1. PREAMBLE

The Expert Consultation entitled „Implementing the Forest Principles - Promotion of National Forest and Land Use Programmes" was held in Feldafing, Germany from June 16 to 21, 1996. The Government of Germany contributed to the international dialogue on the sustainable management of forests by hosting this intersessional event in support of the Intergovernmental Panel of Forests (IPF). The IPF was established by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations in June 1995 under the aegis of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The work programme of the IPF spells out issues, which are clustered around five categories and 11 programme elements. The expert consultation in Feldafing focused its deliberations on components of both programme element I. 1 (Promotion of National Forest and Land Use Plans and Programmes) and programme element II (International Cooperation in Financial Assistance and Technology Transfer for Sustainable Forest Management).

During the IPF Session 1 in New York in September 1995, it was proposed by the Forestry Advisers Group (FAG) to the Group of 77 and China to hold national consultations with interested developing countries on the promotion of national forest and land use programmes as to establish country-specific positions on the issue. After an organising meeting in Germany in January 1996, 21 countries and two regional institutions supported by members of the Forestry Advisers Group (FAG) and international cooperation agencies participated in the consultative processes at the national level to identify national constraints, opportunities and options as well as priorities for action, and submitted reports on their findings.

On the basis of the above national consultations, a synthesis report was prepared as the point of departure for the Expert Consultation. The information obtained during this consultative process is consequently based on inputs from developing countries only. The synthesis report thus did not intend to provide the experience of developed countries in forest and land-use programmes. The Expert Consultation noted that the Swedish - Ugandan Intersessional Expert Consultation, to be held in Stockholm in October 1996, as well as the Japan - Canada International Workshop, to be held in Kochi, Japan in November 1996, will provide experiences from developed countries.

The synthesis report was a working document and does not necessarily represent the views of the contributors in its entirety. In order to contribute effectively to the deliberations on the respective IPF programme elements, the overall objective of the Expert Consultation was to identify constraints and opportunities, and elaborate options to promote national forest and land use programmes. The issues identified in the synthesis report were further elaborated during the Expert Consultations and used as tools to make progress in the identification of options for action.

The report of the Expert Consultation, incorporating „options for action" are forwarded to the IPF Secretariat for further consideration by the lead agencies to prepare for the substantive and final discussions on the issues during IPF Session 3 in September 1996 in Geneva and IPF Session 4 in February 1997 in New York. The report of the meeting in Feldafing will also be made available as a conference room document for the IPF sessions.

75 experts from 29 developing and developed countries were invited to the Consultation. Of these 31 from developing and 36 from developed countries actually participated. They acted in their personal capacity and this report reflects their views. The participants came from governments, the private sector, non-governmental and international organizations.

The Expert Consultation was opened with keynote addresses by Dr. C.D. Spranger, Federal Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development and Mr. W. Gröbl, Parliamentary Secretary of State of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry. Mr Jorge Barba (Ecuador) and Dr. Hans Peter Schipulle (Germany) acted as Co-Chairmen.

2. RESULTS OF THE EXPERT CONSULTATION

2.1 THE CONCEPT OF NATIONAL FOREST PROGRAMMES

The concept of National Forest Programmes (NFPs) has been widely discussed during the past decade, especially in the context of the formulation and implementation of National Forestry Action Programmes (NFAP), Forestry Master Plans and Forest Sector Reviews. These frameworks have been promoted by various international institutions and cooperation agencies as a means of achieving sustainable forest development, especially in developing countries. The importance of such planning and implementation frameworks for all countries is also recognised in UNCED Agenda 21, Chapter 11 on Combating Deforestation.

The Expert Consultation raised the point of the terminology of „National Forest and Land Use Programmes". As stressed during the IPF Session 2 in Geneva and consequently expressed in the co-chairmen's report of the meeting, this term needs clarification. It was pointed out in Feldafing that the issue of land use had not been adequately addressed during the preparations of the meeting. In the following text the above term is abbreviated to „National Forest Programmes (NFPs)" reflecting the content and scope of the deliberations in Feldafing. However, it was felt that the land-use issue requires further discussion at future meetings.

In this context the term NFP was understood to be a generic expression for a wide range of approaches to processes of planning, programming and implementation of forest activities at the national level.

The discussions in the Expert Consultation were carried out based on the understanding that the following four major themes capture the work of the Expert Consultation:

(i) Sectoral planning, policies and the institutional setting; focusing on issues and options related to the overall process of definition of sectoral goals, policies and policy instruments, institutional settings and the broad operational concept for the implementation of sectoral development, including external involvement.

(ii) Investment programming; focusing on the mobilisation of local, national, and external financial resources necessary for the implementation of NFPs, and including both private and public sector financing.

(iii) National capacity and capacity building; focusing on the effective use and development of the national capacity to plan, implement and monitor NFPs, including public sector institutions as well as non-governmental organisations and the private sector.

(iv) International Cooperation in support of NFPs; including national, regional, and international levels.

The results of the Expert Consultation are presented under the same general headings.

2.2 OPTIONS FOR ACTION

2.2.1 Sectoral Planning, Policies and Institutional Setting

In its discussions the Expert Consultation stressed that sectoral planning, policy revision and institutional reform are periodic processes encompassing various stages. It was also fully recognised that these processes should be country-driven, based on the sovereign right of each country to use its forest resources in accordance with its own policies and development needs. The Expert Consultation noted that the experience gained in the implementation of the National Forestry Action Programmes, as well as the Forest Sector Reviews and the Forestry Master Plans provides a solid basis for the identification of the options concerning sectoral planning, policies and revision of institutional settings. Furthermore, the constraints have been extensively discussed in several major evaluations and assessments carried out both at the national and international levels.

The following two basic options set the frame of reference defined by the Expert Consultation on the issues of sectoral planning, policies and institutional setting:

(a) Establishment and improvement of the national forest planning process

Its was suggested that each country should establish or improve its own NFP as the instrument to guide and orient the process of sectoral development, under strong in-country leadership. The goal of NFPs is to promote the conservation and sustainable use of forest resources to meet local, national and global needs, through fostering national and international partnerships for the benefit of present and future generations. NFPs should aim at increasing the economic value of forest products and services, and be realistic in terms of its financial and economic feasibility.

The process should build on national planning capacity, and be based on the following characteristics adapted to the situation of each country in terms of their application:

(i) well defined linkages to macro level policies and policy processes,

(ii) closely linked to cross-sectoral policies and issues, including land-use policies,

(iii) high-level political commitment and broad-based support,

(iv) participatory and decentralised planning approaches, including use of indigenous knowledge,

(v) identification and management of conflicts between relevant actors.

(b) Securing commitments to the implementation of NFPs

It was suggested that IPF acknowledge the importance of NFPs as the framework for the programming and implementation of external assistance to forest sector development to make it an integral part of national development; respecting the objectives, strategies, implementation arrangements, mechanisms and priorities established by each country. Therefore, the preparation of a code of conduct involving international financing institutions, multilateral and bilateral cooperation agencies as well as national authorities should be considered by IPF. The code of conduct could be endorsed by countries and international institutions and the adherence to it by all relevant actors, including the private sector, monitored by a transparent process.

Other options related to policies and institutional setting are:

(c) Promotion of national forest policy formulation

National forest policy formulation should be encouraged and promoted in the context of national policy development. The regular updating of forest policy should be assured and followed up, taking into account the following key aspects in the policy formulation process: (i) forest policy formulation should be closely linked to national macroeconomic planning, (ii) forest, agricultural and environmental policies should be harmonised, (iii) private sector and NGOs should be partners in the national forest policy process, (iv) broad local participation should be encouraged and facilitated in forest policy dialogues, (v) gender issues should be enhanced in forest policy development and related fields, (vi) forestry expertise and knowledge should be incorporated into environmental agencies, and (viii) relevant international experience and principles should be taken into account in policy formulation.

(d) Harmonisation of forest and other land-use related legislation

In order to address the needs of the societies, countries should consider reviewing forest and other land-use legislation. The review processes should focus especially on: (i) promoting decentralisation of decision making by issuing the relevant legislation, (ii) harmonisation of forest and other related legislation at all levels of the administration, (iii) clarifying responsibilities of various levels of administration, (iv) ensuring that benefits from forests and other natural resources are proportionately distributed in accordance with the forest policy, (v) integrating customary rights and regulations on forest land use into the forest legislation process whenever relevant and existing, and (vi) promoting legal security on access to, and use of, land and forests.

This process should be carried out at national, provincial and local levels and stimulate consensus building, formation of new alliances and consultative processes in forest policy and legislation review and implementation.

(e) Revision of roles, mandates and institutional structures

Governments that have not done so should consider initiating a process of review and, if needed, redefinition of the roles and mandates of the major forest related actors, including the administrations at national, provincial and local levels, and the non-governmental sector (non-governmental organisations, community based organisation and the private sector). The process should aim at focusing government functions on (i) policy formulation including legislation, (ii) the provision of administrative services including promotion and facilitation, and (iii) supervision and control. Other functions could be shared with or delegated to the non-governmental sector, including (i) productive activities, (ii) monitoring and evaluation, (iii) technical services, (iv) research and (v) coordination of local-level activities.

In addition to improving or redefining roles and mandates of the various actors, a process should be started to strengthen their political and institutional status and performance. The governmental sector should focus on (i) elimination of overlaps, (ii) creating linkages with other relevant sectors, (iii) promotion of public participation, (iv) reduction of bureaucratic procedures, (v) adequate resource allocation, including manpower and infrastructure, and (vi) decentralisation with clear coordination mechanisms. The non-governmental sector should focus on (i) identification of responsibilities to be taken over, and (ii) promotion and capacity building of institutional structures, including manpower and infrastructure, in order to enable them to be active partners in the NFP.

(f) Establishment and/or consolidation of national coordination

Governments might consider establishing a national body responsible for intersectoral coordination related to forest sector activities. Such a body could assure (i) the involvement of the relevant national actors in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of the NFP, (ii) avoidance of duplication of programmes, (iii) consistency of national, provincial and local actions, and (iv) the effective coordination of the international involvement in the sector. In addition the coordination mechanism could function as an instrument to reflect the commitments between the national and international levels by promoting transparent dialogue between the actors.

2.2.2 Investment Programming

The experts took note of the Pretoria Declaration and the report on the "Workshop on Financial Mechanisms and Sources of Finance for Sustainable Forestry", and considered them valuable input for its work. They agreed that investment in SFM needs both public and private funds in a complementary way and requires long-term commitment.

The following options should be considered:

(g) Strategic planning for investments

Comprehensive national forest strategies (NFPs), that are consistent with macroeconomic planning and policy and are aware of the strategic value of forests as a capital base for national sustainable development, facilitate mobilising funds for sustainable forest management from various sources.

Strategies have to consider the effects of the external economic environment, including the opportunities and risks of international trade on the national forest sector.

Strategies should be based on a participatory process involving all actors, identifying their roles and establishing priorities. This contributes to building up partnership, which facilitates the implementation of the strategies.

The development of these strategies should also include the identification of a wide range of funding sources including public and private, both domestic and foreign. These processes can draw upon the principles outlined in the statement of the Pretoria workshop. In this context, the group recommended significant improvement of the access to information about possible funding sources and related experiences. Countries could be invited to share their experiences on the schemes of forest related economic indicators to promote investment and improved resource valuation and revenue collection

This procedure would lead to the identification of the most appropriate funding sources to implement the various elements of the national strategies.

(h) Domestic public funding

Considering the importance of domestic funding, public budget allocations should reflect the national priority given to sustainable forest management (SFM). This can be achieved by securing appropriate valuation of forest resources, including payments for ecological services of forests and the incorporation of externalities.

An efficient revenue system is fundamental and should ensure that a sufficient part of forestry revenues are directed to forestry agencies active in SFM.

Public funding should create an environment which promotes investments in every step of the value chain (from forest development to primary and secondary processing and distribution) in order to retain added value from forest resources in the countries.

(i) Official development assistance

ODA should be used in a complementary way to supplement public spending for SFM in a way that provides substantial support in particular for capacity building, technology transfer and catalysing other sources of financing.

International cooperation supporting the implementation a comprehensive national strategy should also encompass concepts like community based forestry, alternatives for people making unsustainable use of forest resources, bufferzone management, poverty alleviation etc.

(j) Private funding

The comprehensive strategy should identify and provide information on opportunities for private sector investment and promote its orientation towards SFM.

Appropriate mechanisms should be developed, including covering transaction costs, offsetting market development risks, compensation for the incorporation of externalities, guarantee schemes, etc. Through market based instruments, sustainable practices benefiting the poor and providing alternatives for them should be rewarded and unsustainable practices discouraged.

Macroeconomic stability, proper policy and regulatory framework and an established land tenure system are conducive to attracting responsible private investment.

(k) New and additional financial resources

The potential of mechanisms generating new and additional financial resources (e.g. GEF, Joint Implementation) should be fully explored, so as to integrate the resources into comprehensive national programmes.

2.2.3 National Capacity and Capacity Building

It was stated by the Expert Consultation that before embarking on a capacity building programme, a country should assess its existing capabilities to plan, implement and monitor an NFP on all levels of society. Priorities for strengthening existing institutions, or building new institutions or infrastructure, should be based on this assessment. It should be iterative (periodically repeated and updated) and participatory, involving key local, national and international actors. In addition, gender issues should be considered in all capacity building programmes.

The Expert Consultation identified the following options related to national capacity and capacity building:

(l) Development of improved approaches to external assistance to capacity building

Improvements are often needed in the manner in which external assistance resources are directed towards capacity building. As harmonisation and coordination in donor programmes is often lacking, this may lead to the creation of parallel organisations and the irrational use of funds and manpower.

The development of improved approaches should focus specifically on: (i) establishment of long-term donor commitments for assistance to capacity building, based on a national interinstitutional mechanism for monitoring changes in the forestry sector, (ii) respect for the national priorities and use of national / local expertise when possible, (iii) establishment of an agreement, perhaps in the form of a code of conduct, between cooperation agencies and the government, (iv) the establishment of a transparent mechanism to enable cooperation agencies and key national actors to interact on a regular basis and to coordinate external assistance in the forestry sector, and (v) simplification and harmonisation of cooperation procedures.

(m) Human resource development

In many countries, human resources are not adequate or not effectively utilised. Improvements are needed in training, education and the deployment of human resources to ensure that the appropriate skills and expertise are allocated according to national needs and priorities.

The development of human resources should focus specifically on the following issues: (i) reorienting and/or strengthening of existing training institutions taking a multidiciplinary approach, (ii) establishment of new training institutions only where deficiencies exist, (iii) establishment of systems for the assessment of manpower and training needs, (iv) review of curricula of training institutions according to the results of the needs assessment, (v) reallocation of manpower according to optimal deployment. In addition, national governments should put in place an appropriate remuneration-, welfare- and incentive-system in order to retain manpower and improve efficiency.

(n) Strengthening of local institutions and organisations

Local level capacities, infrastructure and facilities are often weak, because a disproportionately high share of resources is allocated to national level programmes, while locally active institutions and organisations are inadequately supported. Local knowledge is often not adequately incorporated in capacity building programmes.

More capacity building should be directed to local levels, focusing on: (i) assessment of existing (local) knowledge to improve its utilisation, (ii) development of mechanisms for the optimal use of existing institutions and organisations at local levels, (iii) facilitation of formal and informal capacity building activities of local institutions, NGOs and community groups through a decentralised approach, and (iv) development and intensification of retraining systems for civil servants and others working at the local level to promote interaction with the local actors. In addition, local institutions and organisations (including non-governmental and community- based organisations) should be strengthened so that they can provide the necessary infrastructure for capacity building, especially vocational education.

(o) Institutional development

Effective use of human resources can be limited by inadequacies in institutional management systems, the lack of accountability as well as insufficient infrastructure. The focus of institutional development should be on the establishment of administrative and accountability systems, including financial management systems, that emphasise participatory management.

Institutions related to research, extension and forest administration need to be strengthened, taking a cross sectoral approach and promoting networking through North-South as well as South-South cooperation and information exchange. Training in conflict resolution and mediation techniques should be enhanced and incorporated in the curricula.

In many countries, forest sector research is not integrated in forest sector planning and administration, hence the results of research are not effectively applied to solving problems on the ground. The following key issues should be the focus of capacity building in forestry research: (i) integration of isolated research institutes in research networks, and (ii) integration of local knowledge and values in research, using participatory planning methods.

2.2.4 International Cooperation in Support of National Forest Programmes

The Expert Consultation emphasised that national action is the key to sustainable forest management. Modalities of cooperation need to be developed at the national level to help ensure effective NFP planning and implementation. Support to national efforts can be augmented by action at regional and international levels. But such support must be in service of national needs and must be developed at the appropriate level. The following options aim at the promotion of NFPs as the central focus for international cooperation.

(p) Supporting and refining the concept of NFPs

NFPs are expected to play a key role in promoting sustainable forest management. It was stressed that, in accordance with Agenda 21 and the Forest Principles, sustainable forest management is the overall objective of the forest sector and the responsibility of each country. NFPs can be an important means of promoting sustainable forest management. In order to support the NFP process and refine the concept - on which considerable work has been done (i.e. Basic Principles and Operational Guidelines for National Forest Programmes, FAO) - it was suggested that:

(i) The support of the international community should be focused on the implementation of country-led NFPs. This would allow international institutions and partner governments to interact with all appropriate levels within a country.

(ii) Discussions to update the concept of NFPs should continue, leading in the short term to the publication of a widely accepted joint concept on how to prepare and implement NFPs. This could be a living document. In order to provide conceptual guidance, regular consultations in appropriate fora should deal with issues that need further elaboration, such as:

· approaches to the implementation of policies, strategies and actions to operationalise NFPs

· transferring technology and streamlining financial mechanisms and using their respective comparative advantages

· developing additional instruments for implementing NFPs, e.g. Forest Partnership Agreements. The consultations should seek and consolidate the views of all relevant actors, including the private sector and NGOs.

(q) Development of appropriate regional approaches

It was stressed that the regional level has proven to be appropriate for dealing with a range of issues and actions related to forests. However, the formulation of regional policies and the implementation of regional programmes have often been inadequately based on existing national priorities.

It was acknowledged, that the regional level can provide significant advantages when countries use coordinated regional positions in international fora and use regional mechanisms to support national processes. In both cases regional action must derive from each country's assessment of its needs and the ability of the region to act effectively in its support. This means that regional approaches should not be developed in a political vacuum or imposed by external institutions. The point of departure should always be national requirements.

It was suggested that regional approaches would be most effective in the following areas: (i) development of technical institutions to take advantage of economies of scale, (ii) exchange of experiences and technologies on the policies, strategies and actions related to the implementation of NFPs, (iii) establishment of transboundary programmes involving the pooling of national efforts to tackle common concerns, (iv) as a forum for resolving other practical problems of the region, and (v) participation in international fora and processes, where national positions shared by countries of a region can be presented in a coordinated way.

Focusing on such areas is more likely to be cost effective and attract the political and financial support of countries of the regions, and the international community, needed to ensure success.

(r) Establishment of a forum for international consultation on forests

It was recognised that the IPF will consider in depth, including through the work of the Swiss-Peruvian IPF intersessional activity, the question of institutional structures (Programme Element V.1). However, it was noted that there is a lack of international policy dialogue and clear leadership on forest issues. At the same time, understanding of the complexity of forest issues has increased, resulting in rapid changes in the international agenda and shifting priorities of cooperation agencies. This has led to a greater burden on national authorities in establishing and implementing NFPs.

In order to increase the effectiveness of international support to NFPs, it was proposed that a new "Forum for International Consultation on Forests" should be established based on the experience of the IPF. This Forum, with an expanded mandate, might also be used for dealing with action on issues raised in other programme elements of the IPF.

Such a forum would promote international support for the NFP process. It should be a consultative body, whose work is supported by technical and scientific advice. It should establish collaborative leadership in the forest sector. but not seek to coordinate national processes. It should ensure that all actors, including NGOs and the private sector, are integrated into the consultation process. The main tasks of the Forum would include:

(i) to consult on:

· the further development of the concept and methodologies of NFPs, streamlining the application of policy instruments, financial mechanisms and forest related technology transfer;

· NFP related international initiatives. This would help avoid conflicting demands on countries from development institutions. A code of conduct among international institutions, cooperation agencies and NGOs in order to achieve acceptance of NFPs as the relevant framework for actions at the national level was referred to. The Forum might be able to consider this issue;

(ii) to enhance cooperation among international agencies on support for development of NFPs;

(iii) to provide a forum for policy discussions;

(iv) to encourage exchange of information on experiences with the implementation of NFPs;

In addition to discussing these issues directly related to NFPs, national action would also be assisted, if the Forum could give advice to and interact with international institutions, conventions bodies and other fora dealing with forest related issues and work for better understanding of the concept of sustainable forest management.

The form and function of the Forum need further definition, including the question of legal status, funding and secretarial support. One suggestion was to establish the Forum as an intergovernmental body under the aegis of the CSD with the Department of Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development fulfilling the secretariat function taking advantage of the positive experiences gained in the IPF process, which is planned to end in 1997.

It was suggested that the multilateral organisations, collaborating presently in the Inter-Agency Task Force in service of the IPF, should play a similar role for the proposed Forum. In addition to their input at the international level, the multilateral organisations, including the World Bank, could use the mechanism of Country Strategy Notes (CSN). The instrument of the CSN was endorsed by a resolution of the UN General Assembly in 1994 and is meant to pool the activities of the multilateral institutions at the national level. This instrument could be used effectively in support of NFPs.

3. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Expert Consultation on the Promotion of National Forest and Land Use Programmes elaborated a set of options for action as required by the IPF guidelines for intersessional events. During its deliberations, a number of additional cross-cutting issues emerged.

In the last decade, a multiplicity of new and innovative initiatives has emerged from the global, regional and national discussions on forest issues. These have led to an increased burden on countries. During the consultative process, that prepared this expert consultation, it was accepted that improved understanding of the complexity of forest issues should lead to broader concepts of forest management. However, it was stressed that existing concepts, mechanisms and instruments for managing the forest sector would be adequate to take this into account, if they were applied in a coherent and coordinated manner. Lessons learned from past experiences must now be applied in order to avoid institutional competition, ineffective use of human capacity and uncoordinated spending of scarce financial resources.

The IPF process provides an excellent opportunity to foster consultations on the issue at the international level to assist developing countries to take these issues forward.

National strategies are the point of departure for action to achieve sustainable forest management. Looking outward, the regional and international levels must provide adequate support to this process. To achieve this, an effective structure for debate, consultation and coordination at the international level is needed. In the national context the acceptance of country specific priorities and strategies, as well as participation of all actors, must be secured. There was strong support to innovative structures of partnerships for the joint management of forest resources and decentralised decision-making. This process would attract private investment and allow more effective allocation of public funding to the forest sector.

The existing capacity and competence, which are often undervalued and/or under-utilised in developing countries, should be taken as a point of departure as to match development measures with the ability of national and local institutions, including NGOs and the private sector.

If support to country-led forest strategies is to be effective, there must be a long-term commitment of all partners to cooperate on this basis. An agreement, possibly in the form of a code of conduct, could provide a mechanism to achieve reliable compliance with these commitments.

Feldafing

21 June 1996