At its 43rd Session, the Committee made a number of recommendations to FAO, which are listed below.
1. Mutual recognition (par. 24 of proceedings)
Noting that mutual recognition remains an important industry need and that FAO's role over the past 12 months has aimed at achieving a greater degree of comparability and equivalence between systems, the Committee urged FAO to strengthen its role as a facilitator of discussions on mutual recognition. Furthermore, it was suggested that FAO support the development of national sustainable forest management (SFM) certification schemes in countries where they do not currently exist. These national initiatives should be developed in the context of the International Forest Industry Roundtable (IFIR) proposed criteria and indicators for comparability and equivalence of certification schemes.
Implementation
• FAO is planning a meeting with the CEOs of the major certification initiatives to meet for two days under `Chatham House Rules' to discuss the way ahead for certification;
• FAO actively participated in various meetings on the phased approach in Asia and Africa;
• National SFM certification schemes in individual countries are supported through FAO's National Forestry Programme. However, since these schemes are country-driven, FAO requires a request for assistance from the country before it can take any action.
2. Climate change (par. 25 of proceedings)
The Committee asked FAO to play an active role in the IPCC technical work on definitions, measurements and reporting for issues such as carbon sequestration, sinks and Clean Development Mechanisms (CDMs). It urged FAO to include forest industry expertise in this technical development.
Implementation
• The Second Expert Meeting on Harmonizing Forest-related Definitions for Use by Various Stakeholders was held at FAO Headquarters from 11-13 September 2002. The meeting was part of a process driven by FAO, but jointly conducted with IPCC, IUFRO, CIFOR and UNEP. It was attended by 54 participants from different countries and organizations, including individuals from the private sector. The recommendations were published in five languages and presented to ITTO, COP8 UNFF and COFO in March 2003. COFO commended FAO on its work on definitions and recommended that it be continued and accelerated;
• FAO's Senior Officer on Forestry and Climate Change is one of the lead authors for the IPCC Report on Good Practice Guidance;
• FAO gives input to IPCC Task II: forest degradation;
• FAO is involved in the SBSTA-led process on definitions under Article12;
• Within the framework of its FAO-Netherlands Partnership Project, FAO has been supporting capacity building on forestry and CDM for the Central American Forestry Sector;
• A training programme on forestry and climate change for Central America was developed and 300 persons have been trained at capacity building workshops (one regional and 17 national);
• Jointly with UNEP and IUCN, FAO has started a capacity building project on forestry and climate change in South America and Africa. Within the context of that project, three workshops have been held:
1. Latin American Forum on Forests and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), October 2002 in Quito;
2. Technical Workshop on Forests and CDM in Africa, January 2003 in Nairobi;
3. Latin American Expert Meeting on CDM Modalities for Afforestation and Reforestation, February 2003 in Montevideo.
The purpose of the workshops was to inform climate change negotiators from Latin American and African countries about the implications, their decisions would have for the forestry sector. In particular they were informed of the impacts of the different options on modalities (additionality, baseline, non-permanence, leakage) they hade to decide upon for afforestation and reforestation projects under the CDM of the Kyoto Protocol.
• FAO participated in the Latin American Forum on Forests and CDM, an informal forum held in Quito, Ecuador, 2-4 October 2002. Sixty-five experts from 13 Latin American countries participated, representing governments, IGOs, NGOs, and the private sector. A number of participants were also their countries' representatives in the climate change negotiation process. The objective of the meeting was to discuss Latin American forest projects in the CDM, with a view to promoting sustainable development in developing countries;
• FAO has prepared the following publications on forestry and climate change issues:
• CDM Reader;
• CLIM-FO Electronic Newsletter distributed to over 1200 subscribers;
• Forestry & Climate Change in Africa (English, French);
• Shared research agenda for LULUCF and CDM;
· Soil carbon sequestration for improved land management;
• CD-Rom FAO and Climate Change;
• Climate chapter in SOFO;
· Climate change and the forestry sector: Possible legislative responses for national and sub national governments;
• Proceedings of two definitions meetings (in five languages);
• Draft reports on the mitigation potential at the national and regional level in Central America;
• Draft reports on the institutional and legal framework on forestry and climate change in Central America;
• PBCC electronic bulleting - forestry and climate change in Central America;
• Various papers (i.e. Unasylva, WFC, Kotka).
The Committee asked FAO to support implementation of the International Calculation Tools for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Monitoring, especially in developing countries.
• FAO has reviewed and commented on the International Calculation Tools for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Monitoring (see Annex).
3. Sustainable development (par. 26 of proceedings)
As the UN Organization responsible for forestry, and with particular concern for sustainable development, FAO was asked to highlight the key and positive role of forestry in poverty alleviation and sustainable development, particularly in rural areas.
Implementation
• After the informal meeting of experts organized by FAO in January 2002, the Forestry Department recruited a consultant to review FAO's strengths and weaknesses and identify key steps for the Forestry Department's future role regarding poverty alleviation, taking into consideration the ongoing activities in other agencies;
• "Forests, Poverty and Food Security" has become one of FAO's five key thrust areas (others are "Forestry and Climate Change", "Forests and Water", "Governance", "Forests and Biodiversity");
• COFO encouraged FAO to increase its work on the nexus "Forests, Poverty Alleviation and Food Security".
It was recommended that FAO should work with industry experts to communicate the results of the FAO report on the environmental advantages of wood products compared to competing materials derived from non-renewable raw materials.
• FAO supported and actively participated in the Seminar on Strategies for the Sound Use of Wood, which was held in Romania in March 2003.
4. World Forestry Congress (par. 27 of proceedings)
ICFPA and FAO should cooperate to arrange an exhibit at the XII World Forestry Congress (WFC) on best practices in sustainable forestry, showing examples of what industry, people and community have done for forestry.
Implementation:
• FAO is awaiting feedback from ICFPA.
5. Recommendations related to FAO's role and the newly formed International Council of Forest and Paper Associations (ICFPA) (par. 38 of proceedings)
It was recommended that FAO support the accreditation of ICFPA to UN Agencies and endorse ICFPA's declaration on illegal logging and increase efforts to combat illegal activities and assist countries to improve sustainable forestry management standards and practices. In addition, it was recommended that FAO assist ICFPA to participate in:
• the World Summit on Sustainable Development;
• the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) network;
• the forthcoming UNFF-inter-sessional meeting in New Zealand to review the role of planted forests in sustainable forestry management ;
• the XII World Forestry Congress, cooperating with industry in using this forum to celebrate progress and recognize best practices applied by industry, showing examples of what industry, people and community have done for forestry.
Implementation
• ICFPA has now been officially granted liaison status with FAO. This will allow ICFPA to be represented as an observer at FAO meetings on matters of mutual concern, allow FAO to be invited to ICFPA meetings that may be of interest to FAO, and allow the two organizations to develop further cooperation through informal consultations and contacts. Mr Wulf Killmann, Director, Forest Products and Economics Division, will act as focal point for cooperation with ICFPA. Continued and extended cooperation with ICFPA is anticipated.
• FAO has endorsed ICFPA's declaration on illegal logging.
• With regard to the specific meetings mentioned above:
• ICFPA might with to subscribe to the CPF network by completing the application available on the FAO Forestry Department website;
• The inter-sessional meeting in New Zealand was an open meeting;
• FAO is awaiting further communication from ICFPA regarding a joint exhibition or other activity at the WFC.
6. Statistics on recovered paper (par. 41 of proceedings)
It was recommended that work on standardization of classification and definitions start on a few selected paper grades.
Implementation
• Mr Szikla (with support from ICFPA) accepted to act as coordinator for this work. Based on the results of this initial work, the process could be extended to other grades. Outlook studies for raw materials, including pulp and recovered paper, could follow the same pattern.
7. Other
The "Expert Consultation on Trade and Sustainable Forest Management - Impacts and Interactions" was held at the FAO from 3 to 5 February 2003. The key issues were: policies in relationship to SFM; patterns of trade and forest products and the changing patterns of that trade; government issues, particularly at the local level, agricultural and land usage.
The meeting contributed to the discussion on trade and environment, forest products and services. A second meeting will be held in June/July 2003, aimed at trade negotiators.
ANNEX
Calculation tools for estimating greenhouse gas emissions from pulp and paper mills
Wulf Killmann, Chairperson
Interdepartmental Working Group on Climate Change, FAO
We compliment the International Council of Forest and Paper Associations (ICFPA) for having undertaken this work voluntarily, pro-actively and timely, and for having linked it to, and made it compatible with, the protocols and guidelines established by such respected organizations as the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Pew Centre for Global Climate Change.
General comments
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is presently working on Good Practice Guidance (GPG) for the land-use and forestry sector, as mandated by the seventh Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC. The goal of the GPG is to assist countries in producing inventories on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are accurate, transparent, documented, consistent over time, complete, comparable, subject to quality control, efficient in the use of resources available to inventory agencies, assessed for uncertainties and with uncertainties gradually reduced as better information becomes available.
There are striking similarities between UNFCCC's official GPG guidelines for Parties and ICFPA's work on creating tools for the calculation of GHG emissions for its member industries. It is therefore important that the calculation tools and the reports produced with their support are rated by the same criteria that apply to the GPG and national GHG inventories.
Links to national communications and annual GHG inventories
By applying these calculation tools, ICFPA members will optimally meet the requirements of efficient use of resources available to firms and industries, comparability of reporting, completeness of inventories, and, with periodic updates of the tools, consistent reporting over time. Furthermore, we find the instructions for thorough documentation, completeness and transparency impressive and likely to help ICFPA's members carry out these guidelines not only in letter, but also in spirit.
It may by some be seen critically that the industry itself decide on the operational and organizational boundaries for the emission inventory, emission factors which may be site-specific, default values, or so-called insignificant emissions. However, the GPG allows Parties to the UNFCCC also some leeway, and countries may decide to use different tiers with increasing precision and data requirements.
Obviously, when producing emission inventories with ICFPA's calculation tools, their accuracy and completion on the one hand, and their credibility and acceptance on the other, will depend very much on the operational and organizational boundaries set by the reporting company for the emission inventory.
We have the following comments for your consideration:
The `key source' concept of the GPG, requiring more precise measurement or inclusion of sources significant in absolute terms, may perhaps be incorporated into the calculation tools.
The fleet of transport vehicles and harvesting equipment operated by mills are largely company-controlled, if not company-owned, and cause emissions. `Outsourcing' is an accepted practice, but since boundaries have to be drawn somewhere, these emissions could possibly be included in indirect emissions, or should at least be reported for reasons of transparency, comparability and credibility. Otherwise, the degree of outsourcing might affect overall reported emissions, while actual emissions do not change. In this context, we appreciate that your guidelines encourage companies "to include within the operational boundaries outsourced core operations".
Biofuels, particularly wood fuels, are carbon neutral only if they originate from sustainable forest management, or at least from sustainable yield operations. Reports should reflect this consideration.
The calculation tools deal with emission inventories only. We suggest that you also highlight (perhaps in a complementary context) the potential carbon sink in pulp and paper products, which may partially offset emissions, and fossil fuels substituted by biofuels from sustainable sources.