1. TFD IMPF Dialogue 7 March 2007 Aryaduta Hotel Pekanbaru, Indonesia TFD’s Initiative on Intensively Managed Planted Forests Background, Evolution and Progress To Date

2. The Forests Dialogue Overview  Origins  IMPF dialogues and initiatives  Objective of IMPF dialogue series  Conclusions and recommendations to date  The value of dialogue: Stora Enso’s experience  Next steps

3. The Forests Dialogue  1992 – UN Conference on Environment & Development recognizes significance of IMPFs to SFM  1999 – International Experts Meeting on the Role of Planted Forests in Sustainable Forest Management. Santiago, Chile. Considered role of IMPFs as complement to natural forests in SFM  2003 – Expert Meeting on Role of Planted Forests: Maximizing Planted Forests’ Contribution to SFM. Wellington, New Zealand. 10-year review. Origins: IMPFs in the international arena

4. The Forests Dialogue  Gland, Switzerland – 2005  Beihai, China - 2006  Pekanbaru, Indonesia - 2007 Other IMPF initiatives  FAO Planted Forests Code  FSC Plantations Standard TFD IMPF Dialogues

5. The Forests Dialogue  Development of strategies to promote continued innovation in IMPF technology to  optimize social and environmental benefits  maintain competitive advantage and profitability  Ongoing development of best management practice systems and a sustainable development framework for IMPFs  Field visits to test and refine the understanding gained  Where appropriate, contribute to national IMPF policy discussions Objective of IMPF dialogue series

6. The Forests Dialogue General conclusions  Under the right conditions, IMPFs can provide a range of important benefits  External drivers have the greatest influence in shaping design and determining impacts  Large-scale land use change has significant impact Conclusions and recommendations to date: Gland

7. The Forests Dialogue Identified needs  Clear definition of IMPF to minimize misunderstanding and address research gaps  Maintenance of a landscape perspective Unresolved questions  Can IMPFs be considered a neutral technology?  Does IMPF development reduce pressure on natural forests? Conclusions and recommendations: Gland

8. The Forests Dialogue General conclusions  One size does not fit all: no template can satisfy all stakeholder concerns  Both companies and communities share common cause in terms of regulation, land tenure, productivity, ecosystem integrity, and timber security  Potential for community-corporate coalitions to lead government and promote transparency  Potential for private sector to serve as vehicle for development Conclusions and recommendations: Beihai

9. The Forests Dialogue Identified needs  Differentiated understanding (context)  Strengthening of smallholder and community capacity  Corporate best practice acquisition of land use rights  Partnership-building  Building of a diverse forest landscape mosaic Conclusions and recommendations: Beihai

10. The Forests Dialogue Unresolved questions  Should CSR extend beyond ‘do no harm’ and if so, how far?  Can IMPFs be considered a neutral technology? Conclusions and recommendations: Beihai

11. The Forests Dialogue  Positive learning experience  Perspective: provided broader context to the issues; helpful to get different views  Rewarding and affirming: TFD recognition of issues assisted in prioritization of those same issues  Useful in company’s planning process to focus and prioritize work  Networking valuable The value of dialogue: Stora Enso What have companies gained from dialogue?

12. The Forests Dialogue Going Forward Issues to Address  Need to raise the bar for competing sectors  Need to engage the finance sector  Significance of IMPFs for natural forests Next Steps  Southern US – late 2007  Brazil – 2008

13. The Forests Dialogue Thank You! For More Information: TFD Secretariat at Yale University Email: info@theforestsdialogue.org Web: www.theforestsdialogue.org Phone: + 1 203 432 5966