ABSTRACT

This paper describes the various international and regional processes and initiatives that are developing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, and discusses the relationship between these and certification efforts. It highlights the complementarities that exist between them, and indicates the implications they have for trade in forest products.

SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IS AN IMPORTANT GOAL

1. Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) is the basis for sustainable development of the forest sector. Defining SFM in terms of present and future national and local interests and value of forests is one of the major challenges facing African nations. A second challenge is the translation of SFM in the broad sense of management of the environmental, social and economic roles of forests into realistic field practice.

CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT

NATIONAL LEVEL CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

2. One of the actions being taken by governments and other institutions, NGOs and the private sector to make progress towards SFM is the development of "Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management". The aim is to address the difficulty of translating the concept of SFM into an operational tool that could be applied in forest management. It responds to the pressing need to develop a common understanding of what is meant by sustainable forest management. National level criteria and indicators help decision makers, including planners and policy makers, to define what makes up SFM, and to establish guidelines and monitor trends in the sustainability of the goods and services being provided by a nation's forests. They were developed in response to the demand by countries for practical ways of implementing SFM at the national level, as well as benchmarks to measure progress and trends in SFM over time.

3. Criteria and indicators at the national level help guide countrywide policies, regulations and legislation. They help countries monitor and report on overall trends over time in forest management. Positive trends in sustainability will be demonstrated by an upward trend in an aggregate of the identified indicators - that is, the trends must show a positive development over time. Based on information on the trends at national level, and on forecasts for the future based on these, policy and decision making can be rationalised and improved. The ultimate aim of the process is to promote improved forest management practices over time, and to further the development of a healthier and more productive forest estate, which can meet the social, economic, environmental and political needs of countries concerned, now and in the future.

4. National-level criteria define the range of forest values to be addressed and the essential elements or principles of forest management against which the sustainability of forests may be assessed. Each criterion relates to a key element of sustainability, and may be described by one or more indicators. Indicators measure specific quantitative and qualitative attributes (and reflect forest values as seen by the interest group defining each criterion) and help monitor trends in the sustainability of forest management over time. Changes in the indicators between periods indicate whether a country is moving towards, or away from, sustainability. Viewed this way criteria and indicators are similar, for example, to economic indicators such as interest rates and inflation rates that governments use to assess the health of an economy. If these indicators suggest that an economy is moving away from the desired direction, the government is able to adjust its management policies to achieve the preferred outcome. Change in the indicators of SFM provides similar information to policy makers and practising foresters to allow them to intervene appropriately to correct any undesirable trends.

5. The importance placed on criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management by countries is shown by the fact that seven major criteria and indicator processes and initiatives exist¹. These are the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO), Pan-European, Montreal, Tarapoto, Dry Zone Africa, Near East, Central American and African Timber Organization (ATO) processes and initiatives. While each of these differs somewhat in specific content or structure, they are conceptually similar in objectives and approach. It is worth mentioning that criteria of all international, regional and national initiatives and processes centre around seven globally agreed elements of criteria for SFM. This has two important implications. One is that the definition of sustainability remains virtually the same in all processes. The other, that it holds great promise for convergence or mutual recognition, so that over time a common approach can be used globally to measure SFM.

FOREST MANAGEMENT UNIT LEVEL CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

6. The national level criteria and indicators are increasingly being complemented by the development and implementation of sets of criteria and indicators defined for the forest management unit level. A number of the on-going processes mentioned above have, in fact, now developed forest management unit level criteria and indicators in addition to the national level ones. At this level the indicators depend on local, often site-specific factors such as forest type and topography, in addition to social and economic considerations, while also containing some elements applicable on a wider scale. Forest management unit level criteria and indicators may differ between individual forest areas in any one country, as well as over time, depending on prevailing conditions, priorities and aims of management. Thus results from these two levels may vary widely. Nevertheless it is important to ensure compatibility, and comparability, and to provide a continuing feedback on the applicability of criteria and indicators defined at the two levels.

