Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in Changing Societies in EuropeInformation for teaching module

Study CD-ROMPart II: Forestry in Changing Societies in Europe; country reports

Editors:P. Pelkonen, A. Pitkänen, P. Schmidt, G. Oesten, P. Piussi & E. Rojas

SILVA Network2000

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

Study guides now available !!!

The forestry profession has experienced a dramatic transformation during the lastdecade and this change is likely to accelerate. As a result forestry education has hadto adapt in order to adequately prepare students for a dynamic future.

The teaching module "Forestry in Changing Societies in Europe" aims to raisestudents’ awareness of certain aspects of Forestry throughout Europe, and toimprove their ability to analyse key changes and challenges. Study booksForestry in Changing Societies in Europe parts I, II and Teachers’ Manual are nowavailable to accompany the teaching module.

Although it is impossible to foresee the future, forestry students must be prepared forevery eventuality. This newly published study material offers an opportunity tocontemplate challenges facing forestry in changing European societies and to searchfor possible ways to meet these challenges.

Contents

Part I provides a global overview of the European forests, gives information on theEU and the forests, addresses the main issues in forestry on a continental scale andfinally examines the complex interrelationship between social changes and forestry.

Part II offers numerous examples of changes impacting forestry in individualEuropean countries. The 25 country reports describe natural conditions and socialstructures, forest resources and forestry, forest and forest related policies, forestryeducation and research as well as main current conflicts and challenges facing forestryin each country.

Teachers' manual describes emerging teaching models in higher education and givesexamples on how to teach the course Forestry in Changing Societies in Europe indifferent circumstances.

Available now from the SILVA Network at the University of Joensuu, Faculty ofForestry, P.O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland, Phone: +358 13 251 4425, Fax:+358 13 251 3590, Email: silva.network@joensuu.fi.

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

The study books were published at the:Joensuun yliopistopaino (University Press)University of JoensuuP.O.Box 111FIN 80101 JoensuuFINLAND

Layout done by:Ms. Anne Pitkänen and Mr. Pekka ÄänismaaUniversity of Joensuu

Assisted by:Mr. Christopher GreenUniversity of Joensuu

ISBN Number 951-98298-1-4

Key words: forestry, forestry education, society, changes

This CD-ROM has been partially funded by the SOCRATES/ERASMUS -Programme of the Euro-pean Union

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

Preface

Forestry in Changing Societies in Europe has been prepared within the framework of the EUSOCRATES Thematic Network for Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture and Related Sciences(AFANet). AFANet aims to promote a European dimension to higher education in universitiesand colleges offering degree programmes in agriculture, forestry, aquaculture and related sciences.

AFANet, which was launched in 1996, as a joint initiative of ICA, SILVA, NATURA and AQUA-TT and is addressing a number of key issues, both structural and discipline-based, in achievingits aims. The structural considerations have- strengthened communication within our Network of European Universities,- developed approaches to enhance the preparation of our students’ competence in a secondlanguage,- assessed how information and communications technology (ICT) can assist in the delivery ofsuch courses across Europe.

At the discipline level the Network has:- considered the future educational needs of the agriculture, aquaculture and forestry industries,- assessed the impact of issues such as sustainability in the design of curricula, and- developed courses which focus on providing students with a European perspective to their studies.

Forestry in Changing Societies in Europe is one such course. AFANet has funded the meetings ofthe contributors to discuss the aims of the course and to evaluate progress. The publication hasbeen partially funded by the EU SOCRATES/ERASMUS -Programme.

The AFANet Co-ordinating Committee present this publication not only in the expectation thatforestry students in Europe will develop a broader understanding of the industry in which theywill pursue their future careers, but also as an exemplar of an approach that academics in otherdisciplines may adopt when developing a course for delivery on a European wide basis.

Dr Simon HeathAFANet Co-ordinatorUniversity of Aberdeen, UK

Further information about the activities of AFANet can be found athttp://www.clues.abdn.ac.uk:8080/demeter

1 ICA - Interuniversity Conference for Agriculture and Related Sciences in Europe - currently comprisesover 70 European institutions of Higher Education in the field of Agriculture and Related Sciences. Createdin 1996 its objectives are to reinforce collaboration and European integration and dimension within highereducation.The SILVA Network is a Standing Committee of ICA. It presently comprises 29 institutions in forestryeducation.AQUA-TT Ltd. is the European Network for Training, Education and Technology Transfer for Aquacultureand its related sciences.NATURA – Network of European Agricultural (Tropically and Subtropically oriented) Universities andScientific complexes related to agricultural development - is an international association created in 1998which currently comprises 33 European Higher Educational Institutions. It aims to contribute to the transferof knowledge and the creation of new technologies that are essential to the economic, social and culturaldevelopment and to the protection of the environment

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

Acknowledgements

A project like the teaching module “Forestry in Changing Societies cannot be carried out withoutco-operation of many people and institutes. I would like to thank

The European Commission DG XXII Education, Training and Youth for funds through theSOCRATES Programme,

ICA and its staff for valuable assistance,DEMETER for the framework,

Authors of country reports and supplementary chapters for good co-operation and remarkableinput,Prof. Drs. Leena Aho and Leena Kaukinen for valuable comments concerning educational as-pects,

Members of the co-ordinating and editing committee for excellent co-operation,and Ms. Anne Pitkänen for her great contribution to the project management and co-ordination.

Prof. Dr. P. PelkonenChairman SILVA Network

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

ContentsAustria ......................................................................................... 2Azerbaijan ................................................................................. 24Belgium ...................................................................................... 30Denmark .................................................................................... 46Finland ....................................................................................... 62France ........................................................................................ 80Georgia .................................................................................... 100Germany .................................................................................. 116Greece ...................................................................................... 140Hungary ................................................................................... 156The Republic of Ireland ......................................................... 168Italy .......................................................................................... 188The Republic of Latvia........................................................... 204The Netherlands...................................................................... 230Norway..................................................................................... 256Poland ...................................................................................... 276Portugal ................................................................................... 296Romania................................................................................... 324The Slovak Republic............................................................... 336Slovenia.................................................................................... 358Spain ........................................................................................ 378Sweden ..................................................................................... 402Switzerland.............................................................................. 416Ukraine .................................................................................... 444United Kingdom...................................................................... 462

Map of Europe ........................................................................ 482

Austria

1 The Country

1.1 Nature

1.1.1 Topography

The Republic of Austria is a landlocked coun-try in central Europe. Extending about 760 kmlengthwise from east to west and almost 300 kmnorth to south the total land area is 83,858 km2.With this size it is one of the smallest countriesin Europe. The country’s westernmost third onlyconsists of a narrow corridor between 32 and60 kilometres between Germany and Italy. Aus-tria has borders with eight countries. Starting inthe north and going clockwise, these are the CzechRepublic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Italy,Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Germany. Theformer four belonged to the Eastern block untilthe fall of the ”Iron Curtain” and Austria tradi-tionally has been a link between the ”East” andthe ”West”. The most important river is the Dan-ube running through the north of this country.Quite a few important cities, among them alsothe capital Vienna, which is excessively large forthis small country, are located on this river.

1.1.2 Geology, climate, soils, vegetation

Austria is characterised by the Eastern Alpsdominating almost two thirds of this countrybecause of which it is often referred to as the”Alpine Republic”. Covering exactly 62% of theterritory the Alps are sharply structured in zonesrunning in an east-west direction. The narrownorthern boundary zone of the Alps (”Flysch”zone) mainly consists of soft sandstone, marland argillaceous schist. Rounded peaks and soft

slopes covered with mixed forests and mead-ows are typical. Adjoining to the south are theNorthern Limestone Alps (Kalkalpen). Consist-ing of permeable limestone and dolomite theyreach heights of up to 3,000 metres and showthe typical forms such as steep slopes, narrowvalleys and abruptly rising steep walls. The high-est peaks are covered by glaciers and scarcityof water in regions of karstic plateaus is typical.The lower parts (up to 2,000 metres) are cov-ered densely with spruce forests. The followinglower ”greywacke” zone (Grauwackenzone)(slate and shale ranges) is suited for mountainpasturage and is of economical interest due toits mineral deposits such as magnesite, iron orcopper. The Central Alps (Zentralalpen) buildthe band further south consisting of hard gneissand crystalline shales. Austrias highest summitsand most glacierous regions are to be found inthe western part of the Alps peaking at 3797metres (Grossglockner), whereas the eastern partis lower, intersected by many basins, and pre-dominantly covered with forests. The SouthernLimestone Alps (Südlichen Kalkalpen) onlyreach Austria in the very south. The predomi-nant soil types in the Alps are Rendzinas,Lithosols, and Dystric Cambisols (FAO classi-fication). The climate type in the Alpine regions- Alpine climate (Df in the Köppen classifica-tion) - shows several regional variations accord-ing to the altitude. Generally speaking, summersare cool and rather short, in higher areas snowcover may stay for up to four months of the year.The ”Föhn” wind is a typical feature of this cli-mate: it is a dry and warm wind usually blowingfrom the south and raising temperatures.

Only slightly more than one quarter of the fed-eral territory is flat or moderately hilly curving

Austria

Author:Stefan CzamutzianInstitute of Forest Sector Policy and EconomicsUniverstät für Bodenkultur WienGregor-Mendel-Str. 33, 1180 Wien, AustriaPhone: +43 / 1 / 47654-4425; Fax: +43 / 1 /47654-4407E-mail: h9140476@edv1.boku.ac.at

Austria

around the Alpine ”tongue” from the north-eastto the east; these are the lowlands and hills ofnorth-eastern and eastern Austria. In this areaforestry plays a minor role as this is Austria’smost intensively cultivated agricultural region.On fertile brown and black soils cereals andvegetables are grown. The Pannonic climate inthis area – little precipitation and hot summers– is also ideal for growing wine of high qualitymainly in extensive vineyards situated south-eastof Vienna, on the hills of the ”Wine District”(Weinviertel) covered with fertile loess and be-ing situated in the north-east of the capital, andin the Danube Valley (starting approximately120 kilometres west of Vienna). A natural veg-etation of oak and hornbeam can be found inthe lowlands and plains, in the hilly regionsmixed forests stands with different pine speciesand deciduous trees dominate. The south–eastis subject to a more sub-Mediteranean (Illyric)influence and sweet chestnut as well as decidu-ous forests are found. As this climate favoursagriculture, fruits and maize are grown on smallscale. Along the river Danube, alluvial decidu-ous forests (Auwald) are typical and regular in-undations take place. On alluvial soils, rangingfrom gravel to sandy forms, poplars and wil-lows grow close to the water; going further, thevegetation changes to deciduous stands with oak,hazel and other broadleaved trees.

The remaining tenth of the territory of Austriais the Bohemian Granite Massif in the north-west, a medium upland (up to 1,300 metres). Itis part of the central European intermediate cli-mate dictating the weather conditions there aswell as in the Alpine Foreland (Alpenvorland)– this is where the Alps start rising. Predomi-nately westerly winds carry humid Atlantic airmasses and this results in abundant precipita-tion - especially in the west and decreasing east-wards - at all seasons at comparatively mild tem-peratures. But in the Granite upland the climateis rougher and cooler; the stony soils yield rathermodest crops in both agriculture and forestry.In its eastern parts the conditions for agricul-ture are better and potatoes, rye and oats aregrown. This region is densely wooded withmixed stands in the lower regions and sprucestands dominating the higher points.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Population, economy

Austria is inhabited by slightly more than 8 mil-lion people (exactly 8,046,500). This gives apopulation density of 96/km2 , which is low incentral European terms and reflects the Alpinecharacter of this country. The distribution of thepopulation is – according to the geographic con-ditions – very uneven. Roughly two thirds ofthe total population live in the Danube valleyand the Austrian lowlands. The biggest concen-tration is Vienna (about 1.5 million inhabitants)and its environs. Within the Alpine regions,population concentrates in valleys (such as theInn valley in Tyrol in the West of Austria or thebasins in the eastern Alps). Major Austrian cit-ies are also situated there, such as the capitalcities Innsbruck, Graz or Klagenfurt. The sec-ond biggest city is Graz.. Apart from such placesthe Alpine region is quite scarcely populated.

Tourism is the main source of income in Aus-tria. The country is well known for its skiingresorts in the western Alps, mainly in the fed-eral provinces Tyrol and Salzburg (both the cityand the province have the same name). But Aus-tria is also a popular place for spending the sum-mer holidays; in the Alps tourists go hiking,walking, mountain biking or take part in adven-ture sports such as paragliding and rafting. Theones who want to relax, sunbathe or do somewater sports chose one of the numerous lakes inCarinthia in the south, in the ”Salzkammergut” inthe northern-central part or decide to visit the big-gest lake of Austria, the ”Neusiedlersee”. It is lo-cated at the Hungarian border, only 1 – 1.5 metresdeep and is a paradise for sailors and surfers. An-other important form of land use is agriculture:production on a large scale can only be found inthe plains in the east (”Marchfeld”). Crops suchas cereals, vegetables and fruits are grown in theeast where the soil and climate conditions are idealfor agriculture. In the Alps livestock farming withbeef cattle and dairy production is predominant.As with agriculture, forestry is also mainly doneon a small scale which will be discussed later inseveral chapters. Industry is located around Vi-enna and other cities such as Linz; both cities

Austria

lie at the river Danube and have the biggestAustrian ports. Another big industrial zone is inthe federal province Styria which, in addition,is economically significant due to the mineraldeposits such as magnesite, copper or iron ore,the former is among the biggest world-wide.Industry ranges from heavy industry to the pro-duction of high-tech articles such as parts formachines or engines and also includes chemi-cal and textile fibre production. Due to its manyrivers and mountainous lakes, Austria is a netproducer of ”clean” electrical energy mainlyproduced in small to large water power plants.This energy is also exported. There is no nu-clear power plant in operation. Figures aboutthe forest industries are given in Chapter 3 deal-ing with forest economics.

1.2.2 Political structure and society

Austria is a Federal Republic (Bundesrepublik)and consists of nine federal provinces (Länder).According to the Constitution of 1920, amend-ment 1929, the head of the state is the Presidentof the Federal Republic (Bundespräsident) whois elected every 6 years directly by the citizensof Austria and has mainly representative andadministrative functions. The parliament con-sists of 183 representatives of the various po-litical parties (Nationalrat). This is the legisla-tive institution, together with the 58 representa-tives of the federal provinces who constitute the2nd chamber (Bundesrat) which only has thepower of veto. At the moment five political par-ties are represented in parliament (i. e. at least5% of all voting citizens gave them their vote).The Social Democratic Party (SPÖ) is the big-gest one with more than 35% and is in coalitionwith a Christian-democratic party, the People’sParty (ÖVP). They together form the govern-ment, the Federal Chancellor is a member ofthe stronger SPÖ. Each federal province has agovernor; the function of whom, the role of fed-eral and state law as well as the administrativesystem is more deeply discussed in Chapter 4.1.Since January 1995 Austria has been a memberof the European Union.

The majority of the Austrian population is Ger-man speaking and Roman Catholic. There are,

however, ethnic minorities in the south and eastof Austria.

2 Forest resources and their uses

In the beginning of this chapter two terms shouldbe explained briefly: Forest and forestry. Gen-erally speaking, land covered by forest tree spe-cies and exceeding 1,000 m2 (minimum widthof 10 metres required) is defined as forest ac-cording to the Austrian Forest Act 1975 (excep-tions exist). Further important definitions inAustrian forestry are given in the Chapter 2. 5.4 (Forest functions). Forestry from the manage-ment perspective – the term forest managementcan be used - can be described as managementof forest land to provide goods andinfrastructural services; typical features includethe long-term planning and consequences, thevariety of functions, the high degree of indeter-mination, the risk and uncertainty as well as theidentity of capital and product (Brünig andMayer 1987). Forestry as defined in constitu-tional orders – here the term forestry affairswould be appropriate – covers all matters deal-ing with maintenance, tending, and protectionof forest land; this includes matters such as for-est management, import and export of raw wood,forest education, torrent and avalanche control.

2.1 Forest history

In the times towards the end of the glacial pe-riod (11000 - 10000 B. C.) the vegetation com-prised mainly of bushes but in some regionspines and in the Alpine forlands also birchesdeveloped. In the beginning of the post glacialperiod different pine species, according to thealtitude, and birches were the main species, inthe southern regions the spruce appeared. Theclimate of the Boreal (around 6000 B.C.) fa-voured the expansion of spruce covering mostof the Alpine areas. In the lower parts mixedstands of oak and pine dominated. During theAtlantikum (around 4000 B.C.) first mixedstands comprising of spruce, fir and beech de-veloped in the southern and eastern parts of theAlps peaking in the Subboreal time (around

Austria

Federal AustrianForestsand other (17,0)

private forest< 200 ha (48,3)

private forest > 200 ha (22,4)

communityforest (9,8)

communalforest (2,2)

provincial forests (1,5)

Figure 1. Forest ownership in percent of forest area (grey = private forest; black = public forest)(BMLF 1998b)

1500 B.C.); during this period the forest linereached highest levels with spruce, fir andcembra pine in high elevations. In the south-east,hornbeam appeared and mixed with oak, beechand, in some regions, fir. Up to the present, theshare of fir has decreased drastically, also thebeech has gone back whereas spruce expanded.Before the strong influence of man changed thenaturally developed forest zoning, Austrian for-ests could be described as follows: a broadspruce zone in the inner Alps, a belt of spruce-fir-beech stands on the Alpine border line witha narrow band of spruce-fir forest in between.In the lower regions, oak and hornbeam standsdominate; pine and larch is mixed in the forestsaccording to the altitude.

2.2 Forest ownership

The Austrian forest is primarily in private hands.Roughly 80% is private forest and managed ac-cording to a small-scale structure; more than213,000 silviculturists (often farmers who alsoown small forest land) manage enterprises of lessthan 200 hectares forest area, but this accountsfor almost half of all Austrian forests. In 1993,about 140,000 forest enterprises in the size class1 - 5 hectares and 57,000 enterprises in the sizeclass 5 - 20 were recorded; both account for onequarter of the forested land. About one third ofthe entire forest area is looked after by major for-est enterprises. The remaining 20% are public for-ests, more than three quarters of which are in thehands of the Federal Austrian Forests; the rest isprovincial and communal forest land (figure 1) .

2.3 Land use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global overview of land use

Austria is a land of forests - after Sweden andFinland it is the third most densely wooded coun-try in the EU. Of the 8.39 million hectares totalfederal territory of Austria almost half - exactly47% - is covered with forest; this means 3.92million hectares, in total, or approximately 0.5ha of forest per capita. One third (33%) is agri-culturally used land, 11% is either alpine mead-ows or unproductive areas (such as the manyglaciers in western Austria); 7% is developedland such as settlements or transportation sys-tems, and 2% is covered with water. A regionaldevelopment survey over the time period be-tween 1975 and 1996 shows a decline in agri-culturally used land (-9%) whereas developedland and forest land are increasing (+17% and+7% respectively). The annual growth of forestarea is 7,700 hectares at present.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

The forests in Austria are not evenly distributedover the federal territory. The mountainousslopes in the Alpine areas and in the highlands -especially in central and southern Austria - aremost densely covered with forests, also the gran-ite uplands in the north. Areas particularly poorin forest land lie in the east where agriculture isthe main form of land use. The forest cover inthe high mountains in the western parts of thecountry is lower. In addition to the altitude, in-tensive pastures are responsible for this fact. The

Austria

forest line, the border of the dense forest, in theCentral Alps runs at 1,900 metres above sealevel, in the limestone Alps some 200 metreslower. The tree line lies about 300 metres abovethe forest line.

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

In Austrian forests coniferous trees dominate.Their share (77.3%) has been high for a longtime due to the climatic conditions in predomi-nantly mountainous regions. For economic rea-sons, however, it was increased in the past bythe planting of spruce and pine. By far the mostimportant species is spruce (Picea abies) with atotal share of 61.8%. The most frequent decidu-ous tree is beech (Fagus sylvatica) with a shareof almost 10%. A detailed overview of the treespecies in Austrian exploitable forests (about85% of the total forest) is given in ´table 1.

The above species are native to Austrian forestsbut in the past non-native tree species were alsointroduced. Examples would be the Douglas Fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii), and other fir speciesor poplar species which are commerciallygrown. Their share is, however, very small. Intotal, approximately 40 tree species (includingrare species, too) can be found and the forestmanagement distinguishes between coniferous,deciduous and mixed forests. In the plains and

on hilly ground, foliage forests dominate; alongbig rivers (such as the river Danube), alluvialforests are found where inundations are a regu-lar phenomenon. In mountainous regions, co-niferous species form the forests with spruce andcembran pine growing up to the forest line andtree line respectively.

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

The total growing stock in Austrian exploitableforests is almost one billion cubic metres (ex-actly 987 million m3). With about 295 cubicmetres standing timber per hectare, Austria hasone of the largest growing stocks in the EU. Theannual increment is 27.3 million cubic metres(8.2 m3 per ha). As only 19.5 million cubic me-tres are felled annually, almost one third or 29%of the increment remains in the forest.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Various threats cause damage to Austrian forestsevery year and keep silviculturists and forestmanagers busy. They can be classified in bioticthreats (animals, diseases), abiotic threats (wind,snow/hoar-frost, falling rocks) and human threats(pollution, recreation, harvesting damages).These threats are dealt with in this order.

Tree species Forest area (%)Spruce (Picea abies) 61.8Fir (Abies alba) 2.7Larch (Larix decidua) 5.0Pines (Pinus sp.) 7.7other conifers 0.1Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 9.8Oaks (Quercus sp.) 2.2other deciduous hardwood(such as Hornbeam – Carpinus betulus L.; Ash - Fraxinus excelsior; Maple - Acer sp.; Elm – Ulmus sp.) 6.4other deciduous softwood(such as Birch – Betula sp.; Alder - Alnus sp.; Poplar - Populus sp.; Willow - Salix sp.) 4.2

Table 1. Tree species in Austrian exploitable forests by forest area in %

Source: BMLF 1998

Austria

Austrian forests are the habitat for a variety ofanimals, many of them hunted by man. Unilat-eral promotion of specific game species appeal-ing to the hunter combined with the fragmenta-tion and reduction of game habitats, often en-forced by recreation activities such as skiing, isone of the biggest problems for Austrian for-estry. Problems are browsing of regeneratingsaplings, mainly by roe deer and chamois, andbark-peeling by red deer.

According to the regeneration survey of theAustrian Forest Inventory 1992/96, 85% of allregeneration areas show signs of browsing, jeop-ardising a mixed regeneration, particularly asfirs and deciduous tree species are preferred bygame. In some cases sufficient regeneration isprevented at all, causing severe problems par-ticularly in protection forests. Forest authoritiesreport that in about 1/5 of forest areas, regen-eration is impossible without protective and pro-phylactic measures (such as fencing) againstbrowsing; fraying damage has been assessed on8% of all trees in Austrian production forests,debarking by red deer is however estimated stillhigher, both causing rotting of the stem and adestabilisation of the stands. 10% of forest landare still pastured, and domestic animals browseat forest plants and cause damage to roots andsoil by trampling. These problems are outlinedin Chapter 5.

Another threat for Austrian forests is insects. Be-tween 1990 and 1997 a volume of about ten mil-lion cubic metres of damaged wood was causedby bark beetles, mainly by the spruce bark beetle(Ips typographus) and by the six-toothed sprucebark beetle (Ips chalcographus). The infestationsoccur predominately in hot and dry summers andoften after abiotic catastrophes such as thunder-storms. Victims are mainly pure and artificiallyplanted spruce stands below 800 metres in theAlpine forelands, but also healthy and naturalstands in higher altitudes have already been in-fested. Apart from these two beetles, variousother insects cause regional damage to forests.These include the European spruce saw fly(Gilpinia polytoma) and various moths. Differ-ent types of fungi cause rotting or discolorationand as a consequence a devaluation of the tim-ber; one worth mentioning is the annosus root

rot (Heterobasidion annosum) accessing sprucesfrom the root system and hollowing the trunkfrom the inside. Oaks, especially in the east ofAustria, are dying to an alarming extent due toan unknown cause; although a combination ofweakening circumstances such as dryness andfrost combined with biotic factors are believedto be the reason for the ”dying of oaks”.

Thunderstorms, snow, hoar-frost and fallingrocks are the main abiotic threats occurring regu-larly in Austria. In 1990, a catastrophic thun-derstorm blew down or broke approximately halfof the average annual felling quantity of Aus-tria. Landslides and also heavy loads of ice andsnow are hazards for forests particularly in themountainous regions in western and centralAustria. An average of 27% (within the last tenyears) of the total annual timber harvest wasdamaged by wind or snow. Almost 17% of alltrunks in protection forests show signs of dam-age caused by falling rocks indicating clearlythe important role of the forest.

Austria has strict laws on permissible pollutionfor all kinds of sources. Since the discussion of”forest decline” in the 80’s a lot has been doneon the environmental sector. Due to its positionin the middle of Europe, deposits of various kindsof ”foreign” sources come down on Austrian soil:this may include pollution caused by transit-traf-fic through Austria (especially from north tosouth) as well as pollution from other countriescarried over long distances. Measurable effectson the forest ecosystem are regional high levelsof heavy metals, yellowing of leaves or even de-foliation. Roughly one third of all Austrian treesshow visible top defoliation with fir, pine and oakbeing particularly affected. Pollution is also seenas one of the reasons for the ”die-off” of singletree species (see ”dying oak” above).

Austria is a popular country for tourists and well-known for its skiing resorts. But also in sum-mer, Alpine and other regions are frequented andthe sports such as mountain biking, hiking,paragliding are a burden for the forests; game isdisturbed permanently and takes refuge in stillsmaller areas where browsing and frayingdestabilises stands particularly in highly sensi-

Austria

tive protection forests. In addition, skiers out-side the marked and prepared rundowns dam-age roots and young trees. Further damage iscaused by foresters and forest workers them-selves: Almost 7% of trunks in production for-ests show bark damage caused by timber har-vesting. As harvesting techniques are gettingmore and more sophisticated this kind of dam-age should decrease in future.

2.4 Silviculture

In Austria various kinds of silvicultural meth-ods in regeneration, tending and harvesting areused. Table 2 gives a general overview of thesilvicultural management methods.

Protection forests play an important role in Aus-tria, 755,000 hectares are identified as such for-ests, 38% of which are with commercial yield.Protection in this context means that these for-ests need to be protected (according to the Aus-trian Forest Act) and therefore require specialtreatment to fulfil their function; see definitionsin Chapter 2.5.4. Although regulations exist onthe management of protected forests, the Aus-trian Forestry Inventory proves rather unsatis-factory for those sensitive stands. Decreasingstability, overmature stands and lack of regen-eration require effective measures. This prob-lem will be discussed in Chapter 5. It has to bepointed out that in Austria silvicultural manage-ment is done on a small-scale basis; this is alsotrue for removals as, due to the strict forest law,clearcuts bigger than 2 hectares are prohibitedand for clearcuts extending 0,5 hectar a permis-sion of the forest authority is required. Roughlythree quarters of the felling quantity is made upof mature trees, the rest arises from tending, suchas thinning (table 3).

This small-scale management with a high pro-portion of small-scale removals and regenera-tion fellings has also an impact on regeneration.An increasing emphasis is put on natural regen-eration which is already taken into considera-tion when harvesting. While artificial reforesta-tion with coniferous trees was the main ”regen-eration” method in the past, now the natural re-generation is increasingly taking place in Aus-trian forests. This also has a positive ecologicalimpact as the area of mixed and deciduous standsis permanently increasing. In the 1990s, the for-est comprises of 24% mixed forests, 11% de-ciduous and 65% coniferous forests. This is adevelopment in favour of mixed stands. Forest-ers and silviculturists use methods of naturalregeneration and work increasingly towardsmixed stands - where natural - for reasons ofstability, amelioration of soils and diversity. In1996 the age distribution was as follows: 40%up to 40 years, 24% 41 to 80 years; 8 % brush-wood, the rest was older than 80 years.

2.5 Forest production

In Austria, forests do not provide only timber,but a wider variety of products and services. Dueto the many mountainous regions, it often has aprotective function, too. The main use of for-ests, however, is for timber production whichwill be shown in this chapter.

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

Since Austria is a mountainous country and for-ests expand from lowlands up to the forest line,many different harvesting systems are employedaccording to the accessibility. As in Austria manyfarmers own small forest land, this ownership

Silvicultural management methods % of total forest areaCommercial forests 75.7Protection forest with commercial yield 7.4Protection forest without commercial yield 11.9Forest roads and operational areas without commercial yield 2.6Coppice stands 2.4

Table 2. Silvicultural management methods in Austria (after Frank et al.)

Austria

2.5.2 Timber uses

Austria has a well developed timber and timberprocessing industry. Even roundwood is im-ported to cover the demand of sawmilling, pa-per and board, and wood based panels indus-tries. These semi-final and final products areexported to a large extent. The uses of timber inthe various industries in the national context arediscussed more deeply in Chapter 3.1.

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

Apart from timber, Austrian forests provideother products and services, too. Some of themmay not be seen directly as non-timber forestproducts, like hunting; in this chapter, however,non-timber products somehow related to forestsare listed contributing to the income of the for-est owner. Other services and functions are dealtwith in Chapter 2.5.4.

Structure of removals Percentage of total removalsClearcut (5000 - 20000 m2) 28Small-scale removals (up to 5000 m2) 25Thinning 16Regeneration fellings (here: e. g. shelterwood systems; including final felling) 13Incidental felling/clean up cutting 10Natural decay 8

Table 3. Removals 1992/96 (after Schwarzbauer, undated)

Cable yarder15 %

Tractor7 %

Other transportation3 %

Hauling75 %

Figure 2. Methods of timber transportation from felling site to forest roads (Forest and Wood inAustria 1998)

has also an impact on the harvesting methodsdue to the machinery available.

Depending on surface conditions and accessi-bility, timber harvesting is either done with har-vesting machines or manually with chainsaws.The transportation of the timber to the forestroad is also done according to above factors;Figure 2 shows the methods and their relativeimportance.

Most important is hauling. As a very dense net-work of forest roads and logging trails exists inAustrian commercial forests, this is a very eco-nomic method. Cable yarders are employedmainly in the mountainous regions inaccessiblefor vehicles. The reason for the rather high pro-portion of logging by tractors is found in thecharacteristics of the ownership: farmers whoown woodlands and manage their forest adapttheir tractors for forest work such as timber har-vesting. Other transportation includes transportby helicopter, horses or special “log-lines” (halfpipe-like slipways).

Austria

A very important income for forest owners ishunting. According to Austrian law, the ownerof forest land also owns the rights for hunting inhis forests. Depending on the federal province(hunting falls under the jurisdiction of the fed-eral provinces, so there are nine different hunt-ing laws in force), a hunting area has to exceeda defined size limit to be counted as a ”huntingdistrict”. These hunting districts can be rentedas a whole to hunters or permission for a certainnumber of animals is sold. Small forest ownershave to put their areas together to reach a hunt-ing district, whereas big forest enterprises oftendivide their property into several districts. Noteveryone is allowed to hunt; a hunting licenseis required. Approximately 110,000 annual hunt-ing licenses were issued in 1993/94, which in-dicates the high popularity.

The renting of fishing districts or buildings canalso contribute to the income of a forest enter-prise. The selling of Christmas trees or incomegained from touristic activities might also be ofinterest in particular regions.

2.5.4 Forest functions

In mountainous and touristic countries like Aus-tria, forests fulfil a variety of functions. The pro-tective function is most significant in the Alpineregion which would be uninhabitable withoutforests protecting from landslides or avalanches.Before talking about this in more depth, threeterms have to be explained.

It has to be pointed out that the term ”protec-tion” in connection with forests is unclear, as inAustria it comprises two different aspects: pro-tection by the forest and protection for the for-est. The former refers to the protective function,the protection of villages, of the populationagainst falling rocks or landslides by the forest.This land use term is defined in the Regulationon the Forest Development Plan. The lattermeaning - the protection for the forest - is de-fined in the Forest Act; in this case protectedforests are sites endangered by erosive powerssuch as wind or water and therefore require aparticular treatment ensuring the protection ofsoil, vegetation and reforestation. Sites are de-

fined in the Forest Act which are automaticallyprotected forests; special regulations for thesekinds of forests exist. This paper follows the lit-erature (Weiß 1998) and therefore the terms”protective forest” (protective effects by forestagainst natural hazards) and ”protection forest”(forest which needs to be protected as it guar-antees site protection) will be used.

The Austrian Forest Act also formulates anotherterm for forests in connection with protection:Ban forest (protective forest by decree). Banforests are defined as ”Forests which serve toprotect man, human settlements and installationsor cultivated soil from certain dangers as wellas forests whose beneficial effects are moreimportant than their economic effects, shall beprotected by decree, provided that the nationaleconomic or other public interest to be protected(purpose of protection) proves to be more sig-nificant than the disadvantages connected withthe limitation of forest management due to theformal decree proclamation as ban forest” (§27 sec. 1, Austrian Forest Act 1975, amendment1987; in Frank et. al.). A purpose of protection,particular measures or prohibitions laid downby the authority, and a beneficiary of the pro-tection who has to bear the cost, are providedfor by decree in the case of ban forests.

According to the Austrian Forest Act of 1975(amendment 1987) four key functions of theforests are distinguished:

- Production: the economic function, i. e. in par-ticular the economically sustainable produc-tion of the resource wood

- Protection: the protective function, i. e. in par-ticular the averting of elementary dangers anddamaging environmental impacts, as well asthe maintenance of soil fertility against ero-sion by surface water, debris formation andlandslides

- Welfare: the beneficial function, i. e. the effectforests have on the environment, in particularon the balancing of climate and water budget,on cleaning of air and water, and on the reduc-tion of noise

- Recreation: the recreational function, i. e. inparticular the effect forests have as a recrea-tional area for people visiting forests.

Austria

The instrument referring to the above functionsis the Forest Development Plan (FDP). It is oneof the land use plans provided for in the Aus-trian Forest Act and can be defined as a plan-ning frame showing actual forest conditions anddescribing the key functions of the forests forthe whole federal territory. The FDP is describedmore in detail in Chapter 4. According to thisplan the key functions of Austrian forests aredistributed as shown in table 4.

It has to be pointed out that the same forest canhave more than one function, i. e. that the shareof recreation areas in Austrian forests is by farhigher than 1.1%; this figure indicates only theleading function, the one most important in aparticular area. The area where the commercialfunction is the major one is by far the largest.Forests with this key function are mainly foundin the northern, central and south-eastern partof Austria, whereas forests with a protectivefunction are dominating in the mountainouswestern part. Forests serving welfare are dis-tributed over the territory particularly in regionsproviding drinking water; highest shares arefound in the north-east, mainly around Vienna.The spots with recreation as the key functionare well distributed throughout Austria.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

Although Austria is rich in forests and is a largeproducer of forest products world-wide, the for-est sector’s contribution to the national economy- measured as the gross domestic product (GDP)- is small. In 1996, the share of the total forestsector amounted to 3.8%, of which only 0.2%

were attributed by the forestry sector and 3.6%by the processing industry. During recent dec-ades this share has fallen substantially with for-estry losing more of its share than forest indus-try. Looking at the contribution to foreign trade,the situation changes: with 5% of total importsand 10% of total exports the forest industry sec-tor is the second most important contributor tothe balance of trade, following tourism.

3.1.1 Production and consumption

Austria is a large producer of forest products inEurope. Although the number of forest industrymills has decreased dramatically within recentdecades (with the exception of panel industrymills), production is rising. Big mills offset thecapacity lost by closures of smaller ones and sosteadily increase their market share. Taking theexample of Austrian sawmills in 1996, 76%(46%) of total sawnwood was produced by millswith an annual output of more than 10,000(100,000) cubic metres which is a rise in mar-ket share of 51% (no figures for sawmills >100,000 m3) compared to 1965. An overview ofproduction, domestic consumption and changesof production/consumption within the periods1988/97 and 1962/71 is given in Table 5.

Production and domestic consumption is risingin all categories except non-coniferoussawnwood where production falls steadily. Forthe consumption of residuals no accurate fig-ures can be given but it has to be stated that arising share of these products is used in the pulpand panel industry. Panel and ”paper&board”production grew considerably more than conif-erous sawnwood production in the last decades;the reason why pulp production does not rise asfast as ”paper&board” production can be ex-

Key function Percent of total forest areaProduction 64.5Protection 30.7Welfare 3.6Recreation 1.1

Table 4. Key functions of Austrian forests (in %)

Austria

plained by the facts that, firstly pulp is increas-ingly imported and secondly it is increasinglyreplaced by waste paper; almost half of the fi-bres used in paper production is from recycledwaste paper.

The grade of self sufficiency with timber andtimber products in a country can be expressedby the ratio of production (without imports) toconsumption calculated on the basis of ”WoodRaw Material Equivalents” (WRME); with aratio of 1.32 the position of Austria as a timberexporting country is clearly given and is alsosignificantly higher than the ratio of Europe(0.88) or Germany (0.62).

Table 5 shows that the domestic demand forconiferous sawnwood grew more than the pro-duction which results in a decreased share ofnet exports. Panel and paper developed in theopposite way showing a rising importance ofexports relative to domestic consumption.

3.1.2 Forest product trade and markets

Austria is a net-importer of roundwood and anet-exporter of wood products. In 1996, Aus-tria (net-)imported about the same quantity ofconiferous industrial roundwood as the wholeof Europe (in terms of net-imports). But thereare also considerable amounts of non-conifer-

ous industrial roundwood, fuelwood and otherforest products imported every year. Figures ofimports and the shares for each country is givenin figure 3.

Most important suppliers of raw-wood are Ger-many and Eastern European countries, espe-cially the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

When looking at the exports of forest products,the picture is different. Austria exports largeamounts of forest products mainly into coun-tries of the EU and to Eastern Europe but alsoincreasingly to Japan. In 1996 Austria was the6th biggest exporter of coniferous sawnwoodworld-wide. The main market is Italy absorb-ing two thirds of total sawnwood softwood ex-ports and considerable amounts of wood basedpanels followed by Germany which is the big-gest customer of Austrian wood based panelsand paper&board products. The rest is exportedmainly to other European countries and Japan.

3.1.3 Employment

About 130,000 persons were employed in theAustrian forest industry sector in 1996 (3.9%of the total workforce). Only about 15,000 or11.6% make their living on forestry in a nar-rower sense (forest owners managing enterprisesless than 50 hectares are excluded). 47,000 jobs

Product 1000’s cubic metres/tonnes changes in changes inproduction (within consumptionperiods (within periods1988/97:1962/71) 1988/97:1962/71)in % in %

Production ConsumptionConiferous sawnwood 8,146 4,318 + 48 + 118Non-coniferous sawnwood 193 256 - 14 + 23Sawmill residues 3,254 n.a. + 77 n.a.Particle/fibre board 1,811 (1995) 772 +322 (88/95:62/71) + 178Pulp 1,629 1,488 + 95 + 222Mechanical pulp 378 396 + 86 + 97Paper & board 3,817 1,588 + 300 + 192Fuelwood (excl. 2,93 (average 3,570 + 30 (87/96:62/71) + 31residuals) 1987/96)

Table 5. Production and consumption of forest industry products in Austria 1997 (different yearsshown in brackets) (after Schwarzbauer 1994)

Austria

are in the wood processing industry (sawmillingand paper industry roughly 10,000 each, woodprocessing industry 27,000). The timber manu-facturing sector provides most jobs (52,700 injoinery and related sectors); 15,100 people – thesame amount as in the forestry sector – work inthe timber trade and the administration/servicesector. Although the amount of jobs provided bythe forest and forest industry sector is small, ithas to be pointed out that they are very importantin rural and remote areas lacking other employ-ment or well developed commuting facilities.

3.1.4 Profitability and productivity

The profitability of Austrian forestry is annu-ally published by the Ministry of Agriculture andForestry. To measure these data four networksare supported by the Federal Ministry: one net-work for farm forests, two for jointly ownedforests in the two western provinces where thiskind of management prevails (ended 1994), andone for forests larger than 500 hectares. TheAustrian Federal Forests are not included andare cited separately. These networks are basedon voluntary membership, and four underlyingprinciples for the calculation of the data obtainedhave to be stressed:

1) The data such as costs or profit refer to theallowable cut to obtain more stable results forthe time series; as the actual cut is usuallyslightly higher (approximately +20% in enter-prises exceeding 500 hectares), due to severalreasons the actual profit is also higher.

2) The results refer only to the income madefrom forestry not including hunting or othernon-forest income.

3) The data are calculated on a cost account-ancy basis; with farm forests the labour inputof farmers in forestry is taken, and on the ba-sis of cost accountancy a contribution to theincome from forestry work is calculated.

4) Calculated interest is excluded.

According to the Austrian Forestry Report, en-terprises > 500 ha earned ECU 0.94 / m3 allow-able cut. In 1994 and 1995 it was ECU 2.54 andECU 4.93 respectively. These figures indicatethe difficulty the Austrian forestry had in 1996due to the economic development and the open-ing to the European market. The contribution tothe income of farm forestry was - depending onthe region - ECU 23.26 and ECU 16.01 per m3

allowable cut, respectively. A higher incomecould be received in the years before. The Aus-trian Federal Forests are cited separately; in1994 and 1996 the result was a loss, the result

Figure 3. Imports of raw-wood in million cubic metres (in brackets net-imports) and the shareof most important supplying countries (D=Germany, CZ=Czech Republik, SK=Slowakian

Republic, O.E.=European countries except CZ, SK and members of EU) in 1997

1,11 (0,919)

0,156 (0,147)0,716 /n.a.)

4,055 (3,44)

Coniferous industrial roundwood: D (43 %), CZ (30%), O.E. (14%), SK (13%)Non-coniferous industrial roundwood: CZ (31%), O.E. (29%), SK (21%), D (17%)Fuelwood: O.E. (46%), CZ (40%), SK (12%)Other products: mainly D, CZ, SK

Austria

for 1995 was roughly one third compared withthe forest enterprises. One explanation for theseresults are the forests managed by the FederalForests which are in many regions difficult andcostly to manage.

One method used to measure the productivity isthe production per employee. In 1996 the pro-ductivity per employee was 823 cubic metres inthe sawmilling sector, 650 cubic metres in thepanel industry and 349 tons in the paper indus-try. All of these industries could increase theproductivity substantially over the last decades,especially the panel and paper industry.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation and administration

Austria is a federal state with nine federal prov-inces (Länder). Two important constitutionalcharacteristics have to be pointed out which areof interest in the context of this chapter:

1) The delegation of authorities between thefederal state and the Länder

2) Indirect federal administration by the Länder

ad 1: In Austria, forest law is the responsibilityof the federal government. The forest law com-prises all forestry activities and ranges fromtending, maintenance, harvesting operations toforestry education as well as subsidies. A de-tailed overview about the 12 sections of theForest Act is given below. The other legal sec-tors of relevance to forests, such as hunting,regional planning or protection of nature, arewithin the competence of the federal provinces;this means that a) different agencies deal withthese matters and b) each province has its lawfor purposes such as hunting or nature protec-tion. This results in an often competitive co-existence of federal law and provincial lawwhich are applied to the same piece of landand therefore can result in problems, especiallywhen taking the example of forestry and hunt-ing (see Chapter 5).

ad 2: Indirect federal administration by theLänder (mittelbare Bundesverwaltung) means

that in many matters, such as forestry, the leg-islation is the responsibility of the central statewhile the execution of these regulations is amatter of the provincial authorities. There arethree levels of forest administration in Austria(see Figure 3): The Federal Ministry of Agri-culture and Forestry (Bundesministerium fürLand- und Forstwirtschaft, BMLF) is the au-thority at state level. As no corresponding fed-eral administrative bodies exist at provincialand district level, the administrative implemen-tation falls within the competence of the au-thorities at these levels. This means that theprovincial governor (Landeshauptmann) andthe district governor (Bezirkshauptmann) areresponsible in these matters; they have, how-ever, forest authorities at each level on theirside assisting them in these matters.

The present forest legislation in Austria has itsroots in the medieval regulations of Austrianemperors with the focus on a sustainable forestutilisation in the interest of the early salt andiron smelting industries. As a result, the firstcomprehensive forest legislation incorporatingthe basic principles of conservation and protec-tion was released in 1872. The legal foundationsrelevant to forests in Austria today are laid downin the Austrian Forest Act 1975 (amendment1987) and its implementing regulations includethe Regulation on Hazard Zone Plans, the Regu-lation on Forest Development Plan and somemore. The Forest Act consists of 12 sectionswhich are as follows:

1) Definitions: definition of forest, forest areas,and other definitions used in the Forest Act

2) Forest land-use planning: here the ForestDevelopment Plan, the Hazard Zone Plan andother plans are defined

3) Maintenance of the forest and of thesustainability of its functions: a) General regu-lations; b) Forests requiring special treatment(like the protection forest or the ban forest); c)Regulations on using the forests for recrea-tional purposes ; d) Forests with additional uses(such as pasture, water resources/protection)

4) Forest protection: Protection against fire, ca-lamities and pollution

5) Logging and hauling: Regulations for forestroad development, cable installations, skidding

Austria

6) Harvesting operations: strict harvesting regu-lations

7) Protection against torrents and avalanches:Torrent and Avalanche Control Service (TACS)

8) Forest personnel and forest education: dutiesof forestry personnel and their education andtraining

9) Federal Research Centre: Tasks and Regula-tions

10) Forest promotion: Regulation on measurespromoted

11) Forest seeds and nurseries: regulations ontreatment, production and import/export

12) General sanctions

ad 3: According to the Forest Act, everybody isallowed to walk in the forest for recreationalpurposes except for defined areas (such as re-generation areas and others). People are evenallowed to pick defined amounts of mushroomsand berries. Problems arising with this ”open-ing of the forest to the public” arise increas-ingly with mountain bikers using forest roads,cross country ski tourists impacting forest sap-lings or orientation runners harassing wildlifeto some (assumed) extent. This is still a ”greyarea” in jurisdiction and is dealt with in Chap-ter 5.

ad 8: One method to ensure the sustainability ofthe forests and the surveillance by profession-als is laid down in this section. Here the numberof trained foresters who are required to man-age a certain area of forest are clearly defined:up to 500 hectares no trained forester is re-quired; forest estates exceeding 500 ha mustemploy a graduate from a forestry school, es-tates exceeding 1800 ha, require a forester witha university degree.

4.2 Actors in forests and forest relatedpolicies

Figure 4 gives an overview of the forestry or-ganisation. The role of the forest authorities hasalready been dealt with in the Chapter 4.1. Itshould only be mentioned again that the Fed-eral Ministry is responsible for the law making;the other forest authorities on provincial leveland district level have the duty to implement

the Forest Act by assisting the provincial/dis-trict governor who is as the general authorityalso the authority for forest and many othermatters. The TACS, the Federal Research Cen-tre, and Forestry Schools and Training Centreswill be dealt with in the Chapters 4.3 and 4.5.

In Austria, two different kinds of interest groupsexist: Statutory Interest Groups and Private In-terest Groups.

Statutory Interest Groups, so called Chambers(Kammern), are established by public law andwith obligatory membership including fees; theyexist for all businesses and industries. The Cham-bers ofagriculture (Landwirtschaftskammern)deal with the matters of agriculture and forestrywhere all farm and forest owners are automati-cally members. Members may make use of theservices offered by the chambers. Statutorily theChambers of Agriculture have two different tasks:the representation of group interests and the con-sulting of foresters or forest land owners includ-ing the appropriation of subsidies. As these rep-resentatives only exist on district/provincial levelthe presidents of the Chambers of Agriculture areinformally organised at state level. This Stand-ing Conference of the Presidents of the Agricul-tural Chambers (Präsidentenkonferenz derLandwirtschaftskammern) represents the interestsof forestry at state level and is a rather influentialinstitution in forest politics. For the industry sec-tor another Chamber exists with subdivisions rep-resenting the single forest industries.

The most important interest groups based onvoluntary membership in Austria are the Aus-trian Federation of Forest Owners’ Associations(Hauptverband der Land- undForstwirtschaftsbetriebe Österreichs) and theAustrian Foresters’ Association(Österreichischer Forstverein). The AustrianFederation of Forest Owners’ Associations looksafter the interests of private farm and forest landowners. It supports forest owners and tries to safe-guard mainly the right of private ownership andfree disposal of forest property. Since most own-ers of larger forest estates join this federation,the roughly 800 members represent a total forestarea of about 800,000 hectares. Although it hasno official effect on legislation, the Federation

Austria

influences, to some extent, the legislative andadministrative occurrences due to the high de-gree of organisation and the co-operation withother players and authorities in the field of forestpolitics. The Austrian Foresters’ Association rep-resents forest land owners as well as forest pro-fessionals working in the forestry sector. Roughlytwo thirds of the potential members join thisAssociation (the 210,000 owners of small farmforests, mainly farmers, not counted) whose taskis the promotion of forestry in Austria. For mostforest professionals membership is taken forgranted as it results from tradition which playsan important role in the forest sector. This mightalso be the reason that forest owners’ associa-tions have a rather strong relationship with theconservative, Christian-democrat party in Aus-tria, the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP).

4.3 Forest policy tools

Generally speaking, in Austria three differentkinds of policy tools can be distinguished: regu-lation, subsidies, information. These instrumentssometimes are used in combination; due to thesituation in the Alpine regions where forests arecrucial for protecting villages and other devel-oped land, there are several specific regulationsreferring to such forests. The instruments arelisted below and some of them are explainedbriefly (after Weiß 1988).

Regulatory instruments:- General prohibition to clear the forests for other

uses- Obligation to reforest after harvesting- Regulations on forest management which in

addition to above regulations ensures thesustainability

Figure 4. Forest organisation (after BMLF)

Federal Ministry ofAgriculture andForestry

Forest InspectionAuthority for eachprovince

District ForestAuthorities

Torrent and AvalancheControl Service (TACS)Provincial and RegionalHeadquarterss

Federal Forest ResearchCentre

Forestry Schools andTraining Centres

StatutoryRepresentationof Interests(compulsory)

PrivateRepresentationof Interests(voluntarily)

Standing Conferenceof the Presidentsof the AgriculturalChambers inAustria

Chambers ofAgriculture (atprovincial level),Forestry division

Chambers ofAgriculture (atdistrict level)

Central Associationof Agricultural andForestry Enterprisesin Austria

ProvincialAssociations

Forestry

Austria

- Forest management regulations for protectionforests

- Procedures for the establishment of ban forests- Regulations on watershed management

Economic instruments:- Subsidies for forest treatments and technical

investments- Subsidies for high-elevation afforestations and

amelioration of protection forests- Subsidies for watershed management projects

(between Forest Authority and TACS)- Subsidies for technical and biological meas-

ures of torrent and avalanche control

Informational instruments- National Forest Inventory and Austrian Forest

Report- Extension service of Forest Authority- Forest Development Plan by the Forest Au-

thority- Hazard Zone Plans by TACS- Protection Forests Plan by the Forest Author-

ity together with TACS- Expertise by the TACS on natural hazards

The regulatory instruments are laid down in theForest Act 1975 (amended 1987). The subsi-dies are administered by the Chambers and theTorrent and Avalanche Control Service (TACS).This is an agency directly subordinated to theFederal Ministry and is responsible for the pro-tection of human interests against torrents andavalanches. Apart from granting subsidies (mak-ing up 50% of the total amount available forforestry), it carries out technical measures andworks out plans to ensure the protective func-tion of mountainous forests against hazards. TheHazard Zones Plans show catchment areas ofavalanches and torrents as well as endangeredareas of communities. Different risk zones aredistinguished. Hazard zones plans are not bind-ing unless incorporated into the municipal land-use plans; subsidies for preventive measures areonly granted when this plan is taken into con-sideration. The second regional zoning tool isthe Forest Development Plan by the Forest Au-thorities. It covers forest areas and areas affor-ested with regard to the four forest functions laiddown in the Forest Act; a key function is deter-mined - it is timber production unless another

function is assigned as being of outstandingimportance. The Austrian Forest Inventory reg-isters on a statistical basis the structure and de-velopments of the Austrian forests. Data aboutforest area, type of property, amount of woodstocked, increment and many more are obtainedand updated every five years, therefore this in-ventory is an important monitoring tool. TheMinister of Agriculture and Forestry has to givean annual report on the situation about forestsand forestry to the Nationalrat. Many forestrymeasures are promoted and in 1996 the totalvolume of subsidised measures amounted toECU 48.3 million and was 21% higher than theyear before. The EU contributed ECU 3.91 mil-lion, ECU 24.78 million came from the forestowners, the rest were national subsidies. For thestabilisation and rehabilitation of protected for-ests ECU 23.77 million were invested in vari-ous projects covering about 12% of the arearequiring such measures.

