Part I
REGIONAL SYNTHESIS (continued)

Chapter III
FOREST RESOURCES OF TROPICAL ASIA (continued)

1. PRESENT SITUATION (continued)

TABLE 1f - Areas of natural woody vegetation estimated at end 1980
All formations
(in thousand ha)

In general, inaccessible forests, steep terrain, swamps and forests reserved as national parks or equivalent reserves are little or not affected by shifting cultivation. Similarly, shifting cultivation in areas under intensive management is not common since they are supposed to be protected against encroachement. Logged-over forests are particularly susceptible to shifting cultivation. These areas are more easily accessible since logging roads are already constructed. It requires less effort on the part of the cultivator to clear as some of the big trees have already been removed. In general these areas have gentle slopes (preferred by loggers) and are more easily cultivated.

The total area under forest fallows (including bamboo fallows) in 1980 in the region was 69.2 million ha, or about 16% of area under natural woody vegetation. About half of this area is in continental southeast Asia (mainly Burma and Viet Nam); 32% in insular southeast Asia; 16% in south Asia and 2% in Papua New Guinea. In their declining order the countries with forest fallows are: Burma (18.1 million ha), Indonesia (13.5 million ha), Viet Nam (10.8 million ha), India (9.5 million ha), Lao (5 million ha), Malaysia (4.8 million ha), Philippines (3.5 million ha), etc. As a proportion of the total area under natural woody vegetation (N+n) in the country area under closed forest fallows in the different countries and states is as shown below:

Ratio	Countries/states
50%	Viet Nam
30 – 40%	Papua New Guinea, Burma, Brunei and Sri Lanka
20 – 30%	Sarawak, Sabah, Philippines, Lao and Bangladesh
10 – 20%	Peninsular Malaysia, India
10%	Indonesia, Thailand, Bhutan, Nepal, Kampuchea

In countries of south Asia and continental southeast Asia forest fallows correspond for a large part to mixed broadleaved forests of a dry type. But evergreen forests are also affected like in northeastern part of India. In insular southeast Asia practically all forest fallows are in productive closed broadleaved forests already logged-over. For example, in Indonesia about 85% of the forest fallows are in Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi. In Irian Jaya which has the largest area of “virgin” forests in the country forest fallows are not considered of any consequence.

Scrub formations (nH)

Out of an estimated 35.5 million ha of shrub formations in the region some 24 million ha (67%) are in Indonesia. “Belukar” areas (dense thickets possibly dominated by isolated trees tangled with lianas) and other shrub formations resulting from repeated clearing and burning of the original vegetation are classified as nH in Indonesia. This area includes also a small proportion of natural shrub formations. India has some 7 million ha under shrub formations which are extensively distributed throughout the dry peninsular India and in Gujrat state in the west. These are mainly low open forests with thorny species, often the only source for fuelwood to rural populations.

Ownership and administration

It is only in the latter half of the 20th century that a majority of the countries in the region emerged as independant nations and have initiated radical changes in the pattern of ownership of forests and forest lands. In some countries of the region later day political developments and changes in the political systems have had their effect on forest ownership pattern. The overall result of these changes has been a marked increase in forest land under the direct ownership, control and management of governments. Private ownership, ownership by corporations, communities, trusts and temples and other forms also do exist. Even where the ownership is essentially with the government, differences in the degree of control exercised and the agency exercising control can be recognised.

Forest areas owned and controlled by the state directly

In the region as a whole between 80 to 90% of the forest area is state owned and is controlled and managed by the forest departments. On such lands the forest department is responsible for the administration and management of all timber resources, forest law enforcement and forest revenue collection. The process of state control over forest lands was gradual and took place mostly in the last 30 years.

In the south Asia countries (e.g. India) before they emerged as independent nations many forests were owned by princely states or under the ownership of private individuals. Over the years private ownership was abolished by legislation. The last in the line of these enactments in India was the “Kerala Private Forests (vesting and assignment) Act, 1971”. Similar measures were taken in the other countries and control and administration of forest lands was generally vested with the forest departments. There are however, instances where state owned forests are under the control of other departments. For instance, in Sri Lanka forest areas under wildlife reserves and sanctuaries are under the control of Wildlife Conservation Department, Ministry of Tourism and Shipping.

In the Philippines certain types of forest land are classified as alienable and disposable and their administrative jurisdiction is transferred to the Bureau of Lands for disposition in accordance with the provisions of the Public Land Act.

In the centrally planned countries of continental southeast Asia, all forests are state owned and administered by the forest departments.

In recent years semi-autonomous corporations and state forest enterprises were created in several countries and states of the region which share the administrative and management responsibilities with the forest departments, e.g. forest development corporations; state timber corporations; state enterprises in India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Lao, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Sabah etc.

Forest areas owned and controlled by local bodies, trusts, etc.

In some countries of the region the ownership of small areas of forests is vested in local bodies. In Nepal “panchayat” forests and “temple forests” still exist. In Pakistan forest areas around urban centres are under the ownership of cantonments and municipalities. In Kampuchea some 20 000 ha of forest area was reported to be under the control of municipalities.

Forest areas owned by communities

Forests of Papua New Guinea are not owned by the government but by the clans and tribes, as in most countries of the Pacific. In 1974 a mere 89 000 ha were state owned and even this was contested by the people. The government has to negotiate with the clans and tribes for the right to use forest resources. At the end of 1976, under the Forest Act 1936, government purchased timber rights on some 2.2 million ha from the communities, under the “Land Groups Act of 1974”. There are provisions to recognise clans as cooperatives and the “Land Disputes Settlement Act” provides for settlement of disputes relating to land ownership including forest land. Under the Forest Act of 1971, in declared “local forest areas” timber owners can directly deal with the logging companies under Forest Act 1937; land owners may sell small quantities of timber up to approximately 50 m³.

Privately owned forest areas

Relatively small areas of privately owned forests are still existing in the countries of the region; often they are scattered and in the process of conversion to other forms of land use. In India due to historic reasons (princely estates) and the gradual implementation of land reform, it is estimated that close to 940 000 ha of private forest lands (whether covered by forest or not) are still remaining. In Sri Lanka under Land Reform Acts of 1973 and 1975, all private forests of over 20 ha have been nationalised. In Pakistan private forests owned by individuals or by communities are mainly found in the hill region. In Bhutan small areas allotted to individuals for orchard purposes still have forest growth. However, under the Bhutan Forest Act of 1969, the right to absolute ownership of timber and forest produce or private lands has been reserved by the government.

Legal status

The legal status of forest lands in the countries of the region changed over time reflecting, to some extent, the response of governments to increasing pressure on land by growing populations, the escalating demand for timber, firewood and other forest produce, and more importantly, in recent times, the concern for maintaining the quality of environment. Legal provisions have mainly affected the extent of direct access to forest land afforded to local communities, either to enjoy the forest produce or the rights to practice agriculture.

a) Different legal classifications have been evolved where the degree of instructions or regulations relating to such access varies. Although differing in terminology from one country to another the following categories of forest land are generally recognised in the region.

Forest reserves

These are generally well defined, surveyed, demarcated, legally constituted forests under the total control of forest departments. In this class of forests all acts of felling, collection of forest produce, grazing, or even trespassing are prohibited unless expressly permitted by law.

Such a classification is most common in south Asia countries. In southeast Asia, forests are constituted into reserves in Burma, Thailand, Malaysia and Brunei. It is not strictly applicable in either Indonesia or the Philippines.

The proportion of forest reserves to the total forest land varies from one country to another. In India and Bangladesh about half the forest land area has been constituted into reserved forests. In Burma, 14% of the total land area of the country is under reserved forests. In Thailand about 15 million ha have been reserved. In Sabah 37% of total forest area is reserved, in Sarawak it is only 8%. In Kampuchea some 30% of the state forest was reserved in 1970.

Protected forests

They are similar to forest reserves in that they are demarcated and notified and are under the control and management of forest departments. However, the degree of control exercised on them is of a low order and generally villagers in the proximity of these forests have the rights to grazing and procurement of forest produce (small timber, dry fuel, fodder etc) for their own consumption. In south Asia countries (except Nepal) and in Burma forests classified as “protected” in the sense mentioned above are widely prevalent.

Unclassed forests

Forest lands which are publicly owned but where the legal status is not well defined fall into this category, more particularly in south Asia.

The above groupings are not strictly applicable to all the subregions/countries in the region. In Nepal the classification places greater emphasis on management than in other countries: protection forests, production forests, special forests, limited use forests, alienable forests, etc. In Philippines the legal classification is into forest lands and those which are alienable and disposable. In Indonesia where according to the “Basic Forest Act” of 1967 government exercises substantial control over public forests and private plantations, only a functional classification of forest lands has been intended but not completed yet.

b) In almost every country of the region, a growing awareness and interest in conservation of wildlife and protection of environment has lead to the creation of national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, biosphere reserves and other areas similarly protected under one kind of statutory provision or the other. In the forests included in these reserves, in addition to strict protection from biotic interference, logging and even management intervention by forestry departments is kept to a minimum. On a rough estimate some 5 to 6% of total forest area in the region has been incorporated into these reserves and consist mostly of closed broadleaved forests (NHCf2r).

The areas constituted as national parks and equivalent reserves in the 16 countries studied are indicated below. Information has been extracted from the “1980 United Nations List of National Parks and Equivalent Reserves” (IUCN), other documents quoted in the corresponding country briefs as well as the national progress reports presented by the delegations to the Eleventh Session of Asia Pacific Forestry Commission held in Fiji in April 1981 (countries indicated with an asterisk). In most instances only a part of the national parks and equivalent reserves are covered by a tree vegetation.

Management

The degree to which natural forest reserves have to be managed is a delicate question on which opinions are divided. Some would like them to be natural systems with no intervention from outside whatsoever. Others would admit the need for conscious management as a tool to conserving and utilizing the natural forests as an integral part of development planning. In its overall sense forest management should concern itself with three areas. The first is the knowledge of the resource itself: of forest area, forest soil, stand, annual growth and natural factors affecting the trees, such as fire, insects and diseases. The second is the problem of how best to utilize the resource: of silviculture, forest genetics, methods of logging and extraction, processing and marketing. The third which is gaining increasing importance in recent years is the social-economic-political ability to apply the technological skill to achieve development objectives. This integrated logic behind selection of appropriate forest management system is seldom apparent in the region. Management systems tend to concentrate on the floristic, climatic, and topographical aspects of the forest itself.

For the purposes of this study, forest management is used in a restricted sense and forests of the region are classified as those “intensively managed” and those which are not. The concept of intensive management implies controlled application of harvesting regulations complemented by appropriate silvicultural and protective measures designed to maintain the productivity of the forests.

Historically, past experience in practising intensive management is limited to only a few countries in the region, notably, Burma, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Malaysia. The first working plans in the Indian subcontinent were prepared more than a hundred years back under the British administration.

Over the years, knowledge and experience in silviculture and management techniques has been built up in south Asia. Because the bulk of the forests under management in this subregion are the moist deciduous and dry deciduous types where the forest system is not as complex as in the evergreen and semi-evergreen types, it has been possible to adopt intensive management practices in these countries.

On the other hand the practice of intensive management in the tropical forests of southeast Asia countries has to contend with several disadvantages. Firstly, historical experience in the practice of intensive management is limited to a few countries. Secondly, there is a dearth of trained manpower. Thirdly, since commercial exploitation through concessions since late sixties was largely guided by economic considerations, enforcement of prescribed silvicultural treatments received less attention. Lastly, and more importantly, because tropical evergreen forests are highly complex plant communities which exist in a delicate equilibrium with the other components of the ecosystem, scientific knowledge on their ecology and dynamics is still extremely limited. Devising appropriate systems of forest management to suit them prove a difficult task. There is a high local heterogeneity of species with varying demands on growth promoters like light. The continuous manipulation of canopy to provide adequate light to select species at seedling stage poses problems. Good seed years are irregular and infrequent. Seeds in general, lose their viability rapidly and unless there is a happy coincidence of good seed fall followed by adequate rains and appropriate canopy manipulation there is little hope of successful natural regeneration. The unevenness of the forests with several overlapping populations, the erratic distribution of the species and the variability of the dimensions together make the search for appropriate methods of harvesting and regeneration of these forests particularly difficult and unrewarding.

All the foregoing considerations have resulted in intensively managed forests in the region getting mostly confined to south Asia and to formations largely other than tropical rain forest.

About 19% only of the productive closed broadleaved forests (NHCf1) are intensively managed (NHCf1m). It is estimated that nearly 84% of the intensively managed forests in the region are in south Asia, 9% in continental southeast Asia and another 7% in insular southeast Asia. Within south Asia some 70% of the productive closed broadleaved forests are intensively managed; some 97% of these are in India - the rest in Bangladesh and Bhutan, none in Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. In continental southeast Asia all intensively managed forests are confined to Burma. In insular southeast Asia, Sarawak has some 72% of the managed forests of the subregion, the rest are in Peninsular Malaysia and Indonesia. As a whole 4 countries have significant areas of intensively managed closed broadleaved forests (NHCf1m). Their proportion in each country to the total area of productive closed broadleaved forests (NHCf1) are as follows: Bangladesh: 94%, India: 77%, Burma: 15% and Malaysia: 16%. Only India and Pakistan have part of their productive coniferous forests under intensive management (NSf1m). Some bamboo stands in India and Viet Nam are also intensively managed (NHBf1m).

Either monocyclic or polycyclic systems of forest management are observed in the region. Monocyclic systems (better known as shelterwood systems) aim at obtaining a fairly Uniform crop for subsequent harvest. In south Asia shelterwood systems are more common in the coniferous forests and in the evergreen or semi-evergreen forests. The Malayan Uniform System which was practised until the early sixties in the lowland forests of Malaysia has been virtually abandoned and other management systems are being introduced in Peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak. Polycyclic systems - classical selection fellings with or without improvement operations for the residual stand - are more common in high forest areas throughout the region. However many selectively logged forests are subsequently destroyed by shifting cultivation and squatting, which reduces greatly the actual rate of implementation of these management systems.

Clearfelling and artificial regeneration techniques are gaining in popularity in recent years in south Asia.

A list is given below by country of the denominations of the major silviculture and management systems in the region including those which are not actually “intensive management systems” in the restricted meaning used in this study:

• Bangladesh: clearfelling and artificial regeneration; taungya plantations;

• Bhutan: selection-cum-improvement fellings, corridor felling/regeneration system;

• India: uniform or irregular shelterwood systems; clearfelling and artificial regeneration; canopy lifting shelterwood system; coppice with standards/reserves; simple coppice;

• Nepal: selection-cum-improvement system; clearfelling system;

• Pakistan: selection system; uniform shelterwood system; coppice with standards; clearfelling and artificial regeneration; root sucker regeneration system;

• Sri Lanka: selection felling and reforestation by seedlings;

• Burma: Burma selection system; taungya system;

• Thailand: selection system; clearcutting in alternate strips (for mangroves);

• Indonesia: Indonesia selective felling system;

• Peninsular Malaysia: Malayan regeneration improvement system; modified Malayan uniform system; selective management system;

• Sabah: Malayan uniform system with some modifications;

• Sarawak: liberation thinnings;

• Philippines: modified selection system; seed tree method (for pine stands);

• Viet Nam: selection system;

• Papua New Guinea: timber stand improvement treatment; selective logging.

Forest utilization

a) Log harvesting

The rate at which forests of the region are logged is, to a great extent, a response to increasing demand for timber and fuelwood by a growing population. The demand by rural population for small timber, poles, bamboos and fuelwood has increased rapidly in recent years. With the growth in urban population demand for processed wood products (paper, plywood, particle board, fibreboard, etc.) has risen also and is reflected in log harvests. Apart from meeting domestic needs, timber as an exportable commodity earning foreign exchange gained sufficient importance in some countries of the region leading to increased harvests. In the region as a whole recorded removals of roundwood registered an average annual rise close to 3% which is well above the world average. Quantitywise fuelwood and wood for charcoal constitute the bulk of the removals. In the rest of the production, non-coniferous logs constitute a high proportion, more particularly in the insular southeast Asia. An analysis, by subregion, on the production and export of non-coniferous sawlogs and veneer logs, on the sources of supply, on the standing volumes presently commercialized in the undisturbed forests and the areas of undisturbed closed forests likely to be logged over during 1981–85 is presented here, supported by figures given in the following tables (tables 2 and 3).

South Asia

South Asia is among the less forested subregions with a large population, a heavy pressure on forest land for agriculture, a relatively well developed forest industry and a substantial domestic demand which often outstrips the supply. The woody vegetation area is limited to 19% of the land surface and the proportion of productive forest area to land surface is only 11%.

Log production (non-coniferous) in these countries rose from 6.5 million m³ in 1968–70 to 8.4 million m³ in 1977–79 at an average annual rate of less than 3%. The subregion's share in total production of the region was 13.3% in 1968–70 declining to 10.7% in 1977–79.

Some 84% of the log production in the subregion is from India with Bangladesh and Nepal contributing another 13%. Exports are negligible and mainly from Nepal. There is practically no importation. Details are given below (from FAO Yearbook of Forest Products 1968–1979):

Annual production and exports of sawlogs and veneerlogs (non-coniferous) ¹
South Asia
(in thousand m³)

* FAO estimate
¹ The figure in brackets against exports represents the proportion of log production exported

To a greater degree than in earlier years forest logging is being carried out by government agencies. In Bangladesh the state owned Forest Industries Development Corporation logs less accessible areas and private contractors are confined to more accessible forests. In India some 17 state government owned forest development corporations are engaged in logging. In Nepal and Sri Lanka state timber corporations have been constituted for this purpose

In the south Asia countries with few exceptions, logging operations are still labour intensive; the use of axes and saws for felling and bucking and of bullock carts and trucks for hauling is the common practice.

The range of utilizable species extracted is widening over the years and is correlated with decreasing forest resources. The prime commercial broadleaved species remain teak (Tectona grandis) and sal (Shorea robusta). Other major broadleaved timbers belong to the genera Dipterocarpus, Hopea, Mesua, Pterocarpus, Xylia, Adina, etc.

Some 90% of log production in the subregion is from forests under intensive management. An idea of the productivity of the forests in the subregion is obtained by examining the standing volumes (actually commercialised) - VAC - in undisturbed productive broadleaved forests (NHCf1uv) given in table 2. They range from 30 m³/ha in Bangladesh to 76 m³/ha in Bhutan. The volume actually commercialised is, however, only a part of the potential commercial volume. Several species labelled “secondary” are still probably exploitable and in the course of time, as the resources are depleted, they will find increasing market opportunities.

TABLE 2 - Standing “Volume actually commercialized” (VAC) at end 1980 ¹
Undisturbed productive forests
(totals in million m³)

¹ Weighted means are indicated with an asterisk

TABLE 3 - Estimated areas of undisturbed productive closed forests logged annually (sawlogs and veneer logs) in the period 1981–85 ¹
(in thousand ha)

¹ In addition to areas of undisturbed productive closed forests cleared (mainly for agriculture)

Coniferous forest of south Asia, which represent the bulk of this type of forests in the region, are confined to the Himalayan belt. The standing volume (actually commercialised) of undisturbed coniferous forests ranges from 50 m³/ha in Nepal to 80 m³/ha in Bhutan.

In India and Bangladesh future log production would essentially be from the productive managed forests (NHCf1m and NSf1m) of which 30 million ha are broadleaved and 2.9 million ha are coniferous. The annual allowable cut from these forests is in the order of 34 million m³ of which 3 million m³ are of coniferous timber. In Nepal and Bhutan where managed forests in the concept of this paper do not exist, future log production is expected to come from undisturbed productive closed forests. The projected annually logged-over area during 1981–85 is 23 000 ha with a potential of 1.7 million m³ of timber (of which 700 000 m³ are of coniferous timber).

An estimate of the standing volume (actually commercialised) in the undisturged forests of the subregion is of interest to relate annual removals to the stocking. Table 2 sets out the details. In summary, the undisturbed productive closed forests of the subregion are estimated to have a standing volume (actually commercialised) of 359 million m³ of which 277 million m³ (77%) are broadleaved and the rest coniferous.

Continental southeast Asia (including centrally planned countries)

The five corresponding countries (Burma, Thailand, Kampuchea, Lao and Viet Nam) have about 63% of the total land area under natural woody vegetation, with a moderate population density. The per capita forest land area is relatively high. Of the total wooded area some 56% are in Burma and Thailand and the rest in Kampuchea, Lao and Viet Nam. The non-coniferous log production in these countries showed a decline in the last decade - a drop of some 300 000 m³ from 5.9 million m³ in 1968–70 to 5.6 million m³ in 1977–79. Whereas the non-coniferous log output in Thailand maintained a stationary level, there was a production drop in Burma and Kampuchea. The share of the subregion in the total production of the region was 12% in 1968–70 declining to 7% in 1977–79. Thailand accounted for some 53% of the subregion production with Burma and Viet Nam contributing another 43%. The declining trend in log production in the subregion is attribuable to gradually depleting stocks in Thailand, conservative logging in Burma and generally unstable conditions in the centrally planned countries during the 70's.

The exports from the subregion declined from 159 000 m³ per year during 1968–70 to 124 000 m³ during 1977–79. The decline is observed in almost every country except Burma. The major exportable species from the subregion is teak. Production and exports by country in the last decade are presented below (from FAO Yearbook of Forest Products - 1968–1979):

Annual production and exports of sawlogs and veneer logs (non-coniferous) ¹
Continental southeast Asia (including centrally planned countries)
(in thousand m3)

* FAO estimate
¹ The figure in brackets against exports represents the proportion of log production exported.

A notable feature in the region is the growing dependence of Thailand on imports of logs in recent years to keep its sawmilling industry. From a net exporter, with depletion of forest resources, ban on exports and growing domestic demand Thailand has emerged as a net importer during 1977–79. Sizable imports of logs first started in 1977 (61 000 m³) and gradually increased to 204 000 m³ by 1979. The importation is mainly from Malaysia.

Log extraction and hauling methods are not yet mechanized to any appreciable extent. Hauling by elephants and river transportation are still the preferred modes in some parts of Burma and Thailand. Much of the logging in Thailand is carried out by the Forest Industries Organization, a state owned enterprise.

The range of commercial species exploited from the forests in the subregion is greater than in south Asia. In Burma and Thailand teak is estimated to account for some 3 to 9% of the total timber stock, although occasionally it may form more than half of the stand volume. The proportion of teak in the total growing stock decreases from west to east of the subregion, with the dipterocarp species assuming more prominence in Lao and Kampuchea than in Burma. Although teak is commercially more valuable and more important for Burma and Thailand dipterocarp species are more exploited on the whole in the region; they are mostly dark and heavy timbers and constitute a large part of the growing stock. Medium density dipterocarps - Shorea, Parashorea, Pentaome - and Intsia are also represented.

The standing volumes (actually commercialized) in productive closed broadleaved forests are the lowest in the region. In their declining order, they are: 30 m³/ha in Viet Nam, 25 m³/ha in Thailand, 20 m³/ha in Kampuchea, 15 m³/ha in Burma and 12 m³/ha in Lao (table 2).

The intensively managed forests in the subregion are confined to Burma where their annual allowable cut is estimated at 450 000 m³ (see corresponding country brief in part II of this report). The undisturbed productive closed broadleaved forest areas projected to be annually logged during 1981–85 are estimated at 344 000 ha; the corresponding log volume is 6.8 million m³. The total standing volume (actually commercialized) of the remaining productive closed broadleaved forests is 483 million m³ (see tables 2 and 3).

Insular southeast Asia

Insular southeast Asia has more than 77% of its land area under natural woody vegetation. Land pressure on forests is felt in parts of these countries mainly from shifting cultivators and organized settlements for agriculture, oil palm, rubber, etc. The population density is lower and the depletion of forests for firewood is not a significant phenomenon as in south Asia. The subregion as a whole is a large exporter of logs. Domestic processing has been gaining ground in recent years: there is a substantial development of forest industries in Peninsular Malaysia (mainly sawmills and plymills), the Philippines (sawmills, plymills and pulp and paper industry); there has been a spurt in the growth of mechanical wood-based industries in Indonesia in recent years. Despite an overall situation of adequate forest resources, certain parts within the subregion (e.g. Java in Indonesia and northern Luzon in the Philippines) are experiencing shortages of wood.

Log production in these countries rose from 36.2 million m³ in 1968–70 to 63.5 million m³ in 1977–79 at an average annual rate of 6.4% which is the highest observed in any of the subregions. The subregion's share in the total production of the region was 74% in 1968–70 rising to about 81% in 1977–79. During the same period the proportion of log exports in relation to total log production declined from 68% to 59%.

The pattern of production and exports within the different countries of the subregion has undergone substantial alterations in the past decade or so. There was a marked decline in log production during the last 10 years in the Philippines, from 11 to 7 million m³, which was undoubtedly a reflection of the decreasing potential of the forests coupled with an awareness of the need for conservation and a desire for expanded domestic production. The export of logs from the Philippines fell drastically from 9 to 1.8 million m³ in 10 years aided by restrictions on export of logs. There was an increase in domestic production of sawnwood and wood-based panels.

In Malaysia log production continued to rise, from 17 to 30 million m³ in a decade. This increase is mainly attribuable to production in Sabah and Sarawak. There is a decrease in the proportion of logs exported, from 64% in 1968–70 to 54% in 1977–79.

The most marked changes in the pattern of production and exports are observed in Indonesia. Log production trebled in the past decade, from 7.7 to 26 million m^{3 1}, and exports during the same period grew from 4.3 to 19 million m³. The share of Indonesia in the subregion's log production increased from 21% to 48% and exports from 17% to 51%. There was also increased domestic processing - especially wood-based panels -, as evidenced by a rise from 5 000 m³ in 1968 to 526 000 m³ in 1979. A feature of the 70's is, indeed, the emergence of Indonesia as the most important log producer and exporter in the region and in the whole tropical world.

There are many economic arguments which have been advanced in favour of exploitation of tropical forests, the most obvious among them being the foreign exchange earning potential. Together, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines have earned some US$ 2 300 million through export of logs in 1979; the share of individual countries being approximately: Indonesia US$ 1500 million, Malaysia US$ 690 million and Philippines US$ 140 million. The full amount of export value presented above, however, cannot be viewed as representing a benefit to the exporting country. Since much of the exploitation is carried out through foreign based transnational corporations, the net foreign exchange earnings to the country, in effect, will be the residual after deducting from the gross earnings such items as: profit repatriation, imports of equipment and material, and expenditure towards employing expatriates in the operations. M. Gillis estimates (in “Tropical Hardwood Concessions: the Main Fiscal and Financial Issues”) that net foreign exchange earnings in timber operations may not exceed 30% of gross foreign exchange earnings.

Details of production and exports in insular southeast Asia countries are shown below (from FAO Yearbook of Forest Products - 1968–1979):

Annual production and exports of sawlogs and veneer logs (non-coniferous) ¹
Insular southeast Asia
(in thousand m³)

¹ The figure in brackets against exports represents the proportion of log production exported

Logging operations in the subregion are generally carried out by concessionaires, under long term management contracts/timber licence agreements, etc. In recent years there has been a clear policy orientation towards promoting either wholly government owned companies to carry out forest exploitation or joint ventures with indigenous participation or locally controlled private firms with foreign owned firms acting as contractors.

Except in swamp forests where logging operations are still basically manual, in all the dry land areas logging is totally mechanized. Logging the high forest is often associated with damage to the remaining stand, non-utilization of secondary species, and discarding usable wood in the forest. The order of magnitude of wastage in logging a tropical forest in this subregion can be obtained from a recent estimate in the Philippines (“National Progress Report on Philippine Forestry - 1976–1980”): in 1979, the estimated volume of logging wastes and residues generated while extracting 6.6 million m³ of net log production amounted to 5.3 million m³: of this, damaged residuals represented 50%, logs, tops and branches 34%, stumps 10%, butt trimmings 3.5% and abandoned logs 2.5%.

The dominant commercial species are medium and light weight dipterocarps: Shorea, Parashorea, and Pentacme which in the trade are known collectively as lauan, meranti, Philippine mahogany or seraya, depending on the exporting country. The genera Dipterocarpus (keruing), Hopea (giam, merawan, mata), Dryobalanops (kapur), etc. which include both heavy and light weight species, are the next in commercial importance. The more notable non-dipterocarps from these forests currently established in the world market are Gonystylus bancanus (ramin), Dactylocladus stenostachys (jongkong), Palaquium spp.; Octomoles sumatrana, Diospyros spp. (ebony), Agathis spp.. Teak is confined to Indonesia.

The weighted means at country/state level of actually commercialized volume in the undisturbed closed productive broadleaved forests range from 27 m³/ha in Indonesia to 90 m³/ha in Sabah and the Philippines. The corresponding total volume is 1 870 million m³ of which more than 1 000 million m³ are in Indonesia (table 2). The undisturbed closed broadleaved productive forests projected to be annually logged during 1981–85 are estimated at 1 336 000 ha of which 880 000 ha are in Indonesia, 375 000 ha in Malaysia and 80 000 ha in the Philippines (table 3).

¹ This figure may capture only partially the logs meant for pitsawing which could be of the order of 1 to 2 million m³.

Papua New Guinea

The forest resources of Papua New Guinea are extensive (covering 86% of land area) but heterogenous. The extreme species diversity together with widely differing wood properties have to some extent limited marketing opportunities. Even so, log production increased from 370 000 m³ during 1968–70 to a little over 1 million m³ in 1977–79. During the same period exports grew from 146 000 m³ to 431 000 m³, their proportion to total production rose from 39% to 42%. In addition to logs, the country is a major producer of wood chips: an important factory chipping mixed tropical broadleaved species is located in the Gogol forest area near Madang. The production of pulpwood for chips increased from 75 000 m³ in 1974 to 218 000 m³ in 1979; nearly all the wood chips are destined for exports.

The main timber species are: Pometia spp., Intsia spp., Pterocarpus indicus, Dracontomelum mangiferum, Anisoptera polyandra, Alstonia scholaris, Araucaria spp., Octomeles sumatrana, Diospyros spp. and others.

The exploitation is very selective. The standing volume (actually commercialized) in the productive undisturbed closed broadleaved forests is about 30 m³/ha and the total volume some 415 million m³. The projected annual logged-over area of undisturbed productive closed broadleaved forests during 1981–85 is 47 000 ha, corresponding to an average annual output of non-coniferous logs of some 1.4 million m³ (tables 2 and 3).