OUR FORESTS - IISD · 2016-01-18 · cause of forest decline. As a result, more than one-quarter of Europe’s trees show signs of significant leaf-loss. Annual European survey results

SUMMARY REPORT

OF THE WORLD COMMISSION ON FORESTS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

FORESTS

FUTURE

OUR

OUR

Summary Art.qxd3.3 4/15/99 15:17 Page 1

Edited by Ajit Krishnaswamy and Arthur HansonProduced by Ian Darragh CommunicationsDesign: EarthLore Communications

Published by the World Commission on Forests and Sustainable DevelopmentISBN 0-9685191-0-5Cdn. Cataloguing and Publication Data (CIP) available fromthe National Library of Canada, NLC No. C99-920080-1

For additional copies of this Summary Report, please contact:

World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development (WCFSD)c/o International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)161 Portage Avenue East, 6th FloorWinnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3B 0Y4

PHONE: (204) 958-7700 FAX: (204) 958-7710E-MAIL: [email protected]: http://iisd.ca/wcfsd

For copies of the full report, contact either WCFSD, orCambridge University PressThe Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USAhttp://www.cup.org10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia

© World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development, 1999

Photo CreditsFront cover: Indonesia, CIDA Photo: Virginia BoydBack cover: Brazil, H. J. Burkard/First LightSt. Lucia, CIDA Photo: Dilip Mehta

Summary Report World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development

Printed on Recycled Paper


OUR FORESTS

OUR FUTURE

Table of ContentsSummary Recommendations.............................................2

Foreword: Choosing Sustainability........................................4

Forests in Crisis....................................................................6

Roots of the Crisis...............................................................10

Public and Private Interest..................................................14

A Citizens’Force Called FORESTRUST.................................18

Managing Forests Sustainably............................................20

Sustaining Forests and Development...............................23

International Dimensions of Forests................................26

Towards a Forest Capital Index..........................................28

A Forest Security Council....................................................29

Conclusion: The Fate of the Forest is in Our Hands...........30

References..........................................................................31

Glossary.............................................................................32

Acknowledgments.............................................................35

Members of the Commission..............................................36

An Invitation.....................................................................37

Summary Report

World Commission on Forests

and Sustainable Development

W O R L D CO M M I S S I O N O N FO R E S T S A N D SU S TA I N A B L E D E V E L O P M E N T 1

Sw

eden

, Ja

n Tov

e Jo

hans

son/

Mas

terf

ile


Stop the destruction of the earth’s forests: their material products and ecological services are severely threatened.

Use the world’s rich forest resources to improve life for poor people and for the benefit of forest-dependent communities.

Put the public interest first and involve people indecisions about forest use.

Get the price of forests right, to reflect their full ecological and social values, and to stop harmful subsidies.

Apply sustainable forest management approaches so we may use forests without abusing them.

Develop new measures of forest capital so we know whether the situation is improving or worsening.

Plan for the use and protection of whole landscapes,not the forest in isolation.

Make better use of knowledge about forests, andgreatly expand this information base.

Accelerate research and training so sustainable forestmanagement can become a reality quickly.

Take bold political decisions and develop new civilsociety institutions to improve governance andaccountability regarding forest use.

2 W O R L D CO M M I S S I O N O N FO R E S T S A N D SU S TA I N A B L E D E V E L O P M E N T

Our Forests... Our Future

Summary Recommendations

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Mile

s E

rtm

an/M

aste

rfile



Above: clear-cut on a steep mountainsidein Malaysia will lead to severe

erosion and flooding.

Right: with tears of frustration, AntonioLopes da Silva watches an out-of-control

brush fire burn across his pasture landnear Carajas, Brazil. The fire was started

by ranchers clearing the rainforest.

Virginia Boyd/CIDA

Joan

na B

. P

inne

o/A

uror

a




e are drawingon the world’s

natural capital farmore rapidly than itis regenerating.Rather than living on the “interest” ofthe “natural capital,”we are borrowingfrom poorercommunities andfrom future generations.

In this report, the World Commission onForests and Sustainable Developmentproposes a plan for how the world’s forestscan be used without being abused, andoutlines what it takes in terms of policies andinstitutions for such a plan to beimplemented.

The Commission appreciated that thecomplex intertwining of the earth’s ecology,the world’s economy, and the well being ofits people is tied up with considerations aboutpower and poverty and equity. Consequently,the Commission sought out the opinions ofthose whose lives are directly connected withforests. It did this through five public hearingsheld in Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin Americaand the Caribbean, and North America.

We met with forest dwelling and otherlocal communities in developing countrieswho are directly dependent on forests fortheir economic, social, cultural and spiritualwell-being. We listened to farmers fromcountries in the North and South who rely onforests for agricultural productivity andsustenance. We heard executives from forestindustries in different parts of the world andtheir employees who supply wood productsto society.

We took careful note of what scientists,economists, foresters, government officialsand other specialists involved in national andinternational forest policy had to say.

We listened to and readwritten submissions from individuals andcommunity-basedorganizations and met with national andinternational NGOs.

Contributions fromthese groups, all of whichhave their stake in thefuture of the world’s

forests, form the basis of the Commission’sconclusion and recommendations. Most ofthese submissions support the Commission’sconclusion that we are faced with a forestcrisis with many dimensions. These rangefrom highly visible barren, degraded lands inmany developing countries to the less visibleloss of biodiversity, forest decline, andnegative impacts on global ecological cyclessuch as climate change.

In whatever form the crisis appears, itneeds our urgent attention. We have a choiceto make. Do we want to continue on a path of unsustainable development, depleting ournatural capital? Or are we willing to risk achange in direction towards sustainabledevelopment that may involve some short-term political risks?

The report suggests that at this juncture a change in direction is still economicallyand politically possible. But the costs willbecome overwhelming, the longer we delaytaking action. To facilitate this change, theCommission advocates radical reform ofpolicies, calls for a new political agenda,greater civil society involvement and morescience in policy-making.

Ola Ullsten Emil Salim

“T he costs

will become

overwhelming,

the longer we

delay taking

action.”

From the Co-Chairmen’s Foreword

Choosing Sustainability

W

Ste

phen

Hom

er/C

IDA




With womentaking the lead,village co-ops aremanaging treenurseries in India,and have plantedforests on whatused to be barrenland. They arealready seeing thebenefits: lessflooding becausethe trees retainmoisture in thesoil; selectiveharvestingprovides fuel forcooking andlumber for houseconstruction.

Mic

hael

Wild

/CID

A




ver the last two decades of the 20thcentury, rapid deforestation has taken

its toll—some 15 million hectares of forestsare lost annually, largely in the tropics. It isalso clear that the structural integrity of muchof the forest cover that remains hasdeteriorated. The facts are startling:

• Forests have virtually disappeared in 25 countries; 18 have lost more than 95% oftheir forests and another 11 have lost 90%.

• The highest current estimate of the world’s remaining forested areas is about 3.6 billion hectares from an originally forested area of more than 6.0 billion hectares. The loss can be seen by comparing the maps in Figures 1.2 and 1.3. Primary forests have undergone the greatest transition.

• About 14 million hectares of tropical forests have been lost each year since 1980 as a result of changes in land-use from forest to agriculture.

• Forest decline threatens the genetic diversity of the world’s plants and animals.The World Conservation Union recently calculated that about 12.5% of the world’s 270,000 species of plants, and about 75%of the world’s mammals are threatened by forest decline (see Figure 1.1).

• In developing countries alone, some US$ 45 billion per year are lost through poor forest management.

• A study carried out in 1995 suggests that the direct causes for decline in forest quality in Europe are drought, heat, pests, and a legacy of silvicultural errors.Air pollution is identified as an indirect cause of forest decline. As a result, more than one-quarter of Europe’s trees show signs of significant leaf-loss. Annual European survey results show the number of completely healthy trees falling from 69% in 1988 to 39% in 1995 (EC-UN/ECE, 1996). A 1997 EC-UN/ECE study classified more than half of Europe’s forests as “damaged.”

The decline is relentless. We suspect itcould change the very character of the planetand of the human enterprise within a fewyears unless we make some choices.

Forests and Sustainable DevelopmentIt is the linkage between forests andsustainable development that motivated theCommission and those who contributed to its public hearings. There is a high level ofunderstanding that as the health of a forestdeteriorates, all of its functions and servicesare threatened: the protection of watersheds,the habitat it provides to maintainbiodiversity, and its role in storing carbon,for example. The effects on environment,economy and society interconnect and affectone another, compounding cause and effect,transcending national boundaries, andundermining our ability to sustain forests anddevelopment. People understand these issues,worry about them, and are increasinglywilling to change the way things are done.

Forests must and will be used to feed,clothe, house and otherwise satisfy basichuman needs. Human demands on forests are

Fig.1.1Species threatened

by the decline offorests and othernatural habitat.

Source: IUCN,1996; IUCN, 1997

1 Forests in Crisis

O




set to increase exponentially, not just fromincrease in human numbers, but also fromour pattern and level of consumption, the nature of our technology for forestexploitation, our aspirations for growth and increase in wealth.

The implication for forests is that withbusiness as usual their decline will continue.There will be further erosion of the capitalresources of the earth, further reduction in the capacity of countries to meet theirdevelopment needs in a sustained way, andsocial and political unrest related to land use.

• forests can no longer be used in the sameway as they have been in the past

• forest products and services must be assured through new political choices and policy decisions that ensure the survival of forests.

The Forest Crisis Requires Radical and Urgent ActionWe face a stark choice. We can eithercontinue with current approaches thatthreaten the health and survival of forests. Or we can choose a path that respects andreflects the many values of forests while still recognizing their role in raising materialstandards of living—sustaining both forestsand development. The longer the choice isdelayed, the more costly the transition. Wehave to make radical adjustments in policiesand practices in order to sustain both forestsand economic development, and do so with urgency.

The Commission concludes:

Clearing old-growth forestfor farming in St. Lucia, West Indies.

Hél

ène T

rem

blay

/CID

A

The Commission recommends:

• halting further destruction or degradation of remaining primary forests, in order to secure their environmental services for all societies and species;

• improving the allocation and management of forest lands for different purposes: conservation, production, community-based forestry;

• intensifying wood production through expansion of plantation forestry on

degraded and vacant lands and improved productivity in secondary forests;

• reducing pressure on forest land for agriculture through improved productivity in farming;

• providing more extensive support to community based agro-forestry in order to reduce the pressure on primary forests for supplying subsistence products.




Fore

st D

istr

ibut

ion

8,00

0 Ye

ars

Ago

Fig

. 1.

2


WO

RL

DC

OM

MIS

SIO

NO

NF

OR

ES

TS

AN

DS

US

TA

INA

BL

ED

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

9

Our F

orests... Our F

uture

Fig. 1.3The highest current estimate of the world’s remaining forested areas is about 3.6 billion hectaresfrom an originally forested area of more than 6 billion hectares.

Forest Distribution Today

Su

mm

ary A

rt.qxd

3.3

4/1

5/9

9 1

5:2

6 P

ag

e 9

1 0 W O R L D CO M M I S S I O N O N FO R E S T S A N D SU S TA I N A B L E D E V E L O P M E N T


Box 2.1 EXAMPLES OF POLICIES WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO FOREST DECLINE

complex set of forces causes forests todecline. Some are easily visible. For

example, the ways in which timber is over-harvested, or forestland converted toagricultural use. Others are less visibleunderlying or root causes. But theirdestructive effects on forests are no less real.

These underlying forces are embedded inhow we organize our economic and politicalsystems, and in governance structures thatemphasize private gain over the publicinterest. They permit policies, patterns of use,and distribution of benefits from forests thatignore the needs of those who lack politicaland economic power.

These economic and political arrangementscause forests to be used as if they had onlythe limited purpose of supplyingconsumables for human society. Forests arebeing squandered through subsidized activityand wholly marginal uses without concern forsustaining the other basic human need for astable and secure environment. Underlyingall is an ethical failure expressed throughcorrupt and illegal practices, and through greedand inequality in sharing of forest wealth.

The Commission considers these rootcauses to be of immense importance. Theyare why we see so many bad decisions about forest use.

Forces Causing ForestDecline

The Commission emphasizes the ways inwhich missing markets distort investment andeconomic decisions away from conservationand towards extinction of forests. TheCommission also analyzed how governmentpolicies relating to timber concessions,subsidies, land ownership and tenure lead to forest decline.

1. Missing marketsMuch of the real value of forests is notreflected in the calculations governinginvestment and management decisions aboutforests. Typically, the main economic valueassigned to forests is the value of the timberproduced. Market mechanisms today do notvalue the environmental and ecologicalservices which forests provide to maintain astable landscape and atmosphere. Markets do

“Forests are

being

squandered

through

subsidized

activity and

wholly

marginal

uses.”

2 Roots of the Crisis

A

• Timber concession terms which under-price wood, encourage waste or condone poor forestry practices

• Subsidies that encourage destructive forestry or forest land conversion to other uses

• Policies that require forest land clearingas a condition for obtaining legal titles to land ownership

• Road construction into forest areas• Resettlement programs in forest areas• In some cases, log export bans that may

reduce domestic prices of wood, and

therefore reduce incentives to plant treesand also lead to conversion of natural forest lands to other uses

• Subsidies to industrial wood processingthat lead to economic inefficiency

• Plantation subsidies that may induce natural forest conversion

• Price controls and taxes that discourageinvestment in forest planting or conservation

• Policies to boost mining without simultaneously enforcing strict environmental safeguards


W O R L D CO M M I S S I O N O N FO R E S T S A N D SU S TA I N A B L E D E V E L O P M E N T 1 1


not provide signals conducive to forestconservation. In the language of economists,markets rarely capture the public goodaspects of forests.

Lacking economic incentives to preserveforests, landowners usually prefer to dedicatetheir lands to more financially rewardinguses. Because markets do not reflect thewider values of forest resources, consumersuse larger quantities of forest products thanthey would if higher prices reflected their fullvalue. Absence of markets for conservationvalues goes a long way to explain whyconservation uses of forestland often appearto be less valuable than unsustainable uses.

• initiatives to assign economic values toforests other than timber be supported, withthe results applied in policy formulationand reflected in market mechanisms.

2. Timber Concession PoliciesTimber concession policies represent theclassic case of how a few private interestscan benefit from a profligate use of publicresources (see Box 2.2). Government timberconcession terms routinely set stumpageprices and other concession fees atunrealistically low levels. The revenuesforegone are often several times higher thanthe actual fees charged. Timber concessionsare often decided without transparency.

• public sale of timber concessions, licenses and leases through open auctions;

• timber allocation procedures be reformed to include local communities in negotiations;

• stumpage prices that properly reflect the diverse range of forest values;

• timber concession licenses be made conditional on forest management principles consistent with sustainability.

3. “Perverse” Subsidies That Cause Forest Decline

Subsidies occasionally play a crucial role in helping development become more

sustainable. But many of today’s subsidies inthe forestry, agriculture, transportation andresource sectors encourage practices that areeconomically perverse, trade-distorting,ecologically destructive or sociallyinequitable.

• comprehensive review of subsidies and other incentives, which originate within and outside the forestry sector;

• reform or removal of subsidies that have perverse effects on forests.

4. Land Ownership and TenureClearly defined, secure and enforceableproperty rights are a fundamentalrequirement for encouraging sustainableuse of forests. Recent studies in Africaindicate a positive relationship betweensecure tenure and tree planting on farmland.

• a review of land and resource tenure arrangements to make them more conducive to conservation.

5. Governance Failur eThe co-existence of a high incidence ofpoverty with large endowments of forestcapital in some countries is remarkable. It is

Fig. 2.1 Effect of tenure on net primaryproductivitySource: ICRAF,1998



The Commission suggests:





also indefensible. The custodial services ofindigenous and local communities arerecognized by the Convention on BiologicalDiversity. Yet there is no evidence of nationalgovernments involving such communities inthe decision-making and benefit sharing fromforest resources. It is equally a governance issuethat so many communities are displaced bytimber companies and other powerful interests.

The Commission has concluded thatprevailing governance arrangements all toofrequently exclude from consideration anddecision-making disadvantaged groups suchas indigenous peoples and women who aredirectly dependent on and affected by forestpolicies, uses and management. Manygovernments do not acknowledge traditionalland ownership rights.

6. Gender InequityThe Commission is of the view that genderequity is fundamentally an issue ofgovernance. While women normally havemultiple, often disproportionateresponsibilities, they have little ownership orcontrol over productive resources. This

imbalance places women in a subordinateand disempowered position. They are foreverdependent and run a greater risk of beingexcluded from their homes and livelihoods.

• the process of decision-making within a country about the use of its forest lands be opened up to widespread participationby affected groups such as women and indigenous peoples;

• specific opportunities and arrangements be created for achieving gender equality in decision-making, management, entitlements, access to credit, technical assistance and marketing supports.

7. Ethical Failur eThe Commission sees the scale of corruptionin the forest industry as one of the mostintractable problems which societies have toface. Illegal practices (see Box 2.3)jeopardize the financial capacities ofgovernments and societies to sustain bothforests and development.

The Commission advocates that the ethicsassociated with the use of forest resourcesneed to be brought in line with requirementsof democracy, equity, transparency,conservation and sustainability.

• mechanisms that involve communities in monitoring what goes on in their backyard;

• national and global governance structuresthat encourage transparency and redress corrupt practices.

Desperate in theirdaily search for

firewood, villagersin West Africa

overharvest theforests, turning theland into a barrendesert. The resultis worse poverty.

Box 2.2 PRIVATE GAINS AT PUBLIC EXPENSE

• In 1996, the US government spent nearly US$15 million more on logging operationsthan private timber companies paid to purchase the wood.

