Minimum data requirements for sustainable forest management

Ecological Indicators, 2008

2012

Identifying such standards is complicated by the diversity of forests, the diversity of objectives among forest decisionmakers (both public and private), the diversity of values among people who depend on forests, and the diversity of spatial and temporal scales that must be considered. The complexity of determining what is deemed to be sustainable, and by whom, leads to challenges in implementing and monitoring forest management. As a way of framing discussions about

2019

The designations employed in UNECE and FAO publications, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) or the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal status of any country; area or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers. The responsibility for opinions expressed in studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by UNECE or FAO of the opinions expressed. Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply their endorsement by UNECE or FAO, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval.

2020

Executive Summary Sustainable forest management (SFM) includes significantly reducing the potential for regret induced by the occurrence of catastrophic events such as those caused in large landscapes by wildfire and bark beetles, or a sudden collapse of industrial and/or social systems of dependencies. These kinds of events can accrue as a result of the cumulative effects of management practices applied over long periods of time. Focussing on forests, we require knowledge of the dominant ecosystem-level processes that interact with forest and stand conditions to produce such results. SFM indicators can be developed to encapsulate our knowledge in a way that will help forest managers to avoid significant intermediate and long-term negative impacts of forest practices while reaping benefits from their application in the short-term.

The Forestry Chronicle, 1997

Recent international agreements relating to forest practices are Les recentes ententes internationales portant sur les pratiques silent on operational criteria for sustainable forestry. Basic val-forestihes restent muettes quant aux criteres operationnels de la ues to be sustained can be derived from the agreements. Goals foresterie durable. Les valeurs fondamentales a Ctre maintenues for each value are presented that connect simply and directly with de faqon durable peuvent Ctre derivees des ententes. Les buts de public concerns that inspired the agreements. For each goal a sim-chacune des valeurs sont presentes comme se rattachant simplement ple, relatively cheap means of monitoring is suggested that per-et directement aux questions du public qui ont inspirees ces mits an operational approach. By focussing on the essence of inter-ententes. Pour chacun des buts, un moyen simple, relativement national agreements, criteria for sustainable forestry are derived peu dispendieux de surveillance est suggere et pemet une that are operational and scientifically credible, internationally cred-approche operationnelle. En etant centres sur l'essence des ible, and socially responsible. ententes intemationales, les criteres de la foresterie durable sont elabores pour &tre operationnels, scientifiquement et mondiale-

The Forestry Chronicle, 2000

Pierre Drapeau114, Sylvie ~a u t h i e r l~~, David F' ar6115, Richard Carignan6, Rene Doucet7, Luc Bouthillier2, and Christian ~e s s i e r l Within Canada, and internationally, an increasing demand that forests be managed to maintain all resources has led to the development of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management. There is, however, a lack of understanding, at an operational scale, how to evaluate and compare forest management activities to ensure the sustainability of all resources. For example, nationally, many of the existing indicators are too broad to be used directly at a local scale of forest management; provincially, regulations are often too prescriptive and rigid to allow for adaptive management; and forest certification programs, often based largely on public or stakeholder opinion instead of scientific understanding, may be too local in nature to permit a comparison of operations across a biome. At an operational scale indicators must be relevant to forest activities and ecologically integrated. In order to aid decision-makers in the adaptive management necessary for sustainable forest management, two types of indicators are identified: those that are prescriptive to aid in planning forest management and those that are evaluative to be used in monitoring and suggesting improvements. An integrated approach to developing standards based on an ecosystem management paradigm is outlined for the boreal forest where the variability inherent in natural systems is used to define the limits within which forest management is ecologically sustainable. Sustainability thresholds are thus d e f i by ecosystem response after natural disturbances. For this exercise, standards are proposed for biodiversity, forest productivity via regeneration, soil conservation and aquatic resources. For each of these standards, planning indicators are developed for managing forest conditions while forest values are evaluated by environmental indicators, thus leading to a continuous cycle of improvement. Approaches to developing critical thresholds and corresponding prescriptions are also outlined. In all cases, the scale of evaluation is clearly related to the landscape (or FMU) level while the stand level is used for measurement purposes. In this view the forest should be managed as a whole even though forest interventions are usually undertaken at the stand level.

2014

sustainability, harvest scheduling, operations research, forest heritage, activity unit, forest district, planning horizon, human needs, ecosystem, yield, stand. The idea of sustainable development has been based on the illusion that we can have it all. Sustainable development is an oxymoron, suggesting that it can be sustained ecosystem functioning while achieving steady economic growth. In parts of the world where poverty reduces people’s capacity to use forests and other ecosystems in ways that protect ecosystem functioning, some economic growth for a limited period of time may be necessary to avoid intensifying pressures on ecosystems. Sustainable development, in the broadest sense, integrates all of the biological, social, economic, cultural and other factors that affect national management decisions. Everything affects everything else in this view of sustainable development and, therefore, one must know everything about everything to make informed decisions. This may be ultima...

2000

This guide is intended to make a contribution to the larger efforts worldwide at improving forest management, human well-being, and the sustainability of natural resources. In order for it to do so, three important points should be noted by anyone intending to use the Guide: 1) As with any such tool, everything in this guide needs to be considered in, and adapted to, the local context in which it is to be used. We consider it not a 'blueprint', but a 'springboard' to appropriate action… 2) Successful implementation of the approach suggested in this guide relies on adequate understanding of, commitment to, and skills in participatory approaches and processes. This does not mean that only "professional participation practitioners" should use it. It means rather that if there is a lack of any or all of these, this gap should be addressed prior to and during the C&I processes (for example, through the readings or contacts suggested in the reference section). Furthermore, in relation to point 1 above, as the approach to CMF C&I and processes for monitoring are adapted for use locally, it is extremely important that these adaptations build in and maximize opportunities for shared learning and ownership of the processes. For example, while the guide may offer some ideas for 'structuring CMF C&I', it does not go in depth into the kinds of participatory tools that can be best used in different groups to do this. We look to the implementers of the guide to bring in the participatory tools and adaptations that will be needed in each context. We anticipate that across all contexts, this will include such adaptations as: • Locally appropriate games to introduce ideas • Shifting from written word to pictorial representations or other activities as literacy levels dictate • Developing strategies to overcome barriers to participation (such as gender, caste, etc) 3) This is a work in progress! CIFOR and collaborators are continuing work in this area, and we would welcome input and feedback on this guide. This manual is the product of the cumulative efforts and insights of many people over a period of years. We would especially like to express our gratitude to the member of the communities of Akak/Bitetele and Eyek II (Central province, Cameroon), Cachoeira do Maró and São Pedro (Pará, Brazil) and Bedigong and Darok (West Kalimantan, Indonesia) who participated in the CIFOR CMF C&I field tests, and without whose generous participation and wisdom this publication would have been impossible. We also thank and applaud the work of the interdisciplinary team members, facilitators, and supporters involved in that research-too numerous to mention specifically, but all of their efforts are valued and valuable. We can at least thank and name the lead collaborating institutions here: the GTZ-Indonesian Ministry of Forestry funded Social Forestry Development Project (SFDP) (Sanggau, Kalimantan); FERDA (Bogor, Indonesia); ONADEF (Cameroon); WWF-Cameroon; the Sindicato dos Trabalhadores Rurais de Santarem (STR-Santarem), and Projecto Saude e Alegria, Santarem, Brazil. Within CIFOR, Drs Ravi Prabhu, Godwin Kowero and Michael Spilsbury all provided excellent commentary and encouragement. Yvonne Byron is recognised for her editorial contributions, Gideon Suharyanto for his creativity and guidance in the layout and Rahayu Koesnadi for ongoing support of all kinds. Last, but not least, we also extend thanks to the funding agencies who made this manual possible-the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Ford Foundation and the MacArthur Foundation-as well as the European Union (EU), the Swiss Development Corporation (SDC), and USAID who supported the CMF C&I research on which this publication draws. Not only the resources, but also the encouragement, wisdom and patience have been much appreciated. 1 We use the term 'community management of forests' or 'community managed forests' (CMF) rather than 'community forest management' (CFM) in order to keep the frame of reference quite broad. While we do include areas that are under exclusive management of a community or communities, we also are referring to areas managed in part by communities, including instances of collaborative or co-management between communities and other stakeholders. We recognise that this latter case of multiple stakeholder management presents many challenges which are not fully addressed here. We plan to continue to explore these through our research and communication with others, and address them more fully in future publications. 2 Burford de Oliveira (1999) and Burford de Oliveira et al. (1999).

2015

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) has carried out research to develop Criteria and Indicators for sustainable forest management (C&I) in eight countries since 1994. In the CIFOR framework C&I are organised hierarchically as principles, criteria, indicators, and verifiers. Based on an analysis and synthesis of the C&I research a set of C&I has been identified that can form the starting point for developing localised sets of criteria and indicators. This set is called the ‘Generic Template’. A knowledge based system called CIMAT (Criteria and Indicators Modification and Adaptation Tool) has now been developed to support the process of developing locally adapted C&I using the Generic Template as a starting point. In CIMAT all the principles, criteria, indicators, and verifiers of the Generic Template are represented as items that can be modified by the user. The modification can only take place when users explain their reason for the change. All the reasons in the ...

Forests

The United Nations adopted the Agenda 2030 with its core element, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in September 2015. In order to achieve these goals within the coming years, intense efforts are required by all political and societal actors. Although the first definitions of sustainable development referred to the forest sector, the question remains: what contribution can forestry make to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals? Therefore, the direct positive and negative effects of forestry itself on sustainability are analyzed, and it is discussed how sustainable forest management could contribute to achieving other Sustainable Development Goals in addition to SDG 15. This analysis reveals that forestry plays a dual role, i.e., forestry can achieve positive sustainability effects but can also have negative impacts. It is thus recommended to use integrated assessment approaches to analyze whether a specific forest-related policy or strategy is contributing to sustai...