Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY - STATE OF OREGON

SUMMARY OF CASE STUDY No. 1

IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIVE No. 1
STRENGTHENING THE ELABORATION AND APPLICATION OF CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MONTREAL PROCESS:
AN OREGON STATE CASE STUDY

by
James E. Brown1

Presented at the
International Conference on the Contribution of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Way Forward (CICI-2003)
Guatemala City, Guatemala,
3-7 February 2003

Oregon is a state located in the northwestern part of the United States. It is about 60 million acres in size, half of which is forestland. The forestland is owned 60 percent by the federal government, three percent by state and local government and the balance is owned by forest industry or family forest landowners. Forest conditions range from moist forests on the Pacific Ocean to mountainous forests in the west central portion of the state to dry land pine types of forests in the Eastern part of the State.

The Oregon Board of Forestry (a citizen's group that provides policy for the Oregon Department of Forestry) has used forest assessments since 1977 as the basis for developing their policies. Early assessments and policy largely dealt with timber supply. Beginning in 1990, the Board's attention turned to a more holistic approach to forest management in the State. The 1991 Legislative Assembly asked the Board of Forestry to conduct a broad assessment of Oregon's forests. The challenge became what framework to use in conducting the assessment. The Montreal Process was a natural from the standpoint it covered all of the necessary components for a comprehensive assessment, and it had international acceptance and support. The Department recognized that there are four stages to conducting an assessment: data collection, analysis, evaluation, and policy development. The Montreal Process provided the inventory framework as the basis for conducting the analysis, evaluation, and policy development. The Department completed a "First Approximation Report" for Oregon's forest in 2002. The next step became data analysis and evaluation. The Department turned to research scientists at Oregon State University (OSU) and USDA Forest Service research scientists co-housed on the OSU campus. Individual or groups of scientists were asked to analyze and evaluate the data for each of the seven criteria. This information was presented at a public symposium on the OSU campus in October 2001. Over 500 attendees participated in the meeting. Examples of what we learned during the assessment and evaluation phase were:

1. Regarding biodiversity, over 30 percent of Oregon's forests are protected in one form of IUCN class or another. Little is known about species diversity or genetic diversity, and we are only beginning to learn about landscape level diversity.

2. In terms of productive capacity, both Oregon's forestland base and timber supply are stable for the foreseeable future; however, timber supply has been greatly affected by federal policies to protect threatened or endangered species. This policy change has had dramatic adverse effects on rural Oregon.

3. Regarding socio-economic factors, eleven percent of Oregon's export-based dependent jobs come from the forest sector and nearly 7 percent of the total industrial output comes from forestry, which is 12.8 billion dollars and 75,500 living wage jobs. The rural parts of the state are highly dependent on forestry and agriculture, and the working landscapes associated with them.

4. Regarding ecosystem health, Oregon's forest health conditions in Eastern Oregon have significantly changed over the last 100 years as a result of fire suppression and lack of active management. This has created fire-prone fuel types over broad landscapes. When coupled with the recent pattern of lightning in the state, Oregon has had a number of large catastrophic wildfires, and there will need to be some form of management on these lands to protect ecosystem health.

The day after the symposium, the Board of Forestry convened a work group of legislators, non-governmental organizations, landowners, federal agencies, business, and other interested parties, to begin the policy-making discussion to decide how Oregon's forests could best be managed into the future. This commenced a two-year public discussion about Oregon's forests. The Board of Forestry recommended policies will be contained in a document titled, "The Forestry Program for Oregon." The framework of the policy document is the Board's Mission Statement, a vision of what they are trying to accomplish in the next twenty years, and strategies for accomplishing their mission and vision. This policy document is scheduled to be completed by the fall of 2003. Out of this work, an economic action plan has been developed.

