M. Chipeta and T. Michaelsen
Mafa Chipetais Senior Forestry Officer (Policy Analysis), and focal point for FAO's task manager role for UNCED Agenda 21 Chapter 11, Combating deforestation, and the Forest Principles.
Tage Michaelsenis Senior Forestry Officer (Forest Conservation), and focal point for FAO's task manager role for UNCED Agenda 21 Chapter 13, Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable mountain development.The work of FAO, and particularly the Forestry Department, in moving towards the achievement of the goal of sustainable forestry and mountain development established at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED).
The work of FAO, and particularly the Forestry Department, in moving towards the achievement of the goal of sustainable forestry and mountain development established at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED).
The decade from 1985 to 1995 was marked by an upsurge of political debate on forestry. From the launching, in 1985, of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP) with the aim to "save the world's tropical forests for the benefit of all mankind" to the present discussion of such issues as the pros and cons of moving in the direction of a legally binding international agreement on forests, and timber certification, the international community has come a very long way towards being able to discuss forestry issues with a full understanding of the political implications and sociocultural and economic biases involved. FAO, as part of its mandate to provide a neutral forum, has been the scene, and often appeared about to be the battleground, for much of the debate.
Foresters have now realized that the politicians and diplomats were serious when, during the launching of the TFAP, they said that "forestry was far too important to be left to foresters". In fact, the international statutory bodies in forestry serviced by the FAO Forestry Department, such as the Committee on Forestry (COFO), regional forestry commissions and the Committee on Forestry Development in the Tropics (CFDT) which once served as the principal global fora for policy dialogue on forestry, have seen major policy issues raised by them moved to higher-level decision-makers in the Council and Conference of FAO or the post-Rio Summit Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The committees now operate more as technical secretariats and advisory bodies, preparing the ground for these more political fora. Often, the established consultative bodies have been supplemented by ad hoc fora under a spate of international initiatives fuelled by the energy of popular interest which could not be satisfied by the measured pace of consensus building through existing committees.
The process of change continues and is far from smooth. During various stages, professional foresters have watched in frustration and disbelief as they saw their advice being overruled or ignored by politicians tuned in to public opinion and to the voices of non-governmental organizations, even though some of the latter were perceived by foresters to have limited relevant technical understanding. However, this situation has changed dramatically during this decade. Foresters, recognizing that a well-informed public is a potentially strong ally in securing support for the forest agenda, have increasingly taken to providing sound information aimed directly at public opinion and politicians. As a result, it now often happens that foresters listen with some admiration to ministers, diplomats and planners as they engage in debates on forestry issues with profound understanding. At the same time, many national and international NGOs have become mature and respected partners with an essential role to play, both in terms of advocacy and in the implementation of development programmes.
FORESTRY AND MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF RIO
Forestry
For FAO, and especially for its Forestry Department, UNCED turned out in many ways to be a dream come true in the sense that forests were now finally given the prominence in the national and international development and political debate that the Department had been working hard to promote. Under the Tropical Forests Action Programme, as the TFAP was renamed in 1990, emphasis was focused on the important contribution of forestry to overall national, social and economic development. Leadership and coordination of national forestry action programmes was to be with central governments' planning or development authorities rather than within the forestry sector alone; the process was to be "country-led and country-driven", based on participatory planning, and was to involve forest dwellers, indigenous people, NGOs, the private sector and other interest groups. This approach was endorsed by the 10th World Forestry Congress, held in Paris in 1991.
Furthermore, by the beginning of the 1990s, FAO's Forestry Department, and the world forestry community in general, had evolved from a guiding principle of "sustained yield" focused on timber to the concept of forests contributing to "sustainable development". The international forestry community therefore felt particularly well prepared for the debates on forestry in which governments engaged themselves, starting with the first meeting of the UNCED Preparatory Commission (PrepCom 1) in Nairobi in August 1990. However, the politicians and diplomats who now took over what had so far been internal dialogue among forestry professionals soon added new dimensions.
Maintenance of the resource base and restoration of degraded areas will be crucial...
The outcome of the UNCED process included some of what the forestry community had been struggling to achieve for decades: a politically negotiated plan of action in the form of Agenda 21, in general, and Chapter 11, Combating deforestation, in particular; as well as the "Non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable develop-ment of all types of forests" (hereafter called the Forest Principles), providing the basis for a more constructive and balanced discussion by, inter alia, recognizing national sovereignty over natural resources and emphasizing attention to all types of forests.
...as will be the conservation of protected areas and wildlife habitats
Among the most significant benefits of the UNCED process is that a core of politicians and officials became heavily involved in the forest debate under the UNCED PrepCom process and are very well briefed. They are the nucleus of a stratum of extremely well-informed high-level people who now influence the political discussion of forestry issues which has, in the post-UNCED period, been further institutionalized through the CSD.
This was greatly facilitated by FAO's active participation. FAO provided basic information, drafted secretariat documents and served as an adviser. FAO remains the major intergovernmental technical forum on forestry matters (through COFO, meetings of ministers responsible for forestry), and is Task Manager for Chapter 11 and the Forest Principles.
Mountain development
Contrary to the situation in forestry, mountains did not emerge as a subject for a special chapter in Agenda 21 until well into the preparatory negotiations for UNCED. In fact, the incorporation of sustainable mountain development in Agenda 21 was mainly due to the efforts of a group calling itself Mountain Agenda consisting of the International Mountain Society, the Swiss Development Cooperation, the United Nations University, the East-West Center, the World Conservation Union, the University of Bern, the Russian Academy of Sciences and the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. Several UN agencies, including FAO, and the World Bank also provided inputs, as well as cost estimates, to the UNCED secretariat. Having been introduced fairly late in the UNCED preparatory process, development of mountain areas under Chapter 13 was approved without much debate. In September 1993, the Inter-Agency Committee on Sustainable Development (IACSD) decided to allocate to FAO task manager responsibility for Chapter 13, Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable mountain development.
A major difference between FAO's task manager role for forestry and for mountain development is that the Organization does not have a Mountain Department. In order to ensure that the full range of technical knowledge was put behind this new responsibility, an Interdepartmental Mountain Group was established with the participation of nine technical units in addition to the Forestry Department.
AREAS FOR FUTURE ACTION: FAO's ROLE
Forestry
Only limited progress has been made in addressing external factors that affect the sustainability of forests. Incentives for agriculture continue to encourage diversion of forest lands to crop cultivation or ranching. In many developing countries, rapid population growth, poverty and policies favouring alternative land uses to forestry continue to threaten the survival of forests. In developed countries, industrial pollution remains a serious threat to forests. FAO will continue to draw attention to the need for developments in other sectors to be compatible with the achievement of sustainable forest management, with particular attention to land use, agriculture, desertification, biological diversity, climate change and energy [Ed. note: for a fuller discussion of the importance of intersectoral linkages on sustainable forestry development, see article by de Montalembert].
Within the forestry sector itself, a number of issues requiring significant additional progress, and FAO's role in achieving this progress, are highlighted below. These issues are presented under the main programme areas of Agenda 21 Chapter 11, Combating deforestation: institutional development; sustainable forest management and greening activities; development based on processing, utilization and trade as well as improved valuation; and assessment and systematic observation of forests.
If concrete action is to be sustainable, the first priority is for FAO and other agencies to support national pro-grammes to develop capabilities and capacities for sound policy formulation, decision-making and management of forests. Capacity building has become a focus area for international support, and FAO has continued to be a lead agency in this, particularly through projects funded by UNDP or through trust funds of donor governments. FAO will continue to be active and will increasingly enhance support to non-governmental interest groups in parallel with hitherto dominant assistance to governments. An important area will be to assist countries in defining the roles of government and of interest groups and to help them operate in a complementary fashion, in greater accord with the comparative advantage of each partner.
Institutional development
Institutions will be more effective if all are pulling in the same direction. For this reason, FAO will promote the development of mechanisms at the global, national and other levels for dialogue and consensus building among governments, NGOs, the commercial private sector and other interest groups as an essential element in support of capacity building. Part of this can be achieved through existing statutory committees which, at the international level, FAO can consider modifying so that membership is not limited to governments as far as consensus-building functions are concerned. All-government fora will, however, still be needed for formal agreements [Ed. note: see reference to NGO participation in the summary of discussions at the 17th session of the North American Forestry Commission ].
Sustainable forest management
With regard to greening and other aspects of sustainable forest management, one of FAO's major roles is to promote the development of coherent policies and consistent development among all land-using sectors in order to achieve compatibility with forest conservation and sustainable use. This will be pursued through better interaction among the FAO committees that serve the agriculture, livestock, food security and forestry sectors. In the field, focus will be on technology transfer and development and especially on strengthening research capabilities. Improvement of seed and genetic quality of important species, dissemination of techniques for reforesting degraded areas, support to expansion of representative ecosystems and wildlife habitats, preparation of national action programmes for sustainable management are all examples of what FAO will continue to carry out within its available means [Ed. note: see article by Lanly on the search for sustainable forest management]. Given the important roles of forest dwellers, FAO will seek to build upon indigenous knowledge and practice while introducing capacities for modern science and technology.
Processing, utilization and trade
In the field of processing, utilization and trade, an important contribution of FAO would be helping to correct the imbalance in the implementation of action plans, given the post-UNCED tendency for international assistance to emphasize conservation rather than development. FAO will cooperate with other organizations in disseminating and promoting the adoption of its existing model codes of practice for environmentally sound harvesting and will develop codes for the processing and utilization of both wood and non-wood forest products. FAO will also provide support to productive industry based on forests as a source of sustainable livelihoods and prosperity, as long as such activities are compatible with sustainable forest management objectives and with theinterests of indigenous people and other communities most directly dependent on forests [Ed. note: see article by Schmincke on the role of forest industry in overall forestry development].
In view of the importance of trade for development, FAO will use all fora at its disposal to discourage unilateral restrictions to trade in forest products. It will support the efforts of the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) and other organizations closely associated with trade to promote more dialogue, particularly with environmental advocacy groups. It will also support early development and international adoption of neutral criteria and indicators for assessing whether products originate from sustainable sources [Ed. note: the challenge of trade and marketing of forest products will be the focus of Unasylva 183].
Assessment and monitoring
In the field of systematic observation of forests, FAO will institutionalize the work on global forest resources assessment (currently carried out on a ten-year cycle) and progress towards continuous assessment. Its staffing allocated to this work will continue to be increased progressively. FAO believes that strong national capacity is essential for this work and, therefore, it will continue to seek international funding for such capacity development.
Another priority related to information on forests will be to develop and disseminate methodologies for the valuation of forest goods and services so as to improve the economic underpinning for justifying public and political support for the sector.
For all four programme areas of Agenda 21 Chapter 11, the major thrust must be national action. However, FAO will continue to urge better international support which has so far been limited in terms of funding. Furthermore, such funding has been unevenly distributed and donors or their action frameworks are sometimes poorly coordinated. With greater funding stability and distribution, preparation and implementation of National Forestry Action Programmes (NFAPs) can achieve greater success. However, recognizing that international funding is limited, FAO will also encourage all countries to boost the efforts of the private sector and non-governmental groups to find innovative domestic funding mechanisms to reduce dependency on limited international resources [Ed. note: see article by Muthoo on multilateral cooperation in forestry].
Regarding the legal framework for international cooperation in matters related to forests, the situation remains as agreed at UNCED. The non-legally binding Forest Principles had, at the time of writing, not yet been reviewed and it remained unclear if common ground existed on whether they should evolve towards a legally binding instrument. FAO offered an opportunity for discussion of this matter at the 12th session of COFO and the Ministerial Meeting held in March 1995.
Sustainable mountain development
One of the main difficulties encountered so far in the area of sustainable mountain development is the lack of adequate recognition of mountain areas as something special, with common problems not shared by lowlands and therefore worthy of special attention. The fragility of mountain ecosystems and its adverse impacts on lowland populations have not been fully appreciated. This is reflected in the lack of mountain programmes of international agencies, but possibly even more so at the national level where it is still rare to find departments, programmes or legislation dealing in a comprehensive way with mountain issues. More often than not mountain areas and populations are at the "thin end" of general national programmes of education, health, infrastructure, etc. mainly because the cost per person of providing such services in remote mountain areas is above the national average and therefore seen by sectoral agencies as "uneconomical", and because mountain communities very often lack the necessary economic and political influence.
The existence of a separate chapter on mountains in Agenda 21 - Chapter 13, Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable mountain development - provides an unprecedented opportunity for a new and comprehensive focus on the special problems of mountains and the impact this will have on the related downstream areas. The chapter indirectly recognizes the "right to development" of mountain areas, and marks a clear break with the past in the sense that it is realized that mountain people, cultures and economies are values worth investing in, and that the long-term conservation of mountain areas is not a matter of downstream agricultural and industrial development followed by a gradual depopulation of the uplands.
Agenda 21 identifies two programme areas to "further elaborate the problem of fragile ecosystems with regard to all mountains of the world". These are: generating and strengthening knowledge about the ecology and sustainable development of mountain ecosystems; and promoting integrated watershed development and alternative livelihood opportunities.
Strengthening knowledge
As part of its work in strengthening knowledge about mountain ecosystems, FAO will contribute to the strengthening of a Global Information Network and Database. A small secretariat, e.g. within the United Nations University, should be established for this purpose. The network would provide the linkage between NGOs, regional mountain associations, mountain scholars and academic institutions, and should ensure the process of bringing increased understanding of mountain ecosystems, watershed processes and culture-development processes to decision-makers and the public sectors concerned. It would also promote research and monitoring activities at the grassroots level. Databases would enable the preparation of atlases that highlight the global and regional role of mountain ecosystems. Support would be given to regional assessments and surveys, regional mountain database and information systems, and to regional action guidelines, as well as to monitoring the state of the environment and development of the world's mountains.
Promoting integrated watershed development
For several decades FAO has been deeply involved in mountain watershed management in a number of countries. However, it is now time to look at two dimensions of these upland conservation and development programmes, i.e. to have national debates on the formulation of comprehensive national mountain development strategies and programmes; and to reassess ongoing and planned projects and programmes in order to ensure that they work towards fulfilment of the three major objectives identified at UNCED: to develop, by the year 2000, appropriate land-use planning and management for both arable and non-arable land in mountain rainfed watershed areas to prevent soil erosion, increase biomass production and maintain the ecological balance; to promote income-generating activities and to improve infrastructure and social services, in particular to protect the livelihoods of local communities and indigenous people; and to develop technical and institutional arrangements for affected countries to mitigate the effects of natural disasters through hazard-prevention measures, risk zoning, early-warning systems, evacuation plans and emergency supplies.
FAO will assist governments and organizations concerned in generating national capacity for sustainable mountain development, including the formulation of national mountain action plans and investment programmes, the participation of representatives of mountain communities in national development planning and the conservation and development of mountain-specific technologies and cultures.
The empowerment, equity and equality of mountain women should receive priority attention together with improved services related to women-specific needs, reproductive health and nutrition services; education aimed at closing existing literacy gaps between boys and girls, and between men and women; and ensuring women's access to participation in development and technology transfer programmes. The role of children and youth in sustainable mountain development should also be clearly recognized. Not only will they inherit the responsibility of looking after the environment in the future, but they can also be active supporters of today's endeavours. Their interests can best be served by employing a participatory approach that involves them in the whole process of developing programmes and action plans.
Likewise, in many regions sustainable mountain development must start by a change of attitude towards and treatment of indigenous people, recognizing their right to the land, their knowledge about the special living conditions and natural resource management in the mountains, and their need for protection from exploitation by extractive industries, drug dealers, tourist operators, guerilla movements, etc.
A fresh and detailed assessment must be made of the overall flow of resources and services to and from mountain areas, including water, forest and range products, labour and government services. New or revised water tariffs, forest and mining royalties, grazing rights and leases, marketing of medicinal herbs and other non-wood forest products, fees for access to national parks, licences for tourism operations are all possible income earners for mountain communities. This income would, in turn, allow these communities to invest in, and not receive as government hand-outs, such necessities as housing, communication, roads, education and nutrition. Of special interest to financing mountain development is the increasing recognition of the economic value of water, the relationship with Agenda 21 Chapter 18, Protection of the quality and supply of freshwater resources: application of integrated approaches to the development, management and use of water resources, and with the World Bank Water Resources Management Policy Paper.
BOX: UNCED follow-up
CONCLUSIONS
UNCED was a milestone event for forests: first, having previously been taken for granted and obscure, forests received more attention at UNCED than many other sectors. Many interest groups are now clamouring to participate in forest conservation and development. Second, while acknowledging global roles for forests, governments underlined national sovereignty over them; as a corollary, governments accepted national responsibility for ensuring their sustainable forest management. Third, governments agreed to ensure a balance between conservation and development, including the maintenance of opportunities for sustainable livelihoods from commercialization through the trade of forest products. Fourth, the multisectoral context of forest management has come to the fore. Finally, UNCED gave great prominence to partnership among interest groups within countries as well as between nations, hence it called for enhancement of international cooperation. FAO has played a major role in generating the ideas reflected in UNCED and will continue to facilitate their realization, cooperating closely with other intergovernmental organizations and interest groups.
In the field of sustainable mountain development, some of the challenges facing forests also apply. Moreover, it is essential to ensure that the special needs of mountains are brought to the attention of decision-makers so that these ecosystems and the people who actually live in them are given due attention, including a share in the returns gained from mountain-derived resources such as water. Institutions which are active in mountain regions or which depend on them need to recognize their respon-sibility to these regions. This will require financial mechanisms for mountain development, enhancing the status and the participation of women and indigenous people, improving access to relevant education for mountain people and diversifying and strengthening the mountain economy.
Both for forests and for mountain areas, a combination of national action and international support and cooperation is needed to follow up UNCED agreements effectively; possible FAO action has been presented above. All action, whether in the form of policies, strategies, action programmes, agreements or conventions (voluntary or legally binding), will be judged on its ability to help achieve the sustainable management of forests or mountain zones. Fundamental to success will be the development of adequate national capacities in all countries; this should therefore be a focus of attention.
