J. C. WESTOBY
Statement by the Deputy Director to the Technical Committee on Forestry and Forest Products of the FAO Conference
I want to tell you something about current trends in our field operations. These have now reached such a volume that it is impossible to give you a detailed account of the work which we are now carrying out in different parts of the world. This report will therefore not be comprehensive; I shall rather try to illustrate different aspects of our programs by quoting examples, and I shall address myself to three points in particular.
First, I want to bring out the changing pattern, as well as the rising volume, of our field programs, to draw your attention to their impact on our work, and to indicate their implications for our future activities.
Secondly, I want to indicate to representatives of those countries which stand in need of assistance the various ways in which we can either render help ourselves or arrange for help to be given.
Thirdly, I want to suggest to representatives of the more advanced countries the responsibilities- I would even say obligations - that lie upon them, and in particular on their forest services, if the various programs to which their governments have pledged full support are to achieve their declared objectives.
Let me first clear away some misunderstandings. Two years ago this committee, and the Conference in general, expressed serious concern at the curtailment of our regular program in consequence of our rising field programs. This concern was legitimate; our regular program was in fact suffering badly. Today the situation has somewhat improved. This for two reasons. In the first place, we have succeeded in obtaining several additional posts out of headquarters allocations provided to FAO by the Special Fund of the United Nations. Quite recently, two additional posts were authorized, bringing the total number of headquarters staff financed by the Special Fund to nine. Once these have all been filled, we shall be in fairly good shape to handle our present commitments - certainly in much better shape than we have been for the last four years. Secondly, our position two years ago was serious because we were undertaking a good deal of preparatory work (which has since led to many new approved projects) and for this heavy preparatory work, when the Special Fund program was in its initial phase, we were receiving a recompense that was quite inadequate.
I will not pretend that we are yet satisfied. Far from it. There is sufficient evidence of how serious the position is, not merely for this Division, but for FAO as a whole. Nevertheless, our position is a good deal less desperate than it was two years ago, and I think delegates to this committee will be glad to know that there has been improvement.
I would also like to emphasize that since this committee last met our regular program has not been standing still. It is perfectly true that we have failed to carry out several projects that we would have liked to carry out. Nevertheless, in spite of this, the last two years have been years of considerable achievement. Indeed, I doubt whether any previous biennium has witnessed so rich and varied a regular program.
One further general point I would like to make. We tend to fall into the habit of speaking of the regular program and the field programs as if they were separate entities, each in its own watertight compartment. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are indissolubly wedded, both in their conception and their implementation. There is not a single field project but has its roots in one or other aspect of our regular program activities. And every single field project reacts in turn on our regular program. So far as we are concerned, we welcome this rapid expansion of our field programs. We rejoice in the fact that more and more countries are coming to recognize the significant contribution that a sound program of forest and forest industry development can make to their overall economic growth, and are turning to us for help and advice. We rejoice that we are finding wider opportunities for giving concrete expression to the forestry principle which we have endeavored to promote since the first days of FAO In the early years of FAO, lacking means, we tended often to strive for better forestry practices through exhortation. The records of our several regional forestry commissions, of various conferences we have held, of this committee itself, are littered with noble resolutions, many of which have remained dead letters. They have remained dead letters because the countries lacked the means to give effect to them, and because we lacked the means to help. The situation is now changing, and changing rapidly. The time for exhortation is past. Action programs, encompassing specific field projects, with clear unequivocal objectives, point the way forward, both through their direct impact and through their demonstration effects.
Thus, we in no wise look upon our field programs as an incubus, an unwanted intrusion on the even tenor of our regular program development. Rather we see our field programs as conferring meaning and validity to our regular program. It is for this reason that we continually re-examine our regular program in the light of the needs revealed by our field programs.
You will have noted that our regular program is becoming increasingly oriented toward supporting our field programs. This trend will continue. It represents the most effective contribution we can make toward solving the greatest problem of our day: how first to check, then to halt, and finally to reverse, the widening gap between the advanced, industrialized nations and those countries still in the early stages of development. It represents our response to the challenge presented by the United Nations Development Decade.
I would like to say a few words on this, singe it is highly relevant to the theme of our discussion today. Moreover, what I have to say may help to provide a framework, a context, for your discussions.
