A. What to Retain of the Integration of Criteria and Indicators in the NFP process?
B. Possible Implementation
The above remarks underline that the Criteria and Indicators cannot easily measure the complexity of interactions between the forestry and agricultural environments, or the role man should play. Moreover, even if it is possible to integrate the Indicators into a number of themes tackled by the NFP of the six countries (see Annex 4: Indicators Defined Following the NFP Themes), it appears that these are an efficient way to apprehend the evolution and progress of rich tropical forest management (ex. Indonesia).
It should be reminded that the vocation of the Criteria and Indicators is not to construct a sustainable forestry development policy, but to measure it. These are but tools.
Consequently, the Criteria and Indicators must be considered when the evaluation and development of certain forest sector activities are established and implemented. At that point they will become reference and control points forcing the production of data which will provide a coherent comprehension of accomplished progress and facilitate the step towards sustainable forest management.
On the basis of Annex 4, it appears that the Criteria and Indicators are particularly pertinent concerning:
· Forest management
· Eco-system conservation
· Forest genetic and seeds
and that they cover the essential aspects of:
· Fuelwood sector
and that they give a partial view of:
· Forest land-use
Moreover, whatever the sector-based study is, the indicators relative to Legal and institutional frameworks must be taken into account.
For the integration of Criteria and Indicators in NFP to be effective, it appears important that it should be underlined from the start of the organisation of the process. The interest groups of the forestry sector and other related sectors must be informed of the concert of Criteria and Indicators. It should, thus, indicate that:
· The Criteria and Indicators are not another constraint;
· Their vocation is not to moralise the countries regarding their forest management;
· They are only instruments referring to a national situation;
· They participate in strategic planning;
· They can be implemented progressively.
While concentrating on strategic planning, it seems essential that parallel to the identification of the main problems, that the list of Criteria and Indicators is established according to the different experts in charge of the detailed sector-based analyses. Each criterion and Indicator must have a unique definition corresponding to or closely related to the one accepted internationally.
It must then be specified at which level of the Plan of Action the indicators will be used:
· To measure the present situation and it's degree of emergency;
· To specify the realisations to be accomplished in the framework of the scenarios used by the NFP;
· To follow-up it's implementation;
· To evaluate the gains obtained in sustainable forest development.
Concerning the particular category of descriptive Indicators Legal and institutional frameworks, their use must be immediate and correspond to a presentation of reforms which are carried out.
Referring to our six study cases, we propose, as an example to use the Indicators on the basis of general objectives such as:
· Forest management;
· Eco-system conservation;
· Forest land use;
Furthermore, the sets of Indicators proposed (see Annex 5: Proposition for the Use of Criteria and Indicators) can be organised and combined to analyse, amidst the general objectives, more particular aspects such as:
|
General Objectives: |
Particular Aspects: |
|
· Forest management |
- Forest Inventory |
|
· Eco-system conservation: |
- Conservation of the environment, of soils and water, |
|
- Watersheds |
|
|
- Conservation systems, natural parks and protected areas; |
|
|
- Development of wildlife and protected areas; |
|
|
· Forest land use: |
- Forest resources and village land management |
|
- Forestry and rural development |
|
|
- Agro-forestry |
Finally, taking into account the 48 Indicators that appeared in the NFPs studied, and the concern generally expressed by tropical countries, 55 Indicators seem to have priority for the studies carried out in the framework of NFP (See Annex 6: Possible Indicators for the Sector-based Studies).
An Estimation of the Number of Priority Indictors for the NFP process
|
Category Indicators |
1st Priority Indicators to be used commonly |
2nd Priority Indicators which can be used less systematically, but of which the methodology of measure exists and can be developed |
|
State and change process of forest resources |
7 |
5 |
|
Biological diversity |
4 |
5 |
|
Health and vitality |
1 |
5 |
|
Production of wood and other forest products |
2 |
4 |
|
Soil and water protection |
2 |
2 |
|
Socio-economic functions |
11 |
4 |
|
Legal and institutional frameworks |
6 |
|
Depending on the forestry programmes that each country wishes to conduct, the Criteria and Indicators used can be different from one country to another. However, it is essential that the selection used is explained and adjusted to the sustainable development of each nation.
