An interview with René Fontaine, a founder member of the FAO Division of Forestry and Forest Products.
René Fontaine joined FAO in 1946 as Forestry Officer, European Regional Office, and participated in the creation of the Division of Forestry and Forest Products. He became Chief of the Forest Policy Branch in 1962, and Director of the Forest Resources Division in 1970 when Forestry was upgraded to departmental status. Mr Fontaine retired from FAO in 1974. This interview was conducted in March 1995 by Oscar Fugalli, who served as FAO Forestry Officer from 1951 to 1982.
Unasylva. When we first met, more than 40 years ago, FAO was still a child and we were adults. Now FAO is 50 years old and we have grown old. You are now a unique "historical memory" with respect to international forestry activities of the past. Would you recall, for the benefit of the readers of Unasylva, something about the international forestry context on to which FAO's Forestry Division was grafted in the mid-1940s, and the salient events of that time?
Fontaine. I think we first have to go back to the international forestry activities that took place during the period between the First and Second World Wars and immediately after the hostilities.
The International Institute of Agriculture, in Rome, sponsored two world forestry congresses, the first in Rome itself in 1926, and the second in Budapest in 1936. These aroused considerable interest and what was discussed is still relevant today. Then, a few years before the outbreak of the Second World War, and again within the framework of the International Institute of Agriculture, the Centre international de sylviculture (the International Forestry Centre) was established in Berlin, with a predominantly European membership.
This centre was very active, despite the extremely difficult situation at the time. It started the forestry review Intersylva; it amassed a forestry library of 35 000 volumes from a variety of sources, including historical archives such as the Weimar collection; and it organized a series of meetings on issues such as the need for international studies on the trends and prospects of global timber production and consumption.
At the same time, the International Timber Committee in Brussels was compiling and publishing international statistics on forest products.
When the war ended, an emergency European economic commission was established in London to take over from the Allies in the distribution of available raw materials on as fair a basis as possible. One of the first things this commission did was to set up a timber committee whose responsibilities were later taken up, in 1948, by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE), based in the Palais des Nations in Geneva.
An international meeting, held in Rome in July 1946, dissolved both the International Institute of Agriculture and the Centre international de sylviculture, and transferred their respective assets and functions to FAO which, in turn, set up a regional office in 1948 in the Palais des Nations, in Geneva, to work closely with UN/ECE.
With regard, more specifically, to your question on the establishment of a Forestry Division in FAO, one should remember that people's priorities at the end of the Second World War were more to do with reuniting families, rebuilding and securing food than setting up a division of this kind. Nevertheless, there were some political figures and many civil servants and forest experts who were anxious to resume international cooperation in forestry and find new structures to replace those that had been destroyed by the war.
All this eventually led to the inclusion of the forest and primary forest products in the Constitution of FAO signed in Quebec in October 1945, although forestry was not on the agenda of the UN Conference on Food and Agriculture (Hot Springs, May to June 1943) during which the first FAO seed was sown.
The crucial importance of forests to agriculture and the role of forest products in general living standards were in fact recognized as the cornerstones of the new structure that was being put together.
René Fontaine in a group photo of early members of the FAO Forestry Division
Unasylva. Would you describe briefly some of the first major tasks that the Division of Forestry and Forest Products set for itself and some of the early achievements?
Fontaine. I was expecting this question and, therefore, I have refreshed my memory by glancing through some of the very early papers in the life of forestry in FAO. I believe there is no better way to describe the early forestry tasks of FAO than to quote briefly from the preface of the very first forestry paper issued by the Forestry Division, which then consisted of seven officers. The paper was entitled Forestry and forest products: world situation 1937-1946, and the preface was signed by Sir John Boyd Orr, the first Director-General of FAO:
"... studies of certain critical situations have been made in order to formulate an emergency programme. One such study is the result of war's impact on forests, particularly in Europe.... But some of the indirect effects of war have conspired to aggravate situations already critical and now threatening to become worse. First among these indirect effects is overcutting....
"Another indirect effect of the war was the interruption to reforestation and improvement operations in the forests due to manpower shortages. Skilled loggers joined the armed forces and were replaced by untrained men or not replaced at all. Even worse has been the loss of technical forest personnel. The Division of Forestry and Forest Products is now seeking to assemble information regarding the available supply of trained foresters and the estimated numbers needed....
"... the condition of the world's forests gives little cause for comfort. Of the 4 000 million hectares of forest soil, only 300 million receive proper management, 1 000 million are being cut with little or no regard to their continued productivity, and 500 million have been so denuded that today they are not only valueless themselves but a source of danger to agriculture....
"There are other tasks. The afforestation of treeless expanses in China, southeastern Asia, the Near and Middle East.... Yet here forest restoration is the first step to stable agriculture and to a decent nutrition level for over 1 000 million people.... The remedy is clear. The forests must be managed as perpetually renewable crops...."
Unasylva. Except for the impact of the war, I feel these words could have been written today. I am struck particularly by the last few words - "forests must be managed as perpetually renewable crops". To me it seems a lot like "sustainable forest management". But, to continue, would you say something about FAO's first forestry achievements?
Fontaine. On the international level, FAO immediately introduced a forestry review,Unasylva, along the lines of Intersylva which I mentioned earlier. FAO initiated a series of studies on forests and forest products and on basic forestry issues, produced a world forest inventory in 1947 and began to publish a series of statistics on the production and trade of forest products.
One of the first achievements of FAO's Forestry Division was the creation of Unasylva
On the regional level, FAO convened the International Timber Conference in 1947 in Mariánské Lázne, Czechoslovakia, which gave rise to the Organization's European Forestry Commission and the Timber Committee of the UN-ECE. The Forestry Division was also involved in setting up regional offices, particularly that for the Near East which was located in Cairo under the influence of the Arab League. A regional office was also established in Rio de Janeiro because of the importance of the Amazon rain forest, but this was subsequently moved to Santiago, Chile, with an annex in Rio de Janeiro.
The early responsibilities of FAO and its Forestry Division were somewhat affected by the transfer of the Organization's headquarters from Washington, DC to Rome, in 1951.
I think I may complete the answer to your question by saying that, under the inspiration of Marcel Leloup, the first Director of FAO's Forestry Division, the Division pioneered within FAO the process of decentralization which, I understand, is now a major feature in the current restructuring of the Organization.
Unasylva. You have just mentioned, René, the establishment of the European Forestry Commission. Gradually, regional forestry commissions spread to cover the whole world. In addition, other statutory bodies were formed, and you "invented" at least three of them: the International Poplar Commission, the International Chestnut Commission and the Working Party on Cork Oak. At the time the word "agroforestry" had not yet been coined, but these bodies certainly were forward-looking in their focus on multiple use of forests and trees and their integration into farming systems. Can you explain why one is still going strong and the other two have faded away?
Fontaine. Yes, we were practising agroforestry without knowing the expression. We used slightly different terms, such as agro-silvopastoral systems, catch or snatch cropping, etc. As for your question, there is more than one explanation. First of all, the number of member countries interested in participating: more than 30 for poplar, in the developed as well as in the developing world; only a few for chestnut and still fewer for cork oak. Then the nature of the product: the association with agricultural crops and grazing is only a marginal component of the poplar cultivation system, because the multipurpose wood is by far the major product. And wood is still in demand.
Also important was the fortunate encounter of three leading poplar experts who energized the Commission from the very start: Prof. Guinier, Member of the Academy of Sciences in Paris; Prof. Houtzagers of the University of Wageningen in the Netherlands; and Dr Piccarolo, Director of the Italian Institute of Poplar Cultivation in Casale Monferrato (Cartiere Burgo).
Poplar cultivation raises a number of issues, particularly the role of trees outside the forest context. The chestnut is a case in point and is now in serious decline after having flourished in France, Italy and Spain. I have noticed that the chestnut groves in my own region of Haute-Savoie are also disappearing. There are a number of reasons for this, but an obvious one is that, whereas the chestnut tree provided the mountain people with food for the winter 30 to 40 years ago, this is no longer the case as skiing and all that goes with it have totally changed their way of life.
As for the cork oak, it was only really central to a small working party under the "Silva Mediterranea" Committee on Mediterranean Forestry Questions. This mainly involved Portugal, France, Spain and Italy, although it was chaired by a world authority on cork oak, Prof. Viera-Natividade of Portugal. I don't know what the current state of the market is for cork, but clearly there is no point in keeping on a working party if the producer countries are no longer interested. It hasn't existed for a long time, but I believe Silva Mediterranea still has a research network on the subject.
Unasylva. One major line of action in the early years of FAO's Forestry Division was the production of regional studies on timber trends and prospects. The leading force behind these studies was the Deputy Director of the Forestry Division, Egon Glesinger, but you were directly involved. What was the objective of these studies and how did they evolve over time? Did they turn out to be the useful tool they were intended to be?
Fontaine. I have already mentioned, in answer to your first question, that the Centre international de sylviculture had expressed an interest in such studies. For my part, I found them to be indispensable during my first 20 years with FAO until, in fact, the social role of forests began to emerge in complement to those of producing timber and protecting forest soils. There is no doubt that, depending on circumstances, future studies will have to concentrate far more on the role of forests with regard to recreation and leisure and on how they affect climate - all this, of course, within the general framework of land-use planning.
Unasylva. About midway through your nearly 30 years of service with FAO, a major change took place in the nature of the Organization; the total number of FAO Member Nations was dramatically increased by many newly independent developing nations. How did this affect the work of the Forestry Division? Were the staff - who had devoted a large part of their efforts thus far to forest conservation and development, first in the developed countries and then in the Mediterranean region - prepared to deal with the new challenges of tropical forestry?
Fontaine. Obviously, with decolonization in the 1960s a number of countries emerged with different interests from those of the developed world. They were less interested in medium- and long-term policies than in immediate on-the-spot assistance for their education, research and development concerns.
Various bilateral aid arrangements were made with the richer countries and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) was set up to take over from the more modest Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance (EPTA), which had been in operation since the early 1950s. Through the major UN agencies, UNDP helped to formulate and initiate projects in developing countries that could be implemented over a span of several years.
These field programmes had in fact become so important by the early 1970s that the then Deputy Director-General of FAO, Mr Wells, felt obliged to point out that for every million dollars that FAO was spending under its Regular Programme, it was spending $10 million on implementing technical assistance activities funded by UNDP.
On a personal level, first as Service Chief and then as Director, I noticed that my staff were dedicating 70 percent of their time to field operations at the expense, of course, of more conceptual studies on forest policy and institution needs. On the other hand, these field activities kept us in touch with problems on the ground and with forest workers. I should also say that, precisely because of decolonization, FAO was able to recruit a lot of expatriate technical experts with a wealth of experience of working in the tropics.
Unasylva. When you left the Organization, FAO and the International Union of Forestry Research Organizations were practically the only international institutions with important mandates in forestry, with the World Conservation Union and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization collaborating. Since then, many bodies and organizations have been created dealing with international forestry - including the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Tropical Timber Organization, the International Center for Research in Agroforestry and the Centre for International Forestry Research, as well as many international NGOs with significant programmes in forestry. And more are in the making. How do you perceive this proliferation?
Fontaine. You emphasize the importance of the new intergovernmental organizations that also touch on forestry and other non-governmental organizations with important forestry programmes. I have no comments regarding the former as I have been on the sidelines for the last 20 years.
However, I was impressed to read that more than 2 000 NGO observers attended the Rio Summit (UNCED). This is a healthy sign to the extent that these organizations enable the experts and the various sectors of society to participate in international meetings. However, my own experience tells me that many NGOs were indirectly funded by governments who, in the final analysis, virtually controlled what they did. This is something that needs to be looked into.
Unasylva. We have already touched upon the environmental wave, but its impact on forestry is so great that it is worth pursuing the matter still further. In the late 1960s, concern for the environment swept the globe, but more than once I have tried in vain to find a reference to the environmental concern in the proceedings of the Sixth World Forestry Congress (Madrid, 1966). Are foresters simply not very foresighted, or is it rather that environmental concerns were always such an intrinsic part of forestry that the matter did not seem worthy of consideration? You certainly were the driving force within FAO in terms of assuring the Forestry Division its appropriate role in environmental matters - I am referring to the preparations for the 1972 Stockholm Conference. Would you talk a bit about that, and perhaps relate it to recent events, including UNCED in Rio de Janeiro in 1992?
Fontaine. After the Second World War, foresters resumed their tasks in descending order of priority. The Third World Forestry Congress, held in Helsinki in 1949, focused on the problems of quantity and quality; in other words, on the forest as a source of raw materials (particularly timber and industrial wood).
The problem of soil conservation re-emerged five years later at the Fourth World Forestry Congress in Dehra Dun, where the accent was placed on rational land use. Finally, at the World Congress held in Seattle in 1960, multiple forest use dominated proceedings, and the environment and recreation emerged as issues for the first time. Clearly, the environmental issues originated primarily from industrial development and urban population growth, and the latest figures indicate an urban population now accounting for 80 to 85 percent of total population.
Whatever the case, what brought environmental problems strongly to light for me was the Unesco Conference on Man and the Biosphere in Paris in 1968, for which I was seconded to Unesco to help with the preparations. In this connection, the Director-General of Unesco publicly thanked FAO for its contribution to the conference at a ceremony held to mark its twenty-fifth anniversary.
Finally, I should mention the first UN Conference on the Human Environment, held in Stockholm in 1972, which spawned the United Nations Environment Programme. As with UNDP, this programme opened the way for local or regional actions at the country level to study and improve the environment. I had the privilege of attending this conference as a representative of FAO together with Mr Saouma (then with the Land and Water Division) and Mr Ruivo from the Fisheries Department. The preparation of the conference and its follow-up helped to establish or foster an environmental dimension throughout FAO's departments and divisions.
Unasylva. Are there are any additional thoughts you would want to share with the readers of Unasylva?
Fontaine. I should like to finish by mentioning some of the activities which, in all modesty, gave me considerable satisfaction. First, within the Forestry Division, I was able to work on wildlife and national parks in the 1960s, with help from leading experts and thanks to the interest I managed to stir up at the University of Laval in Quebec, which has several top-level experts in this field.
The Unesco Conference on Man and the Biosphere in 1968 helped me inspire environment-oriented activities in several FAO divisions that blended nicely with those we were pursuing in the Forestry Division.
Our FAO/ECE office in the Palais des Nations, in Geneva, brought us closer to the International Labour Organisation and opened the way for useful research into rain forest ergonomics. While the rain forest has high physical productivity, it is difficult to harvest because labour productivity is half that of Europe's forest workers.
Finally, after I left Rome I worked as an FAO consultant helping with the Unesco publication on current understanding of tropical rain forest ecosystems. This important work has of course been criticized by some, but I see it as a useful point of departure for all those who want to come to grips with the immense complexities of tropical rain forests. I, for one, learned a lot about tropical rain forest ecosystems, which I sometimes compare to urban ecosystems.
Unasylva. Thank you very much, cher René, for this very interesting view of the early work of FAO in forestry and for the patience with which you have replied to our questions.