When the Secretary-General of the United Nations proposed that this present decade be designated the United Nations Development Decade, he received the unanimous support of all members of the United Nations. This Organization, too, along with other specialized agencies of the United Nations family, pledged full support. The target set for the Development Decade is modest indeed: to achieve by 1970 an aggregate rate of self-sustained economic growth in the developing countries of 5 percent annually. Modest because, taking into account the expected rate of population growth, this signifies an annual growth per caput of between 2 and 3 percent. Yet even this would signify a considerable step forward. Over the last decade gross income in the underdeveloped part of the world rose on average by 3 percent annually. Because of population growth, the increase in income per person was only about 1 percent per year - that is, about $1 per head per year. By way of contrast - to show how rapidly the gap is still widening - average incomes in some of the advanced areas, in the United States of America and in the European Economic Community for example, rose over the same period by $20 per head per year.
Progress in the developing countries over the last decade has been disappointingly slow, particularly in the light of the hopes engendered during the immediate postwar years. In recent years there has come about a better understanding of the reasons for this relatively slow progress. This is not the time and place to enter into a general discourse on the problem of accelerating economic growth in low-income countries. But some of the elements in this problem are directly relevant to our present and future work.
For example, many of the development plans formulated in the past have ignored the intimate interrelationship which exists between the sectors of agriculture and of industry, have ignored the need for industry to provide the tools for the required breakthrough in agriculture, and have ignored the role of agriculture as a base for industrialization. In this connection, I would direct your attention to a conference paper, Agriculture in economic development, to the preparation of which this Division made an important contribution.
Another point of some importance: the current flow of capital and technical assistance from the advanced to the developing countries is still well under 1 percent of the combined national income of the wealthier countries. Not only is this still too low to make the required impact. Much of it is even less effective than it might be. Thus, while more funds are steadily becoming available for preinvestment purposes, there is still a great lack of financial resources - in the form of either grants or long-term low- or noninterest loans, for such purposes as land improvement, general infrastructural investment or, in particular, major schemes of afforestation and forest improvement, whether for productive or protective purposes. This problem is coming more to the fore, as country after country realizes the weight of the millstone round its neck represented by repayment obligations on earlier development loans. Similarly, as was revealed by the United Nations Conference on the Application of Science and Technology held early in 1963 in Geneva, there is still insufficient effort devoted to adapting technology and research to the specific needs of the developing countries. A large part of the work of this Division is concerned with the adaptation and dissemination of science and technology in the interest of the developing countries.
If the widening gap is to be checked, then the flow of capital and technical assistance from the privileged to the developing countries must be stepped up and made more effective. We are confident that this will happen. Our confidence does not rest only on the fact that the conscience of the world is now awake. We believe there are good hopes that the recent signing of the nuclear test ban treaty may be followed by further steps toward controlled disarmament. This would release immense resources, part of which will be channeled to meet the needs of the developing countries. In the coming years we in this Division may be able to give some thought to the ways in which the specific resources that will be released could be constructively directed into promoting forest and forest industry development in the emerging countries.
A further point of considerable relevance for the work of this Division. From the experience of the last decade, it has become evident that, so long as the developing countries remain heavily dependent on the export of primary products to, and the importation of processed goods from, the more advanced countries, they are running the race for progress with their legs tied. It is common knowledge that the deterioration in the terms of trade of the developing countries over past years has far more than canceled out every penny they have received in financial and technical assistance. The existing pattern of international economic relationships is such that there is a built-in tendency for their terms of trade to deteriorate. This tendency can only be countered by the diversification of their economies and exports, and by the provision of markets for their industrial products in the more advanced countries. These problems will form the central theme of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, to which this Division will contribute a special paper. We believe that the rapidly changing pattern of the world forest and forest products economy presents important opportunities for many of the developing countries. We are also satisfied that in every country forest and forest industry development, apart from being desirable for its own sake in the flow of benefits and needed products it confers, is capable of making a very significant contribution to the overall growth of the economy. Our viewpoint on this is set out in the special article published in Unasylva - "The Role of Forest Industries in the Attack on Economic Underdevelopment."
I have strayed somewhat from my original theme, but I hope that what I had to say will not be considered irrelevant.
In his opening speech, the Director mentioned that this Division is now operating field programs involving some $5 million annually, alongside a regular program of about $1 million a year. The main part of the field programs today consists of United Nations Special Fund projects. By January 1964 the Division will be responsible for 28 or 29 major projects, all of which are designed to remove bottlenecks to development. Thus, some of these projects are essentially preinvestment surveys, aimed at appraising the forest resource and studying the feasibility of developing industries based thereon. Examples are our projects in Mexico, Honduras, Greece, Ecuador, Venezuela, Thailand and Ceylon. Others are concerned with research and development, as for example our projects in Pakistan, Chile, Turkey and Sudan. Still others aim at creating required professional and subprofessional cadres; this is the purpose of projects in Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Liberia, Nigeria and Iran.
We are responsible for more than a quarter of all the projects handled by the FAO Technical Department, standing second among the technical divisions. These projects will require, as they progress, about 250 experts.
Meanwhile the Expanded Program of Technical Assistance (EPTA) continues, and at the present time we have about 80 field officers in some 25 countries. Preliminary indications which have reached us concerning the 1965-66 Expanded Program of Technical Assistance suggest that there may be expansions in many countries but a falling off in some country requests. In some cases the initiation of a Special Fund project has led to the total suppression of the Expanded Program of Technical Assistance in forestry. This may be reasonable where the new Special Fund project takes over and carries forward work previously started under the Expanded Program of Technical Assistance. It is less obvious, however, that the establishment of a forestry faculty, or the conduct of preinvestment surveys in a specific locality, abolishes the need for continued progress in such fields as utilization, management and administration. However, you know full well that the program is made in the countries, not here in FAO. It is in the countries that the forest depart. meets have to establish their claims alongside the claims of other departments. I am simply concerned to remind you that the case for assistance in the forestry and forest industry fields, if assistance is required, should not go by default.
Apart from the dispatch of individual experts to particular countries, the Expanded Program of Technical Assistance also enables us to provide regional advisors, support some regional projects, and organize a certain number of seminars and training centers. Here, unfortunately, we are up against a severe limitation. The proportion of EPTA funds which can be devoted to regional projects is strictly limited, though that proportion has recently been raised from 12 to 15 percent. However, this does not enable us to comply with all the requests we receive for organizing training centers and seminars. We are painfully aware of repeated recommendations from the regional forestry commissions still not satisfied, solely for lack of regional EPTA funds. You will already have noted, in our Program of Work and Budget for the forthcoming biennium, that the ominous phrase " subject to availability of funds " occurs all too frequently. Such training centers and seminars have a vital role to play in the transfer of technology, in the dissemination of new ideas. We know what the most urgent needs are, and if any of those responsible for the direction of bilateral assistance programs in forestry are interested to help by organizing seminars and training centers, we will gladly cooperate.
Before leaving this question of EPTA programs, there is one likely new development to which I should draw your attention. Normally our field experts act as advisors only. Yet in certain developing countries there is need for assistance that goes beyond expert advice. There is need for trained personnel who can occupy posts in the local forestry administration, serving to all intents and purposes as a national civil servant though bearing, of course, a special responsibility for training cadres. Such assignments have in the past been handled by the United Nations Technical Assistance Administration, and we have collaborated in submitting the names of appropriate candidates. In the future this type of assignment (known as an OPEX-type assignment) will also be available under FAO's own Expanded Program of Technical Assistance.
The Special Fund and EPTA, while they form the bulk of our field operations, do not exhaust them. The last Conference approved a special program of education and training in Africa, and under this program we have been able to arrange for a survey of Africa's educational and training needs in the field of forestry, and also for a special training center in savanna problems. This is now being held in Sudan, with the collaboration of the Sudanese Government.
There are two other major field programs in relation to which this Division has assumed important responsibilities in the last biennium. The World Food Program started its operations on 1 January 1963. This new organization, jointly responsible to the United Nations and to FAO, has been established, following the Director General's report, Development through food, at the 1961 Conference, to carry out a three-year experimental program. Three types of aid are envisaged: emergency food aid; school nutrition; assistance in the form of food to development projects. It is this third category which concerns us.
We act as technical advisors for these projects, frequently assisting countries to prepare projects suitable for the Program. So far only two forestry projects are operational, in Syria and in Morocco. The latter, which concerns reforestation and soil conservation, is interesting since it is planned within the framework of the Mediterranean Development Project. Others on the point of being signed or likely to be approved shortly are located in Turkey, Sudan, Korea, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, China (Taiwan) and Jamaica. At the present time projects concerning this Division add up to just over $7 million or rather more than 12 percent of the aggregate of World Food Program projects under active consideration. This gives some idea of the amount of work in which the Division is involved in under the World Food Program.
The Forestry and Forest Products Division also plays an important technical role in Freedom from Hunger Campaign projects. Here the procedure is somewhat more complicated since, once the technical soundness of a project has been established, FAO, acting as a broker so to speak, has to place it with a suitable donor organization. It is not always easy to design a project so that it meets the real needs of the recipient country and at the same time has the sort of appeal which prompts a donor organization to lend its support. In the past year or so we have carefully scrutinized some 30 projects from the technical standpoint. As yet, however, only two minor projects are operational, though we hope that a few others will become operational shortly. Here a situation has arisen which is somewhat discouraging. Although there is no lack of requests for assistance and of sound projects from the countries in the broad forestry field, it is proving extremely difficult to find donor organizations for projects in this sector. There is a lack of understanding on the part of those supporting the Freedom from Hunger Campaign that this is essentially a campaign to eliminate freedom from want, and that fuelwood plantations, shelterbelts, community forest development, sand fixation, and so forth, are valid contributions to this Campaign. We do hope the delegates here, on returning to their countries, will do all in their power to persuade the organizations which are supporting the Freedom from Hunger Campaign that these types of projects also make a real contribution to realizing the objectives of the Campaign. Unless the donor organizations are willing to broaden their views, we shall find it necessary to discourage requests from countries in these sectors.
The important thing to note is that both these programs do afford additional possibilities of securing needed assistance for development purposes,
I have spoken of the changing pattern of our field programs, and of the many forms of help now available to assist countries in the early stages of development. I would like to say a word or two about the obligations that lie on the more advanced countries.
For many decades to come, the developing world will have need of the assistance of foreign experts. Depending on the stage of development reached, this need will express itself in different forms. Some countries need only very specialized advice on particular problems, often for short periods, by high level consultants. Others need longer-term assistance to strengthen particular aspects of their work; they have a reasonably developed service, but certain facets have been neglected. Still others have a fair complement of staff, but nearly all of them lacking in experience. Here a general bracing and strengthening by experienced and qualified staff are required - not necessarily all at the top echelons. Finally, there are some countries where a forest service requires to be built up almost from scratch.
So far as advanced countries are concerned expressions of willingness to help are meaningless unless they are accompanied by a readiness to make experts available. Steps should therefore be taken to arouse the interest of the younger generation of foresters in the forestry problems of the developing countries. Still too few forestry faculties in the advanced countries provide courses on world forestry problems. Finally, a greater proportion of the research effort now being made in the government, university and independent research institutions should be devoted to finding solutions to the specific problems which confront the developing countries.
Much has already been accomplished, but much more remains to be done before the situation can be regarded as satisfactory. Whenever this committee meets we sense the strength of the international bond that links foresters the world over. We speak of our own problems but we are fascinated by the problems confronting our colleagues in other parts of the world. If you can succeed in transmitting to your colleagues in your own forest services this international aspect of forestry, this sense of being co-workers engaged in a common task, we need have no fear that there will be any lack of dedicated men willing to lend their expertise to forward forestry work in those countries which are late starters in the race for a better life.
We would like to pay particular tribute to those countries which have adopted "associate expert" schemes, of which this Division has been assiduous in taking advantage. More than a third of all the associate experts working with FAO field officers are with the Forestry and Forest Products Division. A number of these associate experts have proved their worth to the point where they are now employed as senior experts in their own right. We have noticed in some instances a reluctance on the part of the sponsoring country to allow these associates to serve at headquarters or in our regional offices. We believe this is a mistake. The orientation which an associate gets here at headquarters, the familiarity he gains with all aspects of our work and every type of forestry problem, can be of immense service to him in his future career and of great value to the country in which he eventually serves. In a certain sense it can even be claimed that the Forestry and Forest Products Division of FAO represents the best postgraduate school in world forestry extant. We would therefore like to see developed a "sandwich type" career for some of these associate experts: an initiation period at headquarters, followed by service with an expert in the field, with a short final spell at headquarters before moving on to his new assignment. The associate expert schemes are an excellent means of forming a cadre of competent, internationally minded experts.
One final point. We are apt to stress the scale and variety of FAO field operations and the help they can give in overcoming problems of backwardness. Apart from FAO programs, there are of course many important and bigger bilateral programs pursuing the same aims - and there is an increasing disposition on the part of those countries rendering bilateral assistance to coordinate their efforts with FAO's. But we must never overlook the fact that the main effort comes from, and the main responsibilities lie with, the developing countries themselves. FAO's contribution must be designed to complement and complete such efforts. It is not for FAO to prescribe what their aims should be, nor the means they should employ to achieve those aims. FAO's contribution is a marginal one, and it can seldom be decisive. All the more important, therefore, that we should approach our task with a proper sense of humility as well as of responsibility.
|
Aerial Photographs in Forest Inventories: Applications and Research . Studies (1963). Initiates a series of publications to be issued by the International Union of Forestry Research Organizations. Compiled by an advisory group of Section 25 of IUFRO, the English, German and French texts appear in one volume published in the Federal Republic of Germany, while a Spanish text has been published in Mexico. Obtainable through IUFRO, Amalienstrasse 52, 8 München 13, Federal Republic of Germany. |