7. National level criteria and indicators can help stimulate and assist in the identification of criteria and indicators at the forest management unit level. Criteria and indicators developed at these two levels differ in concept and substance. The national level indicators contribute mainly to the development and regular updating of policy instruments (laws, policies, regulations), while trends in the indicators at the forest management unit level help adjust forest management prescriptions over time to meet established national goals. However, while different in purpose and scope, the criteria and indicators identified at these two levels should be mutually compatible, though not all national level indicators will apply, as such, to the forest management unit level at any one point in time.

CRITERIA AND INDICATORS AND CERTIFICATION

8. Since criteria and indicators - at any level - are neutral assessment tools for monitoring trends, they should not be used as standards for evaluating management practices. However, it may be possible to draw on criteria and indicators when developing standards or guidelines for performance at the management unit level, as has been done in many cases. There are clearly linkages between national and forest management unit level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, but there may, or may not, also be linkages between forest management unit level ones, and forest products certification standards.

9. Criteria and indicators provide a means to measure, assess, monitor and demonstrate progress towards achieving the sustainability of forests in a given country or in a specified forest area, over a period of time. On the other hand certification is a means to certify the achievement of certain, pre-defined standards of forest management in a given forest area, at a given point in time, agreed upon between producers and consumers.

10. Some criteria and indicator initiatives have a close link to certification. Examples include those in Ghana, Indonesia, Malaysia, Finland and Canada. All these national initiatives have been based on identifying standards of SFM, and determining ways of assessing the level of performance being achieved. They have developed, or are developing, principles, criteria and indicators that describe the environmental, ecological, economic and social requirements of good forest management. They have addressed the issue of common standards and approaches.

11. Most have used the international criteria and indicators as the basis or starting point for their certification activities. For example a number of producing countries who are members of ITTO have used the ITTO Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Tropical Forests as the basis; others countries have used the Pan European or the Montreal Process, while yet others have used ISO standards as the basis for their certification schemes. Almost all have also taken note of the Forest Stewardship Council Principles and Criteria and made efforts to ensure a degree of compatibility. Thus there has been a considerable degree of cross-fertilisation involved.

12. Many countries in Africa are involved in the development, testing and implementation of criteria and indicators or certification. Twenty-eight countries in Africa are involved in the development, testing and implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management as members of the Dry-Zone African Process for Criteria and Indicators. In addition to these, thirteen ATO member countries (most of which are also members of ITTO and belong to that initiative as well) are also involved in developing and testing principles, criteria, and indicators for the sustainable management of African tropical forests.

13. Most African countries, as with most developing countries, while making progress with criteria and indicators efforts, are making slow and more varied progress on certification. This is heavily related to the fact that the current status of much of the forest management in the continent is further away from the defined standards for SFM than is the case in most developed countries - and hence from certification. In addition there is a lack of knowledge, resources, manpower, institutions and, to some extent, commitment by governments. It also reflects the fact that in many situations it is still uncertain whether certification is necessary or desirable. Finally the benefits to be achieved from certification are less obvious - and may not exceed the costs involved in a number of countries. Some countries in Africa are in the process of developing - or at least investigating - certification and a small number of individual forests have been certified under the Forest Stewardship Council process.

CERTIFICATION AND TRADE

14. The final issue to discuss is the relationship between certification and trade. This concerns the question of whether certification is necessary or desirable and is therefore a much more complex issue to address. Certification is one of a number of market-based instruments that may contribute to improved management of the forests and to improved forestry sector development. As an instrument it has both strengths and weaknesses which vary with the specific circumstances of the country, the ownership of the forests, the social environment and last, but certainly not least, the markets being served.

15. Judgements about the desirability of undertaking certification, who would do it, how it would be done, and whether there is a role for governments, vary from country to country. Whether or not to proceed to certification is an individual decision. Certification is being promoted for a variety of reasons - from forest management reasons, to marketing reasons. The goal is to try to link trade to the sustainable management of the forest resource, by providing buyers with information on the management standards of the forests from which the timber came. Although certification by itself is unlikely to ensure sustainable forest management, it does have the potential to encourage stronger efforts towards sustainable forest management. There are a number of potential benefits - and some disadvantages - but the main motivation of those undertaking certification at present is probably for marketing reasons, such as in order to gain an advantage over other suppliers in some ecologically sensitive markets, and/or to avoid problems of market access.

