A number of new areas were protected after the war such as natural parks Hutovo Blato (74 km²) and Blidinje (580 km²). Besides, there is a strong campaign to protect huge nature complexes (Igman, Bjelašnica, Prenj, Treskavica, Čvrsnica, Konjuh, Vranica, etc.) and increase the number and surface of protected areas significantly.

Main Forest Policy Issues and Options

A number of factors affect forestry sector in B&H. Some of them originate from external policy influences while the other have more national driven background. To be able to understand recent forest policy issues as well as possible options towards sustainable forest management, policy and institutional implications of these factors have to be analysed carefully. The organisation and political structure of B&H defined by Dayton Peace Agreement (the Annex 4 of Dayton Peace Agreement represents the Constitution of B&H) is complicated, inefficient and indeed very expensive. Herein B&H was defined as a state that consists of two entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Srpska. Besides, the F of B&H consisting of ten cantons with their own constitutions and governments while the RS is more centralised. Consequently, there is neither common forest policy nor legal framework at the state level.

Forest Legislative Framework and Organisation of Forestry Sector - Recent Developments and Challenges in Implementation

Forestry sector in B&H is regulated separately within each of the two Entities. In the RS the Law on Forests was adopted in 1994 and it was amended in 2002. Legal regulations are under jurisdiction of the government of RS, more specifically the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Water resources. The Forest Inspection of RS is responsible for implementation of forest legislation. All activities associated with practical forestry management are integrated within the single public enterprise, called "Srpske _ume".

In the F of B&H the Law on Forests was adopted in 2002 after four-years long preparatory process leading by International Community. There are some provisions of this Law that are very new for the forestry sector in B&H. Thus, implementation of the Law faces many problems. The Forest Inspection at the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Water management and Forestry is mandated to oversee the implementation of the Law on Forests. Reorganisation of forestry sector in the F of B&H is ongoing, pursuant to the new Law on Forests. The federal (the Forest Institute) and cantonal (Cantonal Forest Offices) forest authorities should be established within Federal and Cantonal Ministries to preserve and protect the forests. Cantonal Forest Offices will transfer all management activities to the Cantonal Forestry Management Companies.

The new Forest Law in the F of B&H represents an example of how forest legislation can be influenced by constitutional and political environment of the State. Both, international and national experts have prepared the Law. Struggling to introduce common international principles of forest management into the Law, to respect characteristics of national forestry sector and to satisfy demands of all parties involved in the process, they produced the document that is difficult to comprehend and complicated to implement. Almost two years after promulgation of the Law, the provisions concerning organisation of the sector are not implemented. Federal Forest Institute and Cantonal Forest Offices had to begin with their activities latest within six months after this Law entered into the force. The same deadline was prescribed for the cantons to establish their respective Cantonal Forestry Management Companies. While only 5 cantons established cantonal forest enterprises (they are not registered in accordance with this Law), Cantonal Forest Offices are not formed yet. Federal Forest Institute exists formally with a few employees only. The Law also stipulates that latest one year after it enters into the force, the by-laws should be adopted. Yet, nothing of this was done so far. The question of vertical subordination is a weak point of the organizational model proposed by this Law. Practically, the Forest Institute cannot perform the role of central forestry institution, as it has no any organizational relationships with the Cantonal Forestry Management Companies, which are independent legal persons. It is not clear to whom Cantonal Offices should be subordinated, either to the Forest Institute or to respective cantonal ministries.

Forest planning and management in B&H during the past 40 years have been organized within forest management regions. These regions are formed in 1961 as a basic administrative and management units. They represented in terms of the site and all other aspects a unified entity, in which sustainable management of forests and forestland should be ensured. The new Forest Law in the F of B&H prescribes cantonal boundaries and not previous established forest management regions as the administrative forestry units. The Entities' boundaries in the most cases are nothing but the front line from the war while Cantonal boundaries are the result of post-war political negotiations. Both boundaries are not natural but artificial splitting almost all previous forest management regions into two or even more parts. Such provision is against the principles of sustainable forest management and consequences of its implementation should be very serious.

Further, the collaboration between the Entities related to common principles of forest policy on the whole State territory is not precise defined in forest legislation. Unlike the environmental legislative according to which an competent Inter-Entity Environmental Body shall be set up dealing with all environmental issues that need harmonised approach of the Entities, forest legislation does not prescribe such institution. Having in mind non-existence of Inter-Entity forestry coordination body, it is practically impossible to create and implement a consistent forest policy at the State level.

It is clear that existing forest legislation, due to unsolved political problems, cannot be implemented in a way to ensure sustainable forest management in F of B&H. The problem of competence and relationship between federal and cantonal levels derives from the Constitution's solutions. The Dayton Peace Agreement has had irreplaceable importance for stopping the war but its applicability in building a rational organization of the State is at least dubious. Anyhow, the organizational model of forestry sector characterized by more independent enterprises conducting management activities independently, without precise defined relationships between the state and a regional level does not exist in any other country of the region. The organisation models of forestry sector in Croatia, Serbia and RS assume single state forest company or public enterprise with its dependent organisational units at the regional level. Considering specific organisation and political structure of B&H and the F of B&H, sustainable forest management can be only achieved through the single forest enterprise at the federal level with its organizational units on cantonal levels. Finally, this is the organisation model for many public enterprises in the F of B&H, for instance those responsible for water management, electricity and communication. The area of activities for these forest organizational units should not be artificial cantonal boundaries but previous established forest management regions. The issue of territorial responsibility should be solved by cross-cantonal agreements. Prior to that, it is necessary to lay down scientific-professional criteria for establishing and revision of forest management regions disregard administrative cantonal boundaries.

