] regional and international initiatives [both] quantitative and
qualitative and descriptive indicators have already been established.
140 bis. While recognizing that countries currently cooperating in the
regional and international processes are at different stages of development
and implementation of national level criteria and indicators, the Panel
stressed the need to make further progress through the existing processes, in
order to develop a greater consensus on criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management. The Panel also noted that various
international and regional processes on the development and implementation of
criteria and indicators would benefit from mutual recognition.
141. [The Panel [was not convinced of] [had divergent views on] the merits of
a core set of criteria and indicators for use at the global level, while
noting that consistency was needed in the methodology employed in global
forest assessments. Nonetheless, the] [The Panel was convinced of the
necessity of having a set of criteria and indicators wide enough to be used at
the global level, rather than a reduced core set that might prevent the mutual
recognition of regional and national initiatives, the exchange of information
and the further elaboration of the issues of best forest practices and
voluntary codes. The] Panel supported the promotion of ways and means to
maximize the exchange of information, experience and technical knowledge at
the global level, in particular between the continuing regional and
international initiatives.
142. The Panel welcomed [the progress] [efforts] made in the clarification of
links between the criteria and indicators appropriate at the national level
and those applicable to the forest management unit level, but [noted that
further analysis was required to make these fully understood] [recognized that
these links will vary from country to country].
143. In order to [avoid duplication] [make full use of existing financial
mechanisms and facilitating the transfer of technologies and the sharing of
experiences], close linkages should be forged with action taken in response to
other chapters of Agenda 21 and within the framework of international
conventions [thus making full use of existing financial mechanisms and
facilitating the transfer of technologies and the sharing of experiences].
2. Specific conclusions
144. The Panel stressed that criteria and indicators should be used at the
national [and forest management unit] level, or equivalent level of forest
management where a range of benefits is simultaneously generated so as to
improve the scope of [forest assessment] [assessing sustainable forest
management] and the planning and implementation of forest [management plans
and] programmes, taking due account of social, economic, cultural, [religious]
[spiritual] and environmental values [and so as to achieve sustainable forest
management and an appropriate derivation and apportionment of benefits].
145. National level criteria and indicators should be formulated through a
transparent process involving all [relevant] [interested] parties, including
forest owners, [native forest dwellers and NGOs] [forest dwellers, indigenous
people and local communities, as well as major groups, where applicable].
Criteria and indicators for application at the national level should be
[simple,] [practical,] scientifically based and cost effective and reflect,
inter alia, economic, social, biological and ecological circumstances.
[Attention should be given to] [As appropriate, countries may wish to further
examine] the link between the national level, the subnational level and the
forest management unit level.
145 bis. Criteria and indicators to be used at subnational or management unit
levels should be compatible with the criteria and indicators developed for
both the national and international levels and all relevant interested parties
should be involved in their development.
146. [The development of criteria and indicators for application at the
regional level, in addition to the national level should be considered.]
Analysis should continue of the degree of comparability between ongoing and
emerging initiatives, as well as the degree of compatibility and the
appropriateness of convergence among international initiatives.] [Where
appropriate, development of criteria and indicators at the national and
regional levels should be continued. Efforts should be continued to enhance
comparability, compatibility and eventual convergence of ongoing and planned
initiatives.]
OR
146. [The development of criteria and indicators for application at the
national and regional levels, in particular for forests in similar ecological
zones, in addition to continuing efforts to enhance comparability and
compatibility, as well as the analysis of the appropriateness of convergence
and harmonization among ongoing initiatives, should be considered. Further
work should be performed to develop criteria and indicators for application at
the geographical and phytogeographical levels, promoting their mutual
recognition, within the framework of the analysis of the appropriateness of
convergence.]
147. While recognizing that national level criteria and indicators may
[assist] [play an important role] in clarifying issues related to
[certification of forest products,] [forest certification and labelling of
forest products,] the Panel emphasized that the development of criteria and
indicators is intended for monitoring sustainable forest management and not
for imposing certification schemes. Criteria and indicators are not
performance standards for certifying management at the forest management unit
level and should not be made a basis for restricting trade. The Panel also
emphasized that criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management
should not be used as grounds for conditionality in the provision of ODA.
Proposals for action
148. The Panel:
(a) With reference to the Forest Principles, urged Governments to
prepare and implement criteria and indicators at the appropriate levels to
address:
(i) Trends in the mobilization of financial resources and transfer of
technology needed for sustainable development of forests in
developing countries;
(ii) The evolution of non-sustainable socio-economic behaviour and
consumption patterns with respect to forest goods and services;
(b) Encouraged [Governments [and national forest authorities]]
[countries] to make an immediate start on [the development and] [the practical
development and, when appropriate, the] implementation of criteria and
indicators, even though they may still be imperfect and incomplete. Further
scientific and technical examination, including field testing, of national
level criteria and indicators will itself provide valuable experience and
assist in further development. Formulation and implementation of criteria and
indicators should be cross-sectoral and included in national forest
programmes, as appropriate, and in land-use plans or other relevant policy
frameworks. Such criteria and indicators should be compatible with the
criteria and indicators developed at the international level;
(c) Encouraged [Governments] [countries] not yet participating in any of
the ongoing initiatives on criteria and indicators to become involved as soon
as possible. By doing so they will be able to benefit from the experience of
the existing processes as well as contributing new insights. All countries
are encouraged to take concerted action, individually or jointly, as
appropriate, to further action in this field. Developing countries which have
only recently joined such processes, or which are about to join, should, as
appropriate, be assisted through action aimed at poverty alleviation;
institutional strengthening; human resource development, with special
consideration to gender issues and to education and training at all levels;
establishment of mechanisms for increased public participation; research and
technology transfer; research networking; ensuring access to, and
dissemination and exchange of, information; development of plans and
programmes; and field-level testing of criteria and indicators for sustainable
forest management;
(d) Requested regional and international initiatives and FAO and other
international organizations to explore the possibilities for developing a
consensus on [concepts,] terms and [definitions] [processes] concerned with
criteria and indicators [and] [for] [sustainable forest management;]
[Requested international initiatives and international organizations to
explore the possibilities for reaching internationally agreed definitions,
concepts and terms concerned with criteria and indicators and the term
"sustainable forest management of all types of forests", as well as indicators
for forests in similar ecological zones, and promote their mutual
recognition;] and methodologies for data collection, including definitions of
essential terms; units of measurement to be used; methods for data assembly,
storage, accessibility and dissemination; and methods for measurement and
recording for selected indicators;
(d) bis. Encouraged countries, international agencies and research
organizations to consider ways to promote research relating to indicators for
sustainable forest management in the following priority areas, which are not
listed in any particular order: approaches to measuring biological diversity;
approaches to measuring and valuing the production of non-wood forest
products; approaches to measuring non-market benefits; approaches to
effectively gathering information relating to soil and water conservation;
approaches to measuring fragmentation of forests and its impacts; predicting
impacts of human intervention on forests; cross-sectoral factors and impacts;
development of indicators at the forest management unit level; methodologies
for aggregating data at the forest management unit level to high levels;
linkages among indicators at various levels; impacts of different forest
management systems on sustainable forest management; and social dimensions of
forest management, including land security;
(e) [Urged closer links between ongoing international initiatives,
including the ITTO "Objective Year 2000" and the activities of other
international institutions and conventions;]
(e) bis. Encouraged the fostering of "mutual" recognition of
international and regional criteria and indicators initiatives as tools for
assessing trends in forest conditions and management at the national level,
including increased liaison between processes, transparency in reporting and
closer links with international organizations;
(f) Urged [donors and international organizations] [donor countries and
multilateral and international organizations] to provide technical and
financial assistance to developing countries and countries with economies in
transition, whether they are members of existing processes or are newly
engaged in those processes, to enable them to reap the full benefits of
[participation] [involvement];
(g) Urged [donors and international organizations] [donor countries and
multilateral and international organizations] to provide technical and
financial assistance to developing countries and countries with economies in
transition in the further development, field testing and implementation of
criteria and indicators at the national, [and] [subnational and [field]
[forest management unit] levels] [forest management unit level] and to support
research through appropriate entities;
(g) bis. Urged the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on
Biological Diversity to take note of existing criteria and indicators
frameworks with a view to ensuring that work done under the Convention on
Biological Diversity on developing and implementing biodiversity indicators is
consistent with and complementary to these frameworks;
(g) ter. Urged countries, ongoing processes and international
organizations to strengthen the links between the national level and the
subnational or management unit levels, including market-related initiatives
where appropriate;
(g) quater. Considered the use of criteria and indicators in certifying
forest management, and urged countries to promote national forest plans and
national policies as part of their priorities in developing countries,
including education, capacity-building and research; and to alleviate extreme
poverty as part of the preliminary stages in initiating the use of criteria
and indicators;
(g) quinquiens. In order to reflect the global understanding of
sustainable forest management and having regard to the commonalities between
different regional and international processes, the Panel recommended drawing
on these and the Forest Principles to develop global reference criteria which
would represent the common denominator of all regional and international sets
of criteria;
(g) sexiens. Encouraged countries and relevant international
organizations to promote the application of regionally and nationally agreed
criteria and indicators, and best available forest practices, in connection
with voluntary codes;
(g) septiens. International and regional processes and initiatives
should take the necessary steps towards mutual recognition of and convergence
between their individual sets of criteria and indicators for sustainable
forest management;
(g) octiens. Recommended that criteria and indicators be used by FAO
and other relevant organizations to improve consistency on reporting on SFM.
J. Programme element IV: Trade and environment in
relation to forest products and services
Mandate
149. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element IV is to "examine relevant factors affecting trade in forest
products and other forest and trade issues in an integrated and holistic
approach that promotes a supportive relationship between trade and
environment. In this connection, identify opportunities and recommend
measures for improving market access for forest products on a
non-discriminatory basis and consider factors that may distort trade in forest
products and affect their value, including pricing, import/export controls,
subsidies and the need to remove unilateral bans and boycotts inconsistent
with the rules of the international trade system. Promote the development of
methodologies to advance the full valuation, including replacement and
environmental costs, of forest goods and services, with a view to promoting
full cost internalization. Taking account of the interests of all sectors and
particularities of different countries and ensuring full transparency and
participation of all interested parties, examine the issue of voluntary
certification and labelling of forest products so as to contribute to a better
understanding of the role of voluntary certification with regard to the
sustainable management of forests, including the impact of certification on
developing countries".12
Draft conclusions and proposals for action
1. General conclusions
150. The Panel recognized the wide range and complexity of issues on trade
and environment in relation to forest products and services, and the
importance of promoting sustainable forest management through mutually
supportive trade and environmental policies. Trade in forest products and
services that are renewable and environmentally friendly resources should be
promoted as an important means of contributing to sustainable development.
However, it is critical that trade and trade policies for forest products and
services not have adverse management impacts on [the conservation, use and
sustainable development of forests] [sustainable forest management]. A
gradual, continuing process of consensus-building on these issues is needed.
[This includes exploring the [possible need for an agreement on trade in
forest products] and voluntary codes of conduct to facilitate and improve
trade in forest products in specific areas.] [This includes looking at the
potential for voluntary, private sector codes of conduct, which should be
further explored.] In view of the complexity of these issues, better
coordination for work carried out by relevant international agencies is
essential.
151. The Panel emphasized that the issues of trade and environment in
relation to forest products and services should be addressed in a holistic
manner and take into account chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the Forest
Principles. The Panel therefore considered it critical that the analyses [and
measures] [be conducted in accordance with World Trade Organization rules] on
these issues cover international as well as domestic trade in wood and
non-wood forest products and services from all types of forests. [In special
circumstances, trade [restriction] [measures] may be necessary to achieve
environmental objectives.] The Panel, however, recognized that there was
inadequate information on international trade in non-wood products and forest
services, as well as [a lack of organized information on] [insufficient
information to allow comparability among] trade in domestic markets. Further
studies and data-gathering should therefore be proposed to overcome these gaps
in future.
2. Specific conclusions and proposals for action
Market access
152. The Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations has made
significant progress in improving market access for forest products,
especially in terms of reducing tariffs on all types of forest products. Yet
there are still barriers to international trade in forest products,
particularly non-tariff barriers, which [will] [could] affect better access of
forest products to the international market. [These non-tariff barriers in
forest products include: [the use of export restrictions by developing
countries to encourage domestic processing; and] quantitative restrictions on
[production of "unsustainably produced products"] [imports of certain forest
products.]] [Trade-related measures should be consistent with the Forest
Principles and with multilaterally agreed trade laws and practices, and should
be effective in advancing their stated purpose.]
Proposals for action
153. The Panel:
(a) Urged [Governments] [countries] and relevant international
organizations to undertake research on the [effectiveness] [expected and
actual effects] of trade [restrictions] [measures] in forest products, in
terms of meeting [environmental or social] [objectives] [objectives for
sustainability] [objectives as well as the environmental impacts of forest-
related trade policies;]
(b) [Requested the World Trade Organization to [further reduce]
[continue its efforts to promote the reduction of] tariff and non-tariff
barriers to trade in forest products;] [Requested individual members of the
World Trade Organization to further reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers to
trade in forest products;] [Requested the Trade and Environment Committee of
the World Trade Organization to continue its work to ensure that trade and
environment are mutually supportive, including in the area of forest products
and services;] [Requested Governments, on the basis of this research, to
undertake the necessary steps to promote sustainably produced products
including a further reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in
forest products;]
(c) [Urged [Governments] [countries] to avoid new non-tariff barriers to
trade in forest products that are not in conformity with the World Trade
Organization rules [in order not to over-ride the gains in market access for
forest products resulting from the Uruguay Round.] [and taking into
consideration the exceptions in the World Trade Organization rules;]] [Urged
Governments to avoid conflict between measures that affect trade in forest
products and the World Trade Organization rules;]
(c) bis. Recommended that international organizations, countries and
relevant institutions undertake further studies on international trade in
non-wood forest products and services as well as on the level and impact of
domestic trade to facilitate informed decision-making;
(c) ter. Urged that external trade policies not be at the expense of
community rights over State forest lands and products;
(c) quater. Recommended that the possible need for an agreement on
trade in forest products that relates to all types of forests be further
explored;
(c) quinquiens. Recommended that the possible need for voluntary codes
of conduct for forest owners, forest developers and international investors in
forestry aimed at improving trade in forest products, be further explored;
(c) sexiens. Requested the Secretariat to prepare a study on the
effectiveness of internal subsidies to promote forest production and their
impact on international trade;
(c) septiens. Urged Governments to remove all unilateral bans and
boycotts inconsistent with the rules of the international trade system;
whenever these actions are undertaken by local governments, countries and
national authorities should make every effort necessary to remove these bans
and boycotts and to ensure that the rules of the international trade system
prevail.
