Thumbnail Image

林业机构改革 ― 亚太区域国家林业机构重组的经验

Year of publication 2009

Pages 166

Author Durst, P. (ed.); Brown, C. (ed.); Broadhead, J. (ed.); Suzuki, R. (ed.); Leslie, R. (ed.); Inoguchi, A. (ed.);Forestry Group

Product type Book (stand-alone)

ISBN 9787109136083

Series title RAP Publication

Edition 1

Synopsis (short abstract) Does a quantum leap make more sense than a gradual transition? Is private better than public, or small better than large? Does devolution mean losing power or gaining control - and for who? Should forest protection and production - regulation and implementation - be held apart or brought together? Reinventing forestry institutions is fraught with perils and pitfalls, targets and intents, but all institutions must travel this path if they are to remain relevant in the flux and flow of the modern world. With new prescriptions for conservation and wider changes in society and its demands on forests, the institutions responsible for forest management must compete with and complement other sectoral interests to prove their worth to society. Institutional restructuring or "reinvention" may be necessary to grasp opportunities and deny failure its chance. Experiences of reinvention from nine forestry institutions in eight countries are included in this publication - China, India, Malaysia, Nep al, New Zealand, the Philippines, the United States of America and Viet Nam. The breadth of experience in restructuring these and other forestry institutions is summarized in additional papers. It is hoped that other institutions contemplating reinvention will benefit through better understanding of the issues, challenges and opportunities inherent in reinventing forestry agencies.

Language Chinese

Also available in:

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Re-inventing forestry agencies. Experiences of institutional restructuring in Asia and the Pacific 2008
    Also available in:
    Does a quantum leap make more sense than a gradual transition? Is private better than public, or small better than large? Does devolution mean losing power or gaining control - and for who? Should forest protection and production - regulation and implementation - be held apart or brought together? Reinventing forestry institutions is fraught with perils and pitfalls, targets and intents, but all institutions must travel this path if they are to remain relevant in the flux and flow of the modern world. With new prescriptions for conservation and wider changes in society and its demands on forests, the institutions responsible for forest management must compete with and complement other sectoral interests to prove their worth to society. Institutional restructuring or "reinvention" may be necessary to grasp opportunities and deny failure its chance. Experiences of reinvention from nine forestry institutions in eight countries are included in this publication - China, India, Malaysia, Nep al, New Zealand, the Philippines, the United States of America and Viet Nam. The breadth of experience in restructuring these and other forestry institutions is summarized in additional papers. It is hoped that other institutions contemplating reinvention will benefit through better understanding of the issues, challenges and opportunities inherent in reinventing forestry agencies.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Policy brief
    Reinventing Forest Policies and Institutions. Asia-Pacific Forests and Forestry to 2020. Forest Policy Brief 04 2011
    Also available in:
    No results found.
    With demands on forests expanding and diversifying, and the forestry agenda becoming increasingly fragmented, institutions responsible for forest management must compete with and complement other sectoral interests to prove their worth to society. Institutional restructuring or “reinvention” may be necessary to grasp opportunities and ensure that society’s demands are effectively and efficiently provided for. In particular, institutional structures need to reflect transitions in forest policies from timber-focused management to focus on protection, conservation and management for a wide range of goods and services.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Policy brief
    Policies and Institutions. Asia-Pacific Forests and Forestry to 2020. GMS Forest Policy Brief 04 2011
    Also available in:
    No results found.
    With demands on forests expanding and diversifying, and the forestry agenda becoming increasingly fragmented, institutions responsible for forest management must compete with and complement other sectoral interests to prove their worth to society. Institutional restructuring or “reinvention” may be necessary to grasp opportunities and ensure that society’s demands are effectively and efficiently provided for.
Show more

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.