As stated in the sub-title of this study, it is intended as a “discussion paper”, to stimulate debate which could provide a clearer understanding of where the forest and forest industries sector, and the policies directly concerned with it, stand in relation to other parts of European countries' political, social, economic and environmental constellation. It is hoped that it will generate new thinking which will also help forest policy makers and their advisers to look at the FFI sector from a different perspective.
This study has been looking at the implications for the FFI sector of policies concerned primarily with other sectors. In Europe, this sector is not, with the exception of a few countries, a major component of the political economy, and it could be said that the implications of developments and policies relating to it do not have important implications for the others. However, there is evidence from various directions, some of it covered in this study, that the relative importance of forest resources and forest products and services is increasing, and that the FFI sector is attracting more attention from policy makers than it did in the past. The attention given to the sector in such fora as UNCED, the Ministerial Conferences in Strasbourg and Helsinki on the Protection of Forests in Europe and the European Parliament is indicative of this trend.
At the same time, development of the FFI sector has heavily depended and will continue to do so on the policies and their implementation in other sectors: this has been the thesis on which this study has been based. As stated in a recent FAO Forestry Paper (Gregersen et al., 1994) “… Many of the factors which drive the issues with which forestry is now trying to grapple … lie in other sectors. Solutions, therefore, have to be found outside forestry - in changes in patterns of land use, agricultural pricing, etc. Development within the forest sector therefore increasingly rests on being able to understand how it is linked to decisions elsewhere in the economy, and how the intersectoral institutional issues can be resolved. However, these strong intersectoral linkages often are ignored…”. How, in practical terms, such intersectoral linkages can be strengthened is a matter of serious concern just as much for European countries as for those in other regions.
An essential first step would be to identify the issues on which a dialogue between the FFI and other sectors could be initiated and developed on a continuing basis. This study has, it is hoped, gone a little way towards doing so. No doubt, ETTS V will carry the process forward when it comes to analysing the policy implications of its findings. In addition to that, however, a useful follow-up to the present study would be an analysis of the interactions between forest policies and those of other sectors, and more particularly, the impact of forest policies on those sectors. A number of examples come to mind: forest development policies and their impact on the use of biomass for energy, on climate change, on environmental protection, rural development, location of industry, and so on.
The authors are aware of the shortcomings of the study, despite the tremendous support they have received from many sources, as detailed in the acknowledgements and the annotated bibliography. Readers will probably have little difficulty in spotting inconsistencies and illogical argumentation, as well as gaps in the study. Should we not, for example, have said something about transport and communications as a policy area? And culture? Certainly more could have been included on policies relating to such areas as regional development, the role of the public sector and technology.
We realised from the outset the complexity of the task we were facing, but were comforted by the belief that apparently nothing quite like this had been attempted before and that therefore our path-finding efforts might be looked upon tolerantly. It may have been a question of “fools rush in where angels fear to tread”, but it has been a deeply enriching experience for us. We hope that, despite its shortcomings, the study may have given readers some new ideas or at least have stimulated them to think further about what society at large, and policy makers in particular, may expect of the FFI sector in the future, how the sector may be influenced by a wide variety of policies, and what those responsible for the sector can do to keep it moving forward in the right direction.
