EUROPE AND THE WORLD'S FORESTS
Synthesis Report of the European Regional Meeting,
Bonn 28-29 October 1998.
Marcus Colchester
Forest Peoples Programme

This global initiative has received funding from the following institutions: Department for International Development (UK), Netherlands Development Assistance (DGIS), Finnish Foreign Ministry, European Commission DG XI, Portuguese Government, United Nations Environment Programme, Danish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Asia Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Australian Government, International Center for Environment Studies (Japan). We are grateful for this support. This regional report has been prepared for presentation to the global meeting on 18-22 January 1999 in San Jose, Costa Rica.

Executive Summary

The European regional meeting held in Bonn in October included a range of NGOs, government officials, academic researchers and forestry consultants. The two-day meeting considered ten case studies and a synthesis paper all prepared especially for the meeting and drew on these insights to help them draw their conclusions.

European forests are not in a healthy state. The forests have been reduced to about a third of their original extent and old growth forests have been hugely depleted. What forests remain have been heavily modified and simplified. Two thirds of the continent's trees suffer some degree of defoliation from airborne pollution

Generalization about forests in Europe is very difficult. Factors leading to forest loss in one context may have the opposite effect in another context. Local and national problem-solving approaches were thus emphasised and relatively little emphasis was given to international solutions which many considered were likely to be too blunt to be adequately adjusted to local needs.

Forests are much more than just stands of trees. They are complex ecosystems with integral associations of flora and fauna and long-term resident human communities, and they perform a wide variety of functions. Loss of any one of these elements or functions should be treated as forest loss.

For the purposes of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests, the IPF's broad definition of underlying causes of forest loss should be accepted rather than the more limited approach adopted by CIFOR so as not to give undue emphasis to economic factors.

Land and forest tenure regimes have had a powerful influence over the way forests have been managed and destroyed. Community ownership - as an intermediate form of ownership between State ownership and private ownership - holds out potential benefits for many parts of Europe but should not be imposed at the expense of central regulations. An adequate policy, legislative, institutional enabling framework is required to ensure effective community forest management, including resources and structures for effective community participation in decision-making.

Forest policies have tended to give priority to production, giving second place to protection functions and third place to social functions. Forests have suffered from the 'wake theory' of forest management. National forest policies need to be reformed to give equal weight to social, environmental and economic values.

Powerful interest groups dominate policy-making. More open, transparent and participatory forms of government are required to counter these interests. Guidelines for decision-making processes should be developed to guide the evolution of accountable public institutions dealing with the private sector.

Forest services may need reforms and retraining to effect these new approaches. In transition countries, in particular, institutional capacity needs to be strengthened to cope with new pressures on forests from market forces and tenure reforms.

The short-termism of politicians poses an obstacle to the inclusion of environmental concerns in forest-related decisions. The materialist aspirations of society reinforce this tendency. Solutions include: greater public education, especially about the underlying causes of forest loss; improved media treatment of the issue; greater independence for forest research; electoral reforms.

Markets have very diverse impacts on forests, sometimes beneficial, sometimes destructive. Rising consumer demand is however placing an unsustainable burden on forests and needs to be lessened if forest loss is to be curbed. Solutions include: the removal of perverse subsidies; the imposition of 'ecotaxes'; stricter regulations, including restrictions or tarriff barriers to trade in destructively produced goods; green accounting (incorporating externalities into costs). Some of these solutions will require changes in international law (trade agreements). Voluntary regulation and consumer choice should be encouraged but should not be relied on to effect major transformations in consumption and trade.

European measures to counter air pollution have been ineffective as, overall, they have failed to address the underlying causes of such emissions. Policy and legislative reforms are required to reform transport policies (reduce NOx), clean up industrial emissions (reduce SO2) and promote organic farming (less nitrates). Transition countries will require additional economic assistance to effect these changes.

Through aid, trade and foreign investment, western Europe is a major force contributing to forest loss in the rest of the world, including in eastern Europe. Aid to developing countries is causing forest loss both directly and indirectly, by failing to address underlying causes in recipient countries or even reinforcing them. Reforms in aid programmes are needed. Aid projects should seek to be more beneficiary-driven. More attention needs to be given to social issues and vulnerable sectors especially women and indigenous peoples. Aid should become more programmatic and less project focused. Strategic impact assessments should be required. There should be more experience sharing of 'best practice' among donors. Donor coordination needs to be enhanced.

Most of these proposed actions can be undertaken at the local, national and a few at the regional level. The meeting carefully reviewed the IPF's action proposals and highlighted some that could be especially important in addressing underlying causes. By themselves, however, the proposed actions are inadequate.

In particular, to date intergovernmental negotiations on forests have failed to address a number of key issues:

- more effective measures are needed to change the balance of power over forests.
- measures are needed to reduce consumption.
- aid programmes need to be reformed.
- reforms in international law are needed to permit regulation of trade and investment on environmental and social grounds.

There are no signs that these issues are being considered by those advocating a convention on forests. It seems that the key issues that need to be addressed at the international level are considered to lie outside the present scope of the InterGovernmental Forum on Forests.

1. Introduction

The world has now lost some 50% of its forests and continues to lose forests at an ever-increasing rate. As global concern has grown about the implications of this loss for local livelihoods, regional ecologies, national economies and the global climate, there has been a corresponding increase both in research aimed at identifying the causes of this loss and in actions aimed at reversing it.

Much of this effort has been elaborated within the conventional context of the forestry profession, a relatively marginal and under-resourced discipline in most countries, with little access to power and a heavily circumscribed scope for action. As a result, research has often been limited to an identification of the most immediate causes of forest loss and actions to curb deforestation and forest degradation have, as a result, been relatively ineffective because they have failed to address more fundamental pressures on forests from human societies. Glib phrases like 'lack of political will', 'market failure', 'underdevelopment' and 'over-population' have been used as substitutes for in-depth examination of the political economy of forest loss.

Among the many underlying causes highlighted by some of these studies have been: development assistance; government-promoted forest colonisation schemes; land speculation and land concentration inside and outside forests; the displacement of landless farmers; the denial of secure tenure to forest-dwelling peoples; the expansion of agribusiness and the modernization of farming; the globalisation of trade in forest products and other agricultural products; national debt; structural adjustment programmes; the domination of forestry and agricultural policies by urban elites; the activities of transnational corporations; inequitable patterns of land ownership and income generation opportunities; excessive consumption, especially in the North; perverse subsidies; corruption; bad governance; and narrow economic planning.

Since the mid-1980s, environmental organisations have waged a persistent campaign urging governments to acknowledge and address these underlying causes. In relation to tropical forests, controversies over the Tropical Forestry Action Plan and projects of the International Tropical Timber Organisation and the World Bank, helped illustrate why both forestry and development projects and programmes which ignored the wider social, political and economic contexts in which they were implanted frequently went wrong and caused wide-scale human problems and accelerating forest loss (see box 2). At the same time, in Europe and North America, environmentalists focused concern on the damaging effects on forests of air pollution from traffic and industries and highlighted the heavy pressure on forests globally from urban and industrial consumers. As a result it became accepted wisdom that forest loss could not be addressed by reforms in the forestry sector alone, but required a 'cross-sectoral', 'inter-disciplinary' and 'participatory' approach.

Notwithstanding the explosion of research publications examining environmental problems from a political economy perspective, these findings have been slow to find their way into government documents and intergovernmental negotiations. Governments have had enough difficulty achieving consensus dealing with relatively uncontentious issues, such as forest management standards, and have been reluctant to address more controversial and fundamental issues less directly related to forests. However, as the global forest situation has become more acute, the need to deal with cross-sectoral forces pressing on forests has become clearer to governments. At the same time non-Governmental organisations (NGOs) increasingly have opposed efforts to develop a global forest convention, exactly because it seemed unlikely to address the underlying causes of forest loss and was thus likely to perpetuate the status quo.

1.1 InterGovernmental Panel on Forests:

It was in this context, that the Commission on Sustainable Development set up the InterGovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) in 1995 and established the theme of 'Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation' as one of the 'programme elements' for discussion. Although the element received relatively little attention during the four sessions of the IPF - it was one of the few programme elements not elaborated on through an intersessional meeting - some useful progress was made (See Box 1).

1.2 Intersessional process under the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests:

In 1997, at the first meeting of the newly formed InterGovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF), which has as part of its mandate the promotion of the Programme of Action developed by the IPF, NGOs highlighted the need for further progress in addressing the Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation and offered to organise an intersessional process, in collaboration with governnments, on the theme. Ad hoc meetings with interested Governnments, UN agencies and NGOs demonstrated considerable interest in the proposal and the government of Costa Rica offered to sponsor the process.

It was also agreed at these preliminary meetings that the intersessional process should not be limited to a global workshop but should build first of all on regional workshops, to ensure that more attention could be devoted to local and national differences. It was also agreed that a solutions-oriented approach should be adopted preferably based on consensus-building among a diversity of interest groups. In developing a funding application which elicited donor support, NGOs also proposed that the regional workshops should be focused around a number of case studies in each region which should, wherever possible, look at the actual situation of forests in one locale and then trace out the underlying causes in relation to this concrete situation. Where possible, the case studies should be carried out by local communities or NGOs in close contact with them. Emphasis was given to the need to incorporate the points of views of local communities, especially indigenous peoples, into the case studies.

The overall process has been administered by a 'global secretariat' comprising the World Rainforest Movement secretariat in Montevideo and the Netherlands Committee for the IUCN in Amsterdam. Other NGOs volunteered to act as regional focal points to carry forward the regional consultations and workshops and the work was shared among seven regions - North America, Latin America, Europe, Africa, CIS countries, Asia and South Pacific. In addition an indigenous peoples consultation was made part of the process. These NGOs, along with the Costa Rican Government, the IFF secretariat and UNEP also met periodically as an Organising Committee to oversee the process and they with other interested parties attending the IFF - intergovernmental agencies, governments and NGOs - also met from time to time as a Steering Committee to ensure that a useful contribution would be made to the IFF.

The NGOs which run the Northern Office of the World Rainforest Movement, the Forest Peoples Programme and FERN, have acted as the European focal point for this process. Interest in participation was established through an email consultation, a short list of case studies was then agreed on, and funds sought and eventually secured to carry through the process.

The process has been driven mainly by the schedule of the IFF with the aim of bringing the results of the regional and global consultations to the third session of the IFF in early 1999, when the issue is to receive substantive discussion. There was thus a need for all regional meetings to be completed in good time for the results to be fed into the global workshop of the intersessional process to be held in Costa Rica in late January 1999. This European process was hampered by considerable delays in securing funding for the initiative and, indeed, it was only in early October 1998 that the main part of the funding for the European regional process was finally assured. The case study authors and coordinators of the process are to be congratulated for persevering with their work in this climate of financial insecurity.

2. European Synthesis

2.1 Europe's Forests:

The gradual withdrawal of the ice sheets, which covered much of Northern Europe during the Wurm glaciation, set the conditions for a major expansion of Europe's forests. As the glaciers withdrew between 15,000 and 9,000 years ago, the forests expanded to their maximum extent and ended by covering the great majority of the surface area of the continent by about 8000 BP.

The forests that developed were extremely diverse and regionally varied. Natural forest types include, as examples: boreal forests dominated by spruce, pine and birch as in Northern Scandinavia; upland forests of mixed birch and pine such as the Caledonian forests of Scotland; Atlantic beechwoods in Denmark, Sweden and the UK; very diverse broadleaved forests across the majority of western and central Europe, in England and Denmark once dominated by lime; oak, birch, ash and alder forests across much of Ireland; beech and hornbeam forests in Germany; beech and fir formations in the lower alps; juniper, cork oak and pine forests in the Mediterranean; laurel forests on Madeira; chestnut forests of southern France and Italy; cypress and cedar forests of the eastern Mediterranean.

2.2. Forest Loss in Europe:

Our knowledge of the processes of deforestation in the millenia that followed is extremely patchy, depending largely on the quality of archaeological research done in any one area. As neolithic farming techniques spread across Europe from the east, forests began to be cleared from the more fertile arable areas and areas apt for grazing livestock. The details of this process varied considerably from region to region. In much of southern, central and western Europe, swidden cultivation, originally very widespread gave way to permanent agriculture in areas of more fertile soil and where rising population densities led to land shortages. Permanent deforestation was the result and was already a widespread phenomenon by the time early Greek and later Roman city states emerged on the Mediterranean littoral. Recent research has revealed that, in western Europe too, the process of deforestation advanced far earlier than conventional history books relate. The popular notion that forest clearance was an essential part of the process of capital accumulation in western Europe during the industrial revolution should be laid to rest.

For example, the conventional historical account of England is that the country remained largely covered by 'primeval forests' until extensive land clearance by Anglo-Saxon settlers got underway in the sixth century. Remnant forests, so the story-books relate, were then cleared for ship-building, charcoaling and railway construction as England developed as a regional and then global naval and industrial power.

We now know this story to be essentially a myth. The extensive forests which had covered the country after the end of the last Ice Age, began to be cleared by settled farming peoples from about 5000 BC. By 1600 BC the population of England had risen to as high as one million people and much of the country was already overlaid by an orderly and clearly planned system of fields. The basic lineaments of the country's field systems and landscapes in some parts of the country were thus set in place two to three thousand years ago. By the time of the Roman conquest (AD 43) there were perhaps already two million people living in England. As Christopher Taylor notes in summarising the existing knowledge:

By the end of the prehistoric period, England was crowded, perhaps over-crowded, with most of its land exploited to a greater or lesser extent. The primeval forests had long since gone and what remained, perhaps less than exists today, was the product of two or three phases of clearance and regeneraton and was also carefully managed. Whatever the influence of later people on the making of the English landscape, their contribution merely fitted into a framework which had been established and modified a number of times by prehistoric people.

During the period of Roman occupation, the population in England continued to climb reaching maybe as many of as four or five millions by the early fourth century. Only with the collapse of Roman rule and the period of wars, famines, epidemics and upheavals known as the 'Dark Ages' did the rural economy and population again decline, allowing some extensive semi-natural forests to re-establish themselves in areas such as the Weald, and the Sherwood and Wychwood forests.

Contrarily, in western Ireland, areas that were for long considered 'naturally' open grasslands and limestone pavements, such as the Burren in County Clare, were in fact for thousands of years after the retreat of the glaciers covered with pine, elm, hazel and oak forests. These were subject to extensive clearance from about 5,000 years ago to make way for subsistence arable farming and cattle raising. Only by the beginning of the first millenium AD did something resembling the present landscape get established.

The diverse and locally specific histories of interaction between people and forests have to a large extent determined the state of forests in Europe today. Forests were subjected to powerful economic and demographic pressures linked to other factors such as the decline of rural areas, urbanisation, the rise of mercantilism, industrial development, socialism and the establishment of free market systems. Political changes also had major impacts - the establishment of kingdoms, dictatorships, democracies, wars and revolutions - as did corresponding changes in land ownership (community forests, secularisations, privatization, redistribution and re-nationalization of land etc.). All these forces had tremendous effects on the way forest were destroyed, managed and restored.

One common feature of European forestry (except in very remote areas in the mountains and in northern Scandinavia and the Baltics) can be summarised as a history of recovery from devastation by cultivation and over-exploitation for industry. Centuries of livestock grazing, swidden cultivation and clearance for permanent fields pushed back the forests' boundaries. What remained was prone to intensive logging - both to satisfy the needs of local populations and for emerging industries: shipbuilding, construction, charcoal production and fuelwood for salt, iron, coal and other mining activities - which destroyed very large parts of Europe's forests.This led to a severe shortage of available wood products and the authorities were forced to establish the first 'Forest Acts' to regulate harvesting and the use of the forests.

By the middle of the 19th, forest science had started to develop production-oriented forestry models, based on maximum production and a classification of forests with different age classes and rotation periods. This model, commonly referred to as the 'old German forestry model', because German forest science was prominent and exported all over Europe, promoted a further uniformisation of Europe's forests, by favouring the planting of monospecific, even-aged, mostly conifer plantations, both in converting 'chaotic' semi-natural forests and for the establishment of new plantations in denuded areas. Nevertheless, alternative forestry models, which did not have the rapid production of wood as their primary management objective, also existed and had been developed over a long history. For example: community owners who prioritised the fuelwood and social functions of forests, as well as their role in soil protection and recreation; smaller farmers who used forests as natural 'banks' to provide long-term financial security to tide them over lean harvests and hard times; and also among some large landowners, including public bodies, who did not want to follow the mainstream and preferred other forest functions, like hunting and nature protection.

The last decades have witnessed a growing recognition, especially in central Europe, for this kind of nature-oriented forestry that gives as much weight to ecological and social functions as to wood production. The old German model is no longer generally considered appropriate, although in some parts of Europe, notably the British Isles its influence is still strong.

These developments were often expressed in forestry legislation. In Sweden, for example, the first provincial laws regulating forest husbandry were enacted in the 13th century but they were not able to halt further centuries of forest devastation by farming, fuelwood collection, iron and copper mining and construction. Only with the first forestry act of 1903 was a halt put to this ruthless exploitation of forests with the establishment of regulations aimed at ensuring sustainable forest exploitation. The 'old German model' that dominated forestry for the next decades in Sweden was also reflected in the 1979 law, which focused on the mass production of wood and the regeneration of tree cover, with the aim of heading off a future wood shortage when domestic demand was expected to exceed supply. The latest revision of the Act in 1993, which gives equal weight to ecological and economic functions, can be seen as the legislative recognition of a more multifunctional, nature-respecting kind of forestry in Sweden.

All of these varying historic developments have been hugely different from locality to locality, region to region and country to country. As a result of the wide number of variables, the same types of ownership, policy, law and other events can have either positive or destructive impacts on forest quality in different places. General conclusions from the history of Europe's forests for the whole continent are hard to draw. However, in evaluating the underlying causes of present day forest loss, a knowledge and analysis of the past is crucial.

2.3 The Current State of Europe's Forests:

Today Europe's forests are some of the most degraded in the world. Although tree cover extends over some 30% (144 million ha.) of the surface area of the continent - about half the maximum extent of forest cover - only about 0.24% of this forest is considered by the WorldWide Fund for Nature to be 'virgin' forest and only 1.8% is classified as virgin forest or old growth forest remnants. Even these areas are now at risk from a variety of factors including logging, fires, tourist resort development, pollution and substitution with fast- growing plantation species. An extreme case is Ireland, the country with the least tree cover in Europe (8%), 81% of which is now planted with conifer plantations. Only four countries, Sweden, Finland, Poland and Greece, retain any large-sized remnants of old growth and virgin forests. With the exception of Poland, Central Europe is the area with the worst representation of old growth forest remnants. Some major forest types, such as birch forests in Denmark or the mixed oak, beech and birch forests of central Europe, have completely disappeared from their natural range. In Western Europe, in particular, riverine forests have been severely affected. Montane forests have also been heavily depleted with good quality remnants surviving only in inaccessible ravines.

In the 1970s a further remarkable deterioration in Europe's forests was detected. Trees were losing their foliage and became discoloured. Intensive research since then has demonstrated that this effect is largely caused by atmospheric pollution, much of it drifting across national boundaries. High concentrations of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides not only have a direct effect on foliage but also stress trees through soil and ground water acidification, resulting in reduced levels of potassium and magnesium ions. This has increased trees' susceptibility to stress from drought, a feature exacerbated by high nitrogen levels. In response the EC has initiated a Pan-European Programme to monitor and study the extent of this problem.

Recently the EC has reported the conclusions of the last ten years of this survey. The survey demonstrated a ten-year decline in the health of Europe's forests. Over the past ten years, the proportion of trees with moderate or severe defoliation has more than doubled. Across Europe, only 36% of conifers and 34% of broadleaved tree species show no significant defoliation.

2.4 The Case Studies: Scope of the Investigation.

The case studies commissioned for the regional workshop did not have the primary aim of delving into the processes of forest loss in early times. Rather they focus on the current pressures causing deforestation and forest degradation in Europe, set in their historical and biological context.

The following local and national case studies were contributed:

1. Georgina Green, Examining the Underlying Causes of Woodland Loss from Road-Building: a case study of the Newbury bypass, UK.
2. Karin Lindahl, Forests and Forestry in Jokkmokk Municipality: a case study contributing to the discussion of underlying causes leading to deforestation and forest degradation of the world's forests.
3. Rein Ahas, Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Estonia: a local level case study in Polva County.
4. Michael Pregernig and Gerhard Weiss, Forest Policy in Austria: Policy Making by the Sector for the Sector.
5. Ivan Gyulai, The Underlying Causes of Forest Degradation in Hungary, with a special emphasis on the privatisation of forest areas.
6. Ion Barbu, Sustainable Development of Forestry in Romania.
7. Paulo Canaveira, Ana Maria Almeida, Joao Sousa Teixeira, R. Oliveira, Forests and People in the Iberian Peninsula.

The impact of European societies on forests has not been limited to Europe. As a major colonial force and a centre of industrialization and world trade, Western Europe has had, and continues to have, a profound impact on forests all over the world. At first, the organizers were unsure how to deal with this aspect, as the case study approach - looking out from local forest situations - was not likely to elucidate these connections. On the other hand a comprehensive examination of Western Europe's impacts on the world's forests is a mammoth subject far too ambitious for this process to address adequately. For the purpose of this consultation we have thus had to opt for a compromise. The three case studies do not pretend to do more than illustrate the kinds of connections between European aid and trade and forest loss and summarise some of the main problems and solutions that have been identified in other more detailed studies.

The following case studies were prepared:

1. Tim Rice, European Aid and Forests.
2. Nigel Dudley, Trade as an Underlying Cause of Forest Loss and Degradation.
3. Simon Counsell, Breaking the Iron Triangle: The Influence of the Private Sector in Forest Policy.

2.5 Participation in the Bonn meeting:

The two-day meeting in Bonn was a lively and good-natured encounter involving a good cross-section of NGOs, government officials, academic researchers and forestry consultants. About 30 individuals attended the meeting. See Annex 1. The authors of the case studies and draft synthesis reports presented summaries of their papers, which were then commented on by the meeting. By the end of the first day there was a general consensus on the key underlying causes emerging from the case studies that needed further discussion. During the second day the meeting divided into two working groups each of which considered a sub-set of the main underlying causes identified in the case studies. The groups focused their efforts on identifying possible solutions to these underlying causes. These were then reported back to the plenary and further commented on. In a final session, the level at which these various proposed actions were best implemented, whether local, national, regional or international, was further discussed. The process for developing the final report of the meeting and its possible content was then agrred on. It was agreed that the quality of the case studies warranted their publication in the form of a book, although this might not be achieved in time for the Costa Rica meeting.

3. Emerging Themes:

This section summarises the main themes and conclusions drawn from the various case studies and the discussion in Bonn. It was recognised that this procedure is risky as it involves generalization and in the process the particularities and differences of locales and national situations can be obscured. The meeting in Bonn emphasised these risks of generalization and drew repeated attention to the fact that factors leading to forest loss in one context may have the opposite effect in another context. These considerations led the meeting to emphasise the need for local and national problem-solving approaches and to give relatively little emphasis to international solutions which many considered were likely to be too blunt to be adequately adjusted to local needs. Annex 1 provides summaries of the case studies referred to in what follows.

3.1 Definitional issues:

One contentious issue that immediately emerged is that of definitions. Different countries and interest groups have widely divergent views of what forests are. In summarising the case studies, this synthesis paper tends to use the word 'forests' only to refer to 'natural' forests, reserving other terms such as woodlands, treecover and plantations to refer to the more extensively modified forms of treecover that predominate in much of Europe. However, another approach asserts that forests are defined through people's experience of them and definitions are therefore highly subjective and not amenable to an external definition that is accepted in all contexts.

What are forests?

The meeting did however agree that forests are much more than just stands of trees. They are complex ecosystems with integral associations of flora and fauna and long term resident human communities, and they perform a wide variety of functions. Loss of any one of these elements or functions should be treated as forest loss.

When does forest degradation become deforestation?

Just where forest degradation ends and deforestation begins is also a matter of dispute. Apart from the UK case study, which focused on the clearance of managed woodlands to make way for roads, most of the case studies examined situations where tree cover is being progressively simplified or overharvested for production or damaged by pollution.

What are `underlying' causes?

The meeting noted that not all the parties in the IFF process share a view of what are 'underlying' causes as opposed to direct causes of forest loss. Direct causes of forest loss highlighted in the European case studies include clearance for agriculture, roads, other infrastructural developments and substitution with plantations. They also include intensive silviculture, poor forest management, overharvesting, fire damage, air pollution, pest damage, and damage by game animals.

It is clear that for the IPF, all forces which underlie these direct causes can be considered underlying causes and include elements as close to the main actors as their wealth, status and technical means and as distant from direct impact as currency exchange rates, national debts and other macro-economic variables. This issue needs clarification because the main agency contributing to the UNEP study for the IFF on the Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation, CIFOR, may only be considering the latter set of variables as truly underlying causes preferring to consider the other factors more closely linked to deforestation agents as immediate causes.

The meeting accepted the broader approach adopted by the IPF as the more useful, as it helps focus attention on the social and political dimensions of forest loss and does not give undue priority to economic factors (see also Figure 1).

3.2 Land and forest tenure:

The case studies demonstrate that tenure regimes have had a powerful influence over the way forests have been managed and destroyed. In many parts of Europe community ownership has been largely eclipsed and forests have been either arrogated to the State or distributed as individual holdings to private citizens and companies. Local communities and citizens may have very limited rights of access and use in such forests. However, in Switzerland, Germany and Austria and Portugal inter alia communal forest ownership has been retained to some extent and examples of community forestry are also being re-developed in other countries, for example, Scotland and Sweden.

Both private and State ownership of forests have encouraged forest-owners or managers to treat forests as sources of timber and have lessened the importance of forests' other values and functions, which are accordingly giving secondary consideration. In countries with economies in transition the privatisation of forests or their restitution to previous owners has had a highly destructive effect on forests, yet forests under State control in other countries have also often been treated as little more than timber stands.

Community tenure is often advocated as an alternative form of forest ownership, intermediate between State ownership or private ownership, which - within the right legislative and institutional context - can provide a more socially equitable and environmentally balanced basis for sound forest management. One challenge is to ensure that decisions over the use of communal forests favour, and are made by, the community as whole and are not driven by personal interests. Taking into consideration the highly individualised nature of European society, the degree of market penetration into all aspects of public life and the relative lack of coherence of 'communities', the meeting debated the extent to which community-based forest ownership and management is a desirable or realisable goal in those parts of Europe where it has been lost.

The diversity of local situations was emphasised and the dangers of a prescriptive approach which failed to take account of local differences and traditions was highlighted. It was noted that in some areas there exist strong or growing movements for the re-establishment of community ownership or control of forests. However, environmentalists are wary of the extent to which community control would effectively restore or maintain biodiversity or other ecological values. It was recognised that a precondition for effective communal ownership is to have an effective and functioning local democracy to ensure that local leaders are accountable to the broader community they claim to represent. Community members also need to be aware of the long term environmental values of forests. Public education may be needed to enhance this in many circumstances, though local knowledge should not be discounted. Community ownership was felt to hold out many potential benefits for many parts of Europe but should not be imposed at the expense of central regulations. An adequate policy, legislative, institutional enabling framework was required to ensure effective community forest management, and this framework should include resources and structures for effective community participation in decision-making.

3.3 Forest policy and forestry legislation:

The meeting noted that on the one hand, in many European countries, forest policy has not been given enough weight compared to other sectors of the economy. On the other hand, within the sector, in general too much weight has been given to production forestry, with a primary emphasis on timber production. The case studies clearly illustrate the way forest policies in most European countries are determined by overall goals of national development and economic growth. Not only is forest protection given second place to other interests which are considered to be in the 'public interest' but forest policy itself prioritises production-oriented forestry over other goals of forest management. Non-wood forest values are insufficiently emphasised in forest policies and forestry legislation even where production and conservation are, at least in theory given equal weight. Nevertheless, the fact that forests have been preserved at all in Europe has been largely because central legislation has in many countries prohibited forest conversion and it was suggested that for all their deficiencies the absence of these policies and laws would have resulted in an even worse state.

It remains the case that subsidies and other fiscal incentives, extension services, forest management prescriptions and decision-making processes often tend to favour commercial or even industrial forestry, giving second place to forest management for protection, conservation or other uses.

In all the case studies the relative lack of protection provided to biodiversity values and the interestes of local communities in comparison with other forest uses, users and even forest clearance is an evident cause of forest loss. All the authors advocate stronger legislation at national, regional or even international levels to give greater protection to forests.

The meeting noted how the German model of 'scientific forestry' developed in the early 19th century had actually evolved in a particular political and environmental context, in a situation where forests had already been substantially destroyed and degraded first by agricultural settlement and then pimitive capital accumuluation. A rising market demand for large timber encouraged the adoption of the principle of sustained yield forest management of relatively mature forests. This model was then exported to other countries in Europe and in Western European colonies where conditions were quite different. Moreover, although the 'German model' has been greatly refined and developed since its inception, these improvements have been much less widely disseminated.

The meeting also highlighted the damaging consequences of the 'wake theory' of forest management, according to which managing forests for their 'primary value' of timber production brings other 'secondary' benefits in its wake. The meeting advocated reform of forest policies to make them more holistic and coherent, based on the overarching goal of achieving social, environmental and economic sustainability. The adoption of strategic impact assessments to gauge the cross-sectoral implications of projects and programmes was also advocated.

Most of these policy changes should be introduced at the national level, but the further development of criteria at the European level could also help reinforce this. It was suggested that forest related subsidies should be made payable to EU member states only on condition that national policies are developed which show inter-sectoral coherence and establish mechanisms for participatory forest management.

3.4 Vested interests:

The case studies, particularly those guided by a political economy approach, illustrate the complex structures of power and influence which to a substantial degree determine the outcome of decision-making about forests, a problem which is of global proportions. At one extreme, gangsterism and violent intimidation, and law-breaking may be used to get access to forests (Estonia), on the other hand, and more usually, the cases show how these interests are able to influence the evolution of law and policy and specific decisions about forests through informal networks of contacts (UK), legally incorporated interest groups (Austria), and political parties (UK and Sweden). More open, transparent and participatory forms of government are required to counter these forces. Guidelines for decision-making processes should be developed to guide the evolution of accountable public institutions dealing with the private sector.

3.5 Institutional capacity:

Even in countries with a long experience of market economies, the capacity of forest services to assert the importance of biodiversity and community concerns may be weak and forestry personnel have little training in such issues. Foresters often have a narrow conception of what constitutes a forest, and tend to ignore forests' wider values. Many lack a cross-sectoral understanding of forest policy and management or feel it is not their mandate or responsibility to address such issues.

A serious problem, particularly for transition countries, is the inability of their forestry services and other systems of land and forest administration, to cope with new pressures on forests resulting from land reforms, land restitution processes, privatisation programmes and new commercial opportunities. Although tenure reforms may be entirely justifiable on ethical, social and political grounds, the environmental impacts and long-term social consequences are also matters of great concern. The experiences of Romania, Hungary and Estonia with these tenure reforms have all been negative in terms of forest management and it is clear that measures need to be urgently taken to strengthen the capacity of state forestry institutions so that they can rationalise forest ownership systems and regain control over the activities of forest owners. Rent-seeking behaviour by forest service personnel, so common in developing countries, is also noted as a problem especially in Estonia.

3.6 Politicians' short-termism:

A number of the cases specifically identify the short term thinking of politicians as a significant obstacle to the inclusion of environmental concerns in forest related decisions. The problem is exacerbated by both the general public's materialist aspirations and the lack of clear mechanisms by which 'intangible externalities' can be made part of public policy debate.

The meeting listed a number of options for countering this problem including:

- raising public awareness about the environmental importance of forests and the underlying causes of forest loss and their links to lifestyle choices
- more public education on the links between health and the environment,
- overcoming media indifference to the issue
- establishing greater independence of forest research institutions
- promotion of electoral reform (as much for 'democratic renewal' as for the advantages of any one electoral system over another).
- promotion of local agenda 21s

3.7 Consumer society and global trade:

Politicians and other decision-makers are able to ignore environmental arguments to a large extent because a large proportion of the general public prioritise short-term improvements in their own living standards over long-term environmental benefits. Although some who attended the meeting felt it was useless to lament the erosion of spiritual values, cultural differences and community living and their substitution with individualist profit-seeking and material gratification, others felt these were fundamental issues that needed to be addressed and which are linked to society's indifference to nature. Restoration of these values is considered necessary by some case study authors to address the imbalance between society and environment.

At the same time the sheer demand of consumer society and the industries that service it for wood and wood products is identified as a fundamental underlying cause of forest loss in Europe and overseas. Unless overall consumption is reduced, other changes including attempts to reassert other values, may not have much effect on the overall pattern of forest exploitation. The meeting noted, however, that simplistic assertions along that lines of 'markets destroy forests' are misleading. Markets for the 'right' products and services can help restore or conserve forests while those for the 'wrong' products may encourage forest loss. For example, the shift in demand in Central Europe in the 19th Century from a demand for small roundwood to larger timbers, helped promote the establishment of forest management regimes for relatively mature forests. On the other hand, the huge escalation in global demand for pulp and paper products this century has enouraged much more destructive forestry practices, notably in Scandinavia.

In general, solutions to the pressure from over-consumption and globalised trade lie in ensuring that producers and consumers pay the full costs of production and disposal. This can be encouraged by inter alia:

- the removal of perverse subsidies
- the imposition of 'ecotaxes'
- regulations, restrictions or tarriff barriers to trade in destructively produced goods
- green accounting (incorporating externalities into costs)

Some of these solutions will require changes in international law (trade agreements) and meantime companies should be encouraged to adopt voluntary regulation, such as through certification and the adoption of codes of conduct. Consumer education aimed at reduction of wastage should also be promoted. However, the meeting felt that voluntary schemes and consumer choice could not by themselves be relied on to effect major transformations in consumption and trade.

3.8 Macro-economic context: Eastern and Western European contrasts

The meeting noted that there was a marked difference in both the main underlying causes and the priority actions between Western and Eastern Europe. Whereas in Eastern Europe the main forces driving over-exploitation of forests, especially for export, were national debts and the foreign exchange and national economic crises, in Western Europe the main underlying causes could be summarised as the consumer lifestyle, materialist aspirations and growth economics. Through aid and trade, Western Europe is having an impact far beyond its national boundaries, including a sharp impact on Eastern Europe. Given these broadly different situations, it was hard for the meeting to prioritise solutions in ways that made sense for the whole of Europe.

3.9 Atmospheric Pollution:

Throughout Europe serious damage is being done to forests due to the prevalence of airborne pollutants. The main sources are nitrogen oxides from transport emissions, exaggerated nitrate levels from intensive farming and sulphur dioxide from industrial plant. The problem is particularly hard to address as much of the pollution is transboundary in its impacts. Although the EU has issued a directive to adopt Europe-wide measures to confront this problem it has been ineffective as it has failed to address the underlying causes of such emissions. A cross-sectoral approach is required focused on the revision of transport policies (a shift away from a reliance on private transport), a reform of agricultural production methods (less intensive agriculture and the provision of incentives to promote organic farming), and the mandatory introduction of sulphur scrubbers in coal and oil burners. Transition countries will require additional economic assistance to effect these changes.

3.9 Lack of attention to underlying causes as an underlying cause:

The case studies also raise the question of the extent to which decision-makers and the general public are aware of the pressures on forests or understand the way decisions about forests are shaped by these underlying causes and interests. It may be concluded that underlying causes only become evident when access to forest resources is contested and civil society exposes the vested interests of dominant groups. The promotion of more participatory forms of decision-making is thus one of the key means of addressing the underlying causes of forest loss.

3.10 Aid:

The case studies show that European Aid can be an important contributory force to forest loss in recipient countries. While it is accepted that not all aid projects and programmes have damaging consequences, there is clear evidence that aid directed at non-forest sectors, including sectoral and structural adjustment lending, often completely ignores the possible knock-on effects on forests. Even infrastructural and agricultural projects with very obvious connections to forests are sometimes developed with scant concern for their wider impact.

On the other hand, development assistance for forestry projects in developing countries often causes forest loss exactly because the projects have been developed without taking the underlying problems into account. The result is that these projects perpetuate a destructive model of forest management which excludes communities, place too high a priority on wood production, are export orientated and take no measures to restrain the influence of vested interests who put personal gain above public and environmental concerns.

The meeting noted that aid sometimes promotes the export of technologies, policies and practices which have already been discredited or substituted within Europe. The meeting advocated the following reforms in the aid process.

- aid projects should seek to be more beneficiary-driven
- more attention needs to be given to social issues and vulnerable sectors especially women and indigenous peoples
- aid should become more programmatic and less project focused
- strategic impact assessments should be required
- there should be more experience sharing of 'best practice' among donors
- donor coordination needs to be enhanced

Summary of Proposed Solutions:

4. Implications for the IFF

This final section attempts to review the conclusions from the meeting, and the actions proposed, in terms of the Proposals for Action put forward by the IPF and summarised in Box 1. To what extent has the IPF identified the same underlying causes of forest loss as the case study authors and the meeting? Do the actions proposed by the IPF make sense in the light of the conclusions of the meeting?

4.1 Usefulness of the Diagnostic Framework:

A number of the case study authors have evidently made use of the diagnostic framework as a tool to assist their analyses. It seems clear that the framework has been useful to them in providing a skeleton on which to hang their arguments but that it does not by itself provide more than a starting point to investigation. If revisions of the diagnostic framework are contemplated in the future they should consider giving more explicit guidance which would direct studies to look into national political economies and their relations to forests. Studies should focus on conflicts of interest over forests and seek to elucidate the patterns of power, wealth, social organisation and cultural perception, which help determine their outcome, as it is these patterns which have to be changed if the status quo is to be changed and forest loss curbed.

4.2 Actions to Address the Underlying Causes:

The studies suggest that the list of underlying causes of forest loss adduced by the IPF (see Box 1) is incomplete. In particular it omits the following major forces highlighted in the case studies:

- production-oriented forest policies
- undue influence of vested interests
- skewed forest tenure regimes
- weak institutional and regulatory capacity
- narrow vision of foresters
- unregulated trade
- inappropriate aid
- corruption
- indiscriminate consumerism
- loss of cultural values
- political short-termism
- lack of participatory decision-making

It is also clear that the actions proposed by the IPF specifically to address the national and international underlying causes of forest loss are incomplete, inadequate and ambiguous.

4.2.1 Suppy and demand:

In particular, the conclusions that can be drawn from the European case studies suggest that Action Proposal 28 (a) is unclear. The proposal calls for countries:

to assess long term trends in their supply and demand for wood and to consider actions to promote the sustainability of their wood supply and their means of meeting demand, with a special emphasis on investment in sustainable forest management and the strengthening of institutions for forest resource and forest plantations management.

This could be interpreted as a formula for yet further demand-led decision-making, exactly the underlying cause of forest loss most clearly highlighted by the studies. What the studies make clear is that the need is for exactly the opposite formulation, that countries should seek to reduce demand to match the potential for sustainable supply. If this is what Action Proposal 28 (a) is meant to say it should be reworded.

4.2.2 Role of Plantations:

In Action Proposal 28 (b), the IPF has likewise urged countries:

to recognize and enhance the role of forest plantations as an important element of sustainable forest management complementary to natural forests. (emphasis added)

The meeting concluded that this is quite inappropriate advice for European countries. As the case studies detail, a common cause of forest loss throughout Europe is the substitution of natural forests with intensively managed plantations, through the highly mechanised planting of even-aged stands of often non-native conifers and other fast-growing species in areas of mixed and broad-leaved forests. What is needed in Europe is not an enhanced role for plantations but an enhanced role for natural forests. (and see also section 4.3.4)

4.2.3 Role of Local Communities:

On the other hand, other recommendations of the IPF aimed at addressing forest loss coincide closely with the conclusions of the meeting. In particular Action Proposal 29 (c) urges countries to:

formulate policies aiming at securing land tenure for local communities and indigenous people, including policies as appropriate aimed at the fair and equitable sharing of benefits of forests.

The meeting noted that a breakdown of community management regimes early in the history of European forests has opened the way to destructive exploitation, while contrarily policies to individualise forest ownership through generalised land reforms have likewise intensified profit-seeking at the expense of long-term management. Restoration of community rights and measures that ensure that benefits from forest use accrue first of all

to local people needs to be encouraged in Europe no less than in developing countries where traditional systems have been more recently disrupted. The meeting noted however that the promotion of community control should not be at the expense of a relaxation of central authority.

4.2.4 Promoting Public Understanding:

Action Proposal 30 (a) urges countries:

to provide timely, reliable and accurate information on the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation where needed, as well as on the multiple roles of forests, as a foundation for public understanding and decision-making.

One of the conclusions from the meeting is that a lack of awareness about the underlying causes of forest loss is itself an underlying cause. Many of the case study authors called for enhanced public awareness about forest issues and their informed participation in policy making.

4.3 Other actions proposed by the IPF:

In the light of the European meeting a number of other action proposals by the IPF bear further scrutiny.

4.3.1 Implementing national forest programme:

One of the main proposals for action adduced by the IPF (Action Proposal 17 (a-i)) was to encourage countries to undertake national forest programmes 'taking into consideration the following: partnerships and participatory mechanisms to involve interested parties; recognition and respect for customary and traditional rights of inter alia indigenous people and local communities; secure tenure arrangements; holistic, intersectoral and iterative approaches; ecosystem approaches, which integrate the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of biological resources; adequate provision and valuation of forest goods and services.' Countries were likewise urged to develop 'participatory mechanisms to integrate timely and continuous multidisciplinary research into all stages of the planning cycle', develop more effective means for broad participation in decision-making, including through the creation of national coordination mechanisms for consensus-building and measures to build up the capacity of forest administration.

These proposals coincide, broadly, with some of the conclusions from the European regional process. The European case studies show that in few, if any, of the countries studied are national forest programmes being developed in these ways. In general in Europe:

- participation is weak and national coordination mechanisms, where they exist, rarely involve all 'stakeholders' on an equal basis
- customary rights are in many countries weak, have been undermined or are at risk
- in countries with economies in transition, in particular, tenure regimes are unclear
- intersectoral links are very weak
- ecological, protective, social and conservation values are given little weight compared to industrial demand and wood-production.

The European case studies also suggest that by themselves such national forest programmes may not have much effect if underlying issues are not simultaneously addressed, in particular: the power of vested interests to subvert policy decisions in their favour; the tendency to adjust systems of supply to match demand, rather than vice versa; exaggerated expectations of the degree to which forests can be exploited to contribute to national economic growth.

4.3.2 Promoting traditional forest related knowledge:

Action Proposal 40, especially paragraphs 40 (d), 40 (e) and 40 (h), also coincides with the findings of the European process. Finding an increased role for traditional forest related knowledge in forest management should contribute to the overall goal of shifting forest management policies away from an undue emphasis on wood production by giving more emphasis to the diverse interests of local communities.

4.3.3 Curbing air-borne pollution:

European forests suffer very severely from air-borne pollution, a matter already addressed to some extent by the IPF's Action Proposal 50. Much more detailed discussion is now needed on how to effectively implement Action Proposals 50 (a) and 50 (e). In these Action Proposals the IPF respectively:

Encouraged countries to adopt a preventative approach to the reduction of damaging air pollution, which may include long-range transboundary air pollution, in national strategies for sustainable development.

and:

Recommended countries to consider entering into international agreements as appropriate on the reduction of long-range transboundary air pollution.

The European meeting noted that the EU Directive has not effectively resolved this problem in Europe principally because it does not address the underlying causes of pollution (see section 3.9 above).

4.3.4 Countries with low forest cover:

The European case studies have highlighted the extremely degraded state of Europe's forests. Very few of the countries focused on in the regional consultation can be said to have substantial areas of healthy old growth forests and ancient woodlands, even where they have maintained extensive areas under tree cover. Europe is an area of low forest cover.

The case studies suggest that European countries should give careful attention to implementing IPF Action Proposal 58 (b). Particular emphasis should be given to 58 (b) (ii) which urges countries with low forest cover:

to plan and manage forest plantations, where appropriate, to enhance production and provision of goods and services, while paying due attention to relevant social, cultural, economic and enevironmental considerations in the selection of silvicultural systems, preferring native species where appropriate, and taking all parcticable steps to avoid replacing natural ecosystems of high ecological and cultural values with forest plantations, particularly monocultures.

Given that the majority of forests and woodlands in Europe are heavily degraded, IPF Action Proposal 58 (b) (iv) also requires serious attention. This proposal urges countries:

to promote the regeneration and restoration of degraded forest areas, including by involving inter alia indigenous people, local communities, forest dwellers and forest owners in their protection and management.

The case studies from European countries with economies in transition also make clear that IPF Action Proposal 58 (b) (vi) is particularly relevant. The proposal urges such countries:

to embark on capacity-building at national and sub-national and local leves, and including especially existing national institutions, to promote effective participation in decision-making with respect to forests throughout the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation process, and taking full advantage of the wealth of traditional knowledge available in the country. (emphasis added)

In addition, European countries should give more emphasis to conserving natural forest remnants and to recreating natural forests. While forest policies in Western Europe are already moving in this direction much more needs to be done. In Eastern Europe measures need to be taken to accelerate the same shift in policy and to avert them following the western path of first degrading or destroying forests before realising the value of conserving them.

4.4 What's left out?

This review of the relevant actions so far agreed by government as ways of dealing with the global forest crisis also shows that a number of key underlying causes of deforestation are not yet being taken into account in intergovernmental debates.

4.4.1 Adjusting the balance of power over forests:

The European meeting concluded that decisions about forests which result in forest loss are, on the whole, not taken as a result of ignorance about the likely consequences but because powerful or dominant interests, seek to extract benefits from these decisions. These vested interests, whether they be consumers, forest owners, road-builders, land speculators, loggers, industrialists, politicians or foresters, are able to act in these ways both because national policies, laws, institutions and markets, favour these decisions and because those members of civil society who oppose such decisions are weak, poorly organised, poorly informed and have few institutional means of redress.

The IPF has suggested a number of measures aimed at shifting this balance of power in favour of presently marginalised interests, notably: promotion of traditional knowledge; securing indigenous and local communities' rights; new methodologies for assessing multiple benefits; a greater stress on ecosystem and conservation values; more inclusive and structured systems of participation; assessment of inter-sectoral linkages; greater provision of information to the general public. These suggestions are welcome, though hardly new, but it should be obvious that, even were they to be fully implemented in all countries, they will not by themselves shift power and influence far.

4.4.2 Reducing the pressure of consumption:

The European case studies have also made clear that behind the national policies which have given undue emphasis to forests as sources of wood, rather than other goods and services, lies the overwhelming pressure of the market. Globally escalating levels of consumption of wood and wood products (and many other commodities) are often a driving force behind much forest loss. Forest yield and forest management practices are being determined by the need to (and the profitability of) meeting demand over and above other criteria. Accepted and then enforced 'criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management' may be one way of limiting this pressure but, even if adequate and successful, will only shift the pressure to other forests and countries.

Regionally and globally sustainable forest management will be impossible until the issue of excess consumption is addressed. To date there is no evidence that the intergovernmental community has the will to even discuss this issue let alone confront it in an equitable and unpartizan way.

4.4.3 Reforming European Aid:

The European case studies also demonstrate clearly the need for far-reaching reforms in the way international development assistance is used. The IPF Action Proposals limit themselves to calling for additional aid monies and call on donors and international agencies to support certain actions. They do not however make any proposals on how to improve the quality as opposed to the quantity of aid. Nor is there any evidence that the Inter-Agency Task Force of Forests is contemplating any kind of overall review of the effectiveness of development asssistance related to forests.

In the circumstances, and especially given the loud calls for additional aid from developing and transition countries, there is obviously an urgent need to confront this problem more frankly and openly.

4.4.4 Regulating international trade and investment:

As noted in the previous section, Europe casts a long shadow on the forests of the rest of the world. European consumption, trading enterprises and foreign investment have a major impact on the way forests and other natural resources are exploited in non-European countries. The IPF elaborated almost no Action Proposals so deal with this problem and the 'substantive discussion' on the issue during second session of the IFF was acutely disappointing. Neither are proposals being made for countries to regulate the overseas activities of their own transnational companies, nor are measures being discussed by which countries may restrict or penalise imports of products that are produced by environmentally destructive means. Even measures for host countries to better regulate powerful transnationals operating on their territories are not being seriously addressed.

The lack of progress at the international level in addressing the real connections between foreign trade and investment and the environment is the single greatest failure to date in international environmental negotiations.

The meeting noted how three tiers of international law are given very different priority. International trade agreements are binding, imply a surrender of an important measure of sovereignty, are effectively enforceable and have repeatedly overridden other pieces of international law. Human rights agreements, while binding on governments and implying real new obligations and some surrender of sovereignty, are only weakly enforceable. International environmental agreements, on the other hand, specifically exclude any loss of sovereignty, impose few binding obligations and are hardly enforceable at all. The dominance of trade interests over social and environmental values is thus entrenched in international law.

This imbalance between the three strands of international law, reflects the priorities given to commercial interests over other values and is a fundamental underlying cause of forest loss. The meeting recommended that this issue be given detailed discussion at the Costa Rica meeting, which could consider proposals such as special sessions to address the matter in joint meetings between the IFF and OECD or the CSD and the WTO.

4.5 Implications for a Global Forest Convention:

The IPF's Proposals for Action are the farthest the international community has yet got in developing consensus for action in relation to forests. Before and during the IPF discussions a number of governments and international agencies were pressing for agreement on an international instrument on forests. In the event consensus was not acheived and the CSD and UNGASS only recommended that the possibility of an instrument be further discussed during the IFF. The Governments of Canada and Costa Rica have agreed to sponsor an intersessional process to look into the need for, and the possible scope, content and mechanisms for such an instrument, the first meeting of which will be held in Costa Rica in February 1999. Both Governments have expressed an expectation that the results of the intersessional on addressing the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation will feed into this second intersessional process.

During the IPF the majority of NGOs expressed the view that talk of a global forests convention was premature as there was neither enough consensus on the key issues that such an instrument should address, nor on how they should be addressed. The case studies elaborated for the European workshop and the analysis given above, substantialy reinforce these conclusions. As noted above, major underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation have not yet been identified by the international community. On the other hand, pressing issues that have been repeatedly raised as key issues for resolution - like effective participation, reducing consumption, reform of aid practice, regulations on international trade and investment - are still not being seriously addressed. Until they are, discussion of an international instrument on forests still seems premature.

The European meeting emphasised the extent to which the underlying causes of forest loss while often international in character were also very often context specific in their impacts. Consequently, local and national solutions were often felt to be more likely to be effective than broad-brush international initiatives. The key issues that need to be addressed at the international level were considered to lie outside the present scope of the InterGovernmental Forum on Forests.

back to UC Process