Relative competitiveness of forest products
154. [[Wood] [Forest] products obtained from sustainably managed forests
[are] [may be considered to be] environmentally friendly [products]].
Competition between different [wood] [forest] products, products from
different regions of origin, and wood and non-wood alternatives is
[inevitable. Available evidence suggests that such competition, although
unlikely to constrain unduly a global initiative to improve sustainable forest
management, would have serious implications for the markets for specific
forest products in the future.] [inevitable and does not constrain efforts to
improve sustainable forest management.] Further economic and market studies
should therefore be carried out to determine how best to use markets and
economic instruments to promote sustainable forest management.
155. For the majority of developing countries, exports of processed products
represent a small proportion of total roundwood production. Additional
efforts should therefore be geared towards promoting more environmentally
sound downstream processing industries and exports of processed products,
consistent with sustainable forest management, in order to increase their
contribution to [economic] [sustainable] development [and to increase export
earnings].
Proposals for action
156. The Panel:
(a) Called upon relevant agencies to support efforts to gather more
information and conduct more independent market and economic studies of
potential competition between different [wood] [forest] products, products
from different regions of origin, and wood and non-wood substitutes, analysing
the costs and benefits, including any substitution and the overall impact on
sustainable management of all types of forests;
(b) Urged developed countries and international organizations, in the
context of sustainable forest management, to support efforts by developing
countries to increase their productivity and efficiency in downstream
processing activities [within the constraints of resource sustainability and
wider sustainable development considerations [in order to increase their
export earnings]];
(b) bis. Urged all relevant agencies to provide support and
encouragement to develop mechanisms for promoting community-based processing
and marketing of wood and non-timber forest products.
Lesser-used species
157. Many efforts and initiatives have been carried out by international
institutions and producer countries to promote lesser-used species in the
international market. However, progress is still very limited. The efforts
to promote sustainably produced lesser-used species from tropical forests
should also be [extended to] [expanded in] temperate and boreal species.
Proposals for action
158. The Panel:
(a) Called upon relevant agencies to intensify efforts to promote
lesser-used species from all types of forests in the international [market]
[market, providing for actions compatible and consistent with sustainable
forest management];
(b) Urged producer countries to [ensure that any policy] [implement
policies] for exploiting lesser-used species and increasing the volume of
timber removed from stands [is] compatible and consistent with sustainable
forest management;
(c) Urged international agencies and research institutions to support
national and community-level efforts to develop technologies, including
traditional forest-related knowledge [to increase utilization of lesser-used
species].
Certification and labelling
159. [Certification [is one of] [and labelling are among] the many
potentially useful tools that can be employed to promote and respond to
sustainable forest management.] [The Panel recognized that the major goal to
be achieved is the sustainable management of forests. Voluntary certification
schemes have a role to play with regard to the sustainable management of
forests.] [Certification should be seen as a consequence of sustainable
forest management.] The distinction between certification (which is primarily
related to the implementation of sustainable forest management) and labelling
(which is related to products and is primarily a means for marketing) is
recognized. In view of the potential proliferation of schemes, [the need to
achieve mutual recognition of standards and a common understanding among
[international accrediting] [certification and labelling] schemes, is
[debated] [important].] [There is a debate about the need for mutual
recognition.] [[Before [attempting] [considering] [international
harmonization and] mutual recognition,] it is useful to draw upon experiences
with using certification in a wide variety of forest management situations.]
159 bis. Voluntary certification and eco-labelling are not considered to be
non-tariff barriers.
160. Governments have a critical role to play in relation to certification to
promote effective sustainable forest management systems. However, because
certification has [initially evolved] [thus far been developed] as a voluntary
private initiative, [it is not clear at this stage what] [different views of
the role of government were expressed. It is necessary to clarify what]
roles, if any, Governments and intergovernmental institutions should play in
[either] the development [[or regulation] of new certification systems]
[promotion, implementation and mutual recognition of schemes]. [However, in]
[In] considering [potential] [possible] [roles for Governments] [the important
roles of Governments in information support and monitoring of certification
activities and results], and considering the fact that certification is a
market-driven process, distinctions should be made between the roles of
Governments [as regulators] [promoters of public policy] and, in some
countries, [their roles] as forest owners. The role of Governments should be
recognized, however, in ensuring transparency, full participation of
interested parties, non-discrimination and open access to certification
schemes. Certification should observe sovereignty and be transparent and
rational.
161. International attention to the issues of certification of forest
management and labelling of forest products should be put into perspective.
To date, only a small proportion of the global trade in forest products and a
small area of the world's forests are influenced by [forest [products]]
[forest management]] certification and labelling. Because of inadequate
information and relatively few real world experiences, it is still too early
to assess [objectively the effectiveness of] [objectively the full potential
for] certification and labelling in promoting sustainable forest management.
However, there is a potential relationship between sustainable forest
management, trade, and voluntary certification and labelling systems. More
studies and information are required to clarify various issues about
certification and labelling, including the impacts of certification on
small-scale forest enterprises, competitiveness of forest products, economic
and non-economic costs and benefits, demand for certified products, [the
feasibility of country certification,] the use of criteria and indicators,
market implications, governance and credibility of certification schemes,
consistency with international agreements, and the role of government as a
regulator and in some countries also as a resource owner.
161 bis. The Panel did not endorse the concept of country certification, and
most delegations emphasized that voluntary certification should apply at the
forest management unit level.
161 ter. In relation to certification, both performance standards and
environmental management systems are complementary and are important
components for the assessment of sustainable forest management.
161 quater. As eco-labelling and certification and labelling programmes
develop, it appears likely that some eco-labelling programmes will use
certification as one of the factors in granting an eco-label for particular
forest products.
162. International efforts should focus on ensuring that new and existing
certification and labelling schemes [for forest products are not used in a
discriminatory way] [are open and avoid discrimination in respect of all types
of forests, forest owners, managers and operators, and are not used] [for
forest products are not used in an arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminatory
way] as a form of disguised protectionism. Such efforts should also focus on
ensuring the avoidance of conflicts between World Trade Organization rules and
the use of voluntary certification and labelling schemes relating to
sustainable forest management.
Proposals for action
163. The Panel:
(a) [[Agreed] [Stressed the need] to bring to the attention of all
actors, including the World Trade Organization, the need to recognize the
potential positive relationship between sustainable forest management, trade
and voluntary certification and labelling schemes, to [ensure] [clarify] that
new and existing certification and labelling schemes [for any products] in
importing and consumer markets [are not used in a discriminatory way,] [are
open and avoid discrimination in respect of all types of forests, forest
owners, managers and operators, and are not used] as a form of [disguised
protectionism] [disguised protectionism and are consistent with international
trade rules;] [disguised protectionism and to avoid conflicts between World
Trade Organization rules and voluntary certification and labelling schemes
relating to sustainable forest management;]] [Agreed on the need to ensure
that new and existing certification and labelling schemes for forests and
forest products comply with the provisions of the World Trade Organization
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade;]
(b) [[Called upon relevant agencies [dealing with trade in forest
products] to carry out further] [Encouraged] studies on various issues related
to certification and labelling for sustainable forest management;]
(b) bis. Called upon the International Tropical Timber Organization
(ITTO), UNCTAD and other organizations dealing with trade in forest products,
to bring the current emphasis on certification into perspective and promote
international harmonization and mutual recognition of standards among the
various certification and labelling schemes, including the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), in
an effort to promote trade in forest products and achieve the ultimate
objective of sustainable forest management;
(b) ter. Agreed on the need, at national and international levels, to
ensure greater transparency in certification and labelling schemes by
enhancing the participation of exporting countries in the development of
national schemes where they exist;
(c) Highlighted the principal concepts of the Agreement on Technical
Barriers to Trade, which may be of relevance to proposals for certification
and labelling, and supported the application of the following principles to
certification schemes:
(i) Open access and non-discrimination in respect of all types of
forests, forest owners, managers and operators;
(ii) Credibility;
(iii) Non-deceptiveness;
(iv) Cost-effectiveness;
(v) A participatory process that seeks to involve all interested
parties, including local communities;
(vi) An implementable and practical approach that is naturally related to
sustainable forest management;
(vii) Encouragement of the acceptance of "equivalent" standards and
"mutual recognition".
(c) bis. Considered that the proliferation of certification schemes with
different definitions or requirements could raise questions of credibility,
and that in this context, consideration should be given to the outcome of the
Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) project, which might
provide tools to improve credibility, effectiveness and comparability and thus
facilitate mutual recognition of criteria and indicator frameworks;
(c) ter. Agreed that the following issues with regard to certification
should be addressed further:
(i) Efficiency in promoting SFM;
(ii) The need to take account of the criteria and indicator frameworks
and their development;
(iii) Taking into account the issue of sovereignty, the potential role of
Governments in relation to the development, implementation,
promotion and mutual recognition of voluntary certification and
labelling schemes;
(iv) The special needs of the owners of small forests;
(v) The need to monitor practical experience with certification;
(vi) Accreditation;
(vii) The development of consistent terminology;
(c) quater. Called upon relevant organizations to make arrangements for
a continuous exchange of information and experience on certification and
labelling schemes in appropriate forums to ensure transparency.
Full cost internalization
164. The promotion of full cost internalization [is essential for] [may be
useful in expanding] sustainable forest management in the long term. [The
transition to sustainable forest management and the implementation of full
cost internalization, however, are likely to impose significant costs, at
least in the short term, on timber operations and forest industries in boreal,
temperate and tropical regions. There is still uncertainty about the
long-term economic implications, including costs and benefits and, in
particular, the possibility of losses in forestry income and export earnings
from particular areas.] [Without full cost internalization, socio-economic
and environmental costs may not be fully reflected in and addressed by the
market. This market imperfection may make unsustainable practices seem more
attractive as compared to sustainable forest management. Full cost
internalization would therefore favour the transition to sustainable forest
management and rational resource utilization.] Exchange of information on
various research findings and experiences in relation to costs and policy
mechanisms are encouraged to [speed up the implementation] [facilitate
discussion] of full cost internalization related to sustainable forest
management.
Proposals for action
165. The Panel:
(a) Called upon Governments and relevant international organizations to
examine mechanisms for full cost internalization of forest products and
competing non-forest products and the implications for sustainable forest
management;
(b) [Supported efforts by relevant international organizations in
forestry and trade to carry out more independent market and economic analyses
of the potential [additional [stand-level] [forest management and development
costs, as well as] industry-wide costs resulting from a transition to] [and
possible mechanisms for full cost internalization as a tool for promoting]
sustainable forest management, including related policy reforms; such analyses
should also examine the potential [long-term] benefits of improved efficiency
and sustainability at all levels of the forest industry;]
(c) Drawing upon the work being carried out by countries and relevant
international organizations, encouraged [countries to share] [the sharing of]
information on research findings and experiences in the implementation of full
cost internalization [for] [as it may apply to] sustainable forest management,
including relevant policy mechanisms.
Market transparency
166. Greater market transparency has the potential to promote the mutually
supportive roles of trade and [sustainable environmental management]
[environment] for forest products and services. Improved market transparency
would also help to address effectively such issues as illegal trade in forest
products in the international market, transfer-pricing and market distortions.
Despite some ongoing efforts by relevant organizations, there has been little
progress in improving market transparency for trade in forest products.
Further efforts to improve market transparency for trade in forest products
should be encouraged.
Proposals for action
167. The Panel:
(a) Called upon relevant international organizations to expand their
work on market transparency and possibly to develop a global database, drawing
upon expertise and information from relevant organizations and national
institutions, in order to improve market transparency for trade in forest
products;
(a) bis. Called for an assessment, by an independent body or bodies, of
the nature and extent of the illegal trade in forest products, incorporating
information from all relevant sources and major groups.
K. Programme element V.1: International organizations
and multilateral institutions and instruments
Mandate
168. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element V.1 is to "develop a clearer view of the work being carried
out by international organizations and multilateral institutions and under
existing instruments as appropriate, including the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those
Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in
Africa, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) and the International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA), in
forest-related issues, including UNCED decisions related to forests and the
institutional linkages emanating therefrom, in order to identify any gaps and
areas requiring enhancement, as well as any areas of duplication".13
General conclusions
169. [The Panel agreed that programme element V.1 is an essential component
of the Panel's mandate since it addresses the way the international community,
through international, regional and bilateral agencies and organizations and
existing instruments, including financial and trade institutions and treaty
bodies, will:
(a) Support national forest programmes and activities aimed at achieving
the goals of sustainable forest management, including the implementation of
recommendations and proposals for actions suggested in other sections of the
Panel's report;
(b) Further promote and support international policy dialogue,
consensus-building and cooperation on sustainable management of all types of
forests.]
OR
169. [The Panel agreed that programme element V.1 is an essential component
of the Panel's mandate since it should provide a clearer view of the forest-
related work of international organizations, multilateral institutions and
legal instruments, including their comparative strengths and advantages in
this regard.]
170. The Panel recognized that the [agreements reached] [documents adopted]
at UNCED have significantly [underlined] [increased] the understanding that
forest policy and sustainable forest management must be [reconciled]
[addressed], taking into account the multiple benefits of forests [at the
national, regional and global levels] and that these issues need to be
addressed through a holistic and integrated approach [rather than in a
fragmented manner]. There are numerous important international activities and
programmes related to forests, undertaken by international organizations,
multilateral and regional institutions, and [convention secretariats]
[conventions] [multilateral environmental agreements], and groups of
countries.
171. The Panel felt, however, that there is a significant potential for
[further enhancement of the commitment and capacity of existing international
institutional structures to support and promote the goal of conservation,
management and sustainable development of all types of forests. This can be
achieved through clarifying and [redefining] [focusing] the forest-related
mandates of various institutions and] through better coordination and
collaboration among [them, aimed at ensuring] [organizations, institutions and
instruments, and this would promote] greater complementarity and coherence of
action, including action at the level of their governing bodies. [This, in
turn, will help minimize overlaps and duplication and provide the [means]
[opportunities] to bridge the gaps and focus on jointly agreed priorities.]
The work of the informal high-level Inter-Agency Task Force on Forests (ITFF)
established to support the work of the Panel was commended as an example of
effective inter-institutional collaboration.
171 bis. The Panel invited Governments to make contributions to this process,
in order to improve the work of forest-related international organizations and
institutions and to focus them on the needs and challenges faced by countries
in the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of
forests.
172. The Panel also recognized the need for promoting shared objectives on
forest-related issues among institutions and for promoting work across
institutional borders in an efficient and coordinated manner. Efforts should
concentrate on making existing activities in international organizations,
multilateral institutions and instruments more transparent, effective and
flexible to accommodate existing and emerging needs. This should also provide
for effective participation of and collaboration with [the non-governmental
organizations and the private sector] [all interested parties] [all major
groups, in particular women].
173. The Panel underscored the need for international institutions to support
national, [subregional] [subnational], regional and international action
towards sustainable forest management, [building a consensus on approaches
[and standards] worldwide and improving the conditions for adequate capacity-
building and financing] [to build consensus on approaches and better
coordinate their international cooperation efforts] for [sustainable forest
management] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests]. International institutions should also support efforts to
strengthen the links between research, policy formulation and implementation,
as well as those between national programmes and strategies and the
multilateral system.
174. [Several interlinked forest-related areas are in [critical] need of
enhancement [and] [or] improvement, such as:
(a) Shared and effective governance by the forest community of
international institutions, organizations and instruments dealing with forest
issues;
(a) bis. Strategic data collection and analysis capability at national,
regional and [global] [international] levels;
(b) [[Regional and global] projects [to strengthen] [especially related
to]] [increased attention on] capacity-building and technology transfer and
exchange, and human resource development, in particular at the national and
field levels;
(c) More focused and more effective [funding and coordination for]
research and development on priorities for SFM, including pilot projects
[operations] [of regional [and global] [or international] significance];
(d) Improved mechanisms for [coordination, including donor coordination,
of] [focusing and coordinating] efforts and monitoring the implementation of
activities by agencies and instruments on international forest-related issues
[at [the national and] regional and global levels];
(d) bis. Improved participation of major groups in forest forums and
processes to promote SFM.
Proposals for action
175. [The Panel] [In order to improve the integration and coordination of
efforts by agencies and instruments on forest-related issues, the Panel]:
(a) Called upon countries to establish a high-level forum for
international debate;
(a) bis. Called for clarification of the mandates and tasks of United
Nations agencies and a strengthening of inter-agency cooperation to fill gaps
in relation to needs and new functions already recognized;
(a) ter. Called upon governing bodies of relevant international and
regional institutions and instruments to accelerate incorporation of UNCED
[decisions] [results] on forest-related issues in their work programmes, with
particular attention to [those that provide] cross-sectoral [solutions]
[aspects] and to realign their focus on these priorities;
(b) Called upon [international organizations to facilitate inter-agency
and intergovernmental] [countries to promote international] consultation on
[forest planning and sustainable forest management, [including consultations
on [national forest [development] [plans or programmes] [national forest
programmes]] [the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests] to:
(i) [Implement] [Agree on] [Develop] the principles, content and process
of [NFPs] [national forestry programmes];
(ii) Use country-driven [NFPs] [forestry programmes] [as the main basis
for international cooperation];
(c) Requested FAO, ITTO, UNEP, UNDP, UNCTAD, the World Conservation and
Monitoring Centre (WCMC) and other relevant organizations to coordinate and
enhance strategic data sets and analysis systems, [accessible to and
disseminated] [and the timely dissemination of user-friendly data to] by [a
range of] [all] interested parties and other institutions with forest-related
activities;
(d) Invited [[CIFOR, ICRAF, FAO, ITTO, IUFRO, UNESCO, UNEP, [the
European Forestry Institute (EFI) and IBFRA]] [relevant international
organizations] to propose measures] [in conjunction with relevant national,
regional, intergovernmental and non-governmental bodies] to [strengthen]
[better focus] and improve coordination of forest research and development,
including proposals for the development of a strategic framework for a global
forest network, making full use of existing organizations [and to direct their
efforts towards identifying] improvements to the system of commissioning,
providing and implementing research on priority areas for SFM, including those
recognized by the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests. The Panel
requested them to identify mechanisms for an enhanced and more effective flow
of information and research results [and of strategic analyses of priority
areas] to those engaged in policy and implementation;
(e) Invited Governments to [[provide a coherent and stable] [employ
their national] policy framework in the context of sustainable forest
management [and international cooperation] to]:
(i) Encourage donor countries, multilateral institutions and
multilateral funding agencies to establish [coherent forest
programmes for sustainable forest management] [funding programmes
for the management, conservation and sustainable development of all
types of forests];
(ii) Instil confidence in the private sector to invest in sustainable
forest management;
(iii) [Assign [forest-related programmes] [SFM] increased priority in
[[bilateral] [programming available] ODA] [ODA within the context of
bilateral forest-sector funding policies]];
(iv) [Encourage efficient and effective use of financial resources];
(iv) bis. Promote, directly and through international organizations that
deal with trade, greater market access of forest-related goods
and services.
* * *
Elements for further negotiations under programme element V.1, as
outlined above, are preliminary in nature. The Panel felt that further
information on and study of the international organizations, multilateral
institutions and legal instruments relevant to forests and of their mandates,
as well as their progress in and capacity for implementing the forest-related
outcomes of UNCED, would be needed in order to achieve a more accurate
diagnosis and to formulate proposals for action. A number of delegations felt
that final conclusions and proposals for action under this programme element
would need to take into account conclusions and proposals for action under
programme element V.2, to be considered at the fourth session of the Panel,
since many of the issues are closely interrelated.
More specific conclusions and proposals for action will be elaborated
during the fourth session of the Panel after, inter alia, consideration of
relevant proposals to be prepared by the informal high-level Inter-Agency Task
Force on Forests and the results of other relevant initiatives. It was
suggested that before the discussion at the fourth session relevant proposals
could be reviewed by an independent body, such as the Independent Expert Group
of the Swiss-Peruvian Initiative on Forests.
* * *
L. Programme element V.2: Contribution to consensus-building towards
the further implementation of the Forest Principles, including
appropriate legal arrangements and mechanisms covering all types
of forests
Mandate
176. As defined by the Commission on Sustainable Development, the aim of
programme element V.2 is "in the light of issues I-V.1 above, based on
consensus-building, in a step-by-step process, consider and advise on the
need, or otherwise, for other instruments or arrangements in further
implementation of the Forest Principles, including appropriate legal
arrangements and mechanisms covering all types of forests".14
Conclusions
At its third session the Panel, in accordance with its programme of
work, had only an initial discussion of programme element V.2, which will be
the subject of a substantive discussion during the fourth session. On the
basis of the results of the preliminary discussion, the Co-Chairmen of the
Panel prepared a text drawing some preliminary conclusions. A number of
delegations made specific comments, amendments and additions to that text,
which are reflected below. The conclusions relevant to programme element V.2
will be further elaborated during the substantive discussion at the fourth
session of the Panel.
Preliminary text as discussed during the session
1. The Panel recognized that there are a large number of international
institutions and instruments dealing with specific aspects of or matters
closely related to forests. At the same time, the Panel acknowledged
that at present no single multilateral body, organization or instrument
has either a mandate or the capacity to address, in a balanced,
[integrated] [holistic] and mutually reinforcing way, all forest-related
issues currently on the international agenda on sustainable forest
management.
2. The Panel noted that there are already many international legally
binding instruments relevant to forests, such as the Convention on
Biological Diversity, the Convention to Combat Desertification, CITES,
ITTA, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as
Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention). These instruments deal
mostly with specific [forest-dependent resources] [forest-related
issues] in the overall context of sustainable development. [In fact
they form almost a perfect net around forests, without dealing
primarily, directly, cohesively and comprehensively with forests]
[without dealing comprehensively with sustainable forest management].
These conventions embody the concept of sustainable development and
address many cross-cutting issues that are also relevant to forests,
such as land-use management, financial resources, technology transfer,
trade and traditional forest-related knowledge. Conventions established
before UNCED have attempted to redefine their objectives in line with
those of UNCED. The Central American Forest Convention is an example of
a cooperative approach to regional forest policy-making. However, there
is no instrument dealing in a comprehensive and holistic way with all
types of forests. It was also suggested that international instruments
dealing with trade in tropical timber should be supplemented by similar
instruments for boreal forests. There is also a need to identify and
fill in, within existing international legal instruments relevant to
forests, gaps that may exist in connection with international
cooperation in financial assistance and technology transfer in relation
to their forest-related provisions.
3. The Panel noted that there is a gap in existing instruments and
mechanisms, particularly in dealing with economic aspects of all types
of forests. It was felt that future arrangements should address, in an
integrated manner, such issues as trade, market access and transparency,
economic policies that directly or indirectly affect the forest sector,
private investment, financial resources and transfer of technology. The
Panel agreed that [existing or any future body of] [any future]
international forest-related legal mechanism[s] must deal cohesively
with all the interrelated social, economic, trade, environment,
development, production, financial and technology issues and have a
concrete impact on the future successful implementation of [sustainable
forest management] [management, conservation and sustainable development
of all types of forests] worldwide.
4. [The Panel felt that it had a unique opportunity to submit
substantial recommendations to the Commission on Sustainable
Development, which would subsequently make its recommendations to the
General Assembly at its special session in 1997.] [The Panel felt that
the special session of the General Assembly would provide a unique
opportunity to obtain high-level commitment to and guidance on
sustainable forest management and its worldwide implementation. The
Panel's report should enable the Commission at its fifth session to send
clear messages to the Assembly at its special session.]
5. The Panel recognized that the high-level policy dialogue on forests
should continue on the basis of the shared and common responsibilities
of all countries, taking into account their differentiated possibilities
and capacities.
6. The Panel [called for [continuation and] enhancement of the]
[underlined the need for a] holistic, cohesive and comprehensive
approach to the international forest policy debate and consensus-
building [as launched by the Commission through the establishment of the
Panel. Such an approach will] [in order to] promote and facilitate a
mechanism for integrated consideration of all forest-related issues and
ensure balanced treatment of all types of forests in the future. In
broad terms, the objectives of such a [policy debate] [approach] should
be to:
(a) Provide high-level policy guidance and promote coherence in the
approaches and activities of countries and international institutions
aimed at the implementation of the Forest Principles, the forest-related
provisions of Agenda 21, [the outcome of the Panel] and other
intergovernmental decisions and initiatives on forests;
(b) Identify international priorities among forest-related issues
including priorities for funding and for forest research and assessment;
(c) Further facilitate international dialogue and
consensus-building on forest-related issues and identify emerging issues
that require international attention;
(d) Exchange and analyse information and experience on matters
related to the sustainable management of [all types of] forests;
(e) Promote dialogue and partnership on forests with major groups
and non-governmental organizations.
7. The Panel recognized that among the options for action, which could
also be combined, were:
(a) Enhancing cooperation between existing international
organizations and instruments with responsibilities relating to forests;
(b) Developing the coherent and synergistic application of existing
legal instruments relevant to forests so as to enhance efficiency,
eliminate duplication and fill gaps;
(c) Adopting new international machinery to maintain a dialogue and
coordinate action;
(d) [Negotiating a new international [legal] [legally binding]
instrument providing for a holistic approach to forest-related issues];
(e) Considering the establishment of an international programme on
the conservation, management and sustainable development of all types of
forests.
8. The Panel agreed that a step-by-step process was required to
continue the high-level policy dialogue on forests and agree on
practical goals as well as concrete dates to achieve those goals.