• In 1994, the Russian government collectedonly from 3–20% of estimated potential revenues from stumpage fees – that is, only US$184 million instead of between US$0.9 and $5.5 billion.

• In Indonesia, it is estimated that the government loses between US$1 billion and $3 billion in potential revenues from its forest concessions each year.

• In Cambodia, revenues forgone from timber concessions are estimated at an incredible 63% of the government’s entire revenues each year.

Rog

er L

eMoy

ne/C

IDA






Box 2.3 ILLEGAL AND UNETHICAL PRACTICES IN THE FORESTRY SECTOR

Illegal Logging• logging timber species protected by

national or international law, such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)

• contracting with local entrepreneurs to buy logs from protected areas outside the concession

• logging outside concession boundaries• contracting with local forest owners to

harvest in their land but then cutting trees from neighbouring public lands instead

• logging in protected areas such as forest reserves

• logging in prohibited areas such as steep slopes, river banks and water catchment areas

• removing under/oversized trees• extracting more timber than authorized• logging without authorization• logging when in breach of contractual

obligation• obtaining timber concessions illegally

Timber Smuggling• export/import of tree species banned

under national or international law• illegal log export/import in contravention

of national bans• obtaining declarations of lower volume

exported.

Transfer Pricing and Other Corrupt Accounting Practices• declaring selling forest products at

prices below prevailing market prices to reduce declared profits and corporate and income taxes

• declaring buying inputs at prices above the prevailing market price to reduce declared profits and taxes

• declaring lower-priced species exported• manipulation of debt cash flows

(transferring money to subsidiaries or aparent company where debt repayment is freer than the export of profits; inflating repayments allowing untaxed larger repatriation of profits, reducing the level of declared profits and, therefore, of taxes)

• under-grading, under-measuring and under-valuing of timber and mis-classification of species

• avoiding royalties and duties by declaring a lower value of timber extracted from timber concessions

“T he lack of

respect for

traditional land

ownership

rights is

destroying

some of the

best protectors

of the forest,

the indigenous

populations...”

—participant in

the Commission’s

public hearing for

Latin America and

the Caribbean.

Vir

gini

a B

oyd/

CID

A




he full gamut of needs, interests,concerns and expectations in forests was

reflected in the submissions made in the fiveregional public hearings of the Commission.The conflicts were conspicuous: betweenforest dwellers and corporations, betweenlogging communities and environmentaladvocacy groups, between private interestsand the public interest (see Box 3.1). Thehearings also revealed encouraging efforts ofcommunities and civil society organizationsto respond to the challenge of restoringforests. More participation and devolution ofmanagement would not by themselves arrestforest decline. But these are desirable in theirown right, and consistent with the objectivesof sustainable development.

The Commission advocates the creation of mechanisms that are participatory andtransparent in their operation, in order toensure that the interests of all affected groupsare represented in decision-making aboutforests. Such mechanisms will redressimbalances of power and help to reconcileconflicting needs.

Yet, simply reconciling competing privateinterests will not address the causes of forest decline.

The public interest in forests is paramountand should be secured through appropriategovernance mechanisms. It exceeds the sumof all group interests. Indeed, the publicinterest involves the broad array ofenvironmental functions essential forhumankind as a whole.

• it is the responsibility of governments to perceive, articulate, defend and secure the public interest;

• it is we, as citizens, who hold in trust vital forest resources for present and future generations.

Poverty of Forest Dependent CommunitiesThe extent and depth of poverty in thedeveloping world, and the important role thatforests, woodlands and on-farm trees play incontributing to poverty alleviation, were majorthemes of the Commission’s Asia, LatinAmerica and Caribbean, and Africa Hearings.

• 350 million of the world’s poorest peopledepend almost entirely for their subsistence and survival on forests.

3 Public and Private Interest

Box 3.1SAME FOREST, DIFFERENT USES

Depending on your viewpoint, the sameforest may have many different functions:• a source of foreign exchange• a place to hunt wild animals for food• a site for recreation and education• space for a large plantation• protection for a watershed• site for new settlements• forest reserve for natural regeneration• potential ranch for grazing animals

• a place to find new species• a source of raw materials for industry• a source of firewood, forage, medicines,

building materials, food• a place to live• a sink for carbon sequestration• large-scale agriculture or small-scale

food production.

Source: adapted from FAO, 1995

T

The Commission believes:




• A further one billion poor people, 20% ofthe world’s population, depend on remnant woodlands, on homestead trees, and on agro-forestry systems for their subsistence fuel wood, food and fodder needs. Many are shifting cultivators, among the politically weakest.

Forest decline thus threatens the livelihoodof millions of people. Conversely, forests havethe potential to contribute significantly moreto their welfare and development. There aremany policy interventions available to govern-ments to realize that potential. The poverty ofabout one billion of the world’s poorest peoplein about 30 heavily deforested countries wouldbe alleviated through community forestry.

• intensified agroforestry efforts; • rapid afforestation and reforestation

through community based programs;• removal of obstacles to community

forestry by ensuring secure titles, tenure and access to forest lands and resources;

• support for community forestry through credit facilities, technology, technical assistance, marketing;

• subsidies to support community forestry, made available through a percentage of revenue from timber sales;

• creation of markets for non-timber forest products;

• removal of policy bias towards large-scale timber production by introducing incentives favouring community forestry;

• support for village-level institutions; • involvement of communities in the

decision-making about allocation of forest lands.

Indigenous PeoplesAround the world, about 60 millionindigenous peoples live in forests and depend on them for subsistence. Forests aretheir habitat and their source of survival. Arange of forest products: fruits, vegetables,roots and tubers, bush meat, spices, bark andclothing material such as animal fur andskins, oils, building materials, gums, dyesand medicinal plants contribute to their dailysubsistence needs.

For many forest-dwelling indigenouspeople, forests also have esthetic and spiritualimportance. Their traditional knowledge,acquired over centuries, generally leads suchcommunities to relate to their forest habitat inways that protect and sustain forests. For them,the forest is an extension of their temporaland spiritual lives. Their cultural security isbound up with the security of forest lands.

Forest-dwelling indigenous communitiesaround the world face remarkably similarproblems: erosion of their traditional rights ofaccess and use; displacement of their homes;erosion of their livelihoods; ignorance of theirvalues, their historical custodial functions, theiraccumulated intellectual property; disregardor persecution by the authorities. The pressureson aboriginal peoples are expected to intensifyas the demands on forests increase, and as theforest capital further declines.

Despite a history of abuses, there was littleevidence in any region of the world of aconstructive and systematic process on thepart of political leaders to protect the rightsof indigenous peoples, even though we are inthe United Nations Decade for IndigenousPeoples. Issues are addressed in a scatteredway across a range of United Nationsagencies and intergovernmental processes.Clearly some systematic attention within asingle forum dedicated to issues concerningindigenous peoples would be a more effectiveway of achieving comprehensive attention.

• creation of a forum for Indigenous Peoples under the UN Commission on Sustainable Development;

• incorporating indigenous and local knowledge in forest management.

The Yanomamiaboriginal peoplesof Brazil’s AmazonBasin are losingtheir homelands tofarmers, ranchersand gold miners.

Hél

ène T

rem

blay

/CID

A






“Just 40

corporations

now control

some 115

million

hectares of the

world’s

forests.”

Corporations and Forest Industry WorkersLarge companies produce 38% of the globalyearly turnover of all forest products (Carrereand Lohmann, 1996). Just 40 corporationsnow control some 115 million hectares of the world’s forests. Their activities havecontributed heavily to forest decline. Thesecurity of incomes, profits and jobs arethreatened by that decline. It is encouragingthat some corporations are beginning torealize that long-term success depends uponintegrating profitability with environmentaland social needs.

All corporations need clear signals aboutwhich forests are “out of bounds,” and codesof conduct. Public policy must insist ondefining, applying and monitoring standards ofmanagement and performance indicators.

Forest industrial workers are at the frontline regarding the effects of industrialpractice—or malpractice, as the case may be.Their concerns are jobs and income. Jobs inthe forest sector may sometimes have to besacrificed for the sake of the public interestin protection of forests. Technology choice,improved use of waste materials, and bettertraining can help. The role of workerorganizations is vital in achieving the balancebetween employment, profitability,conservation and sustainable use.

Public Interest and the Role of GovernmentsThe ecological, economic and socialsignificance of forests means that they can no longer be managed primarily for supplyingtimber. Nor can their management be leftonly to private interests. The public interestbecomes more pressing as human demandsincrease while forest cover and qualitydecrease. The public interest goes beyond thematerial interests of a single group and itexceeds the sum of all group interests. Thepublic interest involves securing all theenvironmental functions of forests.

Competing claims and competition, and theconflicts to which they give rise, are likely toget worse. It is the responsibility ofgovernments to perceive, articulate, defendand secure the public interest in thesecircumstances.

The Commission advocates thatgovernments should create mechanisms forconsultation, dialogue and debate in which allprivate interests participate, in which the poorand the politically weak are represented, andthrough which the public interest alsobecomes a vested interest.

