ENB:13:23
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
WORKING GROUP I
Working Group I continued discussion on programme element III.2 (criteria and indicators). The G-77/CHINA called for: criteria that reflect components of SFM; a global set of C&I; and contributions from donor countries and multilateral organizations for the development and implementation of C&I. He encouraged the application of nationally agreed C&I in connection with voluntary codes. GABON, citing the Rio Declaration and Forest Principles, stated the need for the international community to mobilize the financial resources and technology required for C&I formulation and SFM in developing countries.
On programme element I.2 (underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation), the G-77/CHINA, supported by COLOMBIA, suggested language emphasizing production and consumption patterns, non-market values of forest goods and services, studies on historical causes of deforestation and forest degradation (D&FD), and “discriminatory” international trade “practices”. He proposed language from the Forest Principles for “management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests” for several locations in the text. The US proposed language on sustainable management of forests rather than their use and/or sustainable development and added “other relevant policy frameworks” to a section referring to NFPs. He called for further study of the conclusions from a recent Norwegian conference on consumption and production patterns as underlying causes of D&FD, and said countries should “consider” rather than “prepare” corrective action on D&FD. Supported by JAPAN and CANADA, he said a reference to environmental impact assessments should be included as an example of mechanisms to improve policy formulation and coordination rather than as a seperate point..
The EU deleted a statement that poverty and consumption patterns have a major influence on deforestation and urged governments, “where relevant,” to prepare strategic studies of the implications of “current” consumption and production patterns for forests. She called for action on “the promotion of open and participatory programs for the implementation of NFPs, taking into account D&FD” rather than on the formulation and application of national strategies. She also emphasized language on: the “formulation of mechanisms aimed at the equitable sharing of benefits from the forests;” policies for securing land tenure for indigenous peoples and local communities; and prompt government action when direct or indirect causes have been identified. She proposed deleting language stating that diagnostic frameworks should not be used as a basis for ODA conditionality.
COLOMBIA proposed language acknowledging the need for an international meeting to discuss the underlying causes of D&FD and urging countries to fund such a seminar. Environmental NGOs called for such a conference to be held before IPF-4. NEW ZEALAND, for AUSTRALIA, CHILE, CHINA, SOUTH AFRICA and UGANDA, noted the role of plantation forests as an important element of SFM by taking pressure off natural forests, and added language emphasizing the need for countries to actually use the diagnostic framework as an analytical tool in assessing options for utilization of forests and forest lands. JAPAN proposed deleting language on the need to appraise benefits and disbenefits of different types of forests under different conditions and on giving attention to terms of trade, discriminatory trade practices and unsustainable policies related to sectors such as agriculture and energy. He added language supporting conversion of plantation forests. He emphasized “securing” rather than “assessing” the quantity and quality of forest. INDIA highlighted the need for consistency in referring to “deforestation and forest degradation.”
NORWAY supported language for plantations provided they meet social, economic and environmental conditions including conservation of biodiversity. He called for strengthening intersectoral decision-making and institutions for resource management. TURKEY added that the provision of timely and accurate information on underlying causes of D&FD is essential for public understanding and informed decision-making. Environmental NGOs called for “sustainable” rather than “economic” development, recognition of land tenure patterns’ influence on deforestation, and donor assistance to LDCs for conducting strategic analysis of policies contributing to D&FD. CANADA called for all countries to undertake research, technology transfer, case studies using the diagnostic framework and capacity-building activities for an integrated approach. He added that international organizations and developed countries should assist countries with economies in transition as well as developing countries in strategic analysis.