At the United Nations Conference for Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, the countries of the world agreed on the importance of forests, but as preparations for stocktaking on the achievements of the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 begin (with the aim of organizing a "Rio+10" conference), it is apparent that reaching global consensus on forestry issues has not been simple. One of the few topics on which there has been agreement is the need for comprehensive forest policy frameworks as the basis for sectoral development. At the fourth session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) in 1997, consensus was reached on the definition of national forest programmes (nfps) as the generic concept for a wide range of approaches to sustainable forest management.
The definition includes a number of principles. Nfps should be:
Some of the principles are more action-oriented, emphasizing that nfps should be :
Although there has been progress in developing and implementing nfps since UNCED, many countries are having difficulty translating these intentions into action, particularly - but not only - developing countries and countries with economies in transition, which lack sufficient resources and effective institutions. A survey of experience in the implementation of nfps in 145 countries, carried out by FAO in 1998-1999, identified the following constraints:
The main problems are thus related to the need to strengthen national institutions, rather than to a lack of funds or of trained staff alone. Recognizing this, countries are now emphasizing the need to work in partnerships, exchanging information and experience and sharing knowledge. The national forest programme approach - implemented at the national level, but supported and facilitated by international networking - represents, therefore, one of the methods with highest potential for putting the principles of sustainable forest management into effect.
This edition of Unasylva, while not organized around a specific theme, reflects several issues implicit in and relevant to the nfp approach.
M.J. Spilsbury and D. Kaimowitz examine the influence of research and publications on conventional wisdom and policies affecting forests, based on an e-mail survey in which forest policy experts identified the literature they found most influential. In another article concerning forestry publications, T.K. Rudel and co-authors present the findings of an inventory of the literature on tropical deforestation and analyse the patterns of geographical distribution and causation reflected in the literature.
Many countries in eastern and southern Africa have recently revised their national forest policies and forest laws. L. Alden Wily examines trends in the new laws regarding provision for the involvement of forest communities in the management and ownership of forests.
C. Palmberg-Lerche and S. Hald describe international and regional activities in support of national efforts to ensure conservation and sustainable use of forest genetic resources, while F. Castañeda summarizes international processes for the development and global harmonization of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management.
Two articles in this issue deal with the subject of mangroves in India. R. Kumar discusses the various measures taken by the Government of India for the conservation and management of mangroves, particularly in Goa and the Middle Andaman Islands, while L. Hein looks at how conversion of land to shrimp farming has resulted in the degradation of mangroves along India's East Coast.
Finally, an article by M. Nieuwenhuis and N. O'Connor examines the challenges and opportunities for small-scale tree nurseries in the East African highlands, based on a survey carried out in the Murang'a District of Kenya.
