| European
Tropical Forest Research Network |
COMPARISON OF STANDARDS FOR THE EVALUATION OF SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRIES FROM THE SOUTH AND THE NORTH
By Bart Holvoet and Bart Muys
The number of initiatives focused on the evaluation of sustainable forest management has risen considerably since the UNCED Conference in Rio de Janeiro (1992). A large number of countries have already drawn up a set of Principles, Criteria and Indicators. In most of the cases this development took place within the framework of an intergovernmental or international initiative. Other national and international organisations have also been involved in the development of such sets or 'standards'. In our study, we collected and compared the contents of a large number of standards. Although most standards shared the same main elements, there also appeared to be substantial differences between the standards.
Differences between
standards
The level of application - the 'forest management unit' (FMU) or the 'national
level' - appeared to be a major difference. Standards developed for the national
level are less detailed and consist mostly of monitoring aspects at a regional
scale. The more detailed FMU standards combine both monitoring aspects and a
number of management aspects.
Another important difference between the standards can be traced back to different geographical origins. Standards from countries in the South place a greater emphasis on the social and economic forest functions, while those originating from the North pay relatively more attention to the ecological forest functions. One of the most important differences between standards from the North and the South is their use of research-related aspects. The management capacity and research capabilities related to sustainable forest management are far less in evidence in the South than in the countries of the North.
Challenges
A policy challenge is now to find out whether it is a good idea to maintain
the observed differences between sustainable forest management standards or
whether it would be preferable to harmonise them. In those cases in which the
differences reflect diverging local conditions such as ecosystem functioning,
management techniques and traditions and market opportunities, differences are
legitimate and should be maintained. However, when differences are caused by
a lack of capacity or socio-economical inequities, we recommend a harmonisation
of the standards.
Forest certification in the South is in its infancy. However, sustainable forest management is needed just as badly or in some cases even more urgently than in most of the North. Local and international efforts should be made to increase capacity and equity. Logging companies working in the South should be guided to engage in sustainable forest management by NGO pressure, by means of national regulations, or by market pressure. The donor community could support efforts to realise sustainable forest management in the South by assisting the development of proper national regulations and efficient national forest services. In this way, a more harmonised and better forest management can be attained worldwide.
Further information:
Bart Holvoet and Prof. Dr Bart Muys
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, Katholieke Universiteit
Leuven
Vital Decosterstraat 102
B-3000 Leuven
Belgium
E-mail: bart.muys@agr.kuleuven.ac.be