Introduction

This report presents the findings from an analysis and evaluation carried out by environmental non-governmental organizations in Canada, aimed at providing information and input to the International Affairs division of the Canadian Forest Service (CFS). The focus of the analysis is on the implementation of the proposals for action agreed to by countries (including Canada) that participated in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF). It is intended to be a prioritized analysis, weighted towards those proposals that are of greatest interest to conservation groups in Canada.

The Canadian Environmental Network’s Forest Caucus consists of over 100 environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) in Canada. Since 1995 the CEN Forest Caucus has played a key role in coordinating ENGO input on international forest policy to the Canadian government. This has been done through facilitating consultation meetings, developing discussion and position papers and providing NGO advice to the Canadian delegation for major forest-related United Nations meetings.

In the summer of 2001 representatives of the CEN Forest Caucus and CFS International Affairs began to discuss how best to facilitate ENGO input into Canada’s contribution to the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF). It was agreed that initial efforts should focus on the implementation of the IPF/IFF Proposals for Action, since this is a major item of the UNFF’s work plan. Rather than simply having ENGOs react and respond to draft position papers developed by governmental representatives, there was mutual interest in exploring ways to build stakeholder participation into earlier stages of the development and implementation of international forest policy and strategy. For this reason it was decided to hold a workshop that would be able to explore the issues in greater detail than is possible after government positions have already been drafted.

The CEN Forest Caucus appreciates the encouragement and support for this project that we have received from Jocelyne Caloz, Director of International Affairs for the Canadian Forest Service, whose department sponsored the workshop. As well, we are grateful for the active and helpful participation of both Jocelyne and Mike Fullerton from the International Affairs division of CFS, who engaged in discussions with us in an open and thoughtful manner that helped us to identify our common goal in moving the international forest policy dialogue further ahead.

Thanks and appreciation is also owed to Chantal Bois, Caucus Coordinator for the CEN, who coordinated the workshop; to Amelia Clarke, who provided note-taking assistance during our discussions; and to Rachel Plotkin, who assisted in the preparation of the final report.

The body of this report – including the strategic priorities and recommendations for next steps – represents the collective views of the workshop participants, who participated in their individual capacity. They are listed in Appendix A. Their organizational affiliations are included for information purposes but this report does not necessarily represent the views of those organizations.

The International forest policy dialogue[1]

The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) has facilitated extensive deliberations on the actions that are required to promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests by initially establishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and then the Intergovernmental Forum (IFF) on Forests. The IPF and the IFF have examined a wide range of forest-related topics over a five year period and have recommended more than 270 proposals for action to be adopted by the international community.

Although the IPF/IFF proposals for action are of a non-legally binding nature, participants of these processes are under a political obligation to implement the agreed proposals for action. Each country is expected to conduct a systematic national assessment of the IPF/IFF proposals for action and to plan for their implementation.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Forests

The Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) met four times during the period 1995–1997. It was mandated to pursue consensus and formulate options for further actions in order to combat deforestation, and forest degradation and to promote the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests. The IPF’s final report contained more than 150 proposals for action, covering the five elements of its work program:

1. Implementation of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) decisions related to forests at the national and international levels;

2. International cooperation in financial assistance and technology transfer;

3. Scientific research, forest assessment, and development of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management;

4. Trade and environment in relation to forest products and services;

5. International organizations and multilateral institutions, and instruments, including appropriate legal mechanisms.

The Intergovernmental Forum on Forests

The Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF) met four times during the period 1997–2000. It was mandated to facilitate implementation of the IPF proposals for action and to further the policy dialogue on a number of issues that were left pending from the IPF process. The IFF’s final report contained more than 120 additional proposals for action, covering the three categories and eight elements of its work program.

Category I

(a) Promoting and facilitating the implementation of the IPF’s proposals for action.

(b) Reviewing, monitoring and reporting on progress in the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

Category II (including matters left pending from IPF)

(a) The need for financial resources.

(b) Trade and environment.

(d) Issues needing further clarification including: underlying causes of deforestation; traditional forest-related knowledge; forest conservation and protected areas; forest research; valuation of forest goods and services; economic instruments, tax policies and land tenure; future supply and demand for wood and non-wood products; and assessment, monitoring and rehabilitation of forest cover in environmentally critical areas.

(e) Forest-related work of international and regional organizations.

Category III related to future international arrangements and mechanisms for forests.

The United Nations Forum on Forests, and next steps on implementing proposals for action

The United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) is the permanent intergovernmental body responsible for overseeing the implementation of the IPF/IFF proposals for action as well as enhancing cooperation and maintaining forest policy dialogue. The UNFF has to develop a plan of action for the implementation of the proposals for action and then support and monitor progress with the implementation of this work. The UNFF’s first substantive meeting took place in New York City on June 11-12^th, 2001. Its second meeting will take place in San José, Costa Rica from the 4-15^th of March 2002. Among the items on the agenda is a country-level review of the implementation of IPF/IFF proposals for action, as well as a Ministerial meeting that will provide input on forests to the Rio+10 process.

The proposals for action are directed at many players, but particularly at countries and international forest-related organizations and institutions. Within individual countries, the implementation of the proposals for action are to be undertaken by national and sub-national governments as well as a range of relevant stakeholders. In particular, stakeholders such as the private sector, forest and land owners, local communities, indigenous and forest dependent people, civil society, non-governmental organizations, research, education and aid organizations would all have roles to play.

Greater progress with implementation of the proposals for action is likely to be achieved if all of the stakeholders have a common understanding of what needs to be done and there is an appropriate coordinating mechanism in place to foster cooperative partnerships.

The priority analysis

The Canadian Forest Service has asked the CEN Forest Caucus to help facilitate discussion about the IPF/IFF proposals for action among environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) in Canada. These discussions are intended to result in recommendations for priority areas where further attention and action is most urgently needed (and potentially most strategically effective). The results from this consultation will be combined with other input being solicited separately by the Canadian Forest Service, including the views of Aboriginal groups and the forest industry.

We agreed that the best way to obtain this input from ENGOs would be through a workshop, combining the collective expertise and viewpoints of ENGOs from across Canada. It was deemed impractical, however, to have all workshop participants review the full set of IPF/IFF proposals for action, a total of over 250 separate proposals. In order to have a fruitful discussion it was felt to be important to focus discussion on a more manageable set of proposals. On the other hand, it was important to ensure that all proposals were given at least some consideration.

The process used by the Forest Caucus to accomplish this task is as follows:

1. Through a peer delegate selection process three Forest Caucus members were commissioned to jointly write a discussion paper and final report from the workshop.

2. The team of researchers (Martin von Mirbach, Lara Ellis and Mark Purdon) decided to simplify the initial task by taking advantage of work done by the Government of Australia to summarize the proposals in a way that is easy to understand, groups similar actions together and avoids duplication while capturing the important aspects or intent of each proposal for action.

3. The team used the overall grouping of the Australian summary’s 92 proposals as a template (although it was necessary to change the wording of certain proposal groupings). As well, the team ranked each proposal using a ranking scheme that had been used previously in some work carried out internally by CFS.

4. The team identified a provisional set of proposals that they felt might be considered strategic priorities for further action. It is important to note that these proposals are not necessarily the most important ones, but they are ones that offer strategic opportunities for mobilizing new commitments to take action in addition to actions that are being carried out in any case. These proposals are ranked with a “1” and are listed in bold type in the gap analysis (Appendix B).

5. The CEN issued a call for interested Forest Caucus members to attend a workshop to discuss the IPF/IFF proposals for action, and carried out a delegate selection process.

6. The draft priority analysis with the preliminary set of strategic priorities was distributed to workshop participants and to CFS in advance of the workshop, and was discussed at the workshop, held on December 14, 2001, with CFS officials present for the first part of the workshop to provide context, information and preliminary reactions.

7. The team of researchers incorporated the views of all workshop participants in the preparation of the final report, including the selection of strategic priorities, analysis as to why they are important and recommendations for further action.

The CEN Forest Caucus has not been requested to develop a formal position paper. This report reflects the views of the participants to the workshop, but not necessarily the formal views of the organizations each participant is affiliated with.

The Canadian Environmental Network works closely together with members of the First Nations Environmental Network on areas of common interest, with the goal of sharing views and information, articulating areas of commonality and collaborating on joint initiatives. There was participation from the First Nations Environmental Network at the workshop, although there is also a separate process for soliciting the views of Aboriginal organizations in Canada.

It is anticipated that the results from this workshop will be incorporated with findings from other similar processes (involving Aboriginal and industry groups), and will help to guide the development of a Canadian position to take to UNFF2, as well as a national strategy for the implementation of IPF/IFF proposals for action.

Proposed strategic priorities for mobilizing additional activity in Canada

This section describes eight key areas where environmental non-governmental organizations in Canada agree that further work can and should be done in Canada to fulfill the letter and the spirit of some of the key commitments made at the IPF/IFF.

It is important to note that these strategic priorities are not intended to necessarily represent the “most important” IPF/IFF Proposals for Action. Some of the IPF/IFF proposals are of crucial importance to sustainable forestry worldwide, but not necessarily currently being focused on by ENGOs in Canada. Other proposals are priorities for Canadian ENGOs but we felt that progress is currently being made. It is important that the activities being carried out to implement all of the IPF/IFF Proposals for Action be continued and built upon, whether or not they are listed among the strategic priorities below. These strategic priorities are intended chiefly to focus attention on where additional activity is required.

Key strategic priorities for further action are linked to specific IPF/IFF Proposals for Action, the most relevant of which are referenced by number in the section below, with the complete text to be found in Appendix C.

________________________________________________________________

Strategic Priority 1: Develop and implement a holistic national forest program that integrates the conservation and sustainable use of forest resources and values.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals: IPF17(a)

Rationale: Canada already has experience with the process of developing a national forest strategy; the 1998 strategy is the second to be developed by the multistakeholder National Forest Strategy Coalition. There has, however, been a waning of commitment both in the development of the strategy and – even more critically – in its implementation. With Canada expected to develop a new National Forest Strategy in time to showcase it at the World Forestry Congress in Québec City in the fall of 2003, there is a valuable opportunity for Canada to develop a plan that shows true vision, innovation and leadership, and “raises the bar” for sustainable forestry both in Canada and as an international example. In order to do this successfully there must be an effective process to develop the 2003 strategy that engages a broad spectrum of the public and stakeholders.

What needs to be done:

Carry out a critical review of the state of sustainable forest management. This should be done on a provincial basis to determine the success of previous strategies by making available to the public information on the status of:

i) land tenure: indicated by the percentage of forest land base consecrated to different management types

ii) subsidy and financial structure: list the amounts of government funds granted to various aspects of the forest management sector with a focus on stumpage fees and other tax/financial instruments

iii) protected areas: percentage of area of forest land base under conservation using IUCN criteria

iv) timeline: a list of forest related policy measures (international/national/provincial) with indication of intended date of achievement and, if deadline has passed, whether this measure has been achieved or not.

An agreement should be developed with the help of a coalition of NGOs and other relevant parties on how to structure the process to design the
next forest strategy.
There will need to be sufficient resources committed to ensure that participation in the development of the strategy is broad.
To warrant that the new National Forest Strategy is more than simply a compilation of existing initiatives, there should be a defined negotiation process and conflict resolution mechanism to resolve disagreements and conflicts between participants.
Develop the new National Forest Strategy through an open and participatory process, addressing not only “forestry-specific” issues but also the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation.
Ensure that the National Forest Strategy is harmonious with the provisions of the CBD and the decisions of the Parties
Urge countries in implementing their forest programmes, and take measures to rehabilitate and protect the Traditional Forest Related Knowledge (TFRK), taking into account that an essential condition for the effective protection and rehabilitation of TFRK is the integrity and cultural survival of forest-dependent people.

Measures of success:
The number and diversity of new signatories to the new National Forest Strategy
New commitments that "raise the bar" of existing provincial commitments, both in terms of policy and independent monitoring.

Strategic Priority 2: Develop and implement policies and mechanisms to reform forest tenure and recognize access to and use of forest resources by local and/or indigenous communities.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals: IPF 29(c); IFF 64(c) & (d)

Rationale: Large-scale industrial tenure arrangements in Canada have been developed in order to promote sustained yield forestry, which is based upon the principle of converting old growth forests into second growth stands, but are not always appropriate for addressing the more complex requirements of sustainable forest management, which aims to ensure that the ecological integrity of the forest is maintained. Other factors – community benefits, Aboriginal rights, non-timber forest products and services – become characterized as constraints rather than opportunities. At the same time, existing tenure arrangements in Canada have received intense scrutiny and criticism for their trade-distorting impacts inasmuch as they provide large companies with fibre at costs that are significantly less than the true market value. For example, in Newfoundland 99 year leases for hundreds of thousands of hectares were awarded to a company for the cost of less than a third of a cent per acre, with a royalty of 50 cents per thousand board feet of lumber produced, with no stumpage fees. The lease included timber, mineral and water rights, and the cost has not increased over time to reflect inflation. Tenure reform can redress these imbalances and at the same time provide enhanced access to resources by communities.

What needs to be done:

A major national initiative to recognize and address Aboriginal title and rights, both within treaty lands as well as on lands currently being contested or under negotiation
A national initiative to gather information about, learn from and more broadly apply successful experiments in community-based forest license agreements or best-forest community practices
Provincial tenure “clawback” initiatives developed
A nation-wide moratorium on any new large-scale forestry licenses without an integrated land use plan for the region, including completion of any gaps in the protected areas network and resolution of outstanding Aboriginal land claims or other related legal land use issues.
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 the benefits of forests. Indigenous communities and local communities should benefit from the use of their innovations, knowledge and practices. Benefits from the use of forest genetic resources by national and transnational companies should be shared with the communities.

Measures of success:

Significant change to tenures and license agreements currently under re-negotiation (e.g. increased area of First Nations and community ownership agreements, changes in existing stumpage fees and tax instruments).
Level of retention of benefits in affected local and/or indigenous forest communities as a result of new forest policy initiatives.

Strategic Priority 3: Improve the collection of quantitative data on values of all forest goods and services and environmental and social impacts of current and potential changes in forest use to assist policy and investment decisions.

Relevant IFF/IPF commitments: IPF 104(a), IFF 107(a)

Rationale: To date, commitments by forestry companies to incorporate non-timber forest values in their planning have relied mostly on regulations, policies and good intentions, without there always being a sound information base to support these decisions. Full cost accounting is an important methodology that should be more broadly applied, but it requires adequate information in order to be a truly useful tool to promote sustainable forest management.

What needs to be done:

A national effort could systematize the gathering of data on certain non-timber forest goods and services, as well as develop and implement appropriate methodologies for incorporating this information into forest management planning considerations.
Develop credible methods and mechanisms to ensure that forest carbon accounting supports the intent of both the Convention on Biological Diversity as well as the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Apply the Genuine Progress Index to the forest sector in a comprehensive manner.

Measures of Success:

Extent of use of GPI in forest strategies and plans at the national, provincial and regional levels
Range of forest-related goods and services managed using quantitative objectives and indicators

Uses of technological aids such as satellite imagery to capture illegal forestry practices and/or carbon counting (maps publicized).

· Involvement of local and/or indigenous communities in local-level monitoring and/or mitigating regimes.

Strategic Priority 4: Develop and implement integrated national policies, strategies, economic instruments and mechanisms to support sustainable forest management and to address deforestation and forest degradation - including the underlying causes of each.

Relevant IFF/IPF commitments: IPF 29(a), 30(a), IFF 115(c)

Rationale: At previous international fora Canada has tended to interpret the phrase “deforestation and forest degradation” as applying only in developing countries. This must be changed, both because deforestation is a serious problem in certain regions of Canada (urban encroachment, oil and gas impacts in Alberta, NSR lands in Saskatchewan) but especially because forest degradation is a huge issue in Canada, where the conversion of primary forests into secondary forests results in significant impacts. Canada must demonstrate leadership in coming to grips with the issue as a domestic priority.

More study and analysis and action must be taken to support
sustainable forestry. This will include addressing perverse subsidies that benefit companies at the expense of communities and the environment,
taking a different approach to setting harvest levels and looking at some
specific causes of deforestation and forest degradation, such as land tenure structures, oil and gas exploration and air pollution.

What needs to be done:

Build on and continue the work already being done (by Global Forest Watch and the Forest Stewardship Council) to define, identify and map high conservation value and frontier forests.
Improve geographical information systems to include data, so that ecological mapping might be conducted in order to identify forests at high risk of degradation.
Identify and take steps to remove perverse policies, subsidies and incentives that result in forest degradation
Initiate more critical, historical reviews of forest policy with an emphasis on ecological, social and economic aspects.

Measures of success:

· Implementation and impact of new forest management policies

Extent and rate of primary forest conversion
Remaining amount of old-growth forests and habitat for old-growth dependent species
Linear disturbances per km²
Per capita consumption rates of forest products
Value of benefits gained from the sale of forest products, including revenue and employment from manufacturing and value-added manufacturing, per volume logged
Number of historical reviews initiated by third parties

Strategic Priority 5: Complete a national network of representative protected areas and ensure that the ecosystems are managed in order to protect a full range of natural values.

Relevant IFF/IPF commitments: IPF 46(c), IFF 85 (a,b)

Rationale: Canada has not accomplished its goal of protecting biodiversity
through the establishment of national, provincial and territorial networks
of representative protected areas. All jurisdictions committed to
completing this goal by the year 2000, and all failed. These commitments
must be completed as quickly as possible, since demand and competition for
resources will continue to grow and make it harder to complete the
protected areas network.

What needs to be done

· A national moratorium on new forest licenses/allocations without the prior designation of adequate protected areas.

· An active government role to encourage and facilitate delivery of protected areas requirements as part of forest certification schemes.

· Ensure that the 2000 renewed Statement of Commitment to complete Canada’s networks of protected areas adopted jointly by federal, provincial and territorial governments is applied.

Measures of Success:

· Rate of increase in representative protected areas

· Trends in protection of species at risk and the health of their populations.

Strategic Priority 6: Increase forest-related Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) to support “bottom-up” approaches to development – local capacity building, research into underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation, access to information, and integration of local and indigenous communities — in order to ensure a holistic, democratic implementation of SFM.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals: IPF 17(g), 40(g), 58(e), 70(c), 71(b); IFF 9(g), 56(d), 56(f), 56(m), 56(n), 84

Rationale: There has been a history of ODA being used to fund large-scale development projects that endanger ecosystems, displace communities, and break the ties between the two. Recent sustainable development principles that place more emphasis on local capacity-building are welcome, but the actions of donor agencies – including CIDA – aren’t always consistent with those principles. Any increase in Canadian ODA to move towards the target of 0.7% of GDP should be done in the context of grassroots capacity-building and local sustainability.

What needs to be done:

· Develop a document that will serve as a tool for Canadian government development organizations (CIDA/IDRC/International Model Forest Network/CIDA-Inc.) investing in SFM-ODA which will include:

i) list of criteria and indicators of SFM-ODA, as well as a process ensuring their development and implementation.

ii) identify appropriate NGOs from the developing world with whom to undertake SFM-ODA projects. This document and list of references will serve thus as a tool for Canadian government development organizations (CIDA/IDRC/CIDA-Inc/International Model Forest Network) investing in SFM-ODA, both of which need to be acted upon.

· Preliminary SFM-ODA priorities identified by the CEN Forest are forest restoration and the involvement of civil society.

Measures of success:

· Completion and application of an ENGO-led set of criteria for environmentally appropriate ODA

· Growth in the number of ENGO-led (North-South) forest projects supported by CIDA, and the amount of funding allocated to them as a percentage of all forestry funding

Strategic Priority 7: Ensure that international trade negotiations are transparent and accountable to civil society, so that trade-related agreements might better support forest conservation.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals: IPF128(a); IFF 64(b), 65

Rationale: The effect of international trade negotiations and international financial institutions on sustainable forest management and conservation is a priority for ENGOs in their role as a political, economic and historical agents. There is a pressing need to accord greater transparency and accountability of such institutions to civil society and to permit greater participation in these processes by ENGOs and other groups with non-commercial interests. This is particularly important given the current Canada-US softwood lumber dispute, a forum from which ENGO participation has been excluded. Another relevant initiative here is the World Bank Forest Policy review; as well as other umbrella trade agreements (GATT, MAI, FTAA) with potentially significant impacts on all sectors of the economy, including forestry.

What needs to be done:

Develop and implement an adequate protocol indicating a process for civil society involvement in forest-related trade issues.
Apply the existing Strategic Environmental Assessment framework already established under DFAIT to all new forest-related trade measures.

Measures of success:

· Ratio of ENGO access to trade negotiations relative to that of other stakeholders, particularly industry.

________________________________________________________________

Strategic Priority 8: Review contemporary forest revenue collection systems and the relation of land tenure to deforestation and forest degradation in order to better integrate cross-sectoral linkages of the social, economic and environmental aspects of sustainable forest management.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals: IPF 70(b), 89(h), 104(a); IFF 30(d), 64(c), 115(a-g)

Rationale: These reviews must be done in a transparent and participatory manner. When accompanied by appropriate policy changes this proposal offers the possibility of resolving the current softwood lumber dispute. Subsidies, particularly in the form of insufficient stumpage fees, contribute to forest degradation when they undervalue the resource[2].

What needs to be done:

· The ENGO community has taken the following positions on the softwood lumber dispute[3]:

a. Reduce corporate control over forest lands

b. Ensure full market value for our timber resource

c. Resist calls for compensation

d. Strengthen raw log export bans

e. Implement improved environmental measures

f. Recognize Aboriginal Title and Rights of Access

· A review including the above points should be initiated immediately for the softwood lumber dispute under DFAIT’s Strategic Environmental Assessment procedure.

· Establish an independent process to examine the ecological and socioeconomic impact of G8 government subsidies, involving ENGOs, First Nations, industry, government and academia.

· Revenue collection systems and land tenure policies should become a research priority of the Sustainable Forest Management Network, particularly researchers listed under Legacy 2, Strategies for SFM[4].

Measures of Success:

· Changes in provincial stumpage rates that represent the true cost of access to the resource

· proportion of ENGOs included in the review process

· Amount of independent research carried out on this topic

Recommendations for continued dialogue

In order to encourage and facilitate follow-up action on the recommended priority issues several important tasks need to be carried out. These are briefly described below.

1. Develop a multi-year work plan to encourage effective, consistent and strategic input in the development of meaningful Canadian contribution to the international forest policy dialogue

This work plan should be developed collaboratively between CFS and the CEN Forest Caucus. It should include consideration of all relevant international intergovernmental processes related to forests, especially the United Nations Forum on Forests, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Summit on Sustainable Development. It should also consider other processes that have relevance to forests, including the Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention to Combat Desertification, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, as well as various trade negotiations. While CFS is not the lead responsible agency on many of these initiatives it can play an important facilitative role (as it did recently in bringing NGO representatives to technical meetings of the CBD).

2. Reach a shared agreement on how the next National Forest Strategy will be developed

Many of Canada’s international commitments can only be met – or their effectiveness evaluated – in the context of the National Forest Strategy. There is a shared understanding that it will be especially important to “internationalize” the next Forest Strategy, since it will be showcased at the World Forestry Congress in Québec City in September 2003. More than any other individual NGO in Canada, the Forest Caucus has an “institutional memory” related to international forest commitments, and therefore an important role to play in developing the National Forest Strategy.

3. Develop an Action Plan for incorporating relevant international commitments into the National Forest Strategy

Many of the strategic priorities listed in this report are best implemented as part of a new National Forest Strategy. In this way Canada would be able to fully live up to its international commitments at the same time as it develops a truly visionary National Forest strategy; one that clearly and demonstrably advances Canadian forest practices and results in on-the-ground gains in forest and ecosystem health, sustainable communities and a genuine vision of long-term sustainability.

Appendix A: List of workshop participants

Name	Organization	Location
Jean Arnold	Falls Brook Centre	Knowlesville, NB
Chantal Bois	Canadian Environmental Network	Ottawa ON
Tyhson Banighen	Turtle Island Earth Stewards	Salmon Arm BC
Lara Ellis	Canadian Nature Federation	Ottawa ON
Tim Gray	CPAWS/Wildlands League	Toronto ON
Ernest Meili	Saskatchewan Environmental Society	Saskatoon SK
Rosario Ortiz Quijano	Solidarite Canada Sahel	Montreal QC
Erika Pittman	Humber Environment Action Group	Rocky Harbour NF
Rachel Plotkin	Sierra Club of Canada	Ottawa ON
Mark Purdon	L’action boréale en Abitibi-Témiscamingue	Rouyn-Noranda, QC
Jillian Tamblyn	Alberta Wilderness Association	Edmonton AB
Martin von Mirbach	Sierra Club of Canada	Ottawa ON
Cliff Wallis	Friends of the Oldman River	Calgary AB
Valerie Wood	First Nations Environmental Network	Wanipigow MB

Appendix B: The priority analysis

This table is included in a separate file (UNFF Priority Analysis Appendix B.doc).

Appendix C: Strategic Priorities and related Proposals for Action

Strategic Priority 1: Develop and implement a national forest program that integrates the conservation and sustainable use of forest resources and values.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals:

IPF 17(a): develop, implement, monitor and evaluate national forest programmes, which include a wide range of approaches for sustainable forest management, taking into consideration the following: consistency with national, subnational or local policies and strategies, and - as appropriate - international agreements; partnership and participatory mechanisms to involve interested parties; recognition and respect for customary and traditional rights of, inter alia, indigenous people and local communities; secure land tenure arrangements; holistic, intersectoral and iterative approaches; ecosystem approaches that integrate the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of biological resources; and adequate provision and valuation of forest goods and services

Strategic Priority 2: Develop and implement policies and mechanisms to reform forest tenure and recognize access and use of forest resources by local and/or indigenous communities.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals:

IPF 29(c): explore the possibility of an international agreement on trade in forest products from all types of forests

IFF 64(c): Support appropriate land tenure law and/or arrangements as a means to define clearly land ownership, as well as the rights of indigenous and local communities and forest owners, for the sustainable use of forest resources, taking into account the sovereign right of each country and its legal framework;

& (d): Develop mechanisms, as appropriate, to improve land access and use of forest resources on a sustainable basis

IPF 104(a): make use of available methodologies to provide improved estimates of the value of all forest goods and services and allow for more informed decision-making about the implications of alternative proposals for forest programmes and land-use plans, taking into account that the wide range of benefits provided by forests are not adequately covered by present valuation methodology, and that economic valuation cannot become a substitute for the process of political decision, which includes consideration of wide-ranging environmental, socio-economic, ethical, cultural and religious concerns

IFF 107(a): improve collection of quantitative data to enumerate and develop physical accounts of the full range of forest goods and services, including inventories of timber and other goods and services, and impacts of changes in forest use on the environment. This should also be done for substitute non-wood materials

Strategic Priority 4: Develop and implement integrated national policies, strategies, economic instruments and mechanisms to support sustainable forest management and addressing deforestation and forest degradation - including the underlying causes of such.

Relevant IFF/IPF commitments:

IPF 29(a): formulate and implement national strategies, through an open and participatory process, for addressing the underlying causes of deforestation, and, if appropriate, to define policy goals for national forest cover as inputs to the implementation of national forest programmes

30(a): 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;

IFF 115(c): recognize the actual and potential impacts of economic instruments and tax policies as a means of providing incentives to engage in activities that avoid deforestation and forest degradation and that support sustainable forest management practices; and to examine, in collaboration with international organizations, when requested, the role of forest policy failures and policies in other sectors as a contributing factor in deforestation, forest degradation or unsustainable forest management; and to collaborate with international organizations in developing mitigating policies;

IPF 46(c): establish protected areas to safeguard forest and related ecosystems, their water supplies, and historical and traditional uses in appropriate localities in areas affected by drought, particularly in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid regions.

IFF 85(a): Commit themselves to the protection, conservation and representativeness of all types of forests, consistent with national forest policies and programmes that recognize the linkage between forest conservation and sustainable development. This commitment may be achieved through a range of conservation mechanisms, reflecting varying national circumstances, applied within and outside of protected forest areas, and the complementary roles of protected forest areas and other sustainable forest management activities — for example, the production of wood and non-wood products and services, where forest conservation is promoted by other means

IFF 85(b): Develop and implement appropriate strategies for the protection of the full range of forest values, including cultural, social, spiritual, environmental and economic aspects; recognition of the multiple functions and sustainable use of all types of forests, with particular regard to biological diversity; participation of communities and other interested parties; integration of the livelihood needs of indigenous and local communities; and planning and management on an ecosystem basis, in which special emphasis should be put on the continued integrity of genetic diversity

Strategic Priority 6: Increase forest-related ODA to support “bottom-up” approaches to development – local capacity building, research into underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation, access to information, and integration of local and indigenous communities — in order to ensure a holistic, democratic implementation of SFM.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals:

IPF 17(g): include capacity-building as an objective of national forest programmes, paying particular attention to training, extension services and technology transfer and financial assistance from developed countries, taking due account of local traditional forest-related knowledge

29(c): 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 the benefits of forests

40(g): support national, regional and international efforts that will enhance the capacity of indigenous people, forest-dependent people who possess TFRK and appropriate forest owners to participate, inter alia, in agreements that apply TFRK for sustainable forest management, and to promote partnerships among all interested parties

58(e): facilitate and assist developing countries and countries with economies in transition with low forest cover, where required, in building capacity for data gathering and analysis so as to enable them to monitor their forest resources

70(c): enhance, subject to national legislation, community financing as an important strategy to promote sustainable forest management, and to establish policy and programmatic mechanisms and instruments that facilitate local investments in sustainable forest management by, inter alia, indigenous groups and forest owners

71(b) jointly explore, as a priority activity, appropriate indicators for monitoring and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of forest programmes and projects at the national and local levels, supported by international cooperation in financial assistance and technology transfer

IFF 9(g): further assistance by the international community to developing countries and countries with economies in transition in implementing the IPF proposals for action as needed. National forest programmes could be used as a framework for channelling development assistance for implementation. Such support is particularly needed for capacity-building, and for creating participatory mechanisms and innovative financing arrangements.

56(d): recognize the importance of the transfer of technologies to developing countries and economies in transition, including human and institutional capacity-building, as an integral part of the process of investment and sustainable development; and the importance of combining technology transfer with training, education and institutional strengthening in order to promote effective use and broad dissemination of environmentally sound technologies

56(f): consider practical measures to promote the diffusion of environmentally sound technologies to end-users, particularly in local communities in developing countries, through the efficient use of extension services;

56(m): undertake steps to ensure equal opportunities for women, in particular indigenous women and women in rural areas, to become beneficiaries of environmentally sound forest-related technologies, know-how and extension services;

56(n): strengthen outreach programmes targeted at women in the areas of education, training and microcredit, related to community development programmes and household use of wood, wood lots for fuelwood and energy-efficient cooking technology;

84: implement, with the assistance of international organizations, donor countries and financial institutions, the proposals for action of this new programme element through partnership mechanisms involving, where appropriate, the participation of governmental institutions, non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, and indigenous and local communities.

Strategic Priority 7: Ensure that international trade negotiations are transparent and accountable to civil society, so that trade-related agreements might better support forest conservation.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals:

IPF128(a): 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 for meeting demand, with a special emphasis on investment in sustainable forest management and the strengthening of institutions for forest resource and forest plantations management

IFF 64(b): create appropriate procedures in order to promote effective participation of all interested parties in decision-making about forest management;

65: strengthen transparency in decision-making as it affects sustainable forest management, and to ensure that their policies support sustainable forest management.

Relevant IPF/IFF Proposals:

IPF 70(b): encouraged countries in a position to do so to continue to develop and employ appropriate market-based and other economic instruments and incentives to increase rent capture and mobilize domestic financial resources in support of sustainable forest management, as well as to reduce social costs and negative environmental impacts due to unsustainable forest and land management practices

89(h): encouraged countries to begin a consultation process with all interested parties at the national, subnational and local levels to identify the full range of benefits that a given society derives from forests, taking the ecosystem approach fully into consideration

104(a): encouraged countries, in collaboration with international organizations, to make use of available methodologies to provide improved estimates of the value of all forest goods and services and allow for more informed decision-making about the implications of alternative proposals for forest programmes and land-use plans, taking into account that the wide range of benefits provided by forests are not adequately covered by present valuation methodology, and that economic valuation cannot become a substitute for the process of political decision, which includes consideration of wide-ranging environmental, socio-economic, ethical, cultural and religious concerns

IFF 30(d): Undertake activities for systematic collection and analysis of financial flows data in the forest sector in order to enable informed and rational policy decisions based on reliable information

64(c): Support appropriate land tenure law and/or arrangements as a means to define clearly land ownership, as well as the rights of indigenous and local communities and forest owners, for the sustainable use of forest resources, taking into account the sovereign right of each country and its legal framework

115(a-g): a) Encouraged countries, with the assistance of relevant international organizations, to assess the potential scope and effective combination of economic instruments and tax policies as tools for promoting sustainable forest management, as appropriate, as part of their national forest programmes. This assessment should include but not be limited to collection of forest revenue from timber extraction;

(b) Encouraged countries to recognize and use, where applicable, an appropriate combination of regulations and economic instruments for achieving the objectives of forest policies, including the use of charges and forest revenue collection that also offer incentives for sustainable forest management practices;

(c) Encouraged countries to recognize the actual and potential impacts of economic instruments and tax policies as a means of providing incentives to engage in activities that avoid deforestation and forest degradation and that support sustainable forest management practices; and to examine, in collaboration with international organizations, when requested, the role of forest policy failures and policies in other sectors as a contributing factor in deforestation, forest degradation or unsustainable forest management; and to collaborate with international organizations in developing mitigating policies;

(d) Encouraged countries, within their respective legal framework, to support land tenure policies that recognize and respect legitimate access and use, and property rights in order to support sustainable forest management and investment, recognizing that institutionalizing tenure is a long-term and complex process which requires interim measures to address urgent needs, in particular of local and/or indigenous communities;

(e) Requested relevant international organizations to undertake an up-to-date review of contemporary forest revenue collection systems for the use of forest products and services. The Forum encouraged countries to share their experiences in this area and to support this effort;

(f) Invited relevant international organizations to provide, on request, general and specific advice to countries on the design and administration of economic instruments and tax policies to promote sustainable forest management, and encouraged countries to offer examples of successes in using economic instruments to advance the practice of sustainable forest management;

(g) Encouraged countries to develop macroeconomic policies and policies in other sectors that support and contribute to sustainable forest management; and requested international financial and lending institutions to consider mitigating the impacts of macroeconomic structural adjustment programmes on forests consistent with sustainable forest management.

[1] The information in this section is drawn from the Government of Australia’s publication “The Intergovernmental Panel on Forests and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests: Summary of Proposals for Action: A tool to assist countries to measure progress and establish priorities for
sustainable forest management”

[2] Sizer, N. 2000. Perverse Habits: the G8 and Subsidies that Harm Forests and Economies. World Resources Institute, Forest Notes. www.wri.org/wri/forests/g8_sizer.pdf.

[3] Tamblyn, J. (Alberta Wilderness Association), Wallis, C. (Canadian Nature Federation), Matthaus, L. (Sierra Club of British Columbia), May, E. (Sierra Club of Canada), Clogg, J. (West Coast Environmental Law Association), Gray, T(CPAWS-Wildlands League). 2001. Environmental Organizations Release Joint Position on Softwood Lumber Dispute. Press Release: December 12, 2001.

[4] http://sfm-1.biology.ualberta.ca/english/pubs/PDF/ar20002001.pdf