FO: LACFC/2000/5

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

PRESENT STATE AND TRENDS OF NATIONAL FOREST PROGRAMMES IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

CONCLUSIONS

ANNEX 1: STATE AND PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL FOREST PROGRAMMES IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

INTRODUCTION

1.    The present concept of national forest programme which was originally launched in 1985, through the Tropical Forestry Action Programme (TFAP) and other initiatives and international frameworks, was reformulated in 1991, and later, as a result of the recent international forest dialogue, expanded to cover a wide range of forestry actions. These actions especially include, strengthening national institutional capacities for the management, conservation and development of every type of forest. They must also be developed by the countries in accordance with their conditions and priorities.

2.    In 1997, in its fourth meeting, after reaching consensus, the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF), adopted this terminology, and formulated a definition of national forest programme (nfp). (See following description).

3.    The nfps must be formulated based on basic principles derived from the experience acquired during the formulation and implementation processes of different forestry development frameworks, especially of the NFAP in the years 1980 and 1990, which are:

• The sustainability of forestry development;
• The global approach to the forestry sector;
• Conformity with national development policies and the socio-economic sphere;
• Consideration of intersectoral relationships;
• Assumption of operational responsibilities by the countries;
• Co-association, participation and transparency of all actions;
• Consistency with national and international commitments.

These guiding principles for national forest programmes were approved by the IPF, created by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD).

4.    The IPF recommended all countries to "develop and apply national forest programmes in line with these guiding principles, for sustainable forest management, which will make it possible to meet growing and conflicting demand for forest goods and services". In addition, it stressed the need to adopt a flexible approach in their formulation and execution.

5.    The support to Latin American and Caribbean countries in the development of their national forest programmes has been a priority task of FAO, both through its Regular Programme as well as its Field Programme, especially through Regional Project GCP/RLA/127/NET "Support to national forest programmes of Latin America and the Caribbean", and other national projects in some countries of the region. Support to the building and strengthening of national capacities, both institutional as well as of human resources, has been one of the Organisation's priorities in supporting national forest programmes in the region.

PRESENT STATE AND TRENDS OF NATIONAL FOREST PROGRAMMES IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

6.    Most of the region's nfps were initiated before the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). Thus, 17 countries began their exercises after the initiation of the TFAP (1985), and eight Caribbean countries, through a sub-regional effort done by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). The lack of human and financial capacity, the existence of outdated data as well as the lack of a more effective national commitment in connection with the sector are among the major limiting factors of the national forest programmes.

7.    As the Latin American and Caribbean region is economically, socially and environmentally very heterogeneous there is a high level of diversification of trends and common denominators with respect to the Region's development requirements. However, as 5.8 million hectares are deforested every year (0.6% of the area), the fight against deforestation continues to be one of the most important and challenging common denominators for nfps in the Region.

8.    Financing of nfps continues to be an important subject and common denominator, since foreign assistance, even though it is restricted, has been the main source of financing in many countries of the Region. Consequently, innovating mechanisms for the forestry sector are the centre of all forestry discussions, with special emphasis on the potential of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), of the Kyoto Protocol (KP) and have become the great hope of the forestry sector. Some countries, mainly Costa Rica, but also Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico, have made progress in the joint implementation process of carbon sequestration projects and others are beginning to consider these opportunities.

9.    In 1999, FAO, the Central American Commission on Environment and Development (CCAD) and the Government of Honduras organised a Central American Workshop to discuss and agree on the CDM-KP at the regional level, and formulated a project which is currently being negotiated. Recently also, a Regional Workshop on CDM-KP was organised in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, to define a South American position on this subject. Said meeting was the follow up of the Meeting of Environment Ministers of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty countries, held in June 1999, in Cochabamba, Bolivia. Likewise, a national meeting was recently held in Colombia to define, agree on and present a series of financing projects. Several countries have also developed national funds and financing schemes to support forestry activities (Bolivia, Costa Rica and Colombia). There is a better knowledge regarding the value of the goods and services provided by the region's forests, among them carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation and watershed protection being widely recognised.

10.     Recently, FAO and the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) organised with the support of Project GCP/RLA/127/NET, two training courses for 40 professionals of the Region, on economic assessment of the environmental benefits of forest ecosystems, as part of the process for strengthening national capacity for nfps.

11.    The rather limited support received from the international donor community has urged several countries to mobilise substantial national financing to implement nfps. Colombia is a good example of this, where until recently, 130 projects were being implemented combining domestic funds with loans from the World Bank (WB) and the Interamerican Development Bank (IDB). Costa Rica, through the National Fund for Forest Financing (FONAFIFO), has secured significant financing from payment of environmental services.

12.    On the other hand, Guatemala and Ecuador have been successful in obtaining significant support from donors. In Guatemala, in 1995, 16 projects were being implemented with external financing for a total of US$ 53 million, while by 1999, this value was already over US$ 80 million. In Ecuador, some US$ 70 million have been mobilised between 1992-1997. Brazil obtained G-7 support in 1995, with a total of US$ 260 million for 13 projects, and at present with the support of the WB, IDB and the German Bank for Reconstruction, and bilateral support, the country is negotiating support above US$ 700 million for the national forestry programme. Mexico also implemented programmes for a total of 383.9 million pesos in 1995-1997, and important programmes are being negotiated at present.

13.     However, to strengthen the countries' nfps, it has been noted that it is necessary to pay greater attention to the forestry administration process which was weakened in many countries during the 80's and beginning of the 90's. There is growing interest, however, to revert this situation, restructuring the Forestry Administrations and paying renewed attention to forest policies (only 14 countries of the Region have updated their forest policies), update and enforce existing forest legislation, formulate forestry strategies and priority programmes, and promote the necessary legal reforms. In this renewal process, the creation of institutional capacity is essential.

14.    Decentralisation of the nfps to the States and Municipalities, is currently one of the concerns in the region, as well as national competitiveness programmes as a result of the globalisation process, and it will be necessary for the npfs do not lose sight of this process.

15.    There are few countries in which there is a Committee, Concertation Board or Inter-institutional nfp Coordination Commission, genuinely and participatively involving the main stakeholders responsible for sustainable forest development activities in the country.

16.    LACFC Sub-Regional Groups constitute effective channels for dialogue and planning common solutions to support the region's forestry development.

CONCLUSIONS

17.    As the expression national forest programme is a generic one, it is difficult as yet to establish a model for comparison between the different programmes being implemented, as each country has its own programme, in line with its capacities, characteristics and priorities. Thus, it is still difficult to evaluate the present impact of nfps on the regions' forest development process.

18.    However, as a result of discussions on forests and forestry at the international forest dialogue, it has been possible to verify that countries are concerned about formulating or updating their forestry and environmental policies, strengthening their forestry administrations as regards standards, and transferring executive role and responsibilities to the private sector.

19.    Likewise, a trend towards "diversifying" the financing process of sustainable forest development has been observed in some countries, endeavouring, to finance this process through the "economic valuation of environmental goods and services". Valuation of the multiple goods and services of forests is becoming a reality in the region. The KP with its CDM, has become a potential innovating mechanism of the financing process of the npfs.

20.     It is observed that in several countries there is no national forest programme, as agreed on in the IFP to orient the direction of changes, and these are still being processed (when this is the case), in a scarcely systematic technical, political and administrative manner, often scarcely participative, and is largely dependent on government changes.

21.    There is increasing need for countries to update their forest policies and laws, and develop priority actions and strategies to implement such policies, and that they thus may be able to establish their priority strategic programmes and their integrated projects. For this reason, programmes to strengthen national institutional capacities must be intensified, in accordance with the priorities of each country.

22.     In addition, for countries to adequately meet the commitments made in the IPF and its successor, the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF), in relation with the execution of their action proposals, it will be necessary for them to strengthen their nfps and their capacities for negotiation and conflict resolution.

23.    Annex I, briefly illustrates the present state and progress made in the implementation of national forest programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean.

ANNEX 1

STATE AND PROGRESS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL FOREST PROGRAMMES IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN