|
|
Intergovernmental Panel/Forum on Forests
Practitioner´s
guide to the Implementation of the prepared by the Six-Country Initiative in
Support of the
Second Revised Edition May 1999 Table of Contents: List of Abbreviations ANNEXES C&I Criteria and indicators (for
sustainable forest management) The Proposals for Action elaborated under the UN Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) represent significant progress and consensus on a wide range of for-est- related issues. The endorsement of the IPF Proposals for Action (IPF Proposals) by UNGASS in June 1997 marks an important step towards the enhancement of sustainable forest management world-wide, built upon the UNCED decisions of 1992. Governments and in-ternational organizations face a major challenge by putting the IPF Proposals into practice at national and international levels. This process offers the opportunity to move a step forward towards a holistic and compre-hensive approach to sustainable forest management. In order to maintain the momentum and to support efforts, the UN Ad-Hoc Intergovernmental Forum of Forests (IFF), the successor of the IPF, is mandated to promote and facilitate the implementation of the IPF Proposals and to monitor achievements in this regard. Given the complexity and structural particularities of the IPF Proposals, guidance to support their implementa-tion appears to be necessary. As an important tool to facilitate theimplementation process, in particular at the national level, this Practitioner's Guide was prepared aiming at a better understanding of the IPF Proposals, their potential and possible implications. The Guide may serve as an important means to promote the assess-ment of the IPF Proposals and to stimulate the contin-ued discussion on the current global consensus towards sustainable management of all types of forests. The Guide would be helpful to those who are directly con-cerned with the implementation of the IPF Proposals, i.e. national institutions and international organizations. The Guide is the product of a process which started in late 1997, when the Governments of Finland, Germany, Honduras, Indonesia, Uganda, and the Unit-ed Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in cooperation with the IFF Secretariat, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) joined in an initia-tive entitled "Putting the IPF Proposals for Action into Practice". The so-called Six-Country Initiative aimed to enhance the implementation of the IPF Proposals at na-tional level and to develop guidance from country expe-riences for consideration by the IFF and governments. The elaboration of the Guide was based on the assump-tion that a more "readable", user-friendly and annotat-ed version of the IPF Proposals was necessary. The purpose of the Guide was to help identify the "place" and likely "addressees" of the IPF Proposals within the na-tional institutional setting, namely within the national forest programmes as the adequate framework for forest-related action at the country level. During its second session in August/September 1998, the IFF in its preliminary conclusions acknowledged the Practitioner's Guide of the Initiative as a useful tool for the implementation process of the IPF Proposals. The IFF recommended to update the first edition of the Guide based on the experiences made so far. Subse-quently, a broad consultation process was launched to collect views on a revision of the Guide and the Guide was discussed in various fora. As a result of this process, the Guide was revised based on the comments received and incorporating the useful work of Australia on summarizing the IPF Proposals and simplifying their wording. The present version of the Guide is a product of a process involving numerous experts of countries from all regions as well as from international organizations, NGOs and the private sector. The Guide is meant to be a "living document", which needs to be modified and updated according to needs of the practitioners and the results of the international forest dialogue. The process to com-plement and supplement the UNCED decisions as spelt out in the mandates of the IPF and IFF will be contin-ued in view of a holistic and comprehensive approach to sustainable forest management world-wide. The Guide needs to reflect these developments in its future editions considering the results of the existing legally binding instruments like FCCC, CBD as well as other forest-related programmes and initiatives. The present, revised, Practitioners Guide represents one of the results of this extraordinary North-South partner-ship involving three developing and three industrialized countries undertaking similar action within their respective national boundaries to assess the relevance of the IPF’s proposals for action at the national level. One of the results of this experience, the Practitioners Guide, is now available for wider distribution and application by other countries as appropriate. The IFF Secretariat is grateful for the initiative under-taken by the six countries in support of the IPF/IFF process, and wishes to encourage the use of the Practi-tioners Guide in the assessment of the relevance and ap-plication of the IPF’s proposals for action at the national level. It is my hope that the Guide will remain a "living document" which will be used and further enhanced as experiences are gained in other countries and in a variety of social and economic situations. Jagmohan S. Maini 1. Origin and History of the IPF Proposals The formulation of the IPF Proposals in the final report of the UN Ad hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) was based on the mandate of the IPF to promote multidisciplinary action (......) consistent with the Forest Principles and Agenda 21, Chapter 11. The proposals are meant to complement, supplement and elaborate upon the Forest Principles and Agenda 21 (para 7d of the IPF Final Report). The IPF Proposals are the result of inter-governmental negotiations under the IPF and therefore represent negotiated text agreed upon by the interna-tional community. The Proposals were subsequently endorsed by UNGASS in June 1997. Taking into consideration the importance of the IPF Proposals for the international community, the successor to the IPF, the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) included under Category I.a of its Programme of Work the task to promote, facilitate and monitor the implementation of the IPF Proposals. Subsequently, several countries, groups of countries and international organisations launched activities aimed at implementa-tion of the IPF Proposals. These included national processes in Australia, Canada, Denmark, and the Netherlands, as well as the Six-Country Initiative of Finland, Germany, Honduras, Indonesia, Uganda and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in co-operation with FAO and UNDP. Additional activities at international and regional levels have also taken place, including the launching of the Interagency Partnership on Forests: Implementation of the IPF Proposals by the Interagency Task Force on Forests (ITFF), and FAO regional meetings in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The IFF in its second session (Aug./Sept.1998) welcomed the implementation activities of governments and organisations and underlined the need for sustained efforts in implementing the IPF Proposals. Countries were urged to undertake a systematic assessment of the IPF Proposals in the context of their national forest programmes/national policy frameworks in a co-ordinated manner and with the participation of all interested parties. 2. Nature and Contents of the IPF Proposals Indisputably, the IPF Proposals represent significant progress and consensus on a wide range of forest issues. Building upon the Forest Principles, the IPF Proposals are the only guidelines of the so-called international forest regime which approach forest issues in a holistic and comprehensive way, as outlined in the relevant UNCED decisions. Like the Forest Principles and Agenda 21, the IPF Proposals - though they are negoti-ated and agreed text - are of a non-legally binding nature. However, participants in the IPF/IFF process acknowledge that they are under political obligation to give effect to the IPF Proposals. Therefore, implement-ing the IPF Proposals is now high on the agenda of both individual countries and international organisations/ institutions. The IPF Proposals include measures to be taken at international, regional and particularly at national levels. However, there are only a few indications in the IPF Report regarding ways and means by which countries should implement the Proposals and translate them into country-specific action. The following structural particularities of the IPF Proposals are relevant for their implementation: &127; The IPF Proposals constitute almost half
the IPF Report, in some cases involving quite lengthy texts which do not clearly identify
the key issues in question. 3. Political Relevance, Strategic and Operational Value of the IPF Proposals IPF, as part of the post UNCED process, has created significant political support for sustainable forest management as a result of high-level commitments. However, the voluntary nature of the IPF Proposals and lack of adequate understanding and commitment among key actors at the national level has so far limited the possibilities for implementation and impact, particularly beyond forest constituencies. The relatively recent completion of the IPF and the lack of an adequate reporting framework precludes a full assessment of the impact of the Proposals. The initial experience in many countries is, however, positive with promising results in terms of policy development and broadening partici-pation of key stakeholders in implementation. The key areas where impact can already be observed are: (i) increased dialogue with stakeholders and increased transparency, (ii) amendment and increased enforcement of forest policy, (iii) harmonization of forest and forest-related planning and policies, and (iv) enhanced co-ordination. It is, however, difficult to single out the impacts of IPF from those induced by macroeconomic changes and other policy processes. The relevance of the IPF Proposals is clearly related to existing national priorities, but they should also be interpreted in a broader way to allow for the policies themselves to be improved. The value of the IPF Proposals is largely strategic and can best be realised through an adequate legal and policy framework, namely national forest programmes (see Chapter B below). The Proposals can be used by countries to assess and enrich the current national forest programme. The operational value of the IPF Proposals lies, indirectly, in identifying concrete action to be taken within the national forest programme framework, through assessing, integrating and internalising the IPF Proposals into the country's forest policy. In many cases, the strategic and operational value of the Proposals is constrained by the lack of national ownership of the results of the IFF process due to limited participation and information, especially by other sectors. The assessment and implementation process can assist with overcoming these obstacles and translating the international level commitment into a broad based national commitment. 4. How Countries Should Approach Implementation of the IPF Proposals Taking into consideration the characteristics of the IPF Proposals, the following conclusions emerged from the various implementation efforts mentioned above. The term "implementation", as used in the IFF Programme of Work, means (i) an assessment of the IPF Proposals against ex-isting national forest-related frameworks in terms of relevance and value according to national priorities, (ii) the integration and internalisation of the IPF Proposals into existing national processes, and (iii) the identification of country-specific action. This approach to implementation ensures that the IPF Proposals become part of national processes, and thus the implementation process is not regarded as an additional parallel exercise. The IFF in its second session underlined that implementation of the IPF Proposals requires a system-atic assessment by all countries and subsequent integration into their own national processes aimed at sustainable forest management. The IFF also reiterated the results and lessons from the various implementation efforts to date, in particular those of the Six-Country Initiative. These include: &127; Adequate time and resources are needed to imple-ment the IPF Proposals in the national context. This is considered especially important, given the participatory nature of the assessment process, and the need for adequate communication and infor-mation. &127; A focal point at the national level would be useful to guide the assessment and implementation process, including linking national developments to international initiatives. &127; Grouping the IPF Proposals around issues of national importance could help to focus the assess-ment on the underlying priority issues. This could also facilitate an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of implementing the Proposals at the national level. &127; The relevance of the IPF Proposals can best be assessed against existing national frameworks, policies, priorities and programmes in forest and forest-related sectors. Assessment should focus on national priorities, bearing in mind those issues which are regulated through international instru-ments such as the CBD, FCCC and CCD. &127; The assessment of the IPF Proposals in a national context is best conducted as part of a broader process of policy development/reform at the national level. The assessment should, moreover, be used to review the need to revise existing policies and implementation strategies. &127; The assessment of the relevance of an individual IPF Proposal needs to include the current state of implementation of measures already taken, in terms of their effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. The process of integration, internalisation and therefore adaptation of the IPF Proposals will result in country-specific action within the context of national forest programmes. &127; National forest programmes, as defined by the IPF (see Chapter B below), are seen as a significant vehicle for the implementation of IPF Proposals at the country level. These programmes also have the potential for effective co-ordination and imple-mentation of all efforts towards sustainable forest management at the national level, including link-ages with other international forest-related instru-ments. National forest programmes are a means to ensure the integration of forest issues into a coun-try's broader strategies for sustainable development. &127; Participation and awareness building are vital elements of the assessment, integration and inter-nalisation of the IPF Proposals into national frame-works, to ensure that all relevant stakeholders understand their contents, significance and impli-cations. 5. Purpose of the Guide The Guide presented here is designed to: &127; Serve as a tool to support implementation of the IPF Proposals, in particular at the national level. &127; Be particularly useful in the national assessment phase, where it can help to "place" the individual proposal in the overall institutional and administrative setting and to identify the appropri-ate instrument or mechanisms for implementation. &127; Support participants in the national process in structuring their discussions to identify a country-specific approach to the implementation of the IPF Proposals. &127; Help in analysing what has already been achieved at the country level, including the quality of national efforts towards sustainable forest management, as a check of IPF Proposals against existing national forest programmes. &127; Facilitate, through systematic use of the Guide, feedback to the international level, to improve the quality of the international forest dialogue, e.g. monitoring decisions taken in international fora, definitions and formulation of forest-related mea-sures at the international level, and - if appropriate - establishing regulations. Although use of the Guide will substantively facilitate national implementation processes, it is important that countries build on their existing arrangements and find their own particular ways to integrate the IPF Proposals into their national context. The Guide does not impose a methodology on how to implement the IPF Proposals, but rather supports national actors in developing their own ways of organising the implemen-tation process. B. National Forest Programmes - Reference Framework for the Implementation of the IPF Proposals This chapter aims at describing national forest programmes (NFP) as the reference framework for an assessment of IPF Proposals in a specific country con-text. It puts the discussion on national forest pro-grammes in the context of the international discussion on forests, and outlines the NFP concept as endorsed by the IPF. It defines the main characteristics of national forest programmes, including objectives, principles and elements. It also highlights the main issues related to their formulation and implementation, with specific emphasis on integration into national planning and co-ordination. Reference is made to the international forest regime and the institutional framework of international conventions and forest-related initiatives. 1. UNCED and Follow-up - a New Approach to Sustainable Forest Management With the Rio Conference (UNCED) in 1992, the controversial discussion on how to reconcile the various interests related to forests was incorporated into the con-cept of sustainable development, recognising the sover-eignty of all countries over use of their natural resources. Thus, UNCED (Agenda 21 and the Forest Principles) widened the scope and quality of discussions on forest issues. This discussion included, first and foremost, all types of forests world-wide. It also laid the groundwork for a comprehensive and holistic approach towards forest management within the framework of sustainable development. With this wider scope, discussion continued during UNCED follow-up processes, especially within the framework of the IPF. During IPF deliberations, the concept of national forest programmes was developed and generally accepted as the reference framework for conservation, management and sustainable develop- ment of all types of forests in all countries of the North and South. This consensus is now the basis for the work of the IFF, and provides guidance in implementing the IPF Proposals. National forest programmes offer the conceptual framework for implementing the IPF Proposals at the country level. They represent a compre-hensive, holistic approach by which to integrate all forest-related action under consideration by the international forest regime, and to overcome the fragmented nature of past efforts towards sustainable forest management. 2. National Forest Programmes - Definition, Principles and Elements A general definition of national forest programmes was given in the IPF Final Report. It used the term "national forest programme" as a generic expression for a wide range of approaches to sustainable forest management within different countries, applicable at national and sub-national levels. National forest programmes are comprehensive forest policy frameworks for the achieve-ment of sustainable forest management, based on a broad inter-sectoral approach at all stages, including the formulation of policies, strategies and plans of action, as well as their implementation, monitoring and evalua-tion. NFPs need to be implemented within the context of each country's socio-economic, cultural, political and environmental situation. They should also be integrated into the country's sustainable development strategies and into wider programmes for sustainable land use, in accordance with chapters 10 to 15 of Agenda 21. The objective of a national forest programme is to ensure the conservation, management and sustainable development of forests to meet local, national, regional and global needs and requirements, for the benefit of present and future generations. A national forest programme is based on the following principles: &127; national sovereignty and country leadership &127; consistency with the constitutional and legal frameworks of each country &127; consistency with international agreements and commitments &127; partnership and participation of all interested parties in the NFP process &127; holistic and inter-sectoral approach to forest development and conservation long-term and iterative process of planning, implementation and monitoring The main elements of national forest programmes, in practical terms, are described below. To date, these ele-ments have remained focused on government measures. The aim is, however, to include additional stakeholders in order to make a national forest programme a truly broad-based participatory process involving all sections of society. The elements of an NFP include: &127;National forest statement: a political expression of a country’s commitment to sustainable forest management within related commitments and obligations at the international level. &127;Sector review: to establish an understanding of the forest sector and its relations and linkages to other sectors in the context of national development, and to identify key issues and priorities for further action. Depending on existing information this could be a major exercise or a continuous process. &127;Policy, legislative and institutional reform: an inter-sectoral process of policy formulation and institu-tional development to support sustainable forest management, based on the sector review and dia-logue with all actors, including clarification of their roles and mandates. This includes decentralisation, empowerment of regional and local government structures, e.g. transfer of responsibilities for planning and budgeting to local levels, decentralised funding, and building of local level capacities. The reform process needs to address land tenure arrangements dealing with access to natural resources, e.g. through land allocation, land owner-ship and user rights and certificates. It should also address recognition and respect for customary and traditional rights of, inter alia, indigenous peoples, local communities, forest dwellers and forest owners, through, for example, the provision of an appropriate institutional (legal) framework, access to information, definition of rights and benefits, and channels of intervention. &127;Strategy development: defining strategies to imple-ment sustainable forest management policies, in-cluding financing strategies dealing with the roles and potentials of the public and private sector, and domestic and international investment, including ODA. &127;Action plan: a bundle of measures, based on needs assessment and jointly agreed prioritisation, defined for one national planning cycle (e.g. Five Year Plan). &127;Investment programme: prioritised public sector investments, including ODA, and incentives for private and non-governmental sectors deriving from the financing strategy for sustainable forest management. In this context, public-private partnerships could be one means to overcome initial investment hurdles and to tap the financing potential of the private sector for forestry purposes. &127; Capacity building programme: an accompanying programme to assist the governmental and non-governmental sectors in fulfilling their roles and mandates, with specific focus on strengthening capacities at the local levels. &127;Monitoring and evaluation system: multi-layered monitoring of the national forest programme and decentralised forest programmes to provide continuous feedback on NFP implementation, impacts and efficiency. &127; Co-ordination and participatory mechanisms, including conflict-resolution schemes: effective vertical and horizontal co-ordination and commu-nication within the forest sector and with other sectors, at all levels. This should include interaction with the international level, including donor involvement, and international and regional forest-related agreements and commitments. These co-ordination and participatory mechanisms should aim to involve all interested parties, to ensure rights of interventions and fair processes of negotiating and compromising, e.g. through public debate, spe-cific fora and consultative groups. These include the definition and development of national and inter-national forest partnership agreements as mandato-ry instruments to support the formulation and implementation of national forest programmes in a participatory and co-ordinated manner. With the above features, national forest programmes can serve as a means of promoting, prioritising and co-ordinating public and private investments in sustainable forest management, without neglecting the needs and interests of the various actors, the balance between private and public interests, the economic dynamics and potential of the private sector, and the regulatory func-tions of the state. In this context, the national forest programme is a technical process in the sense that the identification of goals, policies, strategies and mechanisms for implemen-tation are based on accurate information. It is a political process in the sense that the choices between available options are the outcomes of debates, negotiations and compromises by relevant stakeholders. This means par-ticipation of all actors, including clarification of their roles and responsibilities, defining their rights of intervention and ways and means of collaboration and co-operation and, eventually, joint implementation and sharing of inputs and benefits. As a holistic and comprehensive approach to sustainable forest management, it is evident that a national forest programme is not only a process involving the govern-ment, with its related institutions and agencies, but one which includes all actors with an interest in forests. This implies transparency at all stages of the process, as well as decentralisation of planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, following upon the princi-ple of subsidiarity, i.e. decision-making at a level closest to the object of activities. According to this concept, decisions are taken directly by the actors and beneficia-ries of forest development, within a jointly agreed institutional and regulatory framework that is compatible with the overall national forest programme. Decentralisation allows, in practice, for the establish-ment of provincial, district-level, and even communal forest programmes that comply with the specific ecological and socio-economic setting, and with the needs and requirements of concerned actors at these levels. The principles and elements of national forest programmes as described above apply at these decentralised levels as they do at the national level. 3. Integration into National Planning Frameworks and Co-ordination Given the above objectives, principles and elements, the aim is to develop national forest programmes within the context of overall national planning for sustainable development. In order to achieve this integration, it is of crucial importance that the national forest programme is regarded by all actors, including donors, as the frame-work for all forest-related activities at the country level. The IPF recommends that national forest exercises and planning tools be part of national economic develop-ment plans and strategies, thus implying the need to har-monise forest projects and programmes with existing planning frameworks, planning cycles and procedures of national development programmes. The holistic concept of national forest programmes also implies, however, that national development planning includes forest-related elements. This suggests that in assessing country-specific frameworks for forest development, the implications of macro-planning and planning in other sectors relating to forests, as well as related institutional and procedural frameworks, have to be taken into account. Consequently, elements of a national forest programme have to be mapped out with reference to forest-related action laid down by macro policies or other sectors. This is a first step in identifying potential interaction - synergies or conflicts - and in harmonising and integrating sector policies and forest-related activities within overall national planning for sustainable development. A specific aspect of integration is co-ordination of various inputs into national forest programmes. With the increasing awareness of forest issues world-wide, a variety of donor initiatives and financing mechanisms for sustainable forest management have emerged in the last fifteen years. This often caused considerable con-fusion at the country level, given the existence of com-peting frameworks with different approaches, priorities and procedures, depending upon which international agency was taking the lead. However, fragmented approaches to environment, conservation and forest development can now draw upon the concept of national forest programmes to develop a comprehensive approach to forest management and development according to national priorities. Co-ordination of forest-related initiatives can be identified at three levels: the country, regional and international level. Each country with its own specific planning mechanisms has to identify the relevant levels and requirements for harmonisation of policies, planning frameworks and measures which affect forests in various ways. This includes sector concepts, the fiscal system, administrative procedures, public investment and incentives or disincentives for forest-related private sector activities. Practical steps towards effective co-ordination within national forest programmes include information management for enhanced transparency of policies and activities, and establishment of consultative mechanisms at national and decentralised levels as plat-forms for a structured dialogue between all stakeholders. The IPF called for additional partnerships in the inte-gration and harmonisation of all forest-related activities at the country level. This can be achieved particularly through the elaboration of forest partnership agreements (FPA) as tools for effective formulation and implemen-tation of national forest programmes. The FPA concept comprises agreements amongst key actors on certain principles, approaches and procedures for harmonisa-tion and effective co-ordination in support of the na-tional forest programme. Partners can include all national and international actors with relevance for the forest sector, including actors at decentralised levels. National or international forest partnership agreements would be concluded based on fair dialogue, negotiation and co-operation between partners, taking into account horizontal and vertical interlinkages between the concerned levels. 4. Consideration of International Agreements and Initiatives Many international agreements, programmes, processes and initiatives have a bearing on forests. The results of these processes, including their application and imple-mentation in the country context, have to be taken into account during the formulation and implementation of national forest programmes. This requires co-ordination and integration of the NFP process within the institu-tional framework established by a country’s commit-ments at the international level. Practically, this means closely involving all national agencies and focal points engaged in international forest-related initiatives and processes. The IPF has made general references to international ini-tiatives and agreements. It highlights that NFP formu-lation and implementation should be based on the results of UNCED, Agenda 21 and the Forest Principles, as well as emerging processes of the international forest regime, including Rio Conventions such as the FCCC, CBD and CCD. Further, in assessing the IPF Proposals, those initiatives and activities which enhance the poten-tial for new approaches to forest management should es-pecially be taken into account. These include on-going deliberations of the IFF, as well as processes towards de-velopment of criteria and indicators for sustainable for-est management, forest certification, or instruments emerging from discussions under the Intergovernmen-tal Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with reference to the Kyoto Protocol. Other international processes and conventions with direct or indirect relevance to forests should also be taken into account In addition, a mapping of relevant international processes and their link to the na-tional level in relation to forests could be a practical means by which to identify the links and their consideration dur-ing the NFP process. In this chapter, the IPF Proposals have been arranged in a matrix format to facilitate the assessment of their perception and value at the national level in operational, strategic and political terms. The matrix serves as an aid to integrating and internalising the IPF Proposals into national forest programmes of respective countries. It contains only those IPF Proposals which are relevant for action at the national level. Those Proposals which require action at the international level are listed in a separate table, in Annex 1 of this Guide. The national dialogue on IPF Proposals should involve all relevant stakeholders and their institutions, as high-lighted in the methodology to assess and integrate IPF Proposals into the national setting, described in Chap-ter A, and the objectives, principles and elements of the NFP concept, outlined in Chapter B. The information and recommendations contained in the matrix aim to enhance this participatory approach in all steps taken. They emphasise that the IPF process not only addressed governments and their organisations, but focused on the need for societal negotiations regarding sustainable forest management in a holistic and comprehensive manner. The matrix below is envisioned as a tool to facilitate the assessment and integration of IPF Proposals into national forest programmes. As a proposed methodolo-gy for the assessment of IPF Proposals, it is not meant to impose a format on national actors but rather to facilitate their task. The columns of the matrix include the following information and recommendations: 1. Cluster/group of IPF Proposals and contents: The IPF Proposals have been rearranged, grouped and clustered according to their contents, as well as accord-ing to their original categorisation in the "table of con-tents" of the IPF Report. The text simplifies the language of the Proposals to enhance understanding of their meaning, and to facilitate the work of policy makers, planners and practitioners in the private and public sector. All IPF Proposals have been taken into consider-ation, and a wide range of resource persons have examined the synthesis text contained in the matrix. It can be assumed that this text reflects the results of the IPF process, even though it needs to be underlined that it by no means intends to substitute the agreed text of the IPF Report. 2. Reference to individual IPF Proposals: Under this column, the numbers of the individual IPF Proposals grouped under the respective cluster are listed. For easy reference, the entire IPF Report is annexed to this Guide (see Annex 3). 3. Relevant NFP elements and level of intervention: In order to increase the orientation and the positioning of the respective grouping of the Proposals in the following matrix, the NFP elements are indicated as outlined in the IPF Report. The community discussing forest policy and planning is aware that more NFP elements and instruments apply, which need to be elaborated further (see Chapter B). Some recommenda-tions are given for the level of intervention, even though the country-specific situation often demands broaden-ing the scope of interventions. 4. Linkage to the international forest regime: The international forest regime, consisting of various forest-related processes and instruments, needs to be taken into consideration when assessing the IPF Proposals. Despite the specific national situation, the results of all instruments and initiatives of the interna-tional forest regime should be evaluated, to support and guide the national forest programme. The listing under this column is not comprehensive (see also Chapter B5). 5. Assessment of existing efforts: Some elements for the assessment of IPF Proposals are proposed. It is evident that each country should design its own national approach to the assessment and sub-sequent integration of IPF Proposals into the national setting. Experiences can be drawn upon from the Six-Country Initiative and other national exercises to facili-tate this. 6. Identification of country-specific action: Some examples of country-specific action are described in this column. This should assist practitioners to decide upon actions following from an assessment of the value and perception of IPF Proposals at the national level. National actions are related not only to the value and perception of the IPF Proposals, but also to measures taken, and their quality and effectiveness within a coun-try to date. In summary, the matrix should guide practitioners through the results of the IPF process, and should assist in the national application of the IPF rec-ommendations in the most effective way. The political commitment and obligations of the countries partici-pating in the IPF/IFF process demands a national debate not only on the specifics of the individual IPF Proposals and their clusters, as shown in this matrix, but also on the need to approach forest development in a more holis-tic and comprehensive manner as agreed upon during UNCED and IPF. The IPF Proposals and their appli-cation at the country level offer a good opportunity to address issues of common concern to all stakeholders, including the private sector, NGOs and governments. |
 |
|||
|
|||
|
Go to Home Page
World Rainforest Movement
Maldonado 1858 - 11200 Montevideo - Uruguay
tel: 598 2 413 2989 / fax: 598 2 410 0985
wrm@wrm.org.uy
