A. Inglis
Andrew Inglis is the NGO focal point with the TFAP Coordinating Unit. FAO. Rome.
The revised Operational Principles for the Tropic al Forests Action Programme (TFAP) put increased emphasis on the involvement of local people and the organization that represent them i'? forest-related decision-making processes. While the Operational Principles are implicit!! directed at the tropical countries participating in the TFAP, this article suggests that increased NGO participation i'' TFAP donor countries would also provide significant benefits.
According to a survey by FAO of official development assistance (ODA) to tropical forest activities in 1990, approximately 65 percent of the total came from bilateral donor governments. This figure compares with 19 percent from the international banks and 16 percent from United Nations organizations (FAO, 1991a).
Given the obvious prominence of bilateral donors in the provision of financial and technical assistance to forestry development in general (and within this to the TFAP), it is apparent that donor countries can and do exert significant influence on tropical countries with regard to their forestry decision-making. They do so by:
· using their position as donors to influence forest-related environmental planning and decision-making in tropical countries; and· by deciding what financial and technical resources go where, i.e. to which countries and types of activity (particularly in regard to TFAP).
To avoid hypocrisy, improve diplomacy and achieve parity, a strong argument can be made that, in the industrialized donor countries, forest-related environmental planning and TFAP decision-making mechanisms should be in line with those recommended for tropical countries. In short, donor countries should also adhere to the revised TFAP Operational Principles (FAO, 1991 b).
A recommendation to this end was put forward by a recent meeting in Bolivia of the TFAP national coordinators for Spanish-speaking Latin American countries:
"Multilateral organizations, donor countries and other institutions involved in the TFAP should make a formal commitment to follow the new Operational Principles and to effectively cooperate with countries which have adopted or intend to adopt them in the future. This would stimulate their rapid adoption by the [tropical] countries" (FAO, 1992a).
Commitment to the new TFAP Operational Principles means that countries of the industrialized world should:
· conduct an inventory of all potential non-governmental partners;· create a TFAP steering committee, composed of representatives from various ministries and departments, NGOs and the private sector;
· ensure that decision-making processes regarding support to TFAP are transparent;
· ensure and facilitate the free flow of information to all interested parties;
· establish a focal point (either a person or a special office) responsible for liaison with NGOs;
· appoint a full-time TFAP focal point' ideally a person who is independent of or senior to the traditional government forestry technical assistance personnel; and
· conduct a thorough, multidisciplinary analysis and review of all policies, institutional arrangements, funding and planning mechanisms that have the potential to make either a direct or indirect impact on tropical forests.
A few TFAP donor countries already have some of these elements in place, for example:
· legislation that guarantees free access to official information exists in the United States;· in Italy, an inventory of potential non-governmental TFAP partners is currently under way;
· a Tropical Forest Forum with a broad membership base was launched in the United Kingdom in 1991.
For the most part, however, the decision-making processes regarding support to TFAP in the industrialized donor countries are hardly ever consultative or participatory. According to a recent FAO report (written by a team including representatives of donor governments):
"most TFAP decisions are made by the donor government's own political, institutional, financial and administrative structures...each with specific political, administrative or other conditions as well as a preference for specific countries" (FAO, 1992b).
An informal analysis, conducted by the TFAP Coordinating Unit concerning TFAP commitments by bilateral donors would appear to confirm this "business as usual" attitude. In examining 14 countries that have reached the funding stages of their TFAP plans, it is apparent that the most favoured countries for total ODA are also the most favoured with regard to TFAP funding. The ranking of the countries by percentage of funding for their TFAP exercises closely matched the ranking orders for the ODA percentage of GNP for 1980-82 and 1985-87 (WRI, 1990). That is to say, donor country decisions regarding the funding of projects and programmes developed under TFAP appear to have been made more on the basis of previously held political biases and country preferences than on the quality of the national TFAP plans and the priorities of the developing countries (FAO, 1992c).
The fuller involvement of NGOs in donor country TFAP decision-making could significantly improve this situation. If the donor government decision-making processes were made more transparent and open to wider debate, there might be less prejudiced and inconsistent political conditionality. Or, at least, the debate could be more consistent, logical, open and honest. This could result in the increased mobilization of international support to well-prepared national TFAP plans which reflect the priorities of the developing countries.
The United Kingdom's Tropical Forest Forum, briefly mentioned above, is an interesting example of how NGOs can be involved in the tropical forest decision-making processes in a TFAP donor country. The forum has a mandate "to strengthen the coherence and effectiveness of British-based actions in support of the sustainable use and conservation of forests and forest lands in tropical countries". The mandate also states that activities to achieve this objective should include the exchange of information and the widening of consensus through dialogue and debate. Forum membership includes development agencies; conservation organizations; educational institutions and training centres; and commercial, industrial and trade organizations - the membership range suggested for a national TFAP steering committee in the new Operational Principles. Although the forum is not an official government lobbying or pressure group, the first session, held in February 1991, was officially opened by the Minister for Overseas Development. The full Tropical Forest Forum meets twice annually but smaller working groups, including one for the TFAP, meet as required; government officials regularly attend meetings contributing to an increased i impact.
The TFAP Operational Principles - as valid for donors as they are for recipients
The Tropical Forest Forum has provided an opportunity for NGOs to contribute to debates and raise issues with policy-makers on behalf of their constituents, both in the United Kingdom and in tropical countries. These issues have included the participation of local people in forestry activities; the importance of recognizing national sovereignty when discussing international instruments/agreements; the strengthening of national capacities for sustainably managing forests; and the labelling of forest products from sustainably managed forests.
Although it is difficult to quantify the forum's impact on government policy, it appears that the United Kingdom Government increased emphasis on the involvement of local people in forestry decision-making in their UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) position paper after meetings with Forest Forum working groups (J. Thornback, personal communication. 1992).
While there are potential advantages of involving NGOs in TFAP decision-making in donor countries, there are also some risks. For example, there is some concern that the more extreme environment-oriented NGOs might pressure bilateral donors into withholding funds for the sustainable management and use of forest resources despite the need for forest conservation to be self-supporting in the long term. In this regard, the Government of Malaysia, one of the most outspoken of the tropical countries regarding the role of northern NGOs, published a critique of a tropical forestry campaign in Germany in 1989. The critique accuses the campaign of being "mounted by certain organizations, groups and individuals,...some genuinely concerned with protecting the environment but [mostly by] others whose intention is questionable". In spite of a generally negative perspective, however, the report notes that, "as a long-term measure, technological cooperation between governmental and non-governmental organizations in industrialized and developing countries could be of benefit to sustainable tropical forest management" (Government of Malaysia, 1989).
Overall, it would seem that the risk is worth the candle. The results of the more extreme NGOs' campaigns have generally been a rising awareness of forest-related environmental issues and a widening of the tropical forests debate, through presenting their case and alternative tropical forest management scenarios in public meetings and through direct ad hoc communication with policy-makers Moreover, the fuller involvement of northern NGOs (particularly those concerned with rural development) may tend to boost the notion that donor governments have regarding the sanctity of tropical, i.e. recipient, countries' political sovereignty.
Free and open debate, dialogue, negotiation and policy shifts are central to the TFAP process which was conceived as a new and dynamic approach, for both donor and recipient governments. Government officials in industrialized countries will find it just as difficult and uncomfortable to open the door to NGOs as do their counterparts in the tropical countries. But, judging by the experience of the United Kingdom's Tropical Forest Forum, this process need not be too painful as long as the participants are open-minded, honest and willing to change their positions. It is obvious that, if donor governments were to commit themselves to the TFAP Operational Principles, for many of them it would involve an unprecedented amount of NGO involvement in their "sovereign affairs" - yet no more and no less than what they are advocating for governments of the recipient countries.
FAO. 1991 a. Review of international cooperation in tropical forestry. Secretarial note for the Tenth Session of the Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics, Rome, December 1991. Rome, FAO.
FAO. 1991b. TFAP Operational Principles. TFAP Coordinating Unit. Rome, FAO.
FAO. 1992a. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Second Meeting of National TFAP Coordinators from Spanish-speaking Countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, April 1992. TFAP Coordinating Unit. Rome, FAO. (Unofficial translation)
FAO. 1992b. The Multi-donor Trust Fund Project in Support of the TFAP. Report of the Joint Evaluation Mission and FAO's comments, March 1992. Rome, FAO.
FAO, 1992c. TFAP funding flow Situation research. TFAP Coordinating Unit. Rome, FAO. (Unpubl.)
Government of Indonesia. 1992. Facial address by the Minister of Forestry to the Indonesia Forestry Action Programme Round Table Type III. February, 1992. Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Government of Malaysia. 1989. The anti-tropical forest campaign in the Federal Republic of Germany. October 1989. Bonn, Germany, Embassy of Malaysia.
WRI. 1990. World Resources 1990-1991. New York, Oxford University Press.
