Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
Conclusions
105. The Panel noted the widespread international interest in and support for the development and implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. It drew attention to the dynamic nature of that process, and emphasized that the current momentum of action must be sustained.
106. The Panel recognized that criteria and indicators provide a conceptual framework for policy formulation and evaluation, and should be considered as useful tools for assessing trends in forest conditions, for reporting on the state of forests and for achieving sustainable forest management. Criteria define the essential elements of sustainable forest management, while indicators provide a basis for assessing actual forest conditions. When combined with specific national goals, criteria and indicators also provide a basis for assessing progress towards sustainable forest management. Criteria and indicators can therefore play an important role in defining the goals of national forest programmes and policies, and evaluating the effectiveness with which they are implemented. Because they reflect components of sustainable forest management, they collectively contribute to its development as a concept.
107. There is a need for a broad spectrum of quantitative, qualitative and descriptive indicators covering social, cultural, economic, ecological, institutional, legal and policy elements, including land tenure. Aspects of forests and woodlands that are essential in meeting the subsistence needs of indigenous people, forest dwellers and other local communities, including forest owners, require special attention in some countries. In many national, regional and international initiatives, both quantitative, qualitative and descriptive indicators have already been established.
108. While recognizing that national-level criteria and indicators may play an important role in clarifying issues related to forest certification and the labelling of forest products, the Panel emphasized that the development of criteria and indicators is primarily intended for promoting and monitoring sustainable forest management, and not for imposing certification or labelling schemes for forest products. Criteria and indicators are not performance standards for certifying management at any level, and should not be made a basis for restriction of trade. The Panel also emphasized that criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management should not be used as grounds for conditionality in the provision of ODA.
109. The Panel stressed the need for further efforts to reach a common international understanding of key concepts, definitions and terms used in formulating and developing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, and methodologies for data collection. Those terminologies and approaches must be compatible with terminologies used in other related fields, such as inventory, assessment and valuation, environmental assessment, national forest programmes, land-use plans and trade-related forest issues.
110. The Panel welcomed the efforts made to clarify the links between the criteria and indicators appropriate at the national level and those applicable to the subnational and forest management unit/operational levels, and emphasized that these should be compatible. It recognized, however, that those links will vary from country to country, and may require further examination. Criteria and indicators should be formulated through a transparent process involving all interested parties, including forest dwellers, indigenous people and local communities, as well as forest owners and other major groups, where applicable. Criteria and indicators for application at all levels should be practical, scientifically based and cost-effective, and should reflect, inter alia, economic, social and ecological circumstances.
111. The Panel noted that a number of countries are participating actively in international and regional initiatives for defining and implementing national-level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. That cooperation has enabled countries to benefit from the experience of others and at the same time bring new dimensions and ideas into international processes. While recognizing that the countries currently involved are at different stages in the process, the Panel stressed the need for further progress towards consensus on concepts, terms and definitions. The Panel also urged continuing efforts to involve countries and regions that are not yet participating in such initiatives.
112. The Panel placed particular emphasis on the need to involve regions and subregions with distinctive ecological and geographical characteristics, and countries with low forest cover. It also agreed that the development of appropriate criteria and indicators for application at the regional levels, in particular for forests in similar ecological zones, should be considered. The Panel also emphasized the need for efforts to enhance comparability and compatibility between various international and regional processes on the development and implementation of criteria and indicators, and stressed the importance of mutual recognition among sets of criteria and indicators as tools for assessing trends in forest management and conditions at the national level; and on transparent methods for the measurement of indicators and for the collection, assembly, storage and dissemination of data.
113. The Panel recognized that there needed to be consistency in the methodology employed in global forest assessments. It supported the promotion of ways and means to maximize the exchange of information, experience and technical knowledge at the global level, in particular the promotion of best forest practices for sustainable forest management.
114. The Panel had divergent views on the merits of a core set of criteria and indicators for use at the global level, while recognizing that dialogue should continue.
Proposals for action
115. The Panel:
(a) Encouraged that criteria and indicators be used by FAO and other relevant organizations in order to improve countries to proceed to prepare, through a participatory approach, national-level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, and, taking cognizance of specific country conditions and on the basis of internationally and regionally agreed initiatives, to initiate and to implement them, where appropriate, while recognizing that further scientific and technical examination, including field testing, will itself provide valuable experience and assist in further refinement and development;
(b) Urged countries to promote, as appropriate, the use of internationally, regionally, subregionally and nationally agreed criteria and indicators as a framework for promoting best forest practices and in facilitating sustainable forest management; to encourage the formulation and implementation of criteria and indicators on a cross-sectoral basis and with the full participation of all interested parties; to include them in national forest programmes; to establish and, where appropriate, clarify links between criteria and indicators employed at the national level and at the subnational or at the forest management unit/operational levels; and to promote their compatibility at all levels;
(c) Encouraged countries not yet participating in any of the ongoing international and regional initiatives on criteria and indicators to become involved as soon as possible, thereby gaining benefit from the experience of the existing processes as well as contributing new insights; and urged donor countries and multilateral and international organizations to provide adequate technical and financial assistance to developing countries and economies in transition to enable them to be involved and participate in the further development, field testing and implementation of criteria and indicators at the national, subnational and forest management unit/operational levels;
(d) Urged countries and international organizations, in particular FAO, UNEP and other participants in international and regional initiatives, to undertake efforts to achieve a common international understanding on concepts, essential terms and definitions used in formulating and developing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management (and to promote their adoption); on indicators for forests in similar ecological zones; on mutual recognition among sets of criteria and indicators as tools for assessing trends in forest management and conditions at the national level; and on transparent methods for the measurement of indicators and the collection, assembly, storage and dissemination of data;
(e) Recommended that FAO and participants in regional and international initiatives draw on commonalities between criteria and indicators developed in such initiatives, as well as on the Forest Principles, and recommended consistency in reporting on forest assessment and sustainable forest management;
(f) Requested that the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity take note of the work of the various existing initiatives on criteria and indicators to ensure that the work done by the Convention on Biological Diversity on developing and implementing biodiversity indicators would be consistent with and complementary to them.
Intergovernmental Forum on Forests
IFF identified various aspects related to data collection, assessment and reporting. One of them relates to
For IFF
IFF encouraged countries to
Process |
Major events |
Global |
- International Expert Meeting on Monitoring, Assessment and Reporting on the Progress Toward Sustainable Forest Management, 5-8 November 2001, Yokohama, Japan |
- FAO Expert Consultation Organized in Collaboration with UNEP, ITTO, CIFOR and IUFRO on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management. Report. Rome, 15-17 November 2000 | |
- IUFRO/FAO International Conference on Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management, Melbourne, 24-28 August 1998 | |
- Intergovernmental Seminar on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management August 19-22, 1996, Helsinki, Finland | |
- FAO/ITTO Expert Meeting on the Harmonization of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management, Rome 13-16 February 1995 | |
Montreal Process |
Working Group Meetings: - November 2000 Twelfth Meeting, Beijing, People's Republic of China - November 1999 Eleventh Meeting, Charleston, SC, USA - October 1998 Tenth Meeting, Moscow, Russian Federation - July 1997 Ninth Meeting, Seoul, Republic of Korea - June 1996 Eighth Meeting, Canberra, Australia - November 1995 Seventh Meeting, Auckland, New Zealand - February 1995 Sixth Meeting, Santiago, Chile - November 1994 Fifth Meeting, Tokyo, Japan - October 1994 Fourth Meeting, Hull, Canada - September 1994 Third Meeting, Olympia, WA, USA - July 1994 Second Meeting, New Delhi, India - June 1994 First Meeting, Geneva, Switzerland Technical Advisory Committee Meetings: - June, 2000 Tsukuba, Japan - May 1999 Montevideo, Uruguay - November 1997 Mexico City, Mexico - September 1996 Pasadena, CA, USA Other Meetings: - October 1999 Ste-Foy/Québec, Canada |
MCPFE |
- 1990 First Ministerial Conference in Strasbourg - 1993 Second Ministerial Conference in Helsinki - 1994 Quantitative indicators, Geneva - 1995 Descriptive indicators, Antalaya - 1998 Third Ministerial Conference in Lisbon (Adoption of Pan-European Operational-level Guidelines) |
ITTO |
- Criteria and indicators for the measurement of sustainable management of natural tropical forests in 1992, revised in 1998 - Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Natural Tropical Forests (1990) - Guidelines for the Establishment and Sustainable Management of Planted Tropical Forests (1993) - ITTO Guidelines on the Conservation of Biological Diversity in Tropical Production Forests (1993) - ITTO Guidelines on the Fire Management in Tropical Forests (1997) - Manual on the Application of Criteria and Indicators, 1999 - Three regional training courses on the application of C&I (2000-2001) - Several country-level projects to develop C&I and train stakeholders - Auditing framework developed for ITTO C&I, 2000 - Reporting format (national and FMU level) adopted, 2001 - Guidelines for sustainable management of degraded and secondary forests are under preparation 2002 |
Tarapoto Process |
- Regional Workshop on the Definition of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainability of Amazonian Forests Tarapoto, Peru, February 23-25, 1995 - National consultations for validation were conducted in each of the participating countries between December 1996 and July 2000 to evaluate the relevance and applicability of these criteria and indicators in light of national conditions and needs. |
Lepaterique Process |
- Expert Meeting on Criteria & Indicators (C&I) for Sustainable Forest Management in Central America Tegucigalpa, Honduras, January 20-24, 1997 - The expert meeting was followed by two subregional training workshops and seven national seminars, which reviewed applicability and availability of data and made recommendations on future implementation. Countries concerned are at present carrying out national validation exercises to review the criteria and indicators identified. |
Dry Forests in Asia |
Workshop on National-Level Criteria and Indicators for the Sustainable Management of Dry Forests in Asia/South Asia, December 1999 |
Dry Zone Africa |
- Meeting on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in Dry Zone Africa Nairobi, Kenya, November 21-24, 1995 - 10th session of the African Forestry and Wildlife Commission South Africa November 27-1 December, 1995 - A number of national and regional workshops and expert meetings have been held to review the applicability of the criteria and indicators in countries concerned, to discuss the availability of information and national capacities for collection and analysis of data, and to elaborate a plan of action for implementation. Two subregional follow-up meetings of national coordinators have also been held, covering countries in SADC and CILSS countries. Following recommendations of the former, Practical guidelines for the assessment and measurement of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in dry-zone Africa has been published (FAO, 2000). - Training workshop, Gambia 2002 - Training workshop, Burkina Faso November 2002 |
Near East Process |
- Expert Meeting on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in the Near East Cairo, Egypt, October 15-17, 1996 - Workshop of the national Focal Points on criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management Cairo, Egypt, July 1997 - A number of regional workshops and expert meetings have been held to review the applicability of the criteria and indicators in countries concerned and to discuss the availability of information and national capacities for collection and analysis of data. - Guidelines for assessment and measurement 2000 |
ATO |
- Principles, Criteria & Indicators (PC&I) for the management of the African natural tropical forest of its member countries, development started in 1993 - PCI were adopted by the ATO Ministerial Conference, 1996 - With cooperation of CIFOR and assistance from the European Union, the C&I were tested in five African countries - A revised PC&I (national and FMU level) was developed, 1998-2001 - The ATO PC&I and the ITTO C&I were harmonised in 2001 - Ghana, Cameroon and Gabon have developed their national PC&I sets |
Thematic area |
C&I Process | ||||||||
MCPFE |
Montreal |
ITTO |
Tarapoto |
ATO |
Dry-Zone Africa |
Near East |
Dry Forest Asia |
Lepaterique | |
Extent of forest resources |
1. Maintenance and appropriate enhancement of forest resources and their contribution to global carbon cycles |
5. Maintenance of forest contribution to global carbon cycles |
2. Forest Resource Security 7. Economic, Social and Cultural Aspects |
4. Conservation of forest cover and of biological diversity |
1. Maintenance and improvement of forest resources including their contribution to global carbon cycles |
1. Extent of forest resources |
1. Extent of Forest and Tree Cover |
2. Forest cover | |
Forest health and vitality |
2. Maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality |
3. Maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality |
3. Forest Ecosystem Health and Condition |
4. Conservation of forest cover and of biological diversity |
3. Maintenance of forest ecosystem health, vitality and integrity |
3. Health, vitality and integrity |
2. Maintenance of Ecosystem Health and Vitality |
3. Forest health and vitality | |
Productive functions of forest |
3. Maintenance and encouragement of productive functions of forests (wood and non-wood) |
2. Maintenance of productive capacity of forest ecosystems |
2. Forest Resource Security 4. Flow of Forest Produce |
3. Sustainable forest production |
4. Maintenance and enhancement of productive functions of forests and other wooded lands |
4. Productive capacity and functions |
5. Maintenance and Enhancement of Forest Productivity |
6. Productive functions of forest ecosystems | |
Biological diversity |
4. Maintenance, conservation and appropriate enhancement of biological diversity in forest ecosystems |
1. Conservation of biological diversity |
5. Biological Diversity |
4. Conservation of forest cover and of biological diversity |
2. Conservation and enhancement of biological diversity in forest ecosystems |
2. Conservation of biological diversity in forest areas |
3. Maintenance and Enhancement of Bio-diversity |
5. Biological diversity in forest ecosystems | |
Protective functions of forest |
5. Maintenance and appropriate enhancement of protective functions in forest management (notably soil and water) |
4. Conservation and maintenance of soil and water resources |
6. Soil and Water |
5. Conservation and integrated management of water and soil resources |
5. Maintenance and improvement of protective functions in forest management |
5. Protective and environmental functions |
4. Conservation and Enhancement of Soil and Water Resources and other Environmental Functions |
4. Contribution of forest ecosystems to environmental services | |
Socioeconomic benefits |
6. Maintenance of other socio-economic functions and conditions |
6. Maintenance and enhancement of long-term multiple socio-economic benefits to meet the needs of societies |
4. Flow of Forest Produce 7. Economic, Social and Cultural Aspects |
1. Socio-economic benefits |
6. Maintenance and enhancement of socio-economic benefits |
6. Maintenance and development of socio-economic functions and conditions |
7. Socio-econo-mic, Cultural and Spiritual Needs 6. Extent of Forest Resource Utilisation |
8. Maintenance and improvement of the multiple socio-economic and cultural benefits of the forest ecosystems.3) | |
Policy and institutional framework |
1. Maintenance and appropriate enhancement of forest resources and their contribution to global carbon cycles1) |
7. Legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable management. |
1. Enabling Conditions for Sustainable Forest Manage-ment |
2. Policies and legal-institutional framework3) 7. Institutional capacity3) 6. Science and technology3) |
Requirements for government2) |
7. Adequacy of legal, institutional and policies frameworks for sustainable forest management. |
7. The legal and institutional frameworks |
8. Policy, legal and institutional framework |
1. Existence of a legal, political, institutional, technical and socio-economic framework 3) 7. Scientific and technological capacities 3) |
1) Pan-European Criterion 1 includes indicators for general capacity for maintaining and enhancing the forest resources related to legal/regulative, institutional, economic and policy frameworks.
2) The ATO criterion for national level are targeted at requirements for functions and activities of the government containing the following criteria: 1. The State has clear objectives for sustainable utilisation of the forest heritage and a realistic action programme for their achievement. 2. An institutional framework exists to achieve the objectives of the sustainable management of forests. 3. The State provides the necessary means for sustainable management of forests. 4. The economic and fiscal policies of the State ensure the viability of forestry enterprises. 5. The Forestry Service/Administration implements effective measures to ensure the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of its forestry policy, in relation to the production, conservation of ecosystems and social benefits.
3) Abbreviated text.
Process |
Completed |
In progress |
MCPFE |
Bulgaria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Russia, Switzerland |
Austria, Italy, United Kingdom |
Montreal |
Australia, Canada, China, the United States |
|
ITTO |
Malaysia |
Myanmar, Thailand, Gabon, Congo, Ghana, Colombia, Brazil |
Tarapoto |
Brazil |
|
ATO |
Ghana, Cameroon, Gabon |
Tanzania |
Dry-zone Africa |
The Gambia |
Burkina Faso |
Near East |
||
Dry Forest Asia |
India, China, Myanmar, Thailand | |
Lepaterique |
||
Other |
Laos |
