national report on sustainable forests-2003
DESCRIPTION
Building upon the National Report on Sustainable Forests and U.S. National Report to UNFF: Assessment, Action and the Need for a National Dialogue on Sustainable Forest Management Al Sample Pinchot Institute for Conservation. National Report on Sustainable Forests-2003. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Building upon the National Report on Sustainable Forests and
U.S. National Report to UNFF:
Assessment, Action and the Need for a National Dialogue on
Sustainable Forest Management
Al SamplePinchot Institute for Conservation
National Report on Sustainable Forests-2003
“This report provides factual
information. It explains what we
know and do not know about
forest sustainability. But this
report will cause no change by
itself. . .”
National Report on Sustainable Forests-2003
“Our actions speak louder than words. This report gives us a golden opportunity to better understand SFM and to immediately begin doing what we know needs to be done on the ground to improve forest sustainability.”
Proposals for Action: Short history
• 1997 - UN Intergovernmental Panel on Forests
(IPF): 150 Proposals for Action to promote
country progress toward sustainable forest
management
• 1999 - UN Intergovernmental Forum on Forests
(IFF): 120 addition Proposals for Action to
promote policy dialogue on unresolved issues
• 2000-2005 - UN Forum on Forests (UNFF): to
oversee implementation of Proposals for Action
UNFF 2 (2002) themes:
• Combating deforestation and forest
degradation
• Forest conservation and protection of unique
ecosystems
• Conservation strategies for countries with low
forest cover
• Rehabilitation/restoration of degraded lands
• Promotion of natural and planted forests
• Concepts, terminology and definitions
UNFF 3 (2003) themes:
•Economic aspects of forests
•Forest health and productivity
•Maintaining forest cover to meet
present and future needs
UNFF 4 (2004) themes:
•Traditional forest related knowledge
•Forest-related scientific knowledge
•Social and cultural aspects of forests
•Monitoring, assessment and reporting
terminology
•Criteria and indicators of SFM
US Commitment
The US has agreed to implement the
IPF/IFF Proposals for Action in a manner
consistent with national priorities and
within political, social, and economic
limits.
Purposes of country reports
1. Domestic. Facilitate a country’s own internal assessment of forest conditions and trends as a basis for evaluation and potential further actions to promote SFM.
2. International. Serve as a basis for technical and/or financial assistance to promote SFM—or as a model to guide other nations as they build their own institutional, legal and policy framework for SFM.
US country report to UNFF:
Unique approach
Existing responses to Proposals for
Action from:
• Government: federal, state and tribal
• Private forest landowners
• Forest industry
• Conservation NGOs
Consultation with stakeholders:
• Acceptability of current conditions
and trends
• Adequacy of existing actions
• Options for possible further actions
• Prioritization among possible actions
Key concerns:
• Loss of forest cover and shifts in forest land use
• Fragmentation by development and other
non-forest land uses
• Forest industry divestitures and loss of long-
term commitment to SFM
• Parcelization of private forests into smaller,
less manageable tracts
Key concerns:
• Conservation of biological diversity
• Representation of full range of ecotypes
• Habitat protection for rare, local, and T&E
species
• Alien invasive species displacing native species
• Aggressive competition
• Introduction of new pathogens
Key concerns:
• Large scale insect and disease outbreaks, and
uncontrolled spread from public to adjacent
private lands
• Catastropic wildfire that threatens communities
as well as forest resources
• Displacement of natural forests by forest
plantations
• Climate change effects on forest ecosystems
Policy change and implementation tools:
• New voluntary market-based mechanisms
(rather than government regulation) for
promoting SFM
• Forest certification
• Provide consumers with environmentally
sound wood products
• Enhance public confidence in forest
management
Policy change and implementation tools:
• Monetize ecosystem services to facilitate
increased financial support for private forest
landowners providing multiple public benefits
• Protect high conservation value forests on both
public and private lands
• Conservation easements in which public
conservation values can be demonstrated and
monitored over time
Policy change and implementation tools:
• Community-based stewardship for ecological
restoration and long-term maintenance of a variety
of conservation values
• Renewable energy development
• Biomass energy to offset fossil fuel use and GHG
• Development of new markets to facilitate
ecological restoration and forest improvement
Information systems and management:
• Improved data collection, with agreed upon
protocols for collecting, organizing, and
sharing information on forests
• Focused, objective-based monitoring as a
basis for change analysis
Information systems and management:
• Improved reporting of forest information,
with better synthesis as a basis for policy
change and decision making
• Better evaluation and prioritizing of
information systems, considering budgets
and human resources
Periodic snapshots important, but not sufficient to address priority needs for improving SFM in US forests
• What does the information mean (interpretation)?
• How can it serve as a basis for improvement in collective
efforts to gather, monitor and report information?
• How can it serve as a basis for identifying specific
opportunities for timely, effective action on forest
conditions and trends widely acknowledged to be:
• Unacceptable
• High priority
How should the National Report on Sustainable Forests – 2010 read differently from the 2003 report?
• Changes measurable in the near-term
• Changes measurable only over longer-term, but
requiring decisive action now for progress to
become apparent in subsequent National Reports
on Sustainable Forests
Ongoing national dialogue on SFM needed:
• Broaden range and diversity of stakeholders with
an opportunity to participate
• Facilitate coordination among institutions on:
• Policy development
• Improvements in information systems
• Action-oriented to address unsatisfactory forest
conditions and trends in advance of next National
Report
Roundtable on Sustainable Forests
• Focused to date on development of factual basis for the
National Report assessment of conditions and trends
• Is RSF capable (and suitable) as an action mechanism
for promoting improvements in SFM, not just
assessment?
Reports available for review at:
•www.pinchot.org/international/unff
(US reports-long version, including
policies, programs, activities by public
private and nonprofit sectors)
•www.un.org/esa/forests/reports-unff5
(country reports-short version)
Pinchot Institute contacts
Al Sample (202) 797-6580
Mary Chapman (202) 797-6585