4.4 Forest policy in relation with othernational policy areas

Forest policy influences and is influenced by othernational policy areas. Protection of nature, hunt-ing and regional planning are to be mentioned.

4.5 EU forest and forest related policies

Since Austria joined the European Union in1995 policies affecting forestry have had to beadapted. The most important common policiesare outlined briefly emphasising the effect onforestry in Austria. The subsidisation by the EU-agricultural structural policy takes place withinthe framework of six objectives, of which 1, 2,5b and 6 are the regions concerned, the rest ap-plies to the whole territory of the EU. The Ob-jectives 1 to 5 are relevant for Austria. The fed-eral province ”Burgenland” is a region underObjective 1, parts of Central Austria are regionsunder Objective 2, and many areas all over thefederal territory are regions under Objective 5b.Of most significant importance for agricultureand forestry are the Objectives 5a (adaptationof agricultural structures throughout the Com-munity), 5b (development of certain geographi-

Austria

cal rural areas), and 1 (speeding up the devel-opment of regions lagging behind). Table 6 givesan overview about the funding concerning thesethree Objectives:

Most money is available for Objective 5a wherethe subsidies for afforestation for agriculturalland are also included. This should enable therestocking of agricultural land with appropriatespecies and, according to the kind of afforesta-tion, the financial aid per hectare is calculated.Tending of such afforestations is promoted fora five year period. Several other forest activi-ties and investments in forests are promoted ei-ther on a national level or in combination withaids from the Union. In 1997 7.83 million ECUwere paid as co-financed subsidies for forestmeasures of which 0.9 million ECU were usedfor afforestation, 0.22 million for tending ofafforestations, 0.46 million for exchange of for-est stands, and 6.23 million were used for forestroads. Comparing with the figures in Table 6the subsidies used for forestry are tiny.

Another EU policy in relation to forestry mightbe the Common Environmental Policy, in par-ticular the fauna-flora-habitat directive and thebird protection directive. The implementationof these directives is within the responsibilityof the Ministry of Environment, Familiy andYouth. The goal is the creation of ”Natura 2000”habitats which should be protected together withthe animals and plants living in it. A workinggroup consisting of representatives of the ninefederal nature protection authorities, research-ers, and representatives of the Federal Environ-ment Agency have been working out a list of”Natura 2000” areas. Such areas are found inall federal provinces with the emphasis on Al-pine regions and regions which are still close tonature.

4.6 Forest education and research

In Austria, forest education and research has along tradition. Several educational institutionsare to be found in Austria: A one-year collegecourse is offered to become a forest wardenwhose duties are mainly the forest protectionand hunting control services. Foresters are edu-cated in one of the two Forestry Schools takingfive years. They finish with a degree in Forestryand get the title of an ”engineer” after a coupleof years practice. The highest level of foresteducation is offered at the University of Agri-cultural Sciences (Universität für Bodenkultur),Vienna. Apart from Forest Sciences two otherforest-related studies are offered: Sciences ofTorrent and Avalanche Control and Wood Sci-ence. Five years of studying are required to be-come a ”graduate engineer” (Diplom-Ingenieur)in one of these subjects; aspects of economy,ecology and technique are covered in their theo-retical principles and practical application. Jobsin forest management, public forest administra-tion, the timber processing industry, and otherfields are offered to graduates. Graduated for-esters of both forest schools and university,whowork in forest management have to takeanother(federal) exam(Staatsprüfung) after afew years practice which is required due to theForest Act to ensure sustainably and well man-aged forests. Training in fields such as silvicul-ture or harvesting are offered by two FederalTraining Centres as well as by training centresof the federal provinces and the chambers.

Research in the field of forestry is covered byseveral institutions. According to the Forest Actthe Federal Forest Research Centre is chargedwith the investigation of problems in the fieldsof forestry and their solution. The responsibili-

Objective EAGGF Federal state Federal province Total1 0.024 0.37 0.16 0.075a 0.026 0.59 0.16 1.355b 0.019 0.39 0.11 0.43

Table 6. Subsidies for integrated rural development in agriculture and forestry according to themissions of the Structural funds 1995 - 1999 in Austria (splitted according to the contribution:EAGGF = European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund) in billion ECU

Austria

ties are laid down by the Forest Act 1975(amended 1987) and include (BMLF 1993):

- Fundamentals of forest production: Site re-search, forest genetics, silviculture and re-search nurseries, forest techniques

- Forest condition and forest growth: Forest In-ventory, forest growth and economics

- Forest damage, diseases and pests: Forest pro-tection, air pollution research and forest chem-istry

- Forest protection from erosion, torrents andavalanches: Torrent research, avalanche re-search, sub-Alpine forest research

To research the above fields and to obtain datamonitoring systems are installed (e.g. on pollu-tion; Forest Inventory), experiments are con-ducted, and there is co-operation with severalother institutes. The permanent Secretariat ofIUFRO (International Union of Forestry ResearchOrganisations) is also located at this centre asAustria was one of the founding members.

Another important institution dealing with for-est research is, of course, the University of Ag-ricultural Sciences, Vienna. At the Faculty ofForestry and Wood Sciences the coordinationof two forest die-back research initiatives (FIWI/II) was organised in the 80’s and 90’s, beingfollowed now by a Special Research Programme(SFB) on Forest Ecosystem Rehabilitation,focussing mainly on secondary coniferous for-ests and on protection forests.

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges

5.1 Relations between different actors inthe field of forestry; forestry matters; therole of the state

One main conflict already mentioned in this re-port exists between forestry and hunting. Dam-age to trees by bark stripping as well as brows-ing of regeneration areas,especially in reforestedclearcuts, (which is even more severe in protec-tion forests) are results of an artificial high gamepopulation (deer, chamois). Measures such as

fencing of regeneration stands or single tree pro-tection are expensive but often required. A so-lution to this problem is difficult as differentlegal foundations are to apply (see Chapter 4.1).Many forest enterprises bear these costs as gamemanagement and hunting (such as renting hunt-ing areas or selling the permission for a singlegame species) often contribute significantly totheir income. As 10% of forest land in Austriaare pastures, similar problems are caused bylivestock animals (browsing, trampling). Suchpastures represent a historically developed typeof forest utilisation, so the farmer’s rights ofredemption are duly respected.

Concerning the mentioned ungulate game dam-ages, there exist controversial ideas about mainreasons and releasers: for example, bark strip-ping impacts are quite different in various prov-inces. But, according to reanalysed statisticalforest inventory, deer harvest and other data,they are much less associated with game densi-ties, harvest numbers, or supplemented winterfeeding than usually assumed. It most signifi-cantly correlates with forest characteristics ifthey are assessed as highly artificial, site-unfa-vourable tree-dominance, high preharvest-thin-ning debts, high clear-cut amounts, and someother forestry practice characteristics (still) typi-cal for most Austrian forests – although withprovincial differences. Obviously, food short-age is a major reason, not to be compensated bysupplemental feeding efforts. Similar researchresults exist for browsing impacts and the majorrole of forest characteristics as a main predispo-sition for browsing probability and its differentthreats to rejuvenation goals and techniques (e.g.shelterwood vs. clear cut rejuvenation).

Austria’s most important income is tourism. Inaddition, also local people increasingly use theforest for recreational purposes. Especially newsports such as mountain-biking cause conflictsbetween foresters/hunters on the one side andbikers/tourism on the other. The main point ofconflict is a ”grey area” in jurisdiction aboutthe use of forest roads and the insurance in caseof an accident. In single areas requiring ”openforest roads” for biking or horse riding an agree-ment is set up between these two parties regu-lating matters such as insurance, redemption, or

Austria

marked ways. This is not possible in all areas asthere is no existing organisation for bikers whichcould negotiate above matters. Efforts are un-dertaken permanently, and at least regional so-lutions have been negotiated.

Silvicultural practices have been changing. Arti-ficial monocultural practices are increasingly re-placed by natural regeneration and the promo-tion of mixed stands – where natural. The latteris regarded as an important practice against acidi-fication of forest soils. Single tree felling andmethods enabling natural regeneration (such asshelterwood cutting) show a rising trend at thecost of (small-scale) clearcuttings. Instead of haul-ing the whole tree out of the forest, branches andleaves are left on site to remove as little nutrientsas possible out of the ecosystem. A similar natu-ral approach is found when looking at the har-vesting methods employed in the past and nowa-days. In the past, timber was often pulled overthe soil surface with cables and winders wound-ing standing trees; these old damages are stillmonitored. Now high-tech harvesting machineshave been replacing cable hauling where possi-ble and the damage decreases.

A challenge for Austrian forestry is the restora-tion of protection forests. These very sensitiveforests require special treatment to fulfil theirfunction. The law obliges the forest owner tomaintain a stable forest and to provide for timelyregeneration. Due to several reasons which can-not be discussed here in more depth and diffi-cult jurisdiction, the measures are not carriedout properly as they are in many cases too costlyfor the owner. In addition, accessibility and theforest road network is worse than in commer-cial forests and, as a result, investments in theseforests are reduced. As the regulations are prac-tically not implemented sufficiently, the pro-tected forests in mountainous areas are aban-doned. 12% of protection forest with commer-cial yield are unstocked, many stands are over-mature and lack regeneration, and browsing bycattle and game makes the situation even worse.A similar situation is found for protected for-ests. 161,000 hectares need silvicultural treat-ment. Several measures have to be undertaken:Reduction of forest damaging pollutants, asound relation between forest and game, sepa-

ration of forest and alp management,silvicultural measures. Subsidies for such meas-ures will be available.

Timber certification is a matter which is alsodiscussed in the Austrian forestry and timberprocessing industry. As a first initiative”PROHOLZ – Holzinformation Österreich”, anorganisation promoting the use of timber prod-ucts launched, in co-operation with other asso-ciations, a label of origin for Austrian timberand timber products. The label ”Timber fromAustria. Natural. Controlled.” can be used vol-untarily according to stipulated regulations. Itmainly guarantees the origin of roundwood fromAustrian forests and its ecological compatibil-ity due to the strict forest regulations and theforest monitoring by experts and authorities.

5.2 Environmental aspects and issuesarising from UN Conference in Rio relatedto forestry

The Conventions, principles and the Agenda 21which were set up in Rio de Janeiro in 1992influence not only the environmental policy inAustria but also aspects of forestry. The latteraspects will be briefly outlined in this chapterbut should not be regarded as a comprehensivesummary. Austria takes the requirements of theConvention into account in a number of meas-ures already undertaken. Such measures includethe provincial laws for nature protection as wellas the Environmental Control Act, the introduc-tion of subsidies for ecological treatment of ag-ricultural land, the establishment of protectedareas and of national parks.

Biodiversity: About one quarter of the federalterritory is governed by conservation laws forthe protection of nature and countryside of whichfive areas have been designated as national parksin Austria. Three parks (”Neusiedler See –Seewinkel”, ”Donau-Auen, ”Kalkalpen”) areinternationally recognised as a national park(category II) according to the IUCN (Interna-tional Union for Conservation of Nature andNatural Resources) definition; the other two(”Hohe Tauern” and ”Nockberge”) are protectedlandscapes (category V). Three more national

Austria

parks are in the planning stage (data from 1995).Apart from these parks a number of nature pre-serves, landscape preserves, and protected land-scapes exist; they include RAMSAR reserves(Convention on wetlands of International Im-portance Especially as Waterfowl Habitats). Aseries of workshops are held dealing with cen-tral issues discussed by the convention. A finalreport was published to provide a basis for im-plementation of the Biodiversity Convention.Plants and animals being under threat of extinc-tion are listed on the ”red list of Austria’s en-dangered animal and plant species”; about onequarter of all animal species (in 1990) and 37%of all plant species (in 1986) were under somethreat of destinction. As the main reason for thehigh number of endangered species is the de-struction of habitats, one aspect of the environ-mental policy is to force their protection as wellas habitat improvement or regeneration efforts(e.g. forest monocultures, hard regulated riversand creeks).

In the forestry sector, several measures havebeen undertaken to increase the stability andsafeguard forest biodiversity. A Protection For-est Restoration Framework has been developedto stabilise and restore protection forests partsof which are in a bad condition because of thelack of regeneration or because of overmaturestands. This framework includes several meas-ures and gives great importance to the Moun-tain Forest Protocol (Bergwald-Protokoll), cur-rently under preparation within the frameworkof the Alpine Convention. Measures to safeguardforest biodiversity are adopted by the forestryauthorities; examples are forest managementbased on natural succession, biotope and habi-tat mapping of forests, and the separation offorest reserves. Such reserves are partly genu-ine residues of virgin forests, the majority areclose-to-natural forests being very similar to theoriginal state; in these reserves human interven-tion is prohibited and the main purpose is fordemonstration, for silvicultural research, and forreasons of biodiversity. Since 1995, a repre-sentative network has been developed system-atically, and the establishment of 430 naturalforest reserves with a total area of 10,000 hec-tares is aimed at. Within the 1992 ”Man and

Biosphere” Programme, the ”Hemerobia ofAustrian Forest Ecosystems” was examinedgathering data for the evaluation of the anthro-pological impact on Austrian forests. The resultsshow that 25% of the forests can be termed asnatural or ecologically compatible, 41% as mod-erately altered; only one third can be termed ashighly altered or artificial. These percentagesare quite unevenly distributed in the variousprovinces; for the mountainous (Alpine) regions,the following measures are of particular impor-tance: high altitude reforestation programmes,guidelines for the preparation of tourist strate-gies, and the Convention on the Protection ofthe Alps (in force since 1995) promotingtransregional co-operation among the Alpinecountries and the EU to protect and preservethe Alpine region as a human habitat.

Guidelines for environmental policy are laiddown in the ”National Environmental Plan”which was adopted by the Austrian parliamentin 1997. It is based on the idea of sustainabledevelopment at the environmental, economicand social level.

Austria

Addresses of organisations related to Forestry:

Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft (BMLF): Federal Ministry of Agriculture andForestry Sektion V (Forstwesen) Ferdinandstraße 4 A-1020 Wien Tel: +43/1/21323 http://www.bmlf.gv.at

Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Jugend und Familie (BMUJF): Federal Ministry of Environment,Youth and Family Affairs Stubenbastei 5 A-1010 Wien Tel: +43/1/51522 http://www.bmu.gv.at

Universität für Bodenkultur (BOKU): University of Agriculture Gregor-Mendel-Straße 33 A-1180Wien Tel: +43/1/47654 http://www.boku.ac.at

References

BMLF. 1993. Federal Forest Research Centre. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Vienna.BMLF. 1998a. Österreichischer Waldbericht 1996. Bundesministerium für Land- und

Forstwirtschaft. Wien.BMLF. 1998b. Der Wald - das grüne Herz Österreichs. The Forest - the Green Core of Austria. La

foret - poumon vert de l’Autriche. Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft. Wien.BMUJF (undated). Environmental Policy in Austria. Federal Ministry of Environment, Youth and

Family Affairs. Vienna.Blüthgen, J. 1966. Allgemeine Klimageographie. Berlin.Brünig, E. and Mayer, H. 1987. Waldbauliche Terminologie: Fachwörter der forstlichen Produktion.

Wien.FAO-Unesco. 1981. Soil Map of the World (1:5,000,000), Volume V - Europe. United Nations.FPP (1996). Wald und Holz in Europa: Österreich im Vergleich (Position 1). Kooperationsabkommen

Forst-Platte-Papier. Wien.Frank G., Pitterle, A., Singer, F., and Siegel, H. 1998. Protective Functions of Mountain Forests in

Austria. In: Glück, P. and Weber, M. (eds.): Mountain Forestry in Europe – Evaluation ofSilvicultural and Policy Means. Publication Series of the Institute of Forest Sector Policy andEconomics. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien.

Hyttinen, P., Kallio, T., Olischläger, T., Sekot, W., and Winterbourne, J. 1997. Monitoring ForestryCosts and Revenues in Selected European Countries. European Forest Institute Research Re-port No. 7.

Knieling, A. 1998. Forest and Wood in Austria. ”Timber from Austria” Initiative at PROHOLZHolzinformation Österreich. Vienna.

Kral, F. 1994. Der Wald im Spiegel der Waldgeschichte. In:Österreichs Wald - Vom Urwald zurWaldwirtschaft. p. 11-40. Eigenverlag Autorengemeinschaft ”Österreichs Wald”. Wien.

Matthews, J. D. 1989. Silvicultural Systems. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Pregernig, M. 1998. Country Report: Austria. In:Glück, P., G. Oesten, H. Schanz, K. Volz (eds)

1998;Formulation and Implementation of National Forest Programmes. Volume II -State of theArt in Europe. Proceedings of the International Seminar held in Freiburg, Germany 18-20 May1998. EFI-Proceedings No. 26. In print.

Reimoser, F. 1986. Wildschäden am Wald – ein multifaktorielles Problem. In: AlpineUmweltprobleme. Der Wald als Lebensraum. Beitr.Umweltgestaltung A98. Schmidt Verlag,Berlin , S.36 – 50.

Reimoster, F., and Gossow, H. 1996. Impacts of ungulates on forest vegetation and its dependenceon the silvicultural system. Forest Ecology and Management.88: S.107-119.

Schwarzbauer, P. 1994. Die österreichischen Holzmärkte: Größenordnungen - Strukturen -Erweiterungen. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Sozioökonomik der Forst- und Holzwirtschaftder Universität für Bodenkultur, Band 22. Wien. Teilweise erweitert (1998).

Schwarzbauer, P. (undated). The Austrian Forest Sector - A Brief Statistical Overview.

Austria

Völk, F. H. 1997. Schälschäden und Rotwildmanagement in Abhängigkeit von Jagdgesetz undWaldaufbau in Österreich. Diss. Univ.f.Bodenkultur Wien. 252 S. (in print bei Schmidt Verlag,Berlin 1999).

Weiß, G. 1998. Evaluation of Mountain Forest Management Policy in Austria. In: Glück, P. and M.Weber (eds.): Mountain Forestry in Europe – Evaluation of Silvicultural and Policy Means.Publication Series of the Institute of Forest Sector Policy and Economics. Universität fürBodenkultur Wien.

Wohlschlägl, H. 1981. Austria: Landscape and Structure. In: Modern Austria, p.23-73. SPOSSInc., USA.

Azerbaijan

1 The country

Azerbaijan borders to the east with the Cas-pian Sea, to the south Iran and Turkey, to thewest Armenia and Georgia and to the northRussia.

1.1 Natural conditions

TopographyThe total land area of Azerbaijan is 86 800 km2.Forests occupy 11-12 % of the area. The to-pography of the country is difficult. The big-gest part (40%) of the country is lowland (1/5below sea level), 23% is low-altitude (up to500 m), 25% mid-altitude (500- 1500 m) and 12%high-altitude (more than 1500 m). The highestpeaks are Bazar-Dyzi mountain (4485m),Sahdag (4250 m) and Murovdag (4500 m).Relief is formed by the mountain systems ofGreat and Small Caucasus and Taljish andKura-Arak lowland.

GeologyAzerbaijan is geologically one of the most com-plicated and original areas of alpine folded zone.Soil stratification encompasses phases fromlower Palaeozoic up to Holocene Epoch. Theformations of Mesozoic and Cenozoic(Miocene Epoch) soils are best developed. Themodern tectonic structures were created in thebeginning of the Neogene period. The terri-tory of Azerbaijan is characterised byincreased seismic activity: the minimum humnoise (background) seismic threat is equal to7 points.

The Azerbaijan ground is rich in various miner-als. Extraction and sale of oil and natural gas

form the largest part of the national income. Bothoil and natural gas are extracted at the coast andfrom the bottom of the Caspian Sea. Addition-ally Azerbaijan extracts iron and cobalt(Dahskestan), copper (Kedabek), alunit (Zaglik),barit (Chovdar), and various non-ferrous met-als.

Hundreds of mineral springs of drinking andmedicinal water are available in the territory ofAzerbaijan. The glaciers are spread in moun-tain areas to heights of more than 3000 meters.Salt-marsh deserts and the semi-deserts occupyhundreds of hectares in the lowlands.

ClimateEight different climate types can be defined inthe territory of Azerbaijan:

1) Subtropical dry climate in lowlands ofdeserts, semi-deserts and in steppe. Precipi-tation of 200 - 250 mm falls during the hotsummer (4-5 months) and mild winter.

2) Subtropical damp climate.3) The continental dry climate, occurs in

Nahichevan region at altitudes of 700 - 1000meters.

4) Moderate warm dry climate, characteristicof the steppe plateau.

5) Moderately damp climate6) Moderately cold climate.7) The cold climate, characteristic at altitudes

of 2000- 2500 meters.8) Alpine tundra climate - alpine zone at alti-

tudes of more than 3000 meters.

SoilsGrey soil and salt-marsh (solonchak) dominatein Azerbaijan lowlands. Desert-steppe chest-

Azerbaijan

Author:Prof. Bagid GadjievDirector of Botanical InstituteAzerbaijan Academy of SciencesIstiglaliyyat St. 10, 370001 BAKU, AZERBAIJAN

Azerbaijan

Main species Subdominant species Altitude (m) %Fagus orientalis Quercus iberica, Q. Macranthera, Q. Erucifolia various 32

Betula sp. Div., Carpinus caucasica,Tilia caucasicaAcer platanoides, A. pseudoplatanus,A. velutinum, A. laetumUlmus elliptica, U. Scabra, Diospyros lotusAlnus subcordata, Rhamnus pallasii

Carpinus orientalis Quercus iberica, Q. Erucifolia,Q. Hypochrysa, Q. Crispata 1800 – 2000 26

C. caucasica Fagus orientalis, Carpinus caucasia, Various Juglans regia

Quercus sp. Div 23.4Q. rubescens 0 – 500Q. araxina 300 – 1150Q. castanifolia Carpinus grataegus, Parrotia persica, 0 – 800

Ulmus hyrcanaQ. iberica Carpinus orientalis, Zelkova carpinifolia 500 – 1500Q. iberica + Q. Macranthera Acer trautvetteri, Sorbus caucasica, Betula sp. 1600 – 2400

Viburnum lantata, Juniperus sp. DivQ. longpipes Pistacia mutica, Elaegnus caspica, River delta

Morus alba,Rubus sp. Div., Prunus sp. Div., Ulmus araxina

Populus sp. Div. 3.6Populus tremula Crataegus sp. Div., Rubus sp. Div., 1000 – 1800

Carpinus orientalis, Fageta orientalisPopulus hyrcana or Morus alba, Eleagnus angustifolia, River delta

Tamarix sp. DivPopulus hibrida Hippophae rhaminoides, Pyracantha coccineaJuniperus sp. Div. Various 2.4Alnus sp. Div 1.9A. incana Periploca graeca 1000 – 1500A.subcordata River delta

0 – 600A. barbata 0 – 200Tilia sp. Div Various 1.7Ulmus sp. Div 1.2U.scraba + Acer velutinum 200 – 600

River deltaU. foliaceae + Populus hyrcana or P. hibrida River delta

Other species Various 8.1

Table 1. Distribution and altitude of main and associated subspecies as a percentage ratio to allforested areas in Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan

nut soil is predominant on flat lands.Chernozem (black earth) occurs in the foothills,brown soils within mountain forests, and moun-tainous meadow (subalpine and alpine) at high-altitudes. Yellow soil can be found in the areaof Lenkoran lowland. Alluvial soils are advanc-ing under forests in Alasan-Agrichai valley.

VegetationThe forests of Azerbaijan can be classified intotwo distinct floristic regions: Ircumboreal (Cau-casus province) and Mediterranean (Girkanprovince) areas. Forests occupy about 11- 12% of the total land area of the Republic. Themain species by forest area are Fagusorientalis, Carpinus orientalis and caucasicaand Quercus sp. at 32, 26, and 23.4%respectively (table 1).

1.2 Society

PopulationPopulation of Azerbaijan is about 7 million.Azerbaijanians form the basic population of theRepublic. In addition to Azerbaijanians, othernationalities such as Russians, Georgians, Ar-menians, lesgins, tatis and others live in thecountry.

Nakhichevan autonomous Republic (capitalNakhichevan) and Nagorno-Karabah autono-mous area (capital Hakkendi) belong to theAzerbaijan Republic. Azerbaijan became an in-dependent state in 1991, after the disintegra-tion of the Soviet Union. Azerbaijan is a Re-public with an elected president and has a mul-tiparty system of parliament.

Politically speaking, since February 1988, ten-sion between Azerbaijan and Armenia hasgrown. After the declaration of independencein August 1991, the situation got worse. In No-vember 1991, Azerbaijan launched a massivemilitary operation against the Armenian enclaveof Nagorno-Karabakh. Life of the people of thatregion began to deteriorate (food supplies,medications and water). As a result of thispolitical conflict the number of displacedpersons is increasing daily. There are now ap-proximately 200,000 persons from or close to

Nagorno-Karabakh who have been displaced,as refugees.

EconomyThe Azerbaijan economy is based on the pe-troleum, chemical, electromechanical industryand metallurgy and metal processing. Thecountry is richly endowed with mineral re-sources, especially with oil and gas.Azerbaijan’s share of the world oil reservestotals 830 million tonnes. Agriculture is basedon the production of cereals, cotton, tobacco,grapes and winemaking, and sheep breeding.The cultivation of citrus, almonds, and melonis well developed.

IndustryAzerbaijan forestry is a large, independentbranch of the economy that is responsible forgrowing and use of forests. Sawmilling existedin the mountain forest regions of Azerbaijanuntil 1960. Now forest resources are used ininsignificant amounts for fuel and, partly, forthe manufacture of furniture, parquet and soon. There are about 40 forest areas in the coun-try. Only sanitary fellings are carried out andan insignificant number of additional planta-tions exist. Besides this, afforestation is car-ried out to prevent soil erosion and tostrengthen and stabilise stands. Cultivation ofcitrus, almonds, walnuts, Diospyros andpistachio (Pistacia vera) are best developed.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest ownership

Forests mean ecologically clean air, water, food,fuel, chemistry, construction materials andmany other products, which are considered asnational property, i.e. state owned, and cannotbe the object of sale and private property. How-ever, land and forests can be sold by a legisla-tively established order to state, NGO’s andcooperative organisations. They can also begiven free to private persons for example forfarming construction or market gardeningpurposes.

Azerbaijan

2.2 Land use and forest resource

2.2.1 Distribution of the forests

Most of the forests distributed in theAzerbaijan area are old growth, or middle agedstands (table 2).

2.2.2 Protected areas

Nature reservesIn Azerbaijan there are 14 nature protection areas.They are habitats of endemic or relict species char-acteristic for the country. The reserves cover notonly forested areas, but also areas covered bymountain xerophytes and moorlands. The follow-ing reserves have at least partial forest cover.

1) The Zakatalskii state reserve was establishedin 1930. Its total area is 25 190 hectares. For-ests occupy approximately 14 500 hectares andsub-alpine and alpine meadows 7000 ha. Thereserve is located on the southern slope ofPrincipal Caucasus Range. The main forestforming species are Fagus orientalis, Quercusmacranthera, Acer trautwetteri, Pinuskochiana and Taxus baccata.

2) The Girkanskii state reserve was created in1936. Its total area is 2900 hectares. The re-serve is located in Lenkoran area. The mainforest forming species are Arrotia persica andQuercus castanifolia together with other spe-cies of Girgisian origin.

3) The Geigelskii state reserve was formed in1926. Its total area is 7900 hectares. It is lo-cated in the north-east of the Republic. Ataltitudes of 300-500 m mountain xerophytesform the main vegetation. At higher altitudestwo zones can be distinguished: a forest beltat 1100-2500 m and a mountain meadow belt

from 2500 m up to 3060 m. The main species inthe forest zone are Pinus eldarica, Fagusorientalis, Quercus iberica, Betula sp. div.and Pinus kochiana.

4) The Basutchaiskii state reserve was estab-lished in 1974 for preservation of a uniquePlatanus orientalis grove along the riverBasutchaja. Several trees in this reserve havereached an age of 500 years. This forest re-serve may have been destroyed as an out-come of the conflict in Karabah.

5) The Karajazkii state reserve was establishedin 1978. Its total area is approximately 4800hectares. It is located in western Azerbaijanalong the river Kura. It is basically “tugai”forest consisting of Populus hibrida, Tamarixramosissima, T. Hohenacheri and others.

6) The Pirkulinskii state reserve was establishedin 1968 in the area of Shemahinskii. It con-sists of three separate areas, commonly of1521 hectares. The reserve is located on south-east slope of Large Caucasus (Shemaha). Allthe areas are covered with forest.

7) The Turianchaiskii state reserve was createdin 1958. It has a total area of 12356 hectares, ofwhich approximately 4660 hectares are forested.

8) The Ismailliiskii state reserve is located on asouthern slope of Large Caucasus. The wholereserve is forested.

9) The Ilisuinskii state reserve is located onLarge Caucasus. The whole reserve isforested.

10) The Altiagachskii reserve is located on theeasternmost slope of Large Caucasus. Thevegetation consists of forest and mountainxerophytes.

11) The Tophaninskii state reserve is located inShushinskii area. It is covered by arid light for-est. At present the reserve is seized by Arme-nia.

2.2.3 Forest threats

InsectsMany species of forest insects are spreadthroughout the forests of Azerbaijan.Operophthera brumata, Erannus defoliariaand Wiston hirtaria are spread mostly on thefoothills. The focal point of infection is in oak -

Table 2. Distribution of forests by age categories.All forest territory 100.0Young stands, class I 12.7Young stands, class II 15Middle-aged stands 21.6Regeneration mature 15.3Old growth 35.4

Azerbaijan

hornbeam forests (or plantings). On averageup to 15.000 hectares are affected annually. Pestinfestation frequently reaches 80-100 %. Thestrength of oak tortricid (Tortrix viridata) hasmultiplied in the foothills over recent years andmass reproduction of Haltica quercetorum hasbeen observed in oak forests. Infestation af-fects hornbeam (Carpinus caucasica), orientalhornbeam (Carpinus orientalis) and oaks(Quercus sp.). Damage to foliage reaches 80-100%. Capnodis tenebrionis is significantlyharmful to plantations of almonds insubmountain areas. Pineus orientalis andLacchnis pineus basically damage pine.

FungusMicrosphaera alphitoides develops on all spe-cies of oak. Mass withering of foliage and shootappear as the result of damage. Infestation isup to 50%. 50.000 oaks have perished over pre-vious years because of Ceratocystis roboris.

PollutionContamination by industrial wastes, some-times oil-processing wastes, also damage for-ests. Serious danger to forests is caused bysheep breeding. The forest is partially cutdown for new pastures, and is partially trod-den by sheep.

Abiotic factorsDuring the last decade the water level has con-stantly risen in the Caspian Sea. Some forestterritories in the coastal areas have been badlydamaged by floods. Tempests, damagescaused by snow and forest fires seldom takeplace.

2.3 Forest production

Most forests are mountain forests (98,5%).They are significantly important for climate andwater protection and soil conservation. Theybelong to the group I. That defines the maintrends of forestry - the whole growing stock ofmountain forests on average for all species isequal to 172 m3 per hectare. Average annualincrement is 1,34 m3 per hectare. Until 1970 onlyabout 150 000 - 160 000 m3 of timber was cut

every year. On average, about 130 000 -150 000m3 of poor quality timber would now beavailable for sanitary fellings.

2.3.1 Non-timber forest products

Annual amount of gathered wild fruits and ber-ries is about 10 000-15 000 tonnes, which isonly about 5-10% of the whole harvest of wildfruits and berries in the republic.

The gathering of fruits from plantations is notconducted, however it is considered, that theseplantations play an important role in the foodbalance of the population. Azerbaijan is thethird poorest area among the former republicsof the former Soviet Union.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Economic structure

The principal industrial control organisation“Azerbles” supervises forest economy in theRepublic. The forest areas, as a rule, are di-vided into separate economical units. Peoplein charge of the economy, are often not expertsin forestry. Forest management units carry outcommercial wood cutting and sanitary fellingsaccording to the regulations and laws in force,and also guard forests and afforestation.

4 Forest education and research

Up to the disintegration of the Soviet Union,there were 18 higher educational institutions,including some universities, but no special in-stitute for forestry. The faculty of forestry ex-isted within the agricultural institute between1950 to 1960. At present there is no educationalinstitution in the Republic to train foresters.The Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences was es-tablished in 1945.

The Botanical Institute forms part of the Acad-emy, where there is a Department of Geobotany.The Forest Laboratory has existed within the

Azerbaijan

Addresses of organisations related to forestry

ECORES, 68, Tagizade str, Baku - 370134 AzerbaijanTel. (99412) 31 78 81, http://solar.rtd.utk.edu/~ccsi/nisorgs/azerbaij/ecores.htm

Web-pages

Azerbaijan Organizations by City: http://solar.rtd.utk.edu/~ccsi/nisorgs/azerbaij/azerbaij.htm

structure of this department since 1970. Thisstructure is unique in the country and is en-gaged in scientific forest research. The commit-tee for forest economy is one of the governmen-tal authorities. Its chairman is an agricultural sci-entist. In the Committee there are a few foresters,all at an average age of 70 years. In the forestregions of the Republic there is a lack of forest-ers.

Belgium

1 The country

1.1 Natural conditions

Belgium has three major geographical areas:lower Belgium (up to 100m above sea level),central Belgium (between 100 and 200m abovesea level) and upper Belgium (from 200 to over500m above sea level). The soils are sandy tosilty and deep in the north-western part of thecountry and become more clayey, stony and su-perficial, in the south-eastern part. Most Bel-gian forest soils belong to the group of DystricCambisols according to the FAO classification,with a multitude of local variations.

Lower Belgium begins in the west (see figure1) at the coast, with the ‘Kustduinen’ (coastdunes) which extend in a straight line for 65 km.Inland from the coast lie the ‘Polders’, a claysoil. This is a flat and fertile land mainly usedfor agriculture. Bordered by the ‘Polders’ to thewest and the Leie and the Schelde rivers to theeast, lie the ‘Zandstreek’ (sand region) and the‘Zandleemstreek’ (sand loam region). The‘Kempen’ lies in the east of the country. Thesoil in the ‘Zandstreek’ and in the ‘Kempen’ issandy and rather poor and the landscape is com-posed of grasslands and cornfields for agro-in-dustry. In the ‘Kempen’ pine woods are anotherimportant landscape feature. In the more or lessrich ‘Zandleemstreek’ several vegetables aregrown.

Central Belgium is the area behind the‘Zandleemstreek’ and the ‘Kempen’. Graduallyrising to the Sambre and Meuse valleys, lies the‘Leemstreek’ (loam region), with its low andvery fertile loess plateau’s. This heavily urban-

ised area contains the forest of Zoniën (‘Soi-gne’). Furthermore, the ‘Leemstreek’ borders onHainaut in the west and on Hesbaye in the east,both fertile areas with large farms and exten-sive fields and pastures.

Upper Belgium, the relatively sparsely popu-lated (±178 inh. km2, N.I.S. 1990) and denselywooded (>30 %, N.I.S. 1990) part of the coun-try, begins south of the Sambre and the Meusevalleys at the Condroz plateau. The Condroz pla-teau is a fertile area. The natural forests wereoriginally oak-beech (Quercus robur, Q. petreaand Fagus sylvatica) stands, but since a longtime, humans replaced them by coppice withstandards based on oak (Quercus robur, and Q.petraea) and noble hardwoods.

To the east lies the ‘Pays de Herve’ which dueto its rich clay soil is suitable for grazing andcattle rearing. South of the ‘Condroz’ lies thearea of ‘Fagne-Famenne’, a poor agriculturalregion. In the ‘Condroz’ and the ‘Fagne -Famenne’ the soils are silty-stony, acid or cal-careous, mainly used as crop, pasture or forestland, according to their thickness, texture, drain-age and pH.

Further to the south are the ‘Ardennes’, a re-gion alternating between a wooded area withnatural beech (Fagus sylvatica) forests on theplateau’s and homogenous spruce stands in thedeep valleys. The soils of the ‘Ardennes’ aresilty acid soils, containing a variable amount ofstones. These soils are mainly used as pastureand forest land due to the cold climate. Peat soilsare often developed in the High Ardennes, dueto high precipitation and relatively impervioussoils. These uplands are called ‘Hautes Fagnes’

Belgium

Luyssaert S.1, Thierron V.2, André P.2 & Lust N.1

2Université Catholique de LouvainForestry sectionPlace Croix du Sud 2/91348 Louvain-la-NeuveE-mail: devillez@efor.ucl.ac.be

1Universiteit GentLaboratorium voor BosbouwGeraardsbergse Steenweg 2679090 GontrodeE-mail: Noël.Lust@rug.ac.be

Belgium

(the elevation ranges from 600 to 700 m). Mostof these lands were planted with conifers butstill a few natural downy birch (Betula pendula)stands remain in natural reserves. The‘Ardennes’ are a natural tourist attraction, andits southernmost part is called ‘La Lorraine’(Belgian Jura).

The country’s relief raises from sea level, in theplains of Flanders, to 694 m, the culminatingpoint located in the Ardennes. Belgium is char-acterised by Cfb (Köppen 1930) as a marine cli-mate, which is a humid climate with a short drysummer. Heavy precipitations occur during themild winters. Average annual temperatures varybetween 9.6°C at the coast and 6.4°C (N.I.S.1990) in the high Ardennes, where frost oftenoccurs. Precipitation varies between 750 mm atthe coast and 1400 mm at higher altitudes.

1.2 Society

Three communities, three regions: one countryIn recent years Belgium has evolved, via insti-tutional reforms, into a federal structure. Thedecision-making power in Belgium is no longerexclusively in the hands of the Federal Govern-ment and the Federal Parliament. Now, the man-agement of the country is the responsibility ofseveral partners, who exercise their competen-cies independently.

A first redistribution gave rise to the Communi-ties, a concept that refers to the peoples’ lan-guage and culture (figure 1). Belgium has threeCommunities based on language: the FlemishCommunity (6,300,000 people), the FrenchCommunity (3,800,000) and the German-speak-ing Community (70,000). For instance, a respon-sibility of the Communities is education.

The second main line of the State reform is his-torically inspired by economic concerns, ex-pressed by Regions who wanted to have moreautonomous power. This gave rise to the found-ing of three regions: the Flemish Region, theBrussels Capital Region and the Walloon Re-gion (Figure 2). Their competence covers amongothers infrastructure, environment, and nature.

The Federal State retains important areas ofcompetence, including: foreign affairs, defence,justice, finance, social security and agriculture.The Regions and Communities are entitled torun foreign relations themselves in the areas inwhich they are competent.

Forestry in federal Belgium is devolved uponeach of the three regions since 1980: Flanders,Wallonia and Brussels. Furthermore forestry isnot incorporated in the agricultural administra-tion, which is still a federal matter in Belgium.

With a population of 10,170,000 at the end of1996 (web site of the Belgian federal govern-ment) and a slight increase of less than 1 per1000 inhabitants, the population of Belgium isnearly stable. With an area of 30,528 km2 (N.I.S.1990), Belgium has a population density of 333inhabitants per square kilometre. The capitalregion of Brussels is the most densely populated,with 5,909 inhabitants/km2 (N.I.S. 1990) fol-lowed by the Flemish region with 337 and theWalloon region with 178 (N.I.S. 1990). The leastpopulated area is the German-speaking commu-nity in eastern Wallonia with 65 inhabitants/km2

(N.I.S. 1990).

Industry employs about 30 % of the active popu-lation and is mainly centred on textile, chemis-try, iron and steel transformation industries andagribusiness (N.I.S 1990). Less than 5 % of thepopulation are employed in agriculture whichis very intensive, associating corn with indus-trial crops such as beet, and with bovine andporcine breeding. The service sector employsabout two thirds of the working population(N.I.S. 1990).

Heavy industry is concentrated in the northernharbours of Antwerpen, Gent and Zeebrugge andon the Meuse river in the south (Namur andLiège). A very dense network of railroads (0.9km/km2), waterways (0.05 km/km2) and motor-ways (0.5 km/km2) links all industries (N.I.S.1990).

Belgium

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Definitions

Forest in Flanders: a ground area, an ecosys-tem, characterised by more or less dense andextensive tree and woody shrub cover. The veg-etation has its own fauna and flora and associ-ated processes and fulfils one or more of thefollowing functions: economical, ecological,shelter, educational, scientific or recreational(Het Bosdecreet 1990, Helms 1998).

Forestry in Flanders: a science and/or a tech-nique of creating, managing, using and conserv-ing forests and associated resources in a sus-tainable manner for human benefit to meet de-sired goals (Helms 1998).

Forest in Wallonia: a natural, semi-natural orman-made ecosystem, dominated by woody spe-cies. This ecosystem has its own fauna and floraand associated processes, and fulfils one or moreof the following functions: economical, ecologi-cal, shelter, educational, scientific or recrea-tional.

Forestry in Wallonia: a science and/or a tech-nique for the management, silvicultural treat-ment, conservation and regeneration of forestsand associated resources in a sustainable man-ner for human benefit to meet desired goals.

2.2 Forest ownership

The ratio public/private forest is stable, there isno policy towards centralisation or privatisationof our forests.

The great majority of the private owners possesonly a few ares to a few hectares. The Belgianforest is extremely fragmented. In Flanders 70%of the fragments are less than 10 ha and 14%even less than 1 ha. Due to the numerous pri-vate owners, the average area of a private forestin Wallonia is 3 ha per owner; however, morethan half of the private properties are less than1 ha. Table 1 shows the differences in owner-ship between the regions.

In Belgium, all of the public forests (state forest& communal forest) are under the management

Figure 1. Federal Belgium with its Communities and Regions

BELGIUM THE COMMUNITIES THE REGIONSTHE FEDERAL STATE THE FLEMISH COMMUNITY

THE FRENCH COMMUNITY

THE GERMAN-SPEAKINGCOMMUNITY

THE FLEMISH REGION

THE BRUSSELS-CAPITALREGION

THE WALLOON REGION

Belgium

of the regional forest services which are for Flan-ders ‘Bos en Groen’ and for Wallonia ‘DivisionNature et Forêts’. These public forests are man-aged in a long-term perspective.

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

Wallonia can be considered as a rural region.Thirty percent is forested (table 2). The maintree species are Pedunculate and Sessile oak(Quercus robur and Quercus petraea), beech(Fagus sylvatica), and Norway spruce (Piceaabies).

As few as 8.5% of Flanders is forested. Thebuilt-up area in Flanders amounts to 170,000ha, which is far more than the forest area of114,220 ha (table 2). So it can be considered asa highly urbanised region. The forests are mainlylocated near the north-eastern border to theNetherlands. The main tree species are oak(Quercus robur, Q. petraea and Q. rubra) beech(Fagus sylvatica), poplar (Populus cv.) and pine(Pinus sylvestris and P. nigra).

Due to the federalisation, forest and nature con-servation is a regional competence and so, thereare no national parks.

2.3.2 Tree species origin and distribution

The Belgian forest is by nature a mixed hard-wood forest, with oak (Quercus robur and Q.petraea) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) as the main

tree species. From the geographical point ofview, the Atlantic and sub-Atlantic regions canbe distinguished in Belgium. Threephytosociological alliances are prevalent(Noirfalise, 1984): Fagion sylvaticae,Carpinion betuli and Quercion roboris-petraeae.

There are various forest types in Wallonia, dueto the diversity of natural conditions: 27 eco-logical areas, differing in terms of climatic, geo-logical or topographical conditions, have beenidentified in Wallonia. In Flanders 22 foresttypes can be distinguished.

History also contributed to the diversity of theforest due to over-exploitation by man, woodconsumption, and the increased conversion tocropland. The productive forest cover has beenrestored, increasing the forested area from434,596 ha in 1866 to 617,000 ha today. Finally,the diversity of forest owners leads to diversityin forest management. Due to all these factors,the Belgian forest is a mosaic of vegetationtypes, tree species and management techniques.There are still some broad-leaved stands whichare considered as ‘old forest stands’, compara-ble to the climax vegetation. However, of thecurrent forest area of 617,000 ha, 48% consistsof mono-specific conifer stands, mainly Piceaabies, Pinus sylvestris, and Pinus nigra. Piceadominates large parts of upper Belgium, Pinusare prominent in the Kempen. These plantationswere highly promising, but actually, in someplaces, they give rise to ecological as well asforest health problems. Broadleaf species arealso sometimes in mono-specific plantations:Fagus sylvatica on plateaus in central and up-

Table 1. Ownership of the Belgian forestFOREST AREA

Wallonia Flandersha % ha %

State forest 62 692 12,2 12 553 11,9Provincial forest 2 017 0,4 677 0,7Communal forest 190 964 37,3 13 452 12,7Forest owned by public institutions 7 501 1,4 3 673 3,5Public forests with private status 14 554 2,8 3 446 3,3Strictly private forest 233 582 45,6 71 815 67,9

Belgium

per Belgium, Populus (most recent cultivars:Beaupré, Ghoy, Hazendans, Hoogvorst) in val-leys in lower and central Belgium.

Only a very small part of the Belgian forest canbe considered as mixed: some coppice and cop-pice with standards and some standards fromhardwoods as well as from softwoods.

Considering the species composition it can beconcluded that about half of the forest area inBelgium is occupied by young to middle-agedconiferous high forests. The area of poplar plan-tations is important in Flanders (29.7% of theforests and additional 2 million solitaire or lineplants of poplar).

The current situation is the direct result of anincrease in the forest area between 1866 and1960, due to an active afforestation policy thatgreatly modified the composition of the Belgianforest in favour of the conifers. During the lastcentury, the major conifer species was Piceaabies, introduced at the end of the last century,mainly in order to transform uncultivated andunproductive crop or pastureland into produc-tive forestland. Pinus sylvestris was mainly im-portant in Flanders and was used as mine build-ing wood.

In the last decades, the Flemish region’s forestarea is slightly but constantly decreasing becauseof infrastructure projects, housing, agricultureand industrial estate.

2.3.3 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

The characteristics of the two main forest re-gions, Wallonia and Flanders, are describedhereafter. The region of Brussels only holds a

small part of Belgium’s forests, which is mainlydedicated to recreation as it is an urban forest.The data given for Wallonia are from the docu-ment DGRNE (1997a), which gives the resultsof the latest regional forest inventory, referringto about 30 % of the whole inventory plots ofthis region. The Flanders data is a compilationof N.I.S. (1990) and AMINAL (1993). It is tobe noted that the data for Flanders is not coherent.

WalloniaWallonia is a forested region. In 1996, it wascovered by 529,000 hectares of forest amount-ing to 31% of its territory. The productive for-ests cover 473,750 ha which is 90% of the totalforested area. The remaining 10% are forestroads, firebreaks, moor land, ponds, etc. Theforest is unequally distributed within Wallonia,varying from 9 to 51% depending on the prov-ince, and reflects the population densities. TheWallonian forest is constituted of about 50%broad-leaved and 50% conifer species(DGRNE, 1997a).

Table 3 shows the distribution of the forest ar-eas (hectares) and wood volumes (1,000 m3) pertree species in 1996. The main broad-leaved spe-cies are oak (Quercus robur and Quercuspetraea) and beech (Fagus sylvatica). The mainconifer species are Norway spruce (Picea abies),Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Scots pine(Pinus sylvestris) and larch (Larix decidua). Theother broad-leaved species are Prunus avium,Acer pseudoplatanus, and Fraxinus excelsior.One of the major coppiced species is Carpinusbetulus.

The annual increment for Quercus robur andQ. petraea is 2 to 3, for Fagus sylvatica 3 to 5,for Picea abies 12 and for Pseudotsugamenziesii 18 m3 ha-1 a-1 (AMINAL 1993).

Table 2. Distribution of the forest area over the Belgian regions (Verbruggen 1994)Total area forest area Forest area % Forest area

ha ha per capita haWalloon Region 1,684,263 500,254 30 0.15Flemish Region 1,350,925 114,220 8.5 0.020Brussels capital Region 16,179 2,446 15 0.0025

Belgium

Table 3. Distribution of the forest area (hectares) and wood volume (1000 m3) per tree species in 1996Forest type Area in VOLUME

Wallonia Flanders Wallonia Flandersha % ha % 1,000 m3 1,000 m3

TOTAL BROAD-LEAVED 239,250 50.4 65,250 49,8 49,735.4 7,800Fagus sylvatica 38,000 8.0 3,650 5.6 9,435.4Quercus robur,Q. petraea /Q. rubra 49,250 10.4 10,309 15.8 9,751.6other broad-leaved 68,000 14.4 31,907 48.9 1,409.3Coppice with standards 59,500 12.6 8,618 8,650.3 655Coppice 13,250 2.8 4,750 4,892.3 190Populus sp. 11,000 2.3 19,400 29.7 2,912.7

TOTAL CONIFERS 234,750 49.6 49,900 38.1 60,531.4 7,150Picea abies 179,000 37.8 2,750 5.5 48,155.2Pseudotsuga menziesii 12,250 2.6 400 0.8 1,986.6Larix decidua 8,250 1.7 2,203.6Pinus nigra & P. sylvestris) 18,750 4.0 41,400 83.1 4,076.3Others 16,500 3.5 4,109.7

MIXED BROAD LEAVED CONIFERS 14,700 11.2PRODUCTIVE FOREST 473,750 100.0 131,000 100.0 110,266.8 15,615

Picea abies is the most important species ofWallonian forests, followed by Quercus robur,Quercus rubra, Quercus petraea and Fagussylvatica. The broad-leaved species representabout 50,000,000 m3, which is 45% of the totalstanding volume. Among the conifers, Piceaabies alone represents 48,000,000 m3 which is43.6% of the total standing tree volume. Thevolumes are calculated on the basis of a treeheight where the circumference is of 22 cm, barkincluded.

The total area of broad-leaved species has de-creased since 1895, but the proportion of even-aged high forests has greatly increased, mainlythrough the transformation of coppice and cop-pice with standards stands to even-aged highforests. Coppice stands lost their interest whenother combustibles substituted wood. Coniferstands have greatly increased, mainly throughthe afforestation of land that was not valuablefor agriculture.

Compared to the inventory data of 1984, in 1996the total forested area of Wallonia has decreased10,000 ha. This is partly due to the vast areasaffected by the heavy winds of February 1990,

when numerous stands were blown down. A lotof these areas have not been replanted since.Compared to 1984, the areas of even-aged broad-leaved high forests have increased, while theareas of coppice and coppice with standards havedecreased. The areas devoted to conifers havealso slightly decreased since 1984, especiallyregarding Picea abies.

The annual increment is of 7.5 m3 ha-1 a-1, whichmeans in absolute figures 4.6 million m3. Table5 compares the annual cutting with the annualconsumption in detail. The cuttings and the in-crement are in balance. The annual consump-tion exceeds the production 3 times.

FlandersThe West and East -Flanders provinces have anafforestation index of respectively 2 and 5%. TheBrabant and Antwerpen provinces have an in-dex of 10 and 12%. The Limburg province has aforest cover of 13%. In total 20,373 ha are ac-cessible to the public.

The forests in Flanders consist of 50% broad-leaved, 39% conifers, 6% mixed conifers and5% mixed broad-leaved. The main tree species

Belgium

are oak (Quercus robur and Q. petraea) beech(Fagus sylvatica), poplar (Populus cv.) and pine(Pinus sylvestris and P. nigra). Ash (Fraxinusexelsior), sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus),birch (Betula pendula) , wild cherry (Prunusavium), black alder (Alnus glutinosa), willow(Salix sp.) and exotic species such as red oak(Q. rubra) and larch (Larix decidua) are alsoused. In the Kempen, Prunus serotina dominatesthe natural regeneration and became in less than30 years a forest pest. Although the use of na-tive species is recommended, the use of Pinussylvestris and Quercus rubra will persist sinceit has economic meaning. An effort is currentlybeing made to manage these stands more natu-rally.

The annual timber production is approximately650,000 m3, which is 10% of the annual timberconsumption. The total annual growth in Flan-ders is estimated at 862,500 m3.

The annual increment for Quercus robur andQ. petraea is 3 to 5, for Quercus rubra 5 to 8,for Fagus sylvatica 5 to 8, for Populus 10 to15, for Pinus sylvestris 4 to 6 and for Pinus ni-gra 10 to 13 m3 ha-1 a-1.

2.3.4 Forest threatsSee ‘Main current conflicts and challenges’.

2.4 Silviculture

The broad-leaved species are submitted to dif-ferent silvicultural systems (classification ofMatthews 1989), the most important of whichis now the group system, but also of minor im-portance coppice, coppice with standards andselection system.

In southern Belgium, when seed is present, theshelterwood method is sometimes practised inbroad-leaved forests. In Belgium the majorityof the state owned forests are managed underthe group system. Natural regeneration as wellas artificial regeneration is used. Biocides arenot used on a regular basis nor recommendedby the forest service.

Private forests are either managed by the ownerhimself or by private forest managers or leftunmanaged. As opposed to Flanders, a manage-ment plan is not mandatory for private forestsin Wallonia, and so there is almost no control ofhow these forests are managed. The private for-ests are managed by a short-term forestry dueto small areas and to high taxes on private prop-erty. In Wallonia, private forests are based onconifers, and especially on Picea abies, and inFlanders they are based on Populus and Pinussylvestris. Privately owned forest fragments withpoplars and conifers are often clear cut whereas

Table 4. Volume per hectare in m3 ha-1 per tree species in 1996, Data for Wallonia DGRNE (1997a).The Flanders data is a compilation of N.I.S. (1990) and AMINAL (1993), and is not coherent.

Forest type VOLUME m3.h-1

Wallonia FlandersTOTAL BROAD-LEAVED 207 154Fagus sylvatica 248Quercus robur, Q. petraea / Q. rubra 198other broad-leaved 207Coppice with standards 145 76Coppice 369 40Populus sp 264

TOTAL CONIFERS 257 143Picea abies 269Pseudotsuga menziesii 162Larix decidua 267Pinus nigra & P sylvestris) 217Others 249

Belgium

in forests with a management plan, cuttings over2 ha are rare, so clear cutting is abandoned. Stripand selection cutting are seldom used.

2.5 Forest production and forest services

In the most urbanised area of the country, wherethere is less than 10% forest, the major forestgood is found in non-profitable services suchas recreation, education, wind-, water- and noisescreens. However, the only source of income isstill cuttings.

In the southern part of Belgium, where there ismore than 30% forest, the major forest produc-tion is timber. In Wallonia, hunting is a regular,non-negligible source of forest income. Thehunting rent amounts to about ECU 25 ha-1 a-1.Side revenues of hunting are the selling of veni-son and of hunting licences.

In Belgium there is no market for secondaryforest products such as berries, mushrooms, sapetc.

In Wallonia there are eight State Forest reserveswhich total an area of 244 ha. They have beenestablished according to the 1973 Law concern-ing Nature Protection. These Forest reserves areall ‘directed’ according to a special managementplan. In Flanders, since 1993, 1,400 ha of stateforest are forest reserves (Vandekerckhove1998). Moreover six forests are protected asnature reserve covering an area of about 500 ha(AMINAL 1993).

Skidders or adapted agricultural vehicles areused for the extraction of big trees to the road.The use of forwarders and processors is rare.Horses are increasingly popular for transport ofpre-commercial thinnings. Most timber is soldon stump. The uses of the harvested wood areshown in table 5.

3 Forest Economics

3.1 Forest industries and employment

Within the total Belgian economy the primarysector (agriculture, fishery and forestry) makes1.9% of the GNP of which forestry is 5.4%. Thismeans that the contribution of forestry to theGNP is 0.11 %. Due to a reduction in the contri-bution of agriculture, the contributions of for-estry and fishery are increasing in the primarysector (N.I.S. 1990). The contribution of forestexploitation in the national economy is negligi-ble. The first links in the processing chain is thesawing, the planing and the kiln drying. In 1989there were 323 sawmills (3,383 employees), 7enterprises for planing (124 employees), and 5for kiln drying good (11 employees). The sec-tor is dominated by small and medium-sizedenterprises: 40% of the enterprises have less than5 employees, 66% of the enterprises have lessthan 10 employees (N.I.S. 1990). The small andmedium sized enterprises are situated in thenorthern part of the country and the big enter-prises in the southern part.

The wood-based semi-manufacturers include thefollowing industries: veneer and multiplex,woodfiber and chips, improved wood, carpet-ing, wrapping materials, and other wood indus-tries. These industries employ 5,385 persons in466 enterprises. The contribution of these in-dustries is 0.89% of the GNP (N.I.S. 1990).

Employment in industries, based on or linkedwith forestry and wood processing, is estimatedto 70,000 employees in more than 6,000 enter-prises. This is 2.3% of the Belgian employeesin 2.6% of the Belgian enterprises (N.I.S. 1990).

The weakness of the wood industry is that only30% of the wood used is actually grown in Bel-gium (table 5). The industry strongly dependson wood import as its main resource.

Belgium is the worlds fifth largest exporter ofwood-based panels especially particle and fi-breboard. The growing global interest in theseproducts is the strength of the Belgian forestryand wood industry.

Belgium

3.2 Profitability

The gross income per hectare was in 1991 about2,8 times higher for coniferous forests (ECU 320ha-1) than for broad-leaved forests (ECU 125ha-1). This is due to more important cuttings: 11,7m3 ha-1 in a productive conifer stand against 3,8m3 ha-1 in a productive broad-leaved stand. Theaverage price though is lower for conifers (ECU30 m-3) than for broad-leaved (ECU 32 m-3). Itmust be indicated that these prices, as well asthe production in 1991, have greatly been influ-enced by the gale, which occurred in 1990.

In four of the ten provinces there is a provincialtax ranging from 3.6 to 6%. There is a nationalestate tax depending on the geographical regionranging from ECU 5 to 50 ha-1 a-1. Last but notleast, there is a succession tax (see paragraph 5.1).

Grants are given for afforestation ranging fromECU 500 to ECU 2500 depending on the treespecies and the presence of an understory. Ac-cessibility is subsidised from ECU 25 to 50 ha-

1 a-1 depending on if the forest is used for hunt-ing. Forest grouping, which means that differ-ent forest owners make a common managementplan for neighbouring forests, can be subsidisedfor the tending. There is also the possibility ofobtaining grants for the afforestation of aban-doned agricultural lands.

3.2.1 Picea abies in Wallonia

Ninety percent of the total forest income is dueto the harvest of timber, and especially to the

sales of conifer wood. Conifer species repre-sent almost 70% of the wood volumes sold and60% of the incomes, whereas they only cover42% of the productive forest area. This is whyprivate owners and municipalities prefer to in-vest in conifers rather than in broad-leaved spe-cies (DGRNE, 1997 a and b).

3.2.2 Populus in Flanders

In Flanders poplars are the only profitable treespecies. In a 15 year rotation on a suitable soilthe wood value exceeds 10 000 Euro. With theexisting financial support the cost-effectivenessof the investment is estimated to be between 6%and 9% at an internal discount rate of 5% (LUST1995a).

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

Different laws ensure the protection of forestsin Belgium since about 150 years. The forestcode, voted in 1854, imposed a managementplan for the public forests. In 1931 a law wasestablished for the protection of private forestsbut it was never applied. It prevents privateowners from forest clearings inducing damageto the general interest. It also protects remark-able trees or forests. In 1973 a law on natureconservation allows the creation of forest re-serves and natural reserves (DGRNE, 1997b).

Table 5. Wood production and consumption in Belgium (F.A.O. 1997)Production 1989-1991 Consumption 1989-1991

(1,000 m3) (1,000m3)Saw- and veneer wood 3,183 2,664Construction wood 1,201 2,858Triplex and veneer 109 329Paper and cardboard 1,200 2,116Pulp 466 774Particle- and fibrepanels 2,266 745Fibrewood 1,217 3,602Total 4,610 11,709

Belgium

In 1981 the federal forest service was regional-ised, and each region established its own ad-ministration. Differences in the distribution offorests and the degree of urbanisation determinethe policy emphasis.

In Flanders the public forests are managed bythe Forest Service (Afdeling Bos & Groen) ofthe Administration Environment-, Nature-,Land- and Water Management (AMINAL) ofthe Environment and Infrastructure Department(LIN) of the Ministry of the Flemish Commu-nity.

In Wallonia there is a similar Forest Service(Division Nature et Forêts) of the General Di-rection of Natural Resources and Environmentof the Ministry of the Walloon Region, com-missioned with the ecological management ofthe natural environment.

In Flanders, since 1990 ‘Het Bosdecreet’ (theForest Decree) is considered as a law. In 1994:a decree on hunting in Wallonia aimed to pro-vide a better balance between forest and game.It was followed in 1995 by a decree on accessi-bility in Wallonian forests to limit the bad ef-fects of motorised activities in forests. Also in1995, the Walloon Parliament approved the‘Plan for the Environment and for SustainableDevelopment’, containing indications on spe-cific forest management situations such as soilprotection areas, wells, rivers, etc.

Both regions participate and collaborate in in-ternational meetings and supranational struc-tures such as the EU, Rio, Helsinki, Lisbon.

4.2 Forest policy tools

4.2.1. Flanders

The major forest policy tool in Flanders is the‘Bosdecreet’ (Grayson, 1993). In the FlemishRegion there is a strong emphasis on multipleuse with an accent on conservation. The policystatement shows the following numbers of Arti-cles devoted to each forestry function: 2 to ‘eco-nomic’ (production of wood as a raw material);

2 to protective; 4 to ‘ecological’ (concerningconservation of native plants and animals); 5 tosocial and educational (principally recreationaland concerning access) and 9 to scientific, in-cluding forest reserves. Despite the relativelysmall amount of space given to wood and othermarketable products, a fair degree of importanceis attached to this function: the novel feature ofthe decree is the emphasis it gives to the otherforest functions.

The following list records both the general ob-jectives of this decree and those specific to pri-vate woodlands.- To promote the opening up of woodland for

recreation and educational purposes, but sub-ject to nature conservation requirements.

- To designate certain areas as protection forest.- To operate a rather conservative form of yield

control, notably by restricting the cut in yearsfollowing an unplanned and abnormally highlevel of cut undertaken for whatever reason.

- To favour silvicultural methods which arecloser to nature, specifically through conser-vation or reconstitution of the natural faunaand flora; use of native species or provenancessuited to the site; natural regeneration; uneven-aged stand or selection forest; ‘ecological equi-librium’ and regulation of the use of herbicides.

- To form perpetual forest (nature) reserves, us-ing management techniques outlined in 4 inorder to conserve and develop woodland veg-etation associations, stands and ‘typical’ habi-tat forms.

- To promote management according to the des-ignated aims by making working plans com-pulsory for all private woods over 5 ha exceptin forest nature reserves where a nature con-servation plan is applied, and as part of this, torequire that private woodland owners conductinventories of their properties every 10 years.

- To encourage co-operative management inorder to secure better the desired benefits, suchco-operative units being formed normally be-tween private owners or occasionally betweenprivate and public sector forest owners.

- To provide grant aid or compensation in sup-port of these measures in private woodlands.

Actors affecting the forest and forest relatedpolicies in Flanders are: the forest service which

Belgium

is responsible for the management as well asthe policy, the union of private owners ‘RoyalForest Society of Belgium (KBBM-SRFB)’,nature service, agricultural service and the un-ions of farmers. Next to the above ‘classic’ ac-tors there is a trend in involving local actors suchas: scouts, neighbours, local environmental or-ganisations etc.

The most important EU ordinance is 2080/92for the afforestation of abandoned agriculturallands. In 1997, 175 ha of forest were plantedwithin this frame. The average size of a forestwas 1.53 ha. Private owners planted 120 ha, therest was planted by the provinces. More than40% of this area was planted with Quercus roburand Q. petraea, 24% with Populus sp., and 65% of the Populus stands were planted with ashrub layer (Gorissen & Schepens, 1998).

4.2.2 Wallonia

The 1854 forest code together with the 1994and 1995 decrees are considered as laws.

The main actor affecting the forest and forestrelated policies in Wallonia is the ‘Royal ForestSociety of Belgium’, which has represented pri-vate forest owners for more than 100 years. Itinforms its members by way of a journal, fieldexcursions and conferences. It also offers aninsurance service to private owners and createssoftware to help private forest management. Thissociety created a trade union of private forestowners concerned with all the subjects relatedto forest policies in private forests. The partici-pation of all the concerned people in the deci-sions concerning the forest is ensured by the‘Conseil Supérieur Wallon de la Forêt et de laFilière bois’, a consultative organ. Moreover,several private owners have come together tocreate forest co-operatives in order to groupoperations such as wood sales, purchase ofplants etc.

The Walloon region gives subsidies to publicand private forest owners in order to encouragesilvicultural practices such as thinning, pruningand regeneration, which should in turn ensure a

sustainable management of this renewable re-source. The Walloon region has published an‘afforestation guide’ (Fichier écologique etGuide des boisements), a tool which helps theforest manager to plant the right species (indig-enous or exotic) in the right site, by taking intoaccount climate and soil data such as drainage,pH, etc.(DGRNE 1997b)

The most important EU ordinance is 2080/92for the afforestation of abandoned agriculturallands. Since 1995 in Wallonia, 63 ha of forestwere planted within this frame. More than 37.5%of this area were planted with poplar, 40.8% withother broad-leaved and another 21.7% withconifers (Balleux 1997).

4.3 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

In Flanders forestry and forests are seen as apart of nature, a place for recreation and a sourceof additional income. In the policy there are re-lations, conflicts and overlaps between natureconservation and forestry. Outside the forestry,administration forestry is neither seen as a wayto create sustainable employment nor as a wayto increase the economic activity. It is interest-ing to note that there is no relation between for-est policy and the policies of economy, recrea-tion and tourism, land-use planning, agriculture,employment…

In Wallonia forestry has an economic interest.For many municipalities and private owners itis a way of to make living. There are no linksbetween forest policy and other policies. Forestlegislation in both Regions has to be seen as afree-standing entity of policy. For actors affect-ing the forest policy see paragraph 4.2.1 for Flan-ders and paragraph 4.2.2 for Wallonia.

4.4 Forestry, research and education

Several institutions are involved with forestryeducation and research: 12 secondary schoolsgive an education in forestry; 2 high schoolsteach forestry at a non-university level, and 4

Belgium

faculties of agronomy allow students to gradu-ate, after 5 years of study, as forest engineer:the University of Gent and the Catholic Univer-sity of Leuven in Flanders; the University ofGembloux and the Catholic University ofLouvain-la-Neuve in Wallonia.

The Flemish Community has a research Insti-tute for Forest and Game Management (IBW)in Geraardsbergen. In Wallonia the similar in-stitute is the Forestry Research Station (SRF) inGembloux. The objectives of these institutes arelong term monitoring and research in differentareas related to forest ecosystem functioning,wood technology, forest genetics, game man-agement, etc.

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

5.1 Fragmentation

In both regions many forests have a low profit-ability. This low profitability, maintained by thetax-system, discourages forest ownership. Pri-vate and public owners often prefer to sell theirforests as housing or industrial estate areas.

High taxes on forest ownership are paid by thepeople who inherit forest. First line heirs haveto pay 7% taxes on the value if the forest is 10ha and up to 30% if the forest is bigger than 70ha. For a forest of 10 ha, brothers or sisters haveto pay 50% of succession taxes. The inheritanceof a forest often results in partial deforestationto enable the heirs to pay the succession taxes,and fragmentation of the ownership in parts forthe different heirs. A possible solution for thisproblem is the exemption of the successiontaxes, which should be linked with good forestpractices. Due to the different forest policies,the preconditions of good forestry practices aredifferent in the two regions.

The fragmentation of forest ownership and thecharacteristics of forest owners have far reach-ing social, technical and silvicultural conse-quences. Whatever the initiative undertaken toimprove either the actual forest distribution,

economic production, organisation of socialfunction or development of ecological values,it has to start with consideration of and respectfor forest ownership. It must always imply aserious attempt to modify management of theprivate forest. But following the same line ofthinking, it is also necessary to find new ap-proaches to manage the public forest.

5.2 Stability

Loss of forest vitality and biodiversity are pan-European problems in which Belgium takes itsshare.

The afforestation between the late 1800s andmid 1900s was mainly based on the use of Piceaabies in the South, Pinus sylvestris in the North-east, while Populus cultivars became widelyused in Northern and central Belgium. Thesestands were planted with a single goal: woodproduction for a specific type of industry e.g.mining, matches. As well as the common prob-lems of even-aged, mono-specific, dense plan-tations, the vast areas planted with these spe-cies give rise to species specific problems.

Populus trees suffer from leaf fungi(Melamspora sp.) during humid summers. Thiscauses a loss of tree growth and might result inthe death of the trees or of the whole stand. Be-cause of the use of monoclonal stands and theuse of a very limited number different cultivarsin Belgium, an attack of these fungi results inwidespread economic damage.

Pinus nigra in the north-eastern part of Belgiumare weakened by strong winters and air pollu-tion, which result in harmful fungi attacks onthe trees (Sphaeropsis sp., Brunchorstia sp.).

The management of the Spruce stands in thesouthern part of Belgium is often characterisedby a lack of pruning and thinning and the use ofthe species on unsuitable soils. This results insoil acidification and in a poor stand stability.In 1990 a gale damaged more than 4,7 millionsm3 of wood.

Belgium

5.3 Vitality

Another long-term threat for the Belgian andcentral European forests in general is air pollu-tion and soil acidification. Agro-industry, cen-tral-heating, transport and industry are the ma-jor sources of atmospherical pollution agents.Forests and especially conifers have the prop-erty to filter these agents in amounts, which aretoxic for the functioning of the forest ecosys-tem. This may result in an accelerated acidifi-cation of the forest soil, to levels that affect plantgrowth. For this reason, part of the Belgian for-ests should be transformed: by replacing someconifer stands by broad-leaved stands and bycreating more mixed stands, introducing speciessuch as Quercus sp. and several other species,in even-aged mono-specific Fagus sylvaticastands. Picea abies stands should be thinnedmore intensively in order to improve thebiogeochemical cycles and to reduce soil acidi-fication. Recently however, forest managementis paying more attention to soil conservation andstability in Picea abies stands. This is obtainedby frequent thinning and the use of lime in someextreme cases.

The management of the even-aged homogene-ous stands is oriented on a short rotation (15 to60 year) biomass production. A more sustain-able and profitable forestry could be reached ifmore emphasis were laid on the production ofquality timber.

5.4 Game

The abundance of game limits the use of natu-ral regeneration in close to nature forestry be-cause the game prefers to browse the native treespecies. Fencing is necessary in most regionsfor both, natural and artificial regeneration. Inthe northern part of the country, rabbit(Oryctolagus cuniculus) and especially roe(Capreolus capreolus) are abundant. In thesouthern part of the country roe and deer (Cervuselaphus) are important.

5.5 Region specific conflicts and challenges

5.5.1 Flanders

Decades of urban emigration in combinationwith poor land use planning made forests themost wanted housing areas of Flanders. Defor-estation for housing, industry and infrastructureis still a threat. The pressure on the open spaceand forests is very high. Every single piece ofland is wanted by agriculture, forestry, natureconservation, housing, tourism and economicdevelopment. Every change in land-use givesrise to a conflict between the above mentionedsectors. The only sector that yields land is theagricultural sector. These lands are often poorand wet soils. There is no tradition betweenfarmers and forests, and the farmers’ union usesthis lack of knowledge to create hostility. Farm-ers prefer to sell their lands to more profitableland uses. Afforestation of abandoned agricul-tural lands is a very sensitive and difficult issue.

With a forest cover of only 8%, an extension ofthe forested area is necessary. The ratio of 8%is insufficient to cover the recreational needs ofFlanders. Cities like Gent and Antwerpen withmore than 250 000 inhabitants lack recreationalforests in the vicinity. The most western prov-ince, bordered by the North Sea and France hasa forest cover of 2%, and over 300 000 personsin this province are living in a town or city withmore than 50 000 inhabitants, without urbanforest.

The high fragmentation of the existing forestsmakes migration of flora and fauna betweenthese fragments either hard or impossible. Somepopulations are extinguished by road kills whileothers can not migrate because of motorways,railroads or waterways.

There is a real need to connect the existing for-est fragments to urban forests in the vicinity oftowns and cities and to productive forests.Wallonia imports50 % of the processed woodand Flanders needs to import as much as 90%.

For Flanders, where afforestation is urgent, theneeds are translated in the ‘structure for land

Belgium

use planing’ (Structuurplan Vlaanderen 1997).The main goals of this plan are a moratoriumon deforestation, afforestation of 10 000 haabandoned agricultural land, and afforestationof 10 000 ha of other lands.

Other priorities are the exemption of the suc-cession taxes on forests, a legal frame for forestmanagement groups, the conservation ofbiodiversity and a close-to-nature forest man-agement. Private owners are encouraged to andthe forest service is obliged to use close-to-na-ture forest practices (Pro Silva), e.g. trees shouldbe given time to get old; native species shouldbe the basis of the forest ecosystem; self regu-lating processes should be the basis of the for-est management; there should be dead wood ina forest; no chemicals should be used in forests.

The forest service has an important role to playin the next decades. Because of the legal frame-work, the forest service has to establish multi-ple-use forests, managed in a close-to-natureway which meet the requirements of the FSC orHelsinki. The extra economic cost of these goalsshould be beared by the whole society. The highcosts are justified by the high demands of theforest services in terms of wood, recreation,shelter, watershed management, education,conservation,... and the low quantity of forestswhich can truly be multiple-use.

5.5.2 Wallonia

Aware of the economic, ecological and socialimportance of forests, the Walloon Region triesto follow the rules of ‘sustainable forest man-agement’ defined at the conferences of Rio andHelsinki.

The forest has to be managed in a sustainableway, in order to ensure its regeneration and itsdifferent functions: the production of wood, theecological role in the sense of biodiversity andof carbon stock; and the social and cultural roleof the forest. The long-term vision of theWalloon forest in its multifunctional dimensionis put forward. Its quality and its diversity haveto be maintained.

The weaknesses of the Walloon forest concernthe economic and the environmental aspects.

From the economic point of view, the parcel-ling out of the private forest (3 ha per owner)makes it difficult to manage. Moreover, inherit-ance duties are very important for private own-ers and contribute to this parcelling out. Thisfragmentation of the private forest makes woodcertification very difficult.

From the environmental point of view, the hu-man pressure on forests is increasing (tourismand recreation), and there is still a lack of infor-mation and education of forest users. The forestis also submitted to some atmospheric pollutionand to climatic changes, but these are problemsat the European, and even at the global scale.

The remedies to this situation would be to re-duce the fragmentation of the forests, to decreasethe tax pressure on private forest owners, tomake management plans mandatory in privateforests, to improve forest exploitation, to de-velop the multifunctional role of forests and topromote afforestation and wood transformation.Efforts are currently being made for the promo-tion of wood as construction material.

Belgium

References

AMINAL 1993. Lange Termijnplanning Bosbouw. Boekdeel 2: bijlage: ondersteunend onderzoek.Dienst Waters en Bossen, Universiteit Gent Laboratorium voor Bosbouw, studiegroep mens enruimte. 274 p.

ANDRE P. 1990. Les forêts belges. Unité des Eaux et Forêts, UCL, Louvain-la-Neuve. 75 p. +annexes.

BALLEUX P. 1997. Le boisement des terres agricoles: enquête “macro” du 2080/92 en Belgique(région wallonne et région flamande). Action concertée BOISTERRA. EFOR-UCL, asbl cen-tre de développement agro-forestier de Chimay, Belgique.

DGRNE 1997a. Inventaire des massifs forestiers de la Wallonie. Direction générale des ressourcesnaturelles et de l’environnement, Division de la Nature et des Forêts, Direction del’Aménagement et du Génie forestiers. Fiche technique n°9 - 1997. Ministère de la régionWallonne. 21p.

DGRNE 1997b. La Gestion durable de la forêt en Wallonie. Direction générale des ressourcesnaturelles et de l’environnement, Division de la Nature et des Forêts. 56 p.

DRIESSEN P.M. & DUDAL R. 1991. The major soils of the world. Agricultural UniversityWageningen - Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. 310 p.

FAO, 1997. Forest products. Rome, Forestry department. FAO Forestry Series No.30; StatisticsSeries N°137. 442p.

GORISSEN, D. & SCHEPENS, D. 1998. Bebossing van landbouwgronden, de cijfers voor hetprojectjaar 1997. De Boskrant, Vlaamse bosbouwvereniging. 28(1): 8-10

GRAYSON, A.J. 1993. Private Forestry Policy in Western Europe. Wallingford, CAB interna-tional.

HELMS, J.A. 1998. The Dictionary of Forestry. The Society of American Foresters and CABIpublishing, Wallingford, UK. 210 p.

HET BOSDECREET 1990. Het bosdecreet. Bestuur van het Belgisch Staatsblad, Direction duMoniteur belge, Leuvenseweg 40-42, 1000 Brussel.

LUST, N. 1995a. Populieren en populierenteelt. Cursus faculteit landbouwkundige en toegepastewetenschappen. Universiteit Gent, 226p.

LUST, N. 1995b. Research on mixed forests in Belgium and the mixed hardwood ecosystem projectin the experimental forest of Aelmoeseneie. Concerted action on mixed forests, p.39-40.

MATTHEWS, J.D. 1989. Silvicultural systems. Clarendon press, Oxford. 284 p.N.I.S. 1990. Statistisch jaarboek van België. Boekdeel 110 1990. Nationaal instituut voor de

statistiek, Ministery van economische zaken. 790 p.NOIRFALISE, A. 1984. Forêts et stations forestières en Belgique. Gembloux, presses agronomiques.

234 p.RONDEUX, J., LECOMTE, H., FAGOT, J., LAURENT, C. & TOUSSAINT, A. 1986. Quelques

données statistiques récentes sur la forêt wallonne. Bull. Soc. Roy. For. Belg. 93, 1-22.RONDEUX, J., LECOMTE, H. & TOUSSAINT, A. 1984. La pessière wallonne en chiffres. Bull.

Soc. Roy. For. Belg. 91, 89-98.RONDEUX, J. 1991. Management of small woods in Belgium. Q. J. For. 85, 37-42.STRUCTUURPLAN VLAANDEREN 1997. Ruimtelijk structuurplan Vlaanderen, samenvatting.

Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, Departement Leefmilieu en Infrastructuur,Administratie Ruimtelijke Ordening, Huisvesting, Monumenten en Landschappen, AfdelingRuimtelijke Planning. 119 p.

VANDEKERKHOVE, K. 1998. Criteria voor de selectie van bosreservaten in functie van eenbetere kadering van de Vlaamse bosreservaten in een Europees netwerk. Werkversie 1 maart1998. Instituut voor Bosbouw en Wildbeheer. 56 p.

VERBRUGGEN, A. 1994. Leren om te keren, milieu- en natuurrapport Vlaanderen. Vlaamsemilieumaatschappij. Garant Leuven-Apeldoorn. 823 p.

Belgium

WebsitesBelgian federal government http://belgium.fgov.beWalloon regional government http://www.wallonie.beEnvironmental and forest topics in Wallonia http://envagri.wallonie.be and http://mrw.wallonie.be/dgrne/home.htmFlemish regional government http://www.vlaanderen.beEnvironmental and forest topics in Flanders http://www.mina.vmm.beUniversity of Gent http://www.rug.ac.beUniversity of Leuven http://www.kuleuven.ac.beUniversity of Gembloux http://www.fsagx.ac.beUniversity of Louvain-la-Neuve http://www.ucl.ac.beFlemish institute of Forest and Game management http://www.vlaanderen.beWWF http://www.panda.orgBelgian scientific, technical and culturale affairs http://www.belspo.beConseil Supérieur Wallon de la Forêt et de la Filière-bois http://www.woodnet.com

Denmark

1 The Country

1.1 Nature

Denmark is situated between approximately 54and 57 oN, and 8 and 15 oE. The country coversan area of 43,100 sq. km. It comprises the west-erly peninsula Jutland (Jylland) connected withGermany to the South, and a great many islandsthe biggest of which are Sealand (Sjælland) andFunen (Fyn). The country is intimately con-nected with the sea, the coastal line totals ap-proximately 7,300 km. Denmark belongs to theScandinavian Countries.

A large part of the land surface is shaped by thelate glaciation (Weichsel). So, the eastern part ofthe country (East Jutland and the islands) showsa gently undulated moraine landscape reachingno more than 200 m above sea level. The westernpart (Central and West Jutland) is formed fromdiluvial Weichsel glaciation deposits. Yet, eleva-tions in the landscape are found, originating fromthe glaciation before the last (Saale).

Small streams are found in nearly all parts of thecountry but no rivers. There are many lakesscattered all over, the biggest of which being 40sq. km. The total area of lakes makes up 1% ofthe land surface.

The climate is cool-temperate and oceanic. It isinfluenced by the Gulf Stream. The mean annualtemperature (1961-1990) is 7.7 oC varying from0.0 oC in January and February to 15.7 oC in Au-gust. Coldest and hottest temperatures ever reg-

istered are -31 oC and 36 oC respectively. Themean annual precipitation (1961-1990) is 712 mmranging from less than 500 mm in the driest partsto more than 800 mm in the wettest parts of thecountry. In the late winter and early springmonths there is a precipitation of 40-45 mm, inautumn months 75-80 mm per month. Westerlywinds play a significant role and gales are notuncommon.

Soils in those parts of the country formed bythe moraine count Inceptisols and Alfisols asthe most important types. Commonly there isan intimate mixture of coarse and fine sand, silt

Figure 1. Map of Denmark

Denmark

The author:Jens Dragsted, Reader of Silviculture, dr.agro.The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University,Department of Economics and Natural Resources.Address: Rolighedsvej 23, DK 1958 Frederiksberg C.E-mail: jd@kvl.dk

Denmark

and clay and medium to high fertility. In manysoils there is a calcareous intermingling. Wherediluvial deposits are found, the texture isdominated by sand and the common soil typefound is Spodosol. Here, the soil fertility is lowand the water holding capacity is critical. Insome areas Histosols (peaty soils) are found, andthey may make up an important part, but on acountry-wide basis these peaty soils play a minorrole.

Since the country is situated in the cool-tem-perate zone, the vegetation is of the nemoral typeand close to the sub-boreal. This means that thedeciduous forest is original to the country, domi-nated by beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), oak(Quercus robur L.), ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.)and birch (Betula spp.) as endemic species withsycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus L.) as an im-portant exotic newcomer. Lime (Tilia cordataMiller), elm (Ulmus glabra Hudson), and alder(Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertner) also play a part.The basic feature of the forested land today isthat hardly no original forest exists, plantationsprevail. A great many coniferous species play asignificant role. They have been introduced fromCentral Europe (Norway spruce (Picea abies(L.) Karsten), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.),Silver fir (Abies alba Miller), and larch (Larixdecidua Miller)) as well as western NorthAmerica (spruce (Picea spp.), fir (Abies spp.),pine (Pinus spp.) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsugamenziesii (Mirbel) Franco)). In Central and WestJutland, heather used to dominate but has nowbeen replaced by coniferous plantations andagricultural land.

1.2 Society

The Danish population is 5.3 M (1998) and thepopulation density 123 inhabitants per sq. km.There is a slow increase in population mainlydue to immigration. Population growth is 0.43%(1997).

A major part of the population lives in Copen-hagen (1.3 M) and there is a high populationdensity in the urban areas around the capital.The same is true for the greater towns in EastJutland and Central Funen. But otherwise vil-lages are evenly distributed all over the countryand except for the smaller islands, all parts ofthe country are inhabited.

Until the middle of this century, Danish economywas dominated by agriculture production. Thisproduction is still important, but industry, in-cluding oil industry, transport, services and tour-ism increasingly influence economy. Today thecontribution from the industrial sectors to thegross domestic product - GDP can be made upas illustrated by table 1.

Over the last decades, the employment of thegrown-up population has changed considerablyfrom primary production in agriculture andheavy industry to advanced industry, communi-cation, the social sector, the health sector, theeducation sector and public administration. Agreat part of the population is not in the labourmarket, the reasons being unemployment, payedvacancy and early retirement. There is no po-litical consensus about the size of this group.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining 5.2Industry, oil and gas 17.8Energy and water 2.2Construction 5.2Wholesale end retail, hotels, restaurants 15.4Transport, communication 7.2Financial, real estate, business activities 23.4Public administration 7.1Education 5.4Health and social work 10.3Other services 0.8

Table 1. Contribution to the gross domestic product - GDP by industrial sectors, per cent (1997)

Source: Statistics Denmark, 1998a

Denmark

The political framework in Denmark is basedupon a one chamber parliamentary system. Par-liament has 179 members. Generally, approxi-mately ten different political parties are repre-sented in Parliament, making the political ne-gotiations onerous. The two largest parties arethe Social Democratic Party and the Liberal Party.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

After the last ice age, the country was graduallyre-covered by forests. During 15,000 years therehas been a gradual change in forest compositioncaused by a changing climate. Around 1000-2000 B.C., the beech (Fagus sylvatica L.)arrived. Today beech is considered the naturallydominating broadleaved species. Until 1200A.D. the utilization of the country for agriculturewas modest. But around this time, the arable landexpanded, and the forest cover decreasedsignificantly. Through the centuries to come,agriculture completely took over, and at the sametime the remaining forest area was treated in avery destructive manner. Around the year 1800,the forest area made up only 3% of the land area.

Already some 200 years before, the King hadstarted issuing decrees aiming at reclaiming thestate of the forest but with rather limited suc-cess. Not until 1805 when the first Danish For-est Act was issued an end was put to the forestexploitation. In the subsequent period, there hasbeen a substantial increase in the quality of theforest. Additionally a tremendous increase in theforest area has taken place. The developmentthrough the last 100 years appears from table 2.A focal point in the 1805 Forest Act is the intro-duction of the concept of Forest Reserves, i.e.forest areas clearly delimited to surrounding ar-

eas and protected against any kind of misuse suchas grazing, pannage and the like. Today the totalforest area comprises 10.3% of the land area.

In connection with the increase in the forest area,a number of exotic tree species, mainly coni-fers, have been introduced. Conifers thereforeplay a major role