• a facilitative function in creating mechanisms of public participation;

• a representative function in advancing and securing the public interest;

• an executive function in ensuring that theoutcomes of public process are reflected in policies, laws, regulations and management;

• an administrative function in reorganizing the public administration system to implement participatory policies.

The Role of Civil SocietyCitizens are becoming motivated to defendthe public interest. They need effectivemechanisms for a more structuredparticipation in forest management decision making.

• a new institutional model called FORESTRUST, that can be applied at the global, national and local level. Such an institution would enable citizens to exercise their right to oversee how forests are being managed. It would have four key components: FORESTWATCH, FORESTOMBUDSMAN, FOREST

MANAGEMENT COUNCIL, and FOREST

AWARD. These components are vehicles for civil society functions such as monitoring and publicizing corruption and mismanagement;setting standards for management; and rewarding excellence (for more details, see pp.18-19).






The Commissionfound communityinvolvement indecision-making isessential forsustainable forestmanagement.Niger, Africa.

Rog

er L

eMoy

ne/C

IDA


The Commission’s hearings revealed anincreasing consciousness among citizens ofthe public trust in forests. More people arebecoming motivated towards instilling moralresponsibility and ethical stewardship in forest management. The Commission wantsto capitalize on this rise of concern forforests. It calls for new and different kindsof mechanisms that would accommodate anactive involvement of local communities indecisions on forests and restore in governmenttheir sense of duty and responsibility tosecure the public interest.

FORESTRUST

Thus the Commission proposes the conceptof FORESTRUST, a citizens’force envisaged as a set of global, national and local levelarrangements to involve people from all parts of the world in solving the forest crisis.

As a first step the Commission wants toestablish FORESTRUST INTERNATIONAL (FTI)which will serve as an international consulta-tive forum on forest issues. FTI will be avehicle for dialogue on equal terms betweengovernments, industry and civil society, andfor keeping forest issues high on the interna-tional agenda.

FTI also would foster the establishment ofnational counterparts and work with them topursue at the national level what the interna-tional body intends to achieve globally. FORESTRUST at the local level will permit people to exercise their right of oversight about how their forests are being managed.

FORESTRUST is envisaged to have four components described in more detail on thesepages.

FOREST WATCH

The FORESTWATCH concept is about getting the public involved in monitoringtheir forests. Forest Watch is expected tocomplement forest related informationavailable from government sources andsatellite imagery.

FORESTWATCH is envisaged as:

• a network for information gathering,analysis, and dissemination;

• a link between local, national andinternational organizations involved inforest information gathering anddissemination;

• a mechanism for linking experts andcommunities;

• a vehicle for bringing to the public’snotice any abuse of the public trust inforests;

• a system for assessing performanceagainst criteria and indicators of SFM.

FORESTWATCH will be a challenge to mismanagement and corrupt activities relatedto forests. It would also allow communities tobe vigilant about other development policieswith a negative impact on forests.

FOREST AWARD

FORESTAWARD is envisaged as a mecha-nism for recognizing and rewarding good per-formance in conservation and sustainable for-estmanagement by communities, corpora-tions and countries.

It will rely on information collected via theother FORESTRUST functions, and from other


“Ultima tely, it

is we as

citizens who

hold in trust

these vital

resources for

present and

future

generations.

It is we,

therefore, who

need to be

vigilant about

that

responsibility.”

A Citizens’ Force Ca




e Called FORESTRUST

“Mechanisms

are required to

permit citizens

to have

a more

structured

participation

in the policy-

making and

management

of forests.”

sources. The international FORESTAWARD com-mittee would be comprised of representativesfrom the major forest related stakeholder groups.

FORESTAWARD committees at the nationallevel will make nominations to the interna-tional FORESTAWARD committee.

FOREST OMBUDSMAN

The international FORESTOMBUDSMAN

would be an innovation among internationalinstitutions. It would pass authoritative judg-ments focused on issues of discrimination,abuse of the forest resource, inequity, andcorruption associated with forest operations.Information on these concerns would beprovided by FORESTWATCH and othersources.

Two models could be considered for establishing the international FOREST

OMBUDSMAN: an independent UN body, similar to the Human Rights Committee; or a creation of international NGOs involvedin forest conservation.

• decisions of the FORESTOMBUDSMAN

would be non-punitive;

• the Ombudsman’s credibility woulddepend on it being impartial, independentand objective;

• financing for the FORESTOMBUDSMAN’S

work will have to be without ties orinfluence;

• conflict resolution could be one of thefunctions of the FORESTOMBUDSMAN.

The FORESTOMBUDSMAN at the national levelis expected to perform similar tasks andwould be modeled on existing ombudsmanfunctions in other areas. Well-respected

prominent citizens would be expected toguide and lead the national institutions. Theinternational FORESTOMBUDSMAN will drawfrom the work of its national counterparts.

FOREST MANAGEMENTCOUNCIL

The Commission concluded that there is aneed for coordinating criteria and indicators(c&i), certification standards and labelinginitiatives.

It proposes a FORESTMANAGEMENT COUNCIL

(FMC) with objectives to:

• encourage the establishment of c&i andcertification systems for forestmanagement;

• support exchange of information betweenexisting c&i and certification processes;

• promote the social and participatoryaspect of forest management in existingc&i and certification processes;

• endorse international certificationsystems to adapt to local conditions;

• coordinate and harmonize policies oninternationally traded products;

• establish standards for sustainable forestmanagement (SFM) and supportintergovernmental negotiations in this area.

FORESTMANAGEMENT COUNCIL at the nation-al level would monitor sustainable forest management standards within individualcountries. They are expected to support theefforts of buyers' groups and consumer organizations to increase the market share for sustainably produced forest products.





any of the solutions to the forest crisis discussed in the earlier sections

involve reforming governance mechanismsand restructuring markets. It is also necessarythat the forest sector adjusts to the need tomanage forests in the broader public interest.This section discusses some of the moreimportant principles that the Commissionbelieves should underlie sustainable forestmanagement (SFM), including: localizedmanagement, participatory decision-making,landscape planning, criteria and indicators ofSFM, certification, and improving research.

Much of the existing controversy aboutSFM derives from differing interpretations ofthe term. The Commission is of the view thatSFM reflects a shift towards forest practicesthat integrate ecological and social concerns.

A strategy for SFM must reflect thefollowing objectives:• indefinitely satisfy needs for timber,

fiber and non-timber forest products;• ensure conservation of soil and water;• sustain the resilience and renewal

capacity of forests;• support the food security and livelihood

needs of forest dependent communities; • conserve biological diversity; • provide a more equitable sharing of the

benefits from forest uses.

Localized Management and Participatory Decision-makingThe Commission believes that sustainableresource use is most likely to occur if localcommunities participate in managing theresources on which they depend. Participatorydecision-making is a prerequisite forcommunity involvement in forest management.There have been several cases around theworld of community-based forestry

management efforts successfully integratingconservation and rural development. Mostprominent among them is joint forestmanagement (JFM) in India (see Box 4.1).

The Commission throughout its Report hasemphasized localized community-basedmanagement and participatory decision-making as key components of SFM.

• involvement of local communities in all stages of planning and implementation offorestry projects;

• establishment of mechanisms for including local communities in monitoring forests and forest management performance through FORESTWATCH (see pp. 18-19).

“SFM reflects

a shift towards

forest practices

that integrate

ecological and

social

concerns.”

4 Managing Forests Sustainably

BOX 4.1LOCALIZED FOREST MANAGEMENT

IN INDIA

Some of the most promising experiencesin dryland forestry management comefrom India where Joint ForestManagement (JFM) schemes haveemerged as a highly influential force inrestoring India’s degraded forest lands(Poffenberger and McGean, 1990). JFM isa variant of community forestry widelyadopted in India, in which responsibilityand benefits are shared by local usergroups with government forestrydepartments. Currently, 16 of 25 states inIndia have issued JFM agreementscovering about 2 million hectares offorests. JFM agreements are anincreasingly influential worldwide modelin attempts to reverse deforestation trendsand uplift disadvantaged rural groups (Jeffery, 1997).

M






Landscape PlanningThe key to successful economic developmentincludes a working landscape that provides astable base for a variety of entrepreneurialactivities. In the forested zones, some of theforests will be used for timber, fiber and fuel.Some will be used for non-timber forestproducts. And some will be used as forestreserves and for water supplies. Such ascenario can come about only throughplanning for the entire landscape.

The Commission has concluded that wemust reach beyond forestry. We need toinstitute a landscape planning andmanagement approach, predicated on widepublic participation, and supported byreliable data and scientific knowledge.

• implementing integrated planning and management approaches at the landscapelevel;

• improvement in the reliability of time-series data for a variety of goods and services;

• creation of mechanisms that would enable public administration systems to overcome the limitations of sectoral planning.

Controversial Forestry PracticesSome controversial forest management issuesfrequently dominate news headlines. Canclearcutting really be a sound managementtechnique? Is there a place for treeplantations with few species? Should largeareas of forest be set aside for environmentalreasons? The appropriateness of thesepractices can only be decided for specificsituations. However, the Commission is ofthe view that the principles of localizedmanagement, participatory decision-making,landscape planning and ecosystem basedmanagement should be the framework forassessing forest practices such asclearcutting, plantation forestry, fire as amanagement tool, and protected forest areas.

Verifying SFM: Criteria, Indicatorsand CertificationThere has been much effort to developcriteria and indicators for assessing SFM and

mechanisms for its certification. TheCommission asserts that there can be nouniversally applicable body of criteria andindicators. Such tools have to be context-specific to include the social dimension ofsustainability. The Commission notes thatsome international processes (ITTOGuidelines, Helsinki Process, MontrealProcess; Tarapoto Proposal; FAO RegionalProcesses) are assisting countries to developnational frameworks to assess progress onSFM.

• all nations having significant forests should develop criteria and indicators specific to their situation.

Few countries have set up nationalcertification programs for imported anddomestically produced wood. Since only 20%of forest products enter international trade,there is an urgent need to establish standardsto certify domestically traded products.

• all countries participate in international certification schemes for their forest products that enter international trade.

The Commission is of the view that forinternationally traded forest products, thevarious criteria, indicators, and certificationsystems should be harmonized. This willensure competitiveness for the products ofthose countries adhering to sustainabilitystandards. The Commission is also concernedabout the risk of lowering the standards of




A patchwork ofclearcuts in British Columbia,Canada.

Ro

n W

atts/

First

Lig

ht




certification systems in order to make thesystem more manipulative and acceptable.

• harmonizing the various sets of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management and coordinating forest certification systems through a FOREST

MANAGEMENT COUNCIL;• adoption of third party certification

schemes for both domestically traded andexported products;

• product labeling in accordance with certification standards and accompanied by consumer education programs.

Private Sector Investment and ManagementThe private sector has a critical role to playin SFM. In most of the major woodproducing countries of the developed world,the private sector is the largest owner ormanager of forests. The role of the privatesector in furthering SFM in developingcountries is also critical. Private capital flowsto developing countries, in the form ofinvestment and lending, now amounts toabout 60% of development financing and hasincreased each year since 1991.

The trends of decreasing public andincreasing private investment are expected tocontinue. In the last few years, foreignprivate sector investments in the forestrysector have rapidly increased in many of theforest-rich countries of the developing world.The operations of trans-national corporations(TNCs) in the forestry sector have alsorapidly grown in the last decade.

• establishing codes of conduct for timber companies consistent with the objectives of conservation, sustainability, equity andtransparency;

• imposing penalties for non-compliance with established standards;

• adherence to social and ethical accounting practices by timber corporations;

• investment in research to increase efficiency in the timber industry.

Improving Research and InformationThe Commission was struck by the inadequacyof forest data, as well as the incompatibilityin definitions and measurements employedby agencies involved in forest data gatheringand analysis.

• establishing an international network for research and training in SFM;

• financial support for this network from corporations, foundations and governments;

• greater effort by UN and other internationalagencies to achieve compatibility in forest data collection and mapping;

• better organization and dissemination of information to enable reliable monitoringof the state of forests;

• improved public awareness about forests through formal and non-formal education;

• disseminating forest-related information to local communities and forest users.

BOX 4.2CERTIFICATION AND LABELING BY FOREST COMPANIES

Many forest product consumers in Europe,U .S.A. and Japan (who between themaccount for more than 60% of worldconsumption of manufactured forestproducts) insist that the products theypurchase come from forests that have beencertified as being managed sustainably.Certification is perhaps the most powerful“soft” policy instrument to be designed and

implemented outside government. Manycompanies whose operations are nowcertified have adopted sound forestrypractices. As certification becomes morewidespread, many forest enterprises willeither be shut out of environmentallydiscriminating markets, or be forced toimprove their forest management to enter such markets.







ustaining forests and development requiresus to manage and use forests in a fashion

that does not impair their environmentalfunctions. The global human habitat isalready unstable and threatened with furtherdestabilization. The world’s forests arecentral to both the cause and the correction of that instability.

Forest functions are already threatened,even as human demands on those functionscontinue to mount. The global population isset to increase by half to around 9.5 billion by2050 before there is any hope of it stabilizing.Rising population and consumption canpotentially overwhelm the world’s forests.

The Commission identified three sources ofthreats to forests and their functions. First arethose threats that originate from competitionfor other land uses, especially from expandingcroplands. Second are threats related to thegrowing global demand for wood. Third arethreats exogenous to forests, the mostprominent being climate change and loss of biodiversity.

Expanding CroplandsForests over the centuries have beenconverted on a massive scale for agriculture.There now exists fierce competition betweenneeds for the forests as habitat, and equallydemanding needs for increased agriculturalproduction.

Since population is unlikely to stabilizebefore 2050, it will be essential to producemore food by diversifying and intensifyingagricultural production. Converting woodlandsto marginal farmland is the least desirableway to expand food supply.

The Commission expresses the need for asecond Green Revolution. One of the lessonsof the first Green Revolution was thattechnological advances alone cannot solvethe problems of food security for the poor.Greater equity does not arise automaticallyfrom greater food production.

Therefore, the challenge for the New GreenRevolution will be to develop technology thatwill make this a “poor farmers greenrevolution.”

• productivity breakthroughs for staple crops grown by poor farmers, often on marginal lands;

• diversified production, using tree crops, livestock and a variety of agricultural crops.

Industrial Wood DemandRecent projections of future consumption ofindustrial wood to the year 2050 suggest anincrease from the current level of about 1.7 billion cubic meters per year to anywherebetween 2 to 3 billion cubic meters per year(see Figure 5.1). By 2050 more than half ofthe world’s industrial wood production willbe for the manufacture of pulp and paper.

The possibilities for meeting and reducingthese surging demands lie in improvedtechnology for the production and use ofwood. There is significant scope for reducingwasteful use of forest resources andincreasing forest/tree productivity. Recyclingcan considerably lessen the demand forindustrial wood. Consumers can influence the

Fig 5.1Growing industrialwood demand Source: Solberg et al., 1996

5 Sustaining Forests and Development

SThe Commission believes this requires:


success of recycling by signaling theirpreference for recycled products and materials.

Tree plantations can meet growingdemands for industrial wood from arelatively small land base. They can mostefficiently be established in warm climateswhere growth rates far exceed those in thetemperate and boreal forests.

Plantation forestry can contribute to:• conserving remaining primary forests;• increasing forest cover;• increasing carbon sequestration;• creating income and employment.

Fuelwood DemandWood is a major rural and industrial energysource. Fuelwood is used for 58% of all theenergy used in Africa, 15% in Latin Americaand 11% in Asia. In some 40 developingcountries (many of them among the leastdeveloped), fuelwood accounts for more than70% of all energy use. It is estimated that by2050 demand for fuelwood will increasefrom 3.0 to 3.5 billion cubic meters per year.Rural well being in many parts of the worldwill continue to depend heavily on access tofuelwood supplies.

There exist several innovative technologiesthat focus on the energy needs of poor ruralpeople, such as: new and more efficient kindsof wood-burning stoves, solar and windenergy. Rural energy alternatives such asthese should be encouraged through greaterfunding for research and development.

At the same time, production of wood onfarms and homesteads should be encouraged.

• agro-forestry systems that produce fuelwood as a by-product;

• incentives to private investors to developenergy plantations for supplying fuelwood to urban centres and thus relieve pressure on natural forests.

Climate ChangeOne of the most important environmentalconcerns is climate change as a result ofemissions of greenhouse gases. Forests play adual role in climate change. When forests arecut or burned carbon dioxide and methane,both heat-trapping gases, are released.

Deforestation contributes 20-25% of totalcarbon emissions into the atmosphere,ranking second only to the combustion offossil fuels as a source of atmosphericcarbon. Intact forests act as carbon sinks by removing carbon dioxide from theatmosphere through photosynthesis. Forests,with their soils, contain two to three times the amount of carbon currently held in theatmosphere.

Global warming is the likely consequenceof rising levels of greenhouse gases in theatmosphere. Even a very moderate increasein the temperature of the atmosphere is likelyto have a considerable impact on thedistribution and health of forests. Thewarming effect becomes auto catalytic as itspeeds the mortality of trees and the furtherrelease of carbon from forest soils into theatmosphere. Accelerated metabolism inforests due to climate change could place theobjectives of the Climate Change Conventionand the Kyoto Protocol beyond reach(Houghton, 1998).

It is important that steps be takenimmediately to stabilize global climates bystopping the further accumulation of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere. Haltingfurther impoverishment of the remainingforests is an essential component of efforts to slow climate change, in order to maintain a habitable biosphere.

Biodiversity LossForests contain at least two-thirds of theearth’s terrestrial species. The biotic diversityof forests is used in breeding economicallyimportant plants and animals. This gene bankis also drawn upon to strengthen the yieldand resistance of domestic and commercialfood crops, and for materials of medicinal,pharmaceutical and industrial value. Plantdiversity ensures a sufficiently wide range oftree species to buffer forests and their functionin regulating landscapes from disruption bypests, disease, and the vagaries of climate.

Recent assessments suggest that presentrates of species extinction are between 100and 1,000 times the natural rates. Speciesextinction is occurring at a time whenhumans have been deliberately narrowing thegene pool through intensive selection andbreeding in order to increase timber and



“Halting

further

impoverishment

of the

remaining

forests is an

essential

component of

efforts

to slow climate

change.”





“We need new

mechanisms

to deal with

global services

from forests.”

agricultural yields. This reduces the resilienceof forests to recover from natural or humandisturbance. The fact is that even beforespecies are lost, the functional aspects ofnature are severely impaired.

Steps such as increasing protected areasand reserves should be taken to avoid theirreversible loss of biodiversity. An obviouspriority would be to conserve intact,undisturbed, forest—the remainder of theworld’s primary forests. The Commissionwelcomes the leadership of the World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation andSustainable Use to set targets by the year 2005of an additional 50 million hectares of newprotected areas, accompanied by more effectiveprotection of 50 million hectares of existingreserves. The Commission considers thisobjective desirable, but the areas inadequate.

Protected areas policy should also seek to:• halt the loss of medicinal plants and their

natural habitats;• protect cultural diversity and the rights of

local people to manage and use forests;• protect sources of non-wood forest

products that provide food, income and livelihood to millions.

Measuring the Forest CapitalHow can we know with any confidencewhether efforts to stem forest decline, arehaving a positive effect? How can we trackwhat is happening to the forest capital overtime? How can we get away from measuringsystematic depletion of the forest resource asa net gain in economic growth? If indeed wevalue forests as an asset, and if ensuring “...the ability of future generations to meet their

own needs” is not just rhetoric, it would beuseful to have such a measure to appraise theeffectiveness over time of all that we do inrelation to sustaining forests. We need ameasure for the changing value of the forestcapital of the world.

Perhaps the most intractable issue in theintergovernmental debates on forests is howto deal with the fact that forests providecommon environmental services for thewhole world, irrespective of theirgeographical location, ownership pattern, orpolitical jurisdiction. The actions ofindividual countries, which result in forestdecline or in enhanced global environmentalservices through their forests, should beessential information available in globalforest negotiations.

We need new mechanisms to deal withglobal services from forests. TheCommission advocates that efforts ofeconomists, ecologists, statisticians and otherexperts be consolidated to estimate the valueof ecosystems, in order to construct ameasure for reflecting the value of the forestsof a country—its forest capital. A forestcapital index would then estimate a country’srelative contribution towards globalenvironmental services from forests (see page 28 on Forest Capital Index).

• development of the concept of Forest Capital;

• development and use of a Forest Capital Index;

• if feasible, creation of financial mechanisms on the basis of such an Index to compensate countries for ecological services from forests.

BOX 5.1IMMINENT EXTINCTION

Biologists advise that we are already amidan extinction crisis unmatched in at least 65 million years and that, if current trendscontinue, one-quarter of the world’s speciesmay disappear in less than half a century.Assuming that earth is home to 10 million

species (a modest estimate), this rate ofextinction means that over 130 species aday will disappear during that time. In thetropics, 15,000 species are disappearingannually, or more than 40 species per day.






he global significance of forests meansthat all countries with forests must

recognize that they hold in trust naturalresources vital to people beyond theirborders. It is this concept which theCommission places at the core of itsconsideration of the international dimensionsof forests and sustainable development.

The Commission believes major changesare needed in the multinational investmentsinvolving forests and in rules governinginternational trade in forest products. TheCommission holds views on theintergovernmental dialogue on forests and the need for a forest convention. Currentdialogues go on without achieving theirintended results. The Commission calls for agroup of countries which together produce orconsume most of the world’s forest resourcesto constitute a Forest Security Council.

Multinational Investment on ForestsIn recent years, private sector investment inthe forest sector has outstripped publicinvestment (Chandrasekharan, 1996).Multinationals are welcomed by developingcountries, as their capital is considered vitalfor development. At the same time, nationalauthority to impose restrictions onmultinational operations is weakening due toglobalization of trade. This erosion ofnational authority is occurring at a time when

governments may need to impose forestexploitation restrictions in the interest ofsustaining their forest capital.

International Trade in Forest ProductsTwo conditions must be satisfied beforeinternational trade in forest products canbenefit all. The sustainability of ecosystemsmust be guaranteed, and trade relationshipsshould be equitable. Neither condition iscurrently met. Between 20% and 25% of allcommercial forest production enters intointernational trade. A few industrializedcountries command about 90% of this trade.

• intergovernmental discussions consider ways to increase the share of developing countries in the global forest products trade;

• developing countries be provided with financing and technology to take advantage of shorter growing cycles and lower wages to increase their market share of timber and fiber, thus reducing pressure on primary forests.

Liberalized trade is regarded as an impetusto economic growth. However, it would becounterproductive if short-term economic

“ All countries

with forests

must recognize

that they hold

in trust natural

resources vital

to people

beyond their

borders.”

6 International Dimensions of Forests

T


• countries require multinationals to operate according to a code of conduct;

• the issue of multinational operations be addressed in intergovernmental discussions. Coordination and solidarity would strengthen the hand of governments that lack bargaining power with multinationals;

• civil society should have a role in monitoring the performance of

multinationals. The set of functions comprising FORESTRUST, especially the FORESTWATCH and FOREST

OMBUDSMAN functions, could contribute to civil society efforts;

• governments need to create the legal framework in which multinationals couldoperate consistent with sustainability objectives.



growth is achieved at the expense ofsustainability. The international bodyresponsible for ensuring sustainability intrade arrangements is the World TradeOrganization (WTO).

• that the WTO should send clear signals that sustaining forests is the bottom line in trade arrangements;

• if trade arrangements negatively impact anation’s forests, countries must be able torely on the WTO for support;

• the environmental and social impacts of liberalized trade in forest products need to be carefully weighed in the WTO’s rulings in trade disputes;

• any resulting “trade and environment” or “trade and sustainable development” agreement must give a country recourse to protect its forest capital (IISD, 1996).

Intergovernmental Dialogue on ForestsForests provide common and indivisibleenvironmental services for the whole world.Developing nations take the position that theyshould be compensated for the globalecological services which their current forestcover provides. Meanwhile, the undertakingof UNCED about financing the transition tosustainable development has not beenrealized. Levels of overseas developmentassistance continue to be reduced. Theintergovernmental debate on forests throughthe UN Intergovernmental Panel on Forests,and its successor, the IntergovernmentalForum on Forests, has remained fixated onthese points.

Thc Commission is of the view that evenas this impasse exists, the intergovernmentaldebate on forests ignores the followingfundamental realities:

• forest conservation costs are in reality investments for environment and sustainable development

• the fate of the world’s poor is dependent on environmental stability

• the intergovernmental dialogue is supposedto focus on common responsibilities to secure environmental stability

• equity requires a pooling of resources

among all nations to make possible environmental stability and sustainable development

• the urgency of the forest crisis demands immediate and concerted attention.

The problem with the intergovernmentaldialogue is that too many issues are beingdiscussed in too large a forum. Whereeverything is a priority, nothing becomes apriority. The continuing intergovernmentaldiscussion ought to therefore focus on a fewpriority issues critical to environmentalstability and eliminating poverty.

A Convention on Forests?The Commission supports the use ofinternational law to defend societal goals andany legal instrument or process that couldhelp sustain forests. The Commission is ofthe view that if a convention is to be effectivein responding to the forest crisis, it shouldaddress fundamental issues with diligenceand commitment.

However, the Commission believes that:• there is little basis for confidence in the

prospects for a forest convention being implemented because of the lack of political will;

• enshrining commitments in a legally binding convention is no guarantee that those commitments will be carried out;

• there exist several international conventions which await implementation. When implemented, they would go a long ways towards dealing with the objective of sustaining forests.

• continue their debate on a convention on forests, but speedily conclude the presentround of intergovernmental deliberations in view of the global forest crisis;

• take into account the proposals of the Commission in their discussion on the role of a global forest convention;

• be politically committed, within a convention, or without one, for urgent action on the issues raised in the Commission’s Final Report;

• use existing regional and multilateral agreements to deal with the forest crisis.



“T he problem

with the

intergovernmental

dialogue is that

too many issues

are being

discussed in too

large a forum.”


The Commission urges that governments:




The Commission advocates a Forest Capital Index:

orests are a capital asset that sustain the global habitat. To manage this capital for thepublic good, societies need indicators of the status of the world’s forests, and estimates

of their ecological and socio-economic value.The Forest Capital Index (FCI) is intended as a tool for international forest policy.

The FCI underpins society’s concern for intergenerational equity.

The FCI could:• permit evaluation of progress in sustaining forest capital for each country;• serve as a benchmark for assessing whether forest capital is increasing or declining;• facilitate a global framework for valuation of forest ecosystem services; • create market mechanisms to compensate countries for ecological services.

The FCI could provide a uniform numerical indicator of each nation’s current forestcapital. A suite of indicators of forest qualities might be used, such as: surface area; standingbiomass; net primary productivity; species richness and diversity; age class of trees; leafarea index; soil fertility measures; soil organic matter content; and the health of foreststands. Examining the changes in these indicators over time will treat internationalcomparisons of forest decline more equitably than absolute measures of deforestation.

Condensing the suite of ecological indicators, appropriately weighted, into onedimensionless number offers a simple tool to compare the progress of countries acrossnumerous categories. Imputing a dollar value to the services provided by the forest thenbecomes possible, and can then be reflected in a workable form in the international dialogue about compensation for global forest services.

Current Status:The Commission, in partnership with like-minded institutions, is actively pursuing ways of developing the FCI concept. More information about the Commission’s initiatives is posted on its website: http://iisd.ca/wcfsd. Other institutions and individuals are invited to join the Commission in this endeavour.

Forests are More than Trees:How to Measure Their Real Value

F

Co

sta

Ric

a,

Pa

tric

io B

ae

za/C

IDA




Fig. 6.1Countries with the most temperate and borealforests. Source: FAO, 1997

Fig. 6.2Countries with the most tropical forests. Source: FAO, 1997

The Commission proposes that a Forest Security Council be established:

ertain countries, by virtue of their command over forest resources, production, trade inforest products, and consumption, should have an extraordinary duty of care for the

world’s forests, and should provide international leadership in the search for global forestsolutions. The Commission challenges these countries to constitute themselves as a ForestSecurity Council (FSC).

The FSC is being proposed to complement the intergovernmental processes. Agreement onsolutions in the intergovernmental process has been elusive. A major reason is that too manyissues are discussed in a large forum. The FSC would be structured to overcome thislimitation. The smaller group of countries constituting the FSC would focus on specificissues that directly affect them, and thus should be interested in arriving quickly at effectivesolutions. Selecting the FSCIt is desirable that the Forest Security Council (FSC) involves countries whose forestcircumstances make them indispensable in any effort to halt forest decline. Identifyingcountries for the FSC could be based on the following considerations:

• involve countries according to their prominence in forest cover (see figures 6.1 and 6.2), wood production, imports and exports of wood, production and export of woodpulp;

• ensure that different types of forests are represented;• ensure that all regions are represented.On the basis of the above considerations, the Commission has indicated a preliminary

group of 25 countries from which the FSC might be constituted. Those countries thatinitially agree to be a part of the FSC are expected to further develop the criteria for theselection of other members.

• Asia and Oceania:China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Japan, Australia• Europe and the CIS:Finland, France, Germany, Sweden, Russian Federation• North America: Canada, Mexico, U.S.A. • Afr ica: Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria• Latin America and the Caribbean: Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia,

Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela

What is Missing is Political Leadership

C




his Summary has attempted to highlight the major proposalsof the Commission as outlined in its Final Report. The

Commission’s recommendations require more than just technicaladjustments. They call for fundamental and far-reaching changesin forestry practices. As the Commission has said, the roots of thecrisis are broad and deep, and the solutions go well beyond theobligations and responsibilities of the forestry sector.

Correcting the root causes of forest decline will require patience,commitment and enlightened leadership. Innovation is desperatelyneeded if the world is to prevent the deepening of the forest crisis,and the Commission has tried to be creative in its own search forsolutions.

After holding hearings on five continents, the Commissionconcluded that if the world is to prevent the worsening of theforest crisis, initiatives already under way must be supported, andnew ways must be found to slow and ultimately reverse forestdecline.

For those directly involved in planning, in policy analysis, inpublic service, or in political processes, a greater sense of urgencyis required to build on current efforts and make them moreeffective. For those who use timber and paper, the challenge is toreduce consumption. For those who depend on forests for theirlivelihood or recreation, the obligation is to spread the message ofwhat could be lost and how it could affect our lives. We all have astake in the future of the world’s forests. We may not have asecond chance. The choice is still in our hands.

Conclusion

The Fate of the Forest is in Our Hands

T

Felling old-growthtrees in the temperaterainforest of BritishColumbia.

Sherman Hines/Masterfile




Carrere, R., and L. Lohmann. 1996. Pulpingthe South. London, UK: Zed Books.

Chandrasekharan, C. 1996. “Status of financing for sustainable forestrymanagement programmes.” WorkshopReport on Financial Mechanisms andSources of Finance for SustainableForestry. Pretoria, South Africa, June1996. New York: UNDP.

Houghton, R. A. 1998. “Forest and theWarming of the Earth,” inForests in aFull World. G.M. Woodwell, ed. Report ofthe Scientific Committee, WorldCommission on Forests and SustainableDevelopment. (in draft)

ICRAF. (International Centre for Research inAgro-Forestry) 1998. More People, MoreTrees: The Future of Trees is on the Farmin Africa. Paper by Pedro A. Sanchez,Anthony J. Simons, F. M. Place, MarkusG. Walsh, Fiona J.C. Chandler, Cheryl A.Palm, Paul K. Konuche, and RoelandKindt, Nairobi, October 1998: ICRAF.

IISD. (International Institute for SustainableDevelopment) 1996. The World TradeOrganization and sustainable development:An independent assessment. Winnipeg,Canada: IISD.

IUCN. 1996. 1996 IUCN red list of threatenedanimals.Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

IUCN. 1997. 1996 IUCN red list ofthreatened plants.Gland, Switzerland:IUCN.

Jeffr ey, R. 1997. Organizing Sustainability:NGOs and Joint Forest ManagementAgreements in India.Edinburgh: Centrefor South Asian Studies, University ofEdinburgh.

Poffenberger, M and B. McGean (eds.).1994. Policy Dialogue on Natural ForestRegeneration and CommunityManagement.Research Network ReportNo. (April). Honolulu: Asia SustainableForest Management Network.

Solberg, B., D. Brooks, H. Pajuoja, T.J.Peck, and P.A. Wardle. 1996. Long-termtrends and prospects in world supply anddemand for wood and implications forsustainable forest management.Joensuu,Finland: European Forest Institute andNorwegian Forest Research Institute.

References

Tur

ner V

alle

y, A

lber

ta,

Ron

Str

oud/

Mas

terf

ile




agroforestry. A land-use system in whichtree crops are planted on the same landused for raising agricultural crops oranimals.

biodiversity. Biological diversity, whichincludes the diversity of species, genes andecosystems and the evolutionary andfunctional processes which link them.

carbon sequestration. The removal andstorage of carbon from the atmosphere bygreen plants through the process ofphotosynthesis, in which carbon dioxide iscombined with water to form carbohydratesthat can be stored in plant tissues.

carbon sink. An area where the rate ofcarbon uptake by living organisms exceedsthe rate of carbon release, so that carbon issequestered in organic or inorganic forms.

certif ication. The process of evaluation oraudits by independent third parties of forestpractices carried out by forest owners andmanagers primarily engaged in woodproduction. The evaluation is usuallycarried out in relation to widely acceptedstandards of sustainable forest management.Some processes focus on certifyingproducts, while others focus on forestmanagement systems.

climate change. An alteration to measuredquantities (e.g. precipitation, temperature,radiation, wind and cloudiness) within theclimate system that departs significantlyfrom previous average conditions and isseen to endure, bringing aboutcorresponding changes to ecosystems andsocioeconomic activity. Associated withgreenhouse gas emissions, of which fossilfuel combustion and forest decline arecontributors.

community forestry (or community forestmanagement). Used as an allencompassing operational term. Thecommon denominator in communityforestry is the focus on the role of localcommunities (usually forest-dependent) inmanaging neighboring forests and sharingthe benefits from those forests. Animportant role is to foster productiverelationships between communities,government agencies, and NGOs.

concession. A lease or contract to use a forestfor the production of forest products.Concessions often take the form ofcommercial agreements granting loggersthe right to harvest a given area of publicforest land for industrial wood.

criter ia and indicators. Criteria are rules,standards, norms, conditions, or behaviorwhich are considered to be “good” or“ideal.” Indicators suggest what kind ofmeasures are needed to judge the successor failure of a program. Desirableindicators are variables that summarize,quantify, measure and communicaterelevant information.

economic. A term that today often implies aprofit motive but more properly concerns awider consideration of the demand for andsupply of scarce resources, bothcommercial and non-commercial.

GlossaryP

ierr

e S

t. J

acq

ue

s/C

IDA

Pleading for help,small-scalefarmers in Brazilhave lost theirentire crop due toflooding caused bywidespreadclearing of forests.


ecosystem-based forest management. Anapproach to forest management focused onmaintaining or enhancing ecosystemintegrity through attempting to simulateecological processes

forest capital. A weighted measure of theintegrity of forest resources in a givenregion (say a country), expressed in areaterms and based on a stated value weighting.Primary forests may be deemed to havegreater integrity than other types of forests,and therefore be given more weight thanmodified, fragmented or planted forests.

forest capital credits. The notion that, sinceforest capital is of global value due to theglobal ecological services provided byforests, the forest capital concept couldform the basis of a global market intradable credits for the global servicesprovided by forests. The forest capitalcredits system could build on or complementexperiences with the emerging internationalmarket in carbon emissions trading.

forest decline. A blanket term encompassingdeforestation (conversion of forests to otheruses) and forest degradation (deteriorationin health and quality).

Framework Convention on ClimateChange. The agreement signed by 154countries at the 1992 Earth Summit at Riode Janeiro under which climate change ismonitored and addressed globally.

global ecological services. The role forestsplay in regulating global climate, energyand hydrological flows, and other key bio-physical functions.

governance. The legal framework andinstitutions within which decisions aremade in a society.

greenhouse gases (GHG).Gases whichaccumulate in the earth’s atmosphere andtrap heat. Some are naturally occurringgases, like carbon dioxide. Others are madeby humans, such as halocarbons, which inaddition to contributing to the greenhouseeffect, also contribute to the thinning of theozone layer.

IFF (Inter governmental Forum onForests). The nineteenth special sessionUN General Assembly held in June 1997decided to continue the IPFs (see “IPF”)intergovernmental policy dialogue onforests through the establishment of an adhoc open-ended IFF under the UNCommission of Sustainable Development.The IFF decided at its first meeting inOctober 1997 in New York that it wouldmeet four times by February or March 2000.

IPF (Inter governmental Panel on Forests).An open-ended ad-hoc body established in1995 by the UN Commission onSustainable Development’s (CSD) to pursueconsensus on the management, conservationand sustainable development of all types offorests. The fourth and final session of theIPF was held in February 1997.

Kyoto Protocol. A treaty negotiated in Kyoto,Japan, in 1997 between 159 countries settingout legally binding reduction targets for sixgreenhouse gases averaging 5 percentemissions below 1990 levels for industrializedcountries between 2008 to 2012.



Huge old-growthlogs in Côted’Ivoire. Toooften, governmentssell cutting rightsto prime timber ata fraction of itstrue worth, theCommissionfound.

Mic

he

l Fa

ug

ère/C

IDA




landscape management. Managing an areaor region by integrating a variety ofhuman, cultural and historical valuesassociated with the land that may beecological, social or economic.

non-timber forest products. Medicinal plants,resins, mushrooms, rattans, wildlife andother non-wood goods obtained from forests.

participatory forest management. Forestmanagement in which the decision-makinginvolves a process of broad publicinvolvement.

pr imary forest. A forest in a maturesuccession phase, whose structure andcomposition have resulted fromunrestrained ecological processes ratherthan from human activity.

pr ivate interests. Interests of individuals,landowners, communities, corporations,and other groups and stakeholders.

public interest. The broader, long-terminterest of society as a whole, whichtranscends the specific agendas ofindividuals or special lobby groups.

sustainable development. Development thatmeets the needs of the present withoutcompromising the ability of futuregenerations to meet their own needs. Itimplies integrating traditional economicconcerns with often-ignored social andenvironmental considerations.

sustainable forest management (SFM). A process, rather than a prescribed systemof management. Elements may includeparticipatory and equitable approaches todecision-making geared towardmaintaining ecosystem and landscapefunctions while also meeting economic,social and cultural needs.

Old-growth forest,Cameroon:

more support forforestry research

is needed.

Ro

ge

r L

eM

oyn

e/C

IDA




mmediately after the Earth Summit in1992, Ola Ullsten, former Prime Minister

of Sweden and Emil Salim, formerIndonesian Minister of Population andEnvironment, supported by the Woods HoleResearch Center, convened a series ofmeetings of world leaders to seek a wayforward from deeply divided North and South positions on forests. Following callsfor action from many concerned groupsaround the world, they responded in 1994 to a proposal by the InterAction Council ofFormer Heads of State and Governments, atthe time chaired by former ChancellorHelmut Schmidt of Germany, to establish anindependent World Commission on Forestsand Sustainable Development.

Its mandate was to increase awareness of the dual function of world forests inpreserving the natural environment and incontributing to economic development; tobridge the gap between the North and South;and to broaden consensus on the data, scienceand policy aspects of forest conservation andmanagement. Emil Salim and Ola Ullstenwere invited to co-chair the Commission.Twenty-three other persons from a variety of backgrounds and perspectives joined theCommission as members. They served intheir individual capacity—and theCommission functioned as an independent body.

Public hearings were held in Jakarta,Indonesia; Winnipeg, Canada; San José,

Costa Rica; Yaoundé, Cameroon; and St. Petersburg, Russia. Internal workingsessions apart from those conducted inconnection with the hearings were held in Switzerland, The Netherlands, and in Trinidad & Tobago. The Commissionrecords its deep appreciation to those whocontributed as local organizers of the publichearings, submitted technical papers orparticipated as resource persons during theCommission’s meetings, as well to otherswhose experience and knowledge theCommission has been privileged to drawnupon. It also expresses its deep appreciationto those governments, intergovernmentalorganizations and private sources withoutwhose generous financial contributions theCommission would not have been able tofinalize its work.

The Commission benefited enormouslyfrom the tireless and dedicated work of itsstaff. A special thanks goes to theCommission’s Secretary General, Dr. JohnSpears, for his leadership over most of theCommission’s duration. Commission memberAngela Cropper was given the duty ofwriting the Report in the form it now exists.She was assisted in that task by Mr. KarlHansen and Dr. Ajit Krishnaswamy, whoheads the Commission’s Secretariat at theInternational Institute for SustainableDevelopment (IISD).

Acknowledgments

I




Co-ChairsOla Ullsten SwedenEmil Salim Indonesia

MembersEmeka Anyaoku NigeriaCharles Caccia CanadaKamla Chowdhry IndiaAngela Cropper Trinidad & TobagoChristine Debrah GhanaB.C.Y. Freezailah MalaysiaJosé Goldemberg BrazilWakako Hironaka JapanYolanda Kakabadse EquadorS. Wandira Kazibwe UgandaLi Lukang ChinaHemmo Muntingh The NetherlandsDavid Pearce UKManuel Rodriguez ColombiaKazimierez Rykowski PolandJorge Miles da Silva BrazilJosé Sarukhan Kermez MexicoM.S. Swaminathan IndiaMargaret Taylor Papua New GuineaMustafa Terrab MoroccoKlaus Töpfer GermanyNikolay N. Vorontsov RussiaGeorge M. Woodwell USAJong-Tack Yoo Republic of Korea

Secretary GeneralJohn Spears

Chairperson of the Editorial Committee and Editor of the Full ReportAngela Cropper

Chairperson of the Science CouncilGeorge M. Woodwell

Researcher and Co-ordinator of the follow-up processAjit Krishnaswamy

Members of the Commission




With the facilitation of the InternationalInstitute of Sustainable Development, locatedin Winnipeg, Canada, a follow-up process tothe Commission’s recommendations willcontinue till the end of 1999 or beyonddepending on funds made available. TheCommission invites research institutions,

NGOs, governments and intergovernmentalorganizations, business, and others to jointhose who are already engaged in spreadingthe Commission’s message and supporting the implementation of its recommendationsand proposed policy changes.

An Invitation


The world’s forests are being cut and burnt at such a rapid rate that if action is nottaken soon, we risk undermining their vital function in maintaining a habitableplanet. Already, forest loss is contributing to the extinction of plants and animals,increased flooding and disruption of climate patterns. In many parts of the world,forest decline adds to people’s social and economic distress.

After holding hearings on five continents to give voice to those who depend onforests for their livelihood, the World Commission on Forests and SustainableDevelopment (WCFSD) concludes: “We must urgently choose a path that respectsthe ecological values of forests while recognizing their role in social and economicdevelopment.”

• the global nature of the forest crisis requires decisive international leadership and action;

• governments must ensure that the public interest prevails over private interests;

• prices and policies that truly reflect all benefits provided by forests are needed to change wasteful production and consumption patterns;

• protection of the remaining primary forests requires that future demand for wood products must be met through plantation and secondary forests;

• community involvement in decision-making is essential for sustainablemanagement of forests.

Our Forests... Our Future is a compelling and well-documented appeal from agroup of respected individuals with backgrounds in politics, policy, science andforestry from 24 different countries in both the North and South. Due to its independence and broad international representation, the Commission has beenable to address the most significant global forest issues from a fresh and unique perspective.

Summary ReportWorld Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development (WCFSD)c/o International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)161 Portage Avenue East, 6th FloorWinnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3B 0Y4

OUR FORESTSOUR FUTURE

Key recommendations in the report include:


Documents

OUR FORESTS - IISD · 2016-01-18 · cause of forest decline. As a result, more than one-quarter of Europe’s trees show signs of significant leaf-loss. Annual European survey results