16. There are still a number of unanswered or unresolved issues and uncertainties concerning certification. In many countries the question of whether to support certification or not is still being debated. Some of the questions concerning the advantages and disadvantages of certification that have yet to be resolved include:

• Where is the market for certified products? It remains unclear as to whether there will be a strong and growing demand for certified wood, and whether a price premium is likely.
• How will certification contribute to improving forest management where deforestation is greatest - in the developing countries? Views vary greatly, particularly between countries, and within countries between different groups.
• Which system of certification is most appropriate? In many countries this is one of the major issues that are under debate.
• How to encourage mutual recognition of different certification systems? There is a need for a degree of international consensus, both because of concern over the wide and varied activities that are taking place, and the fact that a lack of any common agreement will result in different schemes, which have only limited acceptance and therefore limited effectiveness.

FINAL COMMENTS

17. The main goal of the criteria and indicators processes is to improve forest management through the definition of SFM and the assessment over a period of time of progress towards it. Certification is one of a number of market-based instruments that may contribute to improved management of the forests and to improved forestry sector development. It is a means to certify the achievement of certain, pre-defined standards of forest management in a given forest area, at a given point in time, agreed upon between producers and consumers. As an instrument it has both strengths and weaknesses, which vary with the specific circumstances of the country, the ownership of the forests, the social environment and last, but certainly not least, the markets served.

18. Where certification is considered to be a useful tool, it is desirable that the certification processes are closely linked to national level criteria and indicators. Both processes are aiming at the same objective of sustainable forest management and they have many mutual features. While in most instances national level criteria and indicators have been developed primarily to assist sustainable forest management at the national level, currently the main purpose of certification has been for use as a tool for market promotion.

19. Sustainable forest management is possible without certification, but the reverse is not the case. Products cannot be certified unless sustainable or well-managed forests exist and there is some way of objectively determining this. That is, certification, though helpful is not a necessary condition for achieving SFM. Certification will not have a direct impact on achieving sustainable management, but it can have an indirect effect.

20. National and Forest Management Unit level criteria and indicators are a useful (though not essential), part of certification. Many of the national-level processes can be seen as the (essential) stepping-stones for subnational level processes, and for certification efforts. A number of macro-level criteria required for certification, such as the legal and policy framework, can be based on the national level data provided within national criteria and indicators. Where this is the case, certification should use national level programmes directly or through related forest management unit level criteria and indicators. It should see them as complementary rather than as competitive. Where there are shortcomings in either process efforts should be made to overcome them in order to further the cause of SFM. Questions that should be addressed in any consideration include: Are the criteria and indicators processes equivalent, complementary to or sufficient for certification requirements? Do criteria and indicators serve as a basis for certification efforts? If inadequate or incompatible with certification requirements, can they be modified or developed further to more directly meet these requirements (and, is it important to do so)?

21. It is clear that there appear to be an increasing (though still small) number of markets where trade may be dependent on - or at least influenced by - having a certificate. Greatest interest seems likely to continue to come from Europe and to a lesser extent North America. Certification may become a basic requirement of access to some markets - or at least to some market segments. Thus African suppliers who are focussed, or wish to focus, on these markets must seriously consider the question of certification.

22. African countries should assess the implications of certification carefully and determine whether certification is a desirable/necessary action for them; and, if so, determine how best to proceed. They should also participate in the criteria and indicator processes and initiatives and where appropriate use the complementarities and synergies that can exist between the different actions.

____________________________

1  F. Casta�eda, FAO (1999). Why National and Forest Management Unit Levels Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management of Dry Forests in Asia/South Asia? Paper to FAO/UNEP/ITTO/IIFM Workshop on National Level Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management of Dry Forests in Asia/South Asia. Bhopal, India, 30 November-3 December 1999.