Proposals for action
This part of the report will be elaborated by the Panel during the
fourth session. The Panel will consider proposals to be prepared by the
informal high-level Inter-Agency Task Force on Forests on possible
inter-agency and secretariat arrangements to support the work of such a forum
and the information to be prepared by the Secretariat on the possible
organizational modalities of its functioning, including financial
implications. The following preliminary proposals were made during the third
session of the Panel by individual delegations and groups:
(a) At the intergovernmental level:
(i) To establish a high-level forum for policy coordination and dialogue
on all types of forests;
(ii) To continue the Panel;
(iii) To continue the Panel until the year 2000 but with a more focused
mandate;
(iv) To establish a mechanism similar to the Panel and with a redefined
mandate;
(v) To strengthen the FAO Committee on Forests;
(b) At the inter-agency level:
(i) To continue the informal high-level Inter-Agency Task Force on
Forests;
(ii) To transform the Panel secretariat into a more formal arrangement;
(iii) To merge the forest functions of existing institutions, such as FAO,
UNEP and UNDP, into a new institution;
(c) Legal mechanisms:
(i) To improve coordination and implementation of existing legal
instruments;
(ii) To establish a forum of existing institutions that will keep under
review the necessity for a legal mechanism, while dealing with the
main forest issues in a holistic and integrated manner;
(iii) To initiate negotiations on a convention on forest principles and
forest-related provisions of Agenda 21;
(iv) To initiate negotiations on a convention covering all issues
necessary to ensure sustainable management of all types of forests;
(v) To initiate negotiations on a framework convention to provide a
holistic approach to sustainable management of forests and
facilitate coordination and implementation of existing programmes
and instruments as well as foster the negotiation of regional
instruments;
(vi) To initiate negotiations on a convention to provide a holistic
approach to sustainable management of forests and facilitate
coordination and implementation of existing programmes and
instruments;
(vii) To initiate consideration of possible elements of such a convention;
(viii) To initiate negotiations on a convention on trade in forest products
covering all types of forests;
(ix) To combine options (iii)-(vi) above;
(x) To establish a forum that will keep under review the necessity for a
legal mechanism, while dealing with the main forest issues in a
holistic and integrated manner;
(xi) To establish a technical group of legal experts to formulate
proposals on a legal mechanism in an agreed time-frame and on the
basis of a step-by-step approach for the forum suggested above;
(xii) To explore the possibility of voluntary codes of conduct for forest
owners and investors.
The Panel felt that a number of the proposed courses of action set out
above are interrelated. However, none of the proposals were discussed during
the third session and the Panel will consider these and any other proposals
during the substantive discussion of programme element V.2 during its fourth
session.
II. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE PANEL ON ITS THIRD SESSION
1. At the 5th meeting, on 20 September 1996, the Panel had before it the
draft report on its third session (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/L.3), as well as an
informal paper containing a draft introduction to the report and a number of
informal papers on all the programme elements.
2. At the same meeting, after statements by the representatives of the
United States of America, Japan, Switzerland, Germany, India, Colombia, Italy,
Finland and Australia, as well as by the observers for Ireland (on behalf of
the European Union), Indonesia, Portugal and Norway and the representative of
the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the Panel took
note of the draft introduction and the informal papers and adopted the report.
III. ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS
A. Opening and duration of the session
1. The Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests of the Commission on
Sustainable Development held its third session from 9 to 20 September 1996, in
accordance with Economic and Social Council decision 1996/230. The Panel held
five meetings (1st to 5th meetings).
2. The session was opened by one of the Co-Chairmen, Sir Martin Holdgate
(United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). The other Co-
Chairman, Mr. Manuel Rodri'guez (Colombia), also made an opening statement.
3. The Director of the Division for Sustainable Development made an
introductory statement.
B. Election of officers
4. At the 2nd meeting, on 13 September 1996, the Panel elected
Mr. M. F. Ahmed (India) Vice-Chairman of the Panel for the third and fourth
sessions to replace Mr. N. R. Krishnan (India), who had retired.
5. The Bureau of the Panel comprised the following officers:
Co-Chairmen: Sir Martin Holdgate (United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland)
Mr. Manuel Rodri'guez (Colombia)
Vice-Chairmen: Mr. Juste Boussienguet (Gabon)
Mr. M. F. Ahmed (India)
Mr. Anatoliy I. Pisarenko (Russian Federation)
6. As decided at the second session of the Panel, Mr. Juste Boussienguet
(Gabon) also served as Rapporteur at the third session.
C. Agenda and organization of work
7. At its 1st meeting, on 9 September 1996, the Panel adopted its
provisional agenda, contained in document E/CN.17/IPF/1996/13, and approved
its organization of work. The agenda was as follows:
1. Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.
2. Implementation of forest-related decisions of the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development at the national and
international levels, including an examination of sectoral and
cross-sectoral linkages.
3. International cooperation in financial assistance and technology
transfer.
4. Scientific research, forest assessment and development of criteria
and indicators for sustainable forest management.
5. Trade and environment in relation to forest products and services.
6. International organizations and multilateral institutions and
instruments, including appropriate legal mechanisms.
7. Other matters.
8. Adoption of the report of the Panel on its third session.
8. Also at the 1st meeting, the Panel agreed to establish two in-session
working groups, each one to be chaired by one of the two Co-Chairmen.
D. Attendance
9. The session was attended by representatives of 30 States members of the
Commission on Sustainable Development. Observers for other States Members of
the United Nations and for non-member States, representatives of organizations
of the United Nations system and observers for intergovernmental,
non-governmental and other organizations also attended. The list of
participants is contained in annex I to the present report.
Notes
1/ Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development,
Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions Adopted by the Conference
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8 and corrigendum), resolution
1, annex III.
2/ Ibid., resolution 1, annex II.
3/ Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1995, Supplement
No. 12 (E/1995/32), chap. I, sect. D, annex I, sect. III.I, para. 1.
4/ Ibid., sect. III.I, para. 2.
5/ Ibid., sect. III.I, para. 3.
6/ Report of the second meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity, Jakarta, 6-17 November 1995, annex II,
decision II/9 (see A/51/312).
7/ Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1995, Supplement
No. 12 (E/1995/32), chap. I, sect. D, annex I, sect. III.I, para. 4.
8/ Ibid., sect. III.I, para. 5.
9/ Ibid., sect. III.II.
10/ Ibid., sect. III.III, para. 1.
11/ Ibid., sect. III.III, para. 2.
12/ Ibid., sect. III.IV.
13/ Ibid., sect. III.V, para. 1.
14/ Ibid., sect. III.V, para. 2.
Annex I
ATTENDANCE
Antigua and Barbuda Aqeelah Akbar
Australia Geoff Gorrie, Gary Dolman,
Roderick Holesgrove, Dianne Meade,
Peter Lawrence, Frank McKinnell,
Dennis Cullity
Belarus Mikhail Kuzmyankou
Belgium J. L. Tordeur, Ch. Laurent,
J. Cornet d'Elzius
Brazil Enio Cordeiro,
Antonio Fernando Cruz de Mello,
Antonio Ricarte, Antonio Carlos do
Prado, Luis Carlos Ros Filho, Paulo
Fontes, Emanuel Adilson Souza Serrao,
Rubens C. Garlip,
Maria Cristina Weyland Vieira
Canada Jacques Carette, Richard Ballhorn,
David Drake, Ralph Roberts,
Denyse Rousseau, Rosalie McConnell,
Andrew Griffith, Olivier Jalbert,
Victoria Berry, Jean Pierre Martel,
Martin von Mirbach, Peggy Smith
China Qu Guilin, Zhang Zhiqin, Zhou Guolin
Colombia Gustavo Castro Guerrero, Manuel
Rodri'guez, Mari'a Francisca Arias
Castan~o, Carmen Silva Pinzo'n, Fernando
Casas, Alberto Gala'n, Rodrigo
Artunduaga, Antonio Villa,
Mari'a Fernanda Acosta Convers
Finland Birgitta Stenius-Mladenov,
Pekka Patosaari, Elias La"hdesma"ki,
Markku Aho, Leena Karjalainen-Balk,
Erja Faerlund, Heikki Granholm,
Esko Joutsamo, Timo Heikka, Timo
Nyrhinen
France Bernard Chevalier, Ge'rard Fauveau,
Thierry Jaccaud, Herve' Bredif
Gabon Juste Boussienguet,
Andre'-Jules Madingou, Athanese
Boussengue
Germany Ulrich Hoenisch, Hagen Frost,
Peter Fahrenholtz, Peter Franz,
Christian Mersmann,
Mathias Schwerer-Boehning, Udo Vollmer
India M. F. Ahmed
Japan Takao Shibata, Harumitsu Hida,
Kenji Kamigawara, Hiroaki Shinohara,
Yutaka Tsunetomi, Takeshi Goto, Atsuo
Ida, Mitsutoshi Ide, Keiishi Takahata
Malaysia Narayanan Kanan, Nik Adnan Nik Abdulah,
Thang Hooi Chier, Abdul Rahim Nik,
Ahmad Jazri, M. Johar,
Syed M. Hasrin Tengku Hussin
Mexico Diana L. Ponce-Nava
Morocco Omar M'Hirit
Netherlands H. S. B. M. van Asperen,
J. P. Hoogeveen, A. P. M. van der Zon,
P. R. Schu"tz, R. Velders, M. Braeken
Pakistan Kehkeshan Azhar
Papua New Guinea Dike Kari, Adam Vai Delaney, Don Bakath
Peru Jose' Urrutia, Javier Paulinich, Luis
Enrique Cha'vez, Eduardo Pe'rez del
Solar, Micha Torres, Italo Acha
Philippines Lilia R. Bautista, Bernarditas C.
Muller, Monina Estrella G. Callangan
Russian Federation Anatoliy I. Pisarenko,
Valentin V. Strakhov, Eugeny P.
Kuzmichov, Valeriy V. Musinsky, Andreay
F. Tchmyr
Spain Ramiro Puig
Switzerland Philippe Roch, Pierre Muehlemann,
Andrea Semadeni, Monika Linn Licher,
Norbert Ledergerber, Werner Hunziker,
Manuela Jost Ernst,
Pascale Morand Francis,
Franz Schmithuesen, Andreas Klaey,
Ju"rgen Blaser, Bernardo Zentilli
Thailand Sa-nguan Kakhong
Ukraine T. V. Hardashchouk
United Kingdom of Great Britain Sir Martin Holdgate, Andrew Bennett,
and Northern Ireland John Hudson, Anthony Smith, Peter Unwin,
Bridget Campbell, Tim Robinson,
Willie Sheridan, Michael Dudley
United States of America Mark Hambley, Stephanie Caswell,
Robert McSwain, Kathryn Shippe,
Jan McAlpine, Valdis Mazainis,
Mary Coulombe, Douglas Kneeland,
Michael Hicks, Franklin Moore, Marvin
Brown, Julia Jack, Lynne Brenan Van
Dyke, William R. McPherson
Venezuela Samuel Mendoza,
Carmen Vela'squez de Visbal,
Io'le Touron Lugo
Non-member States and entities represented by observers
Argentina, Austria, Chile, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Lebanon, Myanmar, New
Zealand, Norway, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Turkey,
European Commission
United Nations
United Nations Environment Programme
Specialized agencies
International Labour Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization
Intergovernmental organizations
Agence Intergouvernementale de la Francophonie, Centre for International
Forestry Research (CIFOR), International Tropical Timber Organization,
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
Non-governmental organizations
Category I International Chamber of Commerce, World
Wide Fund for Nature International
Category II Greenpeace International, International
Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources, National Wildlife
Federation
Roster or accredited to Canadian Pulp and Paper Association,
the Commission on Sustainable Deutsche Naturschutzring, Environmental
Development Investigation Agency, Friends of the
Earth, Green Earth Organization, Sierra
Club, Survival International, Third World
Network, UNED - United Kingdom (UN
Environment and Development - United
Kingdom Committee)
Annex II
DOCUMENTATION BEFORE THE PANEL AT ITS THIRD SESSION
The Panel had before it the following documents:
(a) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.1. Progress
in national forest and land-use plans (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/14);
(b) Progress report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.2:
Underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/15);
(c) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.3:
Traditional forest-related knowledge (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/16);
(d) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.4: Fragile
ecosystems affected by desertification, and the impact of airborne pollution
on forests (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/17);
(e) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element I.5: Needs and
requirements of countries with low forest cover (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/18);
(f) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element II:
International cooperation in financial assistance and technology transfer
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/19 and E/CN.17/IPF/1996/CRP.1);
(g) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.1 (a):
Assessment of the multiple benefits of all types of forests
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/20);
(h) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.2:
Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/21);
(i) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element IV: Trade and
environment relating to forest goods and services (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/22 and
E/CN.17/IPF/1996/CRP.2);
(j) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element V.1:
International organizations and multilateral institutions and instruments
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/23);
(k) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element V.2:
Contribution to consensus-building towards the further implementation of the
forest principles (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/24 and E/CN.17/IPF/1996/CRP.3);
(l) Report of the Secretary-General on programme element III.1 (b):
Measuring and capturing forest values: issues, policies and challenges
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/25);
(m) Letter dated 15 August 1996 from the Permanent Representative of
Peru to the United Nations and the Charge' d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent
Observer Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations addressed to the
Secretary-General, transmitting the final report of the Independent Group of
Experts established under the Swiss-Peruvian Initiative on Forests
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/26);
(n) Note verbale dated 22 August 1996 from the Permanent Mission of
Australia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General,
transmitting the report of the International Conference on Certification and
Labelling of Products from Sustainably Managed Forests, held in Brisbane,
Australia from 26 to 31 May 1996 (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/27);
(o) Letter dated 28 August 1996 from the Permanent Representative of
Germany to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting
the report of the International Experts' Working Group Meeting on Trade
Labelling of Forest Products and Certification of Sustainable Forest
Management, held in Bonn, Germany from 12 to 16 August 1996
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/28);
(p) Note verbale dated 4 September 1996 from the Permanent
Representative of Finland to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-
General, transmitting the summary report of the Intergovernmental Seminar on
Criteria and indicators for Sustainable Forest Management, held in Helsinki,
Finland from 19 to 22 August 1996 (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/29);
(q) Note verbale dated 14 August 1996 from the Permanent Mission of
Norway to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting
a report entitled "Long-term trends and prospects in world supply and demand
for wood and implications for sustainable forest management: a synthesis"
(E/CN.17/IPF/1996/30);
(r) Letter dated 6 September 1996 from the Permanent Representative of
Finland to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting
the statement made by the Ministers Responsible for Forest Matters of the
Nordic States of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, in relation to
the third session of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests of the
Commission on Sustainable Development (E/CN.17/IPF/1996/31).
-----
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