Introduction

Forests and forestry are frequently subject to influences of external policy the scale of which exceeds the effects resulting from policy within the forestry sector itself. The influence of public policy on the development of the forestry sector, sustainable forest management and ultimately rural development has been recognised for many years. One of the basic principles of the Tropical Forests Action Plan in 1985, and later on, National Forest Programmes, was a holistic and intersectoral approach. This theme continued at UNCED in 1992 and in discussions on the causes of deforestation and forest degradation at the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and subsequently the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF).

The involvement of governments and international organisations in creating and directing policy influencing forests and forestry, other than to enable markets to function freely, may be justified by the following considerations (adapted from Whiteman and Mendelsohn, 2000):

Government involvement does not, however, increase benefits to society where policies fail to reflect the values held by the stakeholders. Thus there is a need in forestry for efficient policy to account for the considerations above whilst avoiding accidental or deliberate deviation from the purposes of involvement.

Current deficiencies in forestry policy and management have prompted a range of studies focussing on the global forestry situation and causes of forest decline. The Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) have been instrumental in the debate, publishing various books and papers that focus predominantly on the causes of deforestation in tropical countries. In the light of this and other work, Kaimowitz and Angelsen (no date) outlined recommendations for World Bank best practice in the light of analyses of impacts upon forestry divided amongst four major policy areas (macro-economic policies, agriculture and land tenure, transportation and energy and mining policies). Similarly, Contreras-Hermosilla (2000) and Verolme and Moussa (1999) focussed on the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation.

Although these approaches stress the common desire to halt forest degradation and loss they do not allow a comprehensive synopsis of forestry and its integration with public policy, specifically that:

These first three points effectively make transparent the principles of sustainable forest management by implying the requirement for integration of stakeholder choices (Ljungman and Nair, 2001). Indeed, sustainable forest management is ultimately about managing all resources in unison according to the needs and wants of the stakeholders. Thus, the forth point should be considered, given the need to accurately assess and realise present commodity values of forests, even though potentially difficult to confront given the uniqueness and latent value of many forest habitats.

With these premises, the case for a balanced analysis of the position of forestry within public policy is evident. Studies using this approach have been done (e.g. de Montalembert, 1995; Peck and Descargues 1997) but have not been extended to include real examples through which the multifaceted nature of the policy environment can be seen and understood. However, Peck and Descargues’ (1997) work is currently being updated under the UN-ECE European Forest Sector Outlook Studies (EFSOS) and will include current policy issues whilst aiming to avoid abstract theoretical policy scenarios. Comprehensive approaches such as these are felt to be beneficial through the breadth of information provided which potentially allows policy makers to address the following questions: