international collaboration to assess, improve and monitor the quality of forest governance
Post on 15-Mar-2016
47 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
International Collaboration to Assess, Improve and Monitor the Quality of
Forest Governance
World Bank presentation at the 20th COFO Meeting, Oct., 6, 2010, Rome.
The PROFOR Program
• PROFOR is a multi-donor partnership program supported by 8 donors (EU, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland and UK)
• Characterized by a tightly focused program strongly aligned with its four core themes;
• Highly cost-effective mechanism for mobilizing leading edge analysis;
• Well-networked into global, regional and national fora;
• Flexible and able to respond quickly as new themes emerge.
PROFOR Knowledge Products
Costs of Poor Forest Governance
• Ecological: Unplanned and inappropriate deforestation, depletion of resources important to rural livelihoods and loss of ecosystem services
• Economic: Loss of billions of dollars annually in evaded taxes, illegal logging and other forest crimes
• Social: Human displacement, conflicts and violence and compromising the traditional rights and beliefs of forest dependent communities
• Political: Corruption contagion and loss of credibility of governments
The Life of a Log: Alchemy of Illegal to Legal
Local logger: $2.20$2.20 Local broker: $20$20 Foreign middle man: $160$160
Foreign lumber processor: $710$710Exporter of sawn timber: $800$800US trader: $1,000$1,000
From illegal to legalFrom illegal to legal
The Life of a Log: Preventing the Undesirable Alchemy
Satellite monitoring Local communities/third party monitor
Log Tracking system: timber cut for export vs.
exported lumber
IKEA Model: Procurement policy
International codes of conduct
Increase supply thru fast growing trees
Putting Forest Governance, Corruption and Illegal Logging Centre Stage
• 1998 — G8: Glen Eagles Summit • FLEG Ministerial Conferences
o 2001—Balio 2003—Yaoundeo 2005—St. Petersburgtriggered initiatives to control illegal logging and
improve forest governance • EU FLEGT action plan (2003)
New Demands and Opportunities to Address Forest Governance (1)
• REDD– good governance essential precondition for success– permanence of emission reductions– equitable distribution of benefits and costs– indigenous peoples rights
• Legality concerns– VPA, timber regulation (EU)– amended Lacey Act (USA)– emerging legislation (Australia)– China, Russia
• FIP– good governance critical to bringing about
transformational changes
New Demands and Opportunities to Address Forest Governance (2)
• Increasing stakeholder demand for good governance
• Increasing political will to tackle forest governance issues
Where Are we Now…10+ Years Hence
• Chatham House Report (2010): o significant reduction in illegal logging in Brazil,
Cameroon and Indonesia. o consuming countries were consuming 26% less than
they were at their peak in 2004o several successes but much remains to be done
• Recognition of the need for a systematic approach to forest governance reforms based on diagnosis, monitoring, assessment and reporting
Approaches to Forest Governance Assessments and Indicators
• Systematic approaches are being developed by: Chatham House, Global Witness, World Resources Institute, Transparency International, FAO-FRA and PROFOR/World Bank, Chatham House-UNREDD.
• Each designed with different objectives, users and applications in mind.
• Yet, they have a healthy commonality.
Example of similarities
World Bank Pillars of Good Forest Governance
UNREDD-CH Core Parameters of Forest Governance
WB1: Transparency, Accountability and Public Participation
UCH3: Transparent and accountable decision making institutions
WB2: Stability of Forest Institutions and Conflict Management
UCH3: Transparent and accountable decision making institutions
WB3: Quality of Forest Administration
UCH1: Clear and coherent policy, legal and regulatory frameworksUCH3: Transparent and accountable decision making institutions
Example of similarities cont…
World Bank Pillars of Good Forest Governance
UNREDD-CH Core Parameters of Forest Governance
WB4: Coherence of Forest Legislation and Rule of Law
CH1: Clear and coherent policy, legal and regulatory frameworksCH2: Effective implementation, enforcement and compliance
WB5: Economic Efficiency, Equity and Incentives
XX
Source: Capistrano, 2010 (unpublished)
FAO-PROFOR Symposium: Overall Objectives
• Share experiences across initiatives developing practical and feasible frameworks for assessing and monitoring the quality of forest governance.
• Foster collaboration to avoid overlap and duplication of effort and explore the possibility of developing a common framework of monitoring forest governance.
• Initiate dialogue with client countries regarding their needs and requirements.
Emerging Consensus (1): International and National Requirements
• International requirements– legality, REDD, etc.
• Domestic governance reform pressures– decentralization– land tenure– accountable and responsive government
• Foreseeable national level diagnostic and monitoring needs differ
Emerging Consensus (2): Different Applications
• Diagnostics vs. tracking/monitoring: different degrees of engagement, scales of ambition and time needed
• Tracking trends within countries (not comparing countries)
• Content applications (certification, legality, REDD, etc.): performance measures
• Different stakeholder and countries have different needs
• Keep it simple – a very few basic indicators, ‘good enough’
Emerging Consensus (3): Coherence
• Useful to increase efficiency and avoid duplication of efforts
• Core sets of common principles and criteria useful to link indicators with outcomes and increase transparency
• Coherence on terminology• Specific indicators should be developed at
the country level to measure progress
Way Forward
• FAO and WB to lead a core group of experts to develop a common framework of principles and criteria for forest governance. Stocktaking of progress envisaged for Spring 2011.
• Continue engagement and promote dialogue on governance issues in FLEGT-VPA, REDD+ and FIP activities.
• Strengthen the demand for good governance as essential to SFM, especially in countries not targeted by REDD+, FIP and VPAs (Europe and Central Asia).
THANK YOU
www.profor.info
top related