The Montreal Process is a very useful and credible framework for collecting and evaluating data about forest conditions, and then developing forest policies and necessary actions that contribute to the social, economic, and environmental sustainability at any scale. For further information, go to www.odf.state.or.us or www.oregonforestry.org

INTERNATIONAL AND SPECIAL PROJECTS
FORESTRY DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS
MALAYSIA

SUMMARY OF CASE STUDY No. 2

IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIVE No. 1
STRENGTHENING THE ELABORATION AND APPLICATION OF CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT

MALAYSIA'S EXPERIENCE IN APPLYING CRITERIA
AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT,
INCLUDING FOREST MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION

by
Thang Hooi Chiew2 

Presented at the
International Conference on the Contribution of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Way Forward (CICI-2003)
Guatemala City, Guatemala,
3-7 February 2003

SUMMARY

At the end of 2001, forests in Malaysia were estimated to be 20.20 million hectares or 61.5% of its total land area, of which, 14.45 million hectares have been designated as the Permanent Forest Estate (PFE) with 10.64 million hectares being production forests and the remaining 3.81 million hectares as protection forests. Malaysia has also 2.15 million hectares of conservation areas which are totally protected by legislation. Hence, with the protection forests of the PFE, the totally protected areas designated for the conservation of biological diversity are now estimated to be 5.64 million hectares, representing 27.9% of its total forested land or 17.2% of its land area.

The inland forests of Malaysia are selectively harvested which are based on prescribed minimum cutting limits with cutting cycles varying from 25 to 55 years, while mature trees in mangrove forests are clear-felled. Of the logged-over forests in the PFE, a total of 2.01 million hectares had been silviculturally treated at the end of 2001, while an area of 42,256 hectares had been enriched with indigenous tree species. Malaysia had also established 258,859 hectares of forest plantations at the end of 2001, mainly with fast-growing hardwood species; and efforts are currently been taken to conserve and establish medicinal plants.

To co-ordinate and facilitate the implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in Malaysia, a National Committee on Sustainable Forest Management was established in 1994 at the Ministry of Primary Industries, Malaysia to ensure that the natural forests are sustainably managed. Hence, in 1994 Malaysia had developed a set of Malaysian Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management (MC&I) at the national and forest management unit levels which was based on the ITTO Criteria for the Measurement of Sustainable Tropical Forest Management.

However, with the adoption of the ITTO Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Management of Natural Tropical Forests and the Manual for its application, Malaysia had taken action in 1999 to revise its MC&I through multi-stakeholders dialogues with interested parties at both the regional and national levels. Currently, the MC&I has identified a total of 64 indicators, 200 activities and 170 standards of performance under the 7 criteria of the ITTO at the national level for reporting progress towards sustainable forest management, while 7 criteria, 56 indicators, 171 activities and 150 standards of performance were formulated for assessing sustainable forest management at the forest management unit level. In revising the MC&I, Malaysia has added a number of elements to the ITTO's indicators at both the national and forest management unit levels, such as the rights of forest workers and mortality rate, as well as in addressing gender issue.

For the MC&I used for assessing sustainable forest management practices at the forest management unit level, Malaysia has also included seven additional indicators/items from those proposed by the ITTO to be used only at the national level to this level, among others, those dealing with laws, policies and regulations; the Bali Partnership Fund; statistics of protected areas in each forest type; percentage of total number of protected areas connected by biological corridors or `stepping stones' between them; and ratio of domestic log production to the processing capacity of wood-based industries.

However, Malaysia has omitted two of the ITTO's indicators from the MC&I at both the national and forest management unit levels, namely, quantity (volume) and value of wood and non-wood forest products for subsistence use, including fuelwood; and number of agreements involving local communities in co-management responsibilities, as they are deemed to be irrelevant to Malaysia.

Malaysia has also omitted four indicators/items at the forest management unit level although they have been proposed by the ITTO, namely, the percentage of original range occupied by selected endangered, rare and threatened species; the item on ex situ conservation; quantity (volume) and value of wood and non-wood forest products traded in the domestic and international markets; and efficiency of utilization in terms of the percentage of felled volume processed, as they are best addressed at the national level.

Through an assessment on the availability of information, it was found that information is available for all the indicators except for those where current studies and research efforts are being undertaken to address them, among others, the percentage of original range occupied by selected endangered, rare and threatened species; percentage of total number of protected areas connected by biological corridors or `stepping stones' between them; existence and implementation of procedures for assessing changes of biological diversity and water quality of streams of the production forests as compared with areas in the same forest type kept free from human intervention; and total amount of carbon stored in forest stands.

Hence, a phased approach has been adopted by Malaysia to realize the full implementation of the criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management at both the national and forest management unit levels, which is monitored through a Task Force using the internal assessment procedures which was jointly developed with the support of the Deutsche Gessellschaft für Technisehe Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) of Germany in 1999.

Malaysia, through the Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC), had launched its Timber Certification Scheme in October 2001 and had issued Certificates for Forest Management to three forest management units, as well as Certificates for Chain-of-Custody to 16 companies in Malaysia. The MTCC has held discussion with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) since 1999 and had adopted a set of "Malaysian Criteria and Indicators for Forest Management Certification (MC&I)" in October 2002 which was technically compatible with the FSC Principles and Criteria for Forest Management (P&C) as it had followed the structure and format of the FSC P&C. In addition, the MTCC was admitted as a member of the Pan-European Forest Certification (PEFC) Council in November 2002 and will be submitting its timber certification scheme for inclusion in the PEFC framework of mutual recognition.

Currently, Malaysia is also leading the process to develop a Pan ASEAN Timber Certification Scheme based on the ASEAN Regional Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Management of Natural Tropical Forests which were developed from the ITTO Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Management of Natural Tropical Forests.

In undertaking forest management certification, a sub-set comprising 7 criteria, 53 indicators, 162 activities and 142 standards of performance formulated at the forest management unit level was used. However, under the Malaysia-The Netherlands Timber Certification Arrangement only 6 criteria, 29 indicators, 87 activities and 49 standards of performance were used in assessing the eight forest management units in Malaysia by independent third party assessors as they have met the Dutch Minimum Requirements for forest management certification. Moreover, two other forest management units were assessed under the FSC P&C.

The development of criteria and indicators through multi-stakeholders dialogues has enhanced a better understanding among the many stakeholders of the need to balance protection and conservation of the forest resources with economic uses, while its application has created greater awareness among forest managers and forest workers of their social responsibility in managing the forest, especially during forest harvesting, and this has brought about a shift in focus from the traditional sustained-yield management to a new paradigm of multi-resource management. Furthermore, the information generated has assisted policy and decision-makers to communicate the status of sustainable forest management more effectively to the public, in developing policies and strategies for sustainable forest management, focusing research efforts where knowledge is still lacking and deficient, and identifying those areas which are in special need of international assistance and co-operation.

The current proliferation of forest management certification schemes using different sets of criteria and indicators to define sustainable forest management has exacerbated the need for a set of internationally agreed criteria and indicators for assessing sustainable forest management practices at the forest management unit level, or at the very least an international framework for their mutual recognition.

In Malaysia, the criteria and indicators formulated at the national level would provide a common framework for monitoring, evaluating and reporting progress towards the attainment of sustainability of its forest resources, especially to the ITTO and UNFF. Those formulated at the forest management unit level will be used to monitor and assess sustainable forest management practices at the field level. However, these criteria and indicators will be reviewed and refined periodically to reflect new concepts of sustainable forest management.

Malaysia has also been organizing training courses, workshops and seminars involving staff of the Forestry Departments, as well as forest managers and workers from the logging and wood-based industries of their roles and responsibilities in implementing the MC&I and the MTCC Timber Certification Scheme, including Chain-of-Custody Certification and Forest Management Certification.

Although forest management certification has been recognized as a potential tool to promote sustainable forest management, the efficacy of this tool is still subject to considerable debate at the international level. Nevertheless, the implementation of forest management certification in Malaysia is being actively pursued to ensure continued market access of Malaysian timber products, particularly in the environmentally sensitive market.

PROYECTO DE ADMINISTRACIÓN DE AREAS RURALES (PAAR)
HONDURAS

SUMMARY OF CASE STUDY No. 3

IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIVE No. 1
STRENGTHENING THE ELABORATION AND APPLICATION OF CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT

THE PRACTICAL USE OF THE CRITERIA AND INDICATORS TO EVALUATE SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE PINE FOREST OF HONDURAS, AT THE MANAGEMENT UNIT LEVEL

by
Miguel Angel Ramírez3

Presented at the
International Conference on the Contribution of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Way Forward (CICI-2003)
Guatemala City, Guatemala,
3-7 February 2003

 

INTRODUCTION

Sustainable forest management responds to a group of actions and activities that allows the permanent use of forest for the benefit of the humanity. Each country and local region has to find out their optimal conditions to implement Criteria and Indicators inside the forest management rules they use. Honduras has been working in this area and has achieved an acceptable knowledge in the last five years managing its pine forest.

This case study is based on the results of the experts meetings on Sustainable forest management Criteria and Indicators in Central America (CCAD/FAO/CCAB-AP), held in Tegucigalpa and in the proposal of C&I at the Management Unit level, held in San José in 1997.

During 1998 and following the mandate given by the "Lepaterique Process", the Honduras forest service developed a series of national meetings in order to define the Forest Management Criteria and Indicators for each of four forest ecosystems well represented in this country (mangrove, pine, hardwoods and dry forest). These meetings were organized by the CCAB-AP, professional forestry associations and the Rural Land Administration Project (PAAR) financed by the World Bank. These meetings were held in each representative region of the country and were attended by forest technicians and experts from private, educational and government organizations that have business with forest management.

Six thematic categories were identified in order to define and implement, in a practical, way the C&I in Honduras. These categories were: Forest Resources, Forest Utilization, Biodiversity, Juridical and legal framework, Socio economic and Forest Management.

The methodology used identified eight Criteria and 52 Indicators at the national level and five Criteria with 51 Indicators at the Management Unit level. (Table No. 1)

Theoretically, the C&I at the national level are the sum of the C&I of the different management units in the country. However, this is not always the case. Sometimes they differ especially when the management objective changes in each of the forest management units. This document recollects and validates the experience acquired by the Honduras forest service (AFE-COHDEFOR) in the use of the criteria and indicators as criteria of sound forest management in the daily forest activities they perform. In order to facilitate the different evaluations and studies, the "Agua Fría" Forest management Unit was chosen as a pilot area where after a period of five years of performing forest management activities the importance of this instrument was proven and the lessons learned about its disadvantages were adopted.

Table 1: Number of indicators defined and identified according its category

Thematic category

National

FMU

Forest resources

Biodiversity

Forest utilization

Juridical and legal framework

Socio-economic

Forest management

7

9

1

12

17

6

-

9

1

1

16

24

 

52

51

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The objective point out at the necessity of going deeper in the development of actions in order to adopt and use the C&I at the management unit level, using the experience gained by the Forest Service during the implementation of the first five years of forest management. At the same time, to define if these C&I are sufficient enough to be used as a future forest certification parameters.

The Criteria to be investigated were:

1. Political, juridical and institutional frame

2. Sustainable forest production

3. Maintenance of the Biological diversity in the forest ecosystem

4. Soil and water protection

5. Improving social and economic status at local level

METHODOLOGY USED

Each and every one of the Criteria and its corresponding Indicators were analyzed by the forestry technicians that worked in the management unit helped by private groups that have been working in forestry related activities trough out the five year term (agroforestry groups, land owners, municipalities and private foresters). Parameters like the practical use of the indicator, the necessity of having an indicator to monitoring the sustainable management of the forest, the consequences of adoption, its advantages and disadvantages for future certification evaluations and the expenses involved in their utilization were among the choices selected for validation.

The meaning of each indicator, were then compared with the different silvicultural activities prescribed in the management plan and implemented in the management unit with the objective of find out if those activities really correspond or gives answer to the original Criteria and Indicators proposed.

Taking in consideration the C&I practical utility and their technical and economic feasibility, the management unit technical group selected those C&I that will be adopted at the management unit level taking in consideration the actual situation of the Honduras Forest Service.

CONCLUSIONS

  1. The C&I defined at the national consultancy meetings for forestry management units, are applicable and easy to recognize, monitor and evaluate in the forest management and operative plans that the Honduras Forest service is implementing at that level.
  2. All the 5 Criteria can be adopted as means of evaluate sound forest management. However, the practical use of accounting for all the Indicators as means of evaluation should be studied in detail.
  3. The use of all the C&I are not recommended for forest certification. Further selection should be done in order to find out which ones of the C&I will be most appropriate for forest certification.

1 State Forester; Oregon Department of Forestry; 2600 State Street; Salem, OR 97310; PH: 503-945-7201; FAX: 503-945-7212; email: jeri.chase@state.or.us

2 Deputy Director-General of Forestry (International and Special Projects), Forestry Department Headquarters, Peninsular Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Salahuddin, 50660 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel:603-26988244, Fax: 603-26925657, E-mail:hcthang@forestry.gov.my

3 Coordinador del Componente de Recursos Naturales del Proyecto de Administración de Areas Rurales (PAAR). Tegucigalpa. Honduras. e-mail: mar.paar@sdnhon.org.hn

Previous PageTop Of PageNext Page