The objective of this paper is to:
- describe the need and benefits of reaching a global consensus on harmonization of definitions;
- describe and review activities related to terms and definitions in the international fora including the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF), the FAO-led process on harmonizing forest definitions and related processes, the Forest Resources Assessment (FRA);
- describe and review progress towards harmonization of definitions;
- make suggestions on how to ensure countries/processes use such definitions;
- make conclusions and draw recommendations.
Overall, the paper should contribute to improving common understanding of concepts, terms and definitions related to criteria and indicators as well as to the identification of common approaches, methods and protocols for collecting, storing and sharing data.
Key terms related to harmonization are defined here as in Puustjärvi and Simula (2002), who themselves build on TBFRA 2000 definitions. Note the important difference between harmonization and standardization (see table 1).
Table 1: Definitions of key terms on harmonization
Harmonization |
Making existing definitions, which denote the same or closely related concepts, comparable and consistent. |
Comparability of definitions |
Definitions are set so that their possible differences can be identified and data based on one definition can be converted to meet the needs of another, related definition. |
Compatibility of definitions |
Definitions are aligned, congruous, and not conflicting with each other. |
Consistency of definitions |
Internal agreement of various elements of definitions, or agreement between systems of definitions. |
Standardization |
Applying the same definitions for a concept within different contexts, or applying the same rules for how locally applicable definitions are defined. |
(Source: Puustjärvi E. and Simula M. 2002)
