To ensure a realistic expectation regarding networking and to avoid the consideration of unrealistic options, it is important to be aware of what networking exactly means. Thus, this section will start with a discussion about the meaning of networking. The next section deals with the question: What are the potential net workers? Finally, the national perspective on C&I processes and networking is analyzed.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines networking as “…the action or process of making use of a network of people for the exchange of information, etc., or for professional or other advantage…” This definition implies the expectation of networking partners to receive certain benefits. UNFF, for example, expects to profit from promoting the implementation of C&I by receiving information needed to achieve its own goals, while the international community as well as the countries receive better information about progress made towards sustainable forest management and the IPF/IFF Proposals for Action at a global level (UNFF, 2001). An unfavourable balance of the costs and benefits for one potential networking partner would consequently provoke disinterest and communication problems. Receiving benefits from networking is a fundamental precondition for success. This opens two major possibilities to motivate partners to participate in networks: to reduce their input or to increase their benefit. In general, networking requires as a precondition a clear perception of potential benefits and inputs for each partner.
It is also helpful to consider that there are different forms of networking. The definition presented above mentions the exchange of information (communication) as one possible objective, but leaves room for other important options, such as:
- Exchange of results: Countries provide national information about forests and international or regional secretariats use this information to inform about international trends.
- Collaborative administration of information: The networking partners manage their information in a common database, where every partner may use them.
- Discussion of results: Different actors come together to discuss their results in a kind of collaborative learning network.
- Dividing tasks: each partner performs a specific task within an overall goal (i.e. some partners receive funding; others provide technical assistance or advice, others data, while others carry out field assessments or research to improve indicators, and so forth).
Different actors, due to their interests, resources, expertise and competences, provide different opportunities for networking. Partners with similar expertise may collaborate in a different manner than partners that differ substantially in their expertise. These considerations are important to evaluate realistically the potential for networking. Against this background the next paragraphs examine the initiatives and actors potentially relevant for networking related to the implementation of C&I.
A reasonable number of initiatives deal with the assessment and monitoring of environmental and forest-related issues. Nearly all countries of the world are related to one or more international environmental conventions and agreements. For forests, however, the international community failed in the attempt to work out a binding convention. But, Rio 1992, in particular, gave strong impulses for the development of assessment systems based on C&I as an important tool for countries to improve the implementation of sustainable forest management.
Annex 1 presents some of the most important international and regional assessment initiatives related to forests, environment and sustainability. In the context of this paper, an initiative is understood as a continuous and regular action, taking place or carried on in a definite manner, and leading to the accomplishment of the results to be defined by the participating members. There are different types of initiatives dealing with forestry, environmental, social and economic issues. Environmental initiatives include a variety of issues such as forest, biodiversity, oceans, wetlands, wildlife, and world heritage. Each type of initiative is related to a specific level of commitment by its participants and provides specific conditions for networking. In particular the following types of initiative can be distinguished:
- A convention is a formal assembly for deliberating on or legislating on important matters, ecclesiastical, political, or social. They are legally binding to the participating parties, and thus represent a high level of political commitment. Examples of this category are the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNFCCC), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
- A process presents a continuous action under way to achieve a commonly defined goal. Processes are based on agreements between the partners. These agreements may be legally binding, such as conventions, or voluntary, as in the case of international C&I processes. Some assessment processes also provide continuously statistical data about specific issues such as FRA or the ITTO statistics on timber trade.
- A programme is a definite plan or scheme of any intended proceedings. It describes a planned series of activities or events. In this sense a programme provides the guiding framework and strategic objectives for action. Often, programmes are equipped with financial and human resources for their execution. Examples of this category are the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) or the Forest Conservation Programme of the World Conservation Union (IUCN).
- Projects are intended to achieve a specific objective in a defined period. Project partners have clearly defined tasks to be achieved with a defined budget. Related to the implementation of C&I at national level, the establishment of national assessment mechanisms is an example for projects. In this category also fall a number of non-public initiatives led by NGOs, such as Forest Watch.
- A network is a group of interacting actors. Networks enable a continuous exchange of information or provide a platform for discussion. Examples of such networks are CPF or the European Tropical Forest Network (EFTRN).
- Database centre represents a specific kind of network to systematize data or information from different sources to improve physical and thematic access. They facilitate the collection of data required for particular processes and also encourage data sharing. Examples for of this type are the European Environment Agency (EEA) or the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), as well as a number of global observing systems, such as Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), Global Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS), Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and Global Observation of Forest Cover (GOFC). In some cases, however, as for example the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), only own data are processed. Other initiatives like the Global Forest Information Service (GFIS) coordinated by a management unit located at IUFRO serve as an Internet-based search machine using metadata to provide access to forest information.
Because an international agreement for the sustainable management of forests has never been reached, existing initiatives rely on voluntary processes set up at regional level, most of them aiming to support countries’ efforts to attain better forest management by using C&I. A global forest assessment, coordinated by FAO, periodically provides information about the state of the world’s forests. At the forest management unit level, forest certification initiatives led by independent, non- profit organization such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) support the sustainable production of timber. Global initiatives on environment deal mainly with biodiversity issues, climate and water. In addition, a number of global initiatives are related to the assessment of social and economic parameters, such as the human development indicator, the poverty index, statistics on labour and health and so forth. These socio-economic assessments play an extremely important role for policy-makers.
There is a great, partly confusing, diversity of national, regional and global initiatives to assess aspects relevant to sustainable forest management. In evaluating the potential for networking, the fact that nearly all the mentioned initiatives already represent some kind of network has been taken into account. All of them incorporate a number of different countries, organization, secretariats and other actors. It can be assumed that most initiatives are based on long-running negotiation processes between the collaborating actors, and are working with well-established formal and informal communication mechanisms. A huge amount of valuable technical and institutional knowledge about information management is accumulated in these initiatives. In particular, initiatives for the assessment of social and economic aspects may provide important insights also for the C&I processes. The initiatives also dispose of a huge amount of environmental and socio-economic information relevant to assessing sustainable forest management. Their consequent utilization provides an opportunity to improve the efficiency of C&I processes. Undoubtedly, there is a high potential to share information and to make use of information about social and economic aspects of sustainability. But, the existence of well-established communication mechanisms inside these initiatives also may complicate networking, as negotiation processes with new partners naturally start on the status quo of the initiative.
Corresponding to the wide variety of assessment initiatives is the huge large number of actors involved. A closer look at these actors and their specific roles generates insights, which may help to evaluate their relevance regarding the implementation of C&I. Annex 2 provides an incomplete but however representative overview about of some of the most important actors involved in international assessment initiatives. The actors are working in the areas of research, policy development, planning, advocacy, development or technical assistance, and in the provision and exchange of information through forest and environmental networks and database management. Typically information about such organizations or groups is more readily available about those operating at the global or regional level. Certainly global and regional organizations such as the United Nations, ITTO and the European Union, with their capabilities, have promoted and supported the development and initiation of the overarching processes, research, networks and initiatives in sustainable development and policy recommendations together with partner organizations and countries. These organizations and groups address sustainable development from social, economic, environmental and natural resource perspectives. Organizations such as the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) promote the human dimension of development. Science and technology organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) working more broadly in technological developments taking into account social and economic sustainability goals. The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), as part of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), represents a global research organization supported by international organizations and national governments, undertaking research into natural resource management towards sustainable development, thus contributing to the identification of C&I. CIFOR’s research agenda also incorporates social systems research.
There are also a number of independent institutions involved in sustainable development of forests and the environment. The World Economic Forum (WEC) and the United Kingdom Tropical Forest Forum are independent discussion and action groups contributing to the discussion on sustainable development. The World Resources Institute (WRI), the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and Tropenbos International (TBI) are research organizations involved in sustainable development research contributing towards policy development. The Rainforest Information Centre (RIC) is an advocacy group for the protection of the world’s rainforests.
UNSD manages a database system compiled from many international sources to produce and make available social and environmental indicators for use in forest and environmental assessment processes. The Earth Resources Observations Systems’ (EROS) Data Centre in the United States makes available data for scientists, managers and technical users.
At international level, UN-related organizations dominate the institutional landscape. The other organizations involved in global monitoring processes, to a great extent are mostly located in the United States of America and Europe. Industrialized countries dominate international assessment initiatives. Many of the organizations listed in Annex 2 are related to more than one assessment process. This reveals that at international level an intense networking on environmental issues is already common. However, it has to be considered that within the organizations different persons are responsible for the assessment initiatives, which for the quality of the network depends, apart from inter-institutional arrangements, strongly on communication inside the organizations and between the competent staff. It becomes also obvious that some actors are involved in similar activities without visible linkages or coordination efforts. The environmental and socio-economic networks seem to work quite separately, exploring their own processes, mechanisms and fora. Nevertheless, there are initial attempts to link these dimensions of sustainability more systematically2.
The initial aim of using C&I at national level is to support national governments in their efforts towards sustainable forest management. But also most global assessment initiatives rely on data provided by countries. Consequently, the performance of the activities carried out at national level is essential for the quality and functioning of the related regional (multinational) or international initiative. To learn about the experiences of countries involved in environmental assessment initiatives, in particular the implementation of C&I, questionnaires were sent to competent governmental representatives. Answers were received from Canada, Cyprus, Finland, Malaysia, Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. In addition, information from India, Brazil and Australia was available from secondary sources or own experiences3. Although this range of countries may not be a representative sample, the following observations may be relevant also for other countries:
- The assessment of forest and environmental issues is a complex task. The efficiency of the assessment depends strongly on good collaboration between the different groups related to natural resource management at national as well as sub-national levels. Thus, at national level, networking is a fundamental precondition for the success and quality of assessment initiatives. Experiences with the application of C&I are generally positive, not least because the integrative approach of C&I stimulates collaboration between the different governmental and non-governmental organizations, in terms of data exchange and mutual respect. This collaboration contributes also to a more integrative understanding of the role of natural resources for society. In addition to governmental organizations responsible for the environment and/or forests, which are normally the main actor in these initiatives, national research organizations also play an important role. Other important contributors are statistical government departments, environmental groups and forest owner associations.
- Despite positive experiences regarding enhanced collaboration, the acceptance of C&I as part of the national information system is not without problems. A lack of understanding about sustainable forest management and the concept of C&I significantly diminishes the usefulness of the provided C&I-related information for the potential clients at sub-national levels. Even within the governmental departments responsible for the implementation of C&I there is often a significant lack of understanding and support. In addition, sponsor-driven differences in the approach often confuse private forest owners. Also, the technicians responsible for data capture do not always understand the integrative approach of C&I. A general lack of communication and collaboration between organizations related to social and economic areas is obvious. In particular actors involved in environmental monitoring have knowledge of and experience in the assessment initiatives of social and economic parameters related to sustainable forest management.
- The application of C&I for national assessment requires substantial efforts for the definition of measurable verifiers and adequate assessment methods. In particular, developing countries, with a limited logistical infrastructure and restricted human and financial resources, depend on external input to develop and implement a practical set of C&I. Against this background, support for the development of national procedures for the application of C&I sets by international organizations such as FAO and IUFRO is evaluated very positively. Developed countries normally do not experience similar difficulties in creating C&I sets in accordance with national demands and capacities. However, even here, some indicators defined at international or regional level are not supported by data, because no adequate assessment is possible.
- The composition of C&I and the logistics and methods for their assessment vary strongly within countries, even among those with similar economic and environmental conditions. Thus, regarding the costs needed to implement C&I at national level, no clear statement can be given, nor is there a clear perception of these costs in those countries that have started to implement C&I. Often, the investments related to C&I are assimilated under the general costs related to the national monitoring activities. Although in some countries the implementation of C&I already improved the efficiency of information management on forests, the use of C&I, especially in the beginning, is just an additional component to already existing assessment procedures, which consequently increases the overall monitoring costs.
- In countries’ perception, FAO should be the global key player in supporting the implementation of C&I-based forest assessment processes, facilitating the networking of forest issues as well as disseminating assessment results about forests. Also IUFRO and CIFOR are seen as important actors, while the role of ITTO is viewed as ambiguous. An efficient information exchange between national and international C&I initiatives does not appear to exist. It would increase the relevance of international processes and facilitate the implementation of international agreements on a national scale. The survey also revealed that developing countries should participate more actively in international processes.
- The survey further showed that the financial and personal capacity of governmental organizations is generally crucial for the implementation of C&I at the national level, whereas the importance of training and technology depends on the specific national context. Also a number of factors restricting the implementation of C&I were identified. In many cases, the incomplete information about some specific indicators or regions was named. For some indicators, also the credibility of the data suffers from unknown errors due to inadequate methods. In some countries, there are also significant problems related to data sharing between organizations involved in monitoring processes.
2 Environment-socio-economic initiatives from UNDP, World Bank, DFID, EC, the Poverty and Environmental Partnership – PEP. For a field case study see also Nunan et al. (2002).
3 The authors would like to acknowledge in particular the contributions from Dr Michael Kleine (IUFRO).