The organisational issues are probably the main weakness of the Law on Forests in the F of B&H. It does not mean that this Law, particularly in some provisions concerning preservation and protection of the forests and their functions cannot contribute in sustainable forest management. Due to pronounced society demands for economical benefits from forests, forest policy in B&H in the past has been characterized in lack of sustainable balance between ecological/social and economical aspects of forests. In order to achieve that balance, this Law emphasizes preservation and protection of the forests as well as forests' ecological functions. It provides protection of certain species, obligatory environmental impact assessment as well as harmonization of the Law with the Environmental legislation. Unlike the previous B&H forest legislation, the new Law also emphasizes some modern approaches in forest sciences such as pluralistic approach in forest management, participatory process in forest planning as well as restricted domination of technical authorities.

Following step in consolidation of the forest sector at the state level should be creating of the Inter-Entity forestry coordination body within the Council of Ministers. That body would be responsible for the issues such as: development of National Forestry Programme and long-term forest policy, international treaties and programmes concerning forestry, cooperation with international organizations and other countries, coordination and implementation of existing legislation in both Entities, coordination of the State monitoring and information system in forestry, etc. Moreover, there are a number of requirements for changing some provisions of the Constitution towards cancel of the Entities. These initiatives might have significant influence to the public policy in B&H as well as the further developments of the forest sector.

Forest Strategy - Lack of Long-term and Consistent Vision

The Law on Forests in the F of B&H prescribes the need, the content and the way for creating long-term forestry strategy. As a similar document exist neither on the State nor the Entities level, this prescription is very important for further development of forestry sector.

According to the Law, the Forestry Program of the Federation shall, taking into account international agreements and commitments, define general forestry and wildlife management policies of the F of B&H, oriented towards the preservation and sustainable forest management, including the maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity in the forests and forestland. The general part of the Forestry Program of the Federation should be prepared for a long-term period and the operational part for a period of five years. Cantonal forest development plans shall be drawn up every ten years for all forests and forestland, irrespective of ownership, with the purpose to ensure sustainable forest management in each of the Cantons. In addition to guidelines of the Forestry Program of the Federation, the Cantonal forest development plans shall also respect guidelines for managing the natural and cultural heritage in the forest and forestland, the water management conditions and guidelines for ensuring other functions of the forest, which are prepared by the Forest Institute and Cantonal office. It was mentioned before that the implementation of this Law faces many difficulties. Thus, the provisions related to creating long-term strategy and forestry programme are just death letter on the paper so far.

Another three initiatives (National Forestry Project, National Environmental Action Plan and Development Strategy - PRSP) include to the certain extent some elements of long-term forest strategy. In the immediate post-war period, the international community's relief strategy aimed at jump-starting economic activity by implementing large number of different emergency projects. Acknowledging the importance of forestry sector for the national economy, the European Commission, together with the World Bank and the Governments of Italy and Norway, has initialised the National Forestry Project in B&H. The Project was approved in 1998 with the objective to resume sustainable management and protection of B&H forest resources in order to ensure the rapid recovery of the wood-harvesting and wood-processing sectors but also to control the potential environmental impacts of this recovery. The Project had the following components:

• Support to forest management (development appropriate forest legislation, analysing marketing aspects, improving forest management planning, strengthening forest inspection services);
• Protection and rehabilitation of forests (procurement equipment and chemicals against insect attacks, silviculture management, reforestation, protected areas development);
• Rehabilitation of State forest enterprises' operational capacities (procurement of equipment for transport, harvesting, communication and nursery production);
• Project management and monitoring.

National Forestry Project in B&H cannot be identified with the concept of "National Forestry Programme" well known and developed in many EU countries. This project simply does not have strategic background as approximately 75% of the Project budget was allocated for equipment procurement.¹⁵ While there was an effort to re-establish the legal framework and support institution building within forest sector, several studies (forest legislation, privatisation, organisational aspects) conducted within the Project did not have significant practical implications.

In July 2000, the Governments of the F of B&H and RS received an International Development Fund (IDF) grant from the World Bank allocated for environmental capacity building. With the assistance of this grant, the National Environmental Action Plan for B&H (hereinafter NEAP) was completed in early 2003. The aim of the NEAP was to facilitate the preparation of a unified environmental protection policy within the framework of macroeconomic reforms, poverty reduction strategy and the overall process of transition.

A key element of the NEAP is the comprehensive analysis of the state of the environment. To organise this, ten thematic areas (forestry was one of them) were identified as covering the key environmental issues. In addition, eight priority areas of NEAP were established through a joint multidisciplinary approach. Following this process, the participants and experts defined priority measures and activities, which are a necessary precondition for undertaking actions in each of the above areas. The analysis conducted within the NEAP identified the key problems in forest management as follows¹⁶: