Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North Bart Holvoet Amsterdam, October 2003

Introduction Sustainable development = development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Forestry sector: evolution –sustained yield  productive forest functions –Sustainable Forest Management (SFM)  ecological, economical & social forest functions Criteria & Indicators (C&I) for the evaluation of SFM :  Different scope, different scale & different purpose  many standards, many differences Objectives : comparison of standards based on their contents Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Methodology Collecting standards (different scope, scale or purpose) Background information about the standard and country Developing a ‘reference standard’ Comparing each individual standard with reference standard  presence/absence data matrix Multivariate statistical analysis (CA, CCA)  discovering similarities & differences Explaining the observed patterns Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Results: collected standards 164 standards collected and compared with the reference standard SCOPE: see figure SCALE: ­Forest Management Unit : 68% ­32% developed for at least one higher level (sub-national and/or national) PURPOSE: ­Intergovernmental standards : 10% ­Certification standards : 64% (FSC : 42%, PEFC : 9%) Distribution of collected standards according to their scope (geographical origin) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Results: reference standard Constructed following the Tropenbos Hierarchical Framework (Lammerts van Bueren E.M. and Blom E.M, 1997) Contains all elements ever mentioned in the collected standards Consisting of Principles, Criteria and Indicators : 7 principles, 47 criteria and 308 indicators Every principle forms an essential requirement for SFM Criteria and indicators cover all necessary elements for SFM, without overlap or duplication Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Results: reference standard The 7 principles of the reference standard

Results: statistical analysis Statistical output: distribution of standards distribution of elements of the reference standard Correlations of certain explanatory variables (background information about standards) 2 major causes of difference: difference in level of application: National level  Forest Management Unit (FMU) difference in geographical origin: North  South comparison conclusions Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Results: statistical analysis Level of application FMU level  national level Distribution of the standards in the two- dimensional space of the first 2 factorial axes of the CA Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Results: statistical analysis Distribution of the standards in the two-dimensional space of the first 2 factorial axes of the CA. Geographical origin North  South Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion CAUSE ?  different objectives  differences in structure, detail and contents FMU level: objective = guiding forest management in practice towards SFM National (or sub-national) level: objective = guiding national policies and regulations towards SFM (not further elaborated) Level of application FMU level  national level Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

CAUSE ?  different geographical origin different ecological, social and economic aspects Northern countries: forests less complex, often smaller and fragmented lower biodiversity large capacities (financially and human resources)... Southern countries: extended and complex forests high biodiversity socio-economical inequity low capacities (financially and human resources)... Discussion Geographical origin North  South Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 1: Policy and planning strive for sustainable and multifunctional forest management, and are being supported by legislation and facilities. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 1: Policy and planning strive for sustainable and multifunctional forest management, and are being supported by legislation and facilities. North  South more experience & large knowledge large capacity little experience & small knowledge little capacity (financially, human skills) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 1: Policy and planning strive for sustainable and multifunctional forest management, and are being supported by legislation and facilities. North  South more experience & large knowledge large capacity little experience & small knowledge little capacity (financially, human skills) differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 1: Policy and planning strive for sustainable and multifunctional forest management, and are being supported by legislation and facilities. North  South more experience & large knowledge large capacity elements related to the use of technical and research capacity little experience & small knowledge little capacity (financially, human skills) elements for evaluation & stimulation of current capabilities transfer of technology! Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 2: The surface, vitality and state of the forest resources will be maintained and protected, and where possible even improved. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 2: The surface, vitality and state of the forest resources will be maintained and protected, and where possible even improved. North  South huge pressure on forest (past) environmental concern large technological capacity & knowledge growing pressure on forests (present & future) low technological capacity, little knowledge Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 2: The surface, vitality and state of the forest resources will be maintained and protected, and where possible even improved. North  South huge pressure on forest (past) environmental concern large technological capacity & knowledge growing pressure on forests (present & future) low technological capacity, little knowledge differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 2: The surface, vitality and state of the forest resources will be maintained and protected, and where possible even improved. North  South huge pressure on forest (past) environmental concern large technological capacity & knowledge elements to evaluate, encounter or prevent forest damage growing pressure on forests (present & future) low technological capacity, little knowledge specific elements for forest protection seldom present Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 3: The productive forest function will be maintained, by sustainable forest exploitation and by reassuring forest regeneration. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 3: The productive forest function will be maintained, by sustainable forest exploitation and by reassuring forest regeneration. North  South less complex ecosystems low species diversity large monitoring capacity very complex ecosystems high species diversity limited monitoring capacity Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 3: The productive forest function will be maintained, by sustainable forest exploitation and by reassuring forest regeneration. North  South less complex ecosystems low species diversity large monitoring capacity very complex ecosystems high species diversity limited monitoring capacity differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 3: The productive forest function will be maintained, by sustainable forest exploitation and by reassuring forest regeneration. North  South less complex ecosystems low species diversity large monitoring capacity elements related to stocks, stock changes and harvest of non woody forest products very complex ecosystems high species diversity limited monitoring capacity elements for identification & stimulation of the use of non woody forest products (+ extra pressure on sustainable wood production : LKS) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 4: Biodiversity and ecological processes will be maintained and protected, and where possibly strengthened. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 4: Biodiversity and ecological processes will be maintained and protected, and where possibly strengthened. many human influences (fragmentation, access, artificially restored,...) environmental concern complex ecosystems, often in natural state lack of capacity for sustainable managing of forest species North  South Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 4: Biodiversity and ecological processes will be maintained and protected, and where possibly strengthened. many human influences (fragmentation, access, artificially restored,...) environmental concern complex ecosystems, often in natural state lack of capacity for sustainable managing of forest species North  South differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 4: Biodiversity and ecological processes will be maintained and protected, and where possibly strengthened. many human influences (fragmentation, access, artificially restored,...) environmental concern elements for : protection of ecosystem and sustainable management of forest species restoration of naturalness complex ecosystems, often in natural state lack of capacity for sustainable managing of forest species elements mentioned are absent exclusive element: prohibition of hunting ! North  South Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 5: Protective forest functions shall be maintained and protected, and where possible strengthened. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 5: Protective forest functions shall be maintained and protected, and where possible strengthened. North  South often chemical pollution (industrial development) large capacity for chemical analyzing (e.g. nutrient cycling, pH) small capacity in chemical analyzing extended surfaces of physically vulnerable soils and water resources (e.g. sediment loss, runoff) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 5: Protective forest functions shall be maintained and protected, and where possible strengthened. North  South often chemical pollution (industrial development) large capacity for chemical analyzing (e.g. nutrient cycling, pH) small capacity in chemical analyzing extended surfaces of physically vulnerable soils and water resources (e.g. sediment loss, runoff) differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 5: Protective forest functions shall be maintained and protected, and where possible strengthened. North  South often chemical pollution (industrial development) large capacity for chemical analyzing (e.g. nutrient cycling, pH) strong focus on chemical quality of soils/water resources exclusive elements: elements related to global carbon cycle (Kyoto, Montreal & Helsinki Process) small capacity in chemical analyzing extended surfaces of physically vulnerable soils and water resources (e.g. sediment loss, runoff) little attention to chemical properties of soil/water more attention to physical and quantitative aspects of soil/water Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 6: The sustainable forest management shall be economically viable and shall improve the conditions of local communities and local economies. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 6: The sustainable forest management shall be economically viable and shall improve the conditions of local communities and local economies. North  South Forests seldom economically important Forest sector well known (employment, value production,..) Forests often economically important (strong dependency) Forest sector not well known (large informal sector) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 6: The sustainable forest management shall be economically viable and shall improve the conditions of local communities and local economies. North  South Forests seldom economically important Forest sector well known (employment, value production,..) Forests often economically important (strong dependency) Forest sector not well known (large informal sector) differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 6: The sustainable forest management shall be economically viable and shall improve the conditions of local communities and local economies. North  South Forests seldom economically important Forest sector well known (employment, value production,..) elements for estimation of employment and value of forest sector Forests often economically important (strong dependency) Forest sector not well known (large informal sector) no estimation of value or employment of forest sector elements to evaluate & steer the socio-economic situation (inequality, estimation of the forest dependency,...) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 7: The social and cultural wellbeing of all stakeholders shall be maintained and protected, and shall be improved when necessary. North  South different ecological, social and economic aspects Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 7: The social and cultural wellbeing of all stakeholders shall be maintained and protected, and shall be improved when necessary. North  South Often low dependency on forests Local or indigenous people are often absent (exceptions: Scandinavian countries, Canada, USA,...) Strong dependency on forests Local and/or indigenous people Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 7: The social and cultural wellbeing of all stakeholders shall be maintained and protected, and shall be improved when necessary. North  South Often low dependency on forests Local or indigenous people are often absent (exceptions: Scandinavian countries, Canada, USA,...) Strong dependency on forests Local and/or indigenous people differences in standards Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Discussion Principle 7: The social and cultural wellbeing of all stakeholders shall be maintained and protected, and shall be improved when necessary. North  South Often low dependency on forests Local or indigenous people are often absent (exceptions: Scandinavian countries, Canada, USA,...) typical elements: recreational forest function elements concerning local/indigenous people are absent (not always justified!) Strong dependency on forests Local and/or indigenous people More focused on the social & cultural aspects of local and/or indigenous people (wellbeing, quality of life, participation) Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Northern countries: more attention to environmental aspects less attention to the socio-economic forest functions Southern countries: more attention to social and economic aspects less attention to the environmental forest functions importance of capacity building Discussion Geographical origin North  South Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Conclusions Differences caused by: various conditions (ecological, economical, social and cultural)  typical elements representing these differences difference in overall capacity for SFM: shortcomings  many elements are missing in Southern standards because of their lack in capacity (technology, planning and research capability) Geographical origin Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Conclusions Harmonization between standards? To what extent? How? Differences resulting from specific local conditions (ecological, economical, social or cultural)  harmonization not advisable Differences resulting from shortcomings  Southern countries !!! (small overall managing capacity or socio-economical inequity)  harmonization advisable !  need for capacity building in the field of forestry  international cooperation Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Recommedantions Capacity building -Transfer of knowledge and technology -Support development of national regulations and efficient national forest services -Aid and guide local communities towards SFM Tackle the socio-economic aspect of inequity Adaptation of SFM standards -use knowledge & experience in tropical forest management to rethink some aspects -participatory process Implementation of SFM standards: active involvement of all the stakeholders -National forest services: implement forest regulations + support -Logging companies, communities, forest managers: implementation of SFM standards -NGO pressure -Market driven pressure. Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North

Thank you for your attention Comparison of standards for evaluation of Sustainable Forest Management between countries from the South and the North