Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Este miembro contribuyó a:

    • Dear colleagues,

      Here my personal comments on Global Core Set of forest-related indicators with the focus on moderator's questions:

      1) Is the global core set, as it stands in April 2017, sufficiently comprehensive, balanced and short to achieve its stated objectives? (The Global Core Set of forest-related indicators is intended to contribute to the following purposes:

      1.To measure progress towards sustainable forest management (including SDG 15.2.1).

      2.To measure progress in implementing the UN Forest Instrument and the UN Strategic Plan for Forests, notably the Global Objectives on Forests, and their associated targets.

      3.To measure progress towards SDG targets other than 15.2.1, as well as internationally agreed goals on forests in other instruments notably through meeting the forest-related reporting needs of the Rio conventions.)

      - I consider proposed set of indicators to be sufficient for reporting of SDG 15.2.1 as it covers its components (Forest area, Biomass stock, Protected areas located in forests, Forest area under forest management plan)

      - To measure Global Forest Goals and their associated targets a specific system should be proposed or the list of indicators should be extended to cover 6 Global Forest Goals and all 26 associated targets. Proposed set covers GFGs 1-5, but does not cover all associated targets and GFG 6.

      - To measure progress (contribution of forests and forestry sector) towards SDG targerts other than 15.2.1 should be further discussed and analysed.

       

      2.If not, how should it be changed:

      •Additional indicators? Please specify.

      If there are 3 thematic objectives (SFM, UNSP, non SFM SDGs) of the core set, I would suggest to split and further develop this core set accordingly.

      •Deletion of indicators? Please specify.

      The same as above.

      •Modification/reformulation of indicators? Please specify.

      Provided below.

      3.In particular, please provide suggestions for development of the indicators marked YELLOW – further work needed.

      4-Forest area designated and managed for protection of soil and water - I support indicator as proposed.

      5-Employment in forestry and logging - I suggest: Employment in forestry and forest industry/wood processing.

      10-Forest area under an independently verified forest management certification scheme - I suggest: To complement this indicator with the indicator Area of forests available for wood supply.

      12-Volume of wood removals - I support indicator as proposed.

      In addition I suggest: Volume of increment.

      13-Existence of a traceability system for wood products - I support indicator as proposed.

      14-Forest health and vitality: % of forest area disturbed - I support indicator as proposed.

      15-Percentage change in area of degraded forest - I suggest: Area of degraded forest land.

      In addition, I suggest indicator: Area of restored degraded forests/Degraded area restored by afforestation.

      16-a. Percentage change in the number of forest dependent people or b. Livelihoods of forest dependent people - I suggest to remove both variants due to difficulty of data collection as well as interpretation.

      17-Financial resources from all sources (except ODA) for the implementation of sustainable forest management ($/ha of forest) - I support indicator as proposed.

      18-Share of wood based energy in total primary energy consumption, of which in modern clean systems (%) - I suggest: Wood based energy, of which produced in modern clean systems (%), Total primary energy production.

      19-Value of payments for ecosystem services (PES) related to forests (value of payments, as ratio to total forest area or area of forest covered by such PES)- I suggest: Value of payments for ecosystem services (PES) related to forests and area of associated forests

      20-Recovery rates for paper and solid wood products (volume recovered for re-use as % of volume consumed) - I suggest to remove if not specifically relevent for any target.

      21-Carbon stocks and carbon stock changes in forest land: net forest GHG sink/source of forests, forest carbon stock, carbon storage in harvested wood products (Tons C) - I suggest to use directly figures reported under UNFCCC/KP.

      I also suggest additional indicators highly relevant for SFM:

      Naturalness: % Undisturbed by man; Semi-natural; Plantations

      Genetic resources: Area managed for in situ gene conservation; Area managed for ex situ gene conservation; Area managed for seed production

      Thanks for the oportunity to comment. I look forward to cooperate on the theme.

      Best regards,

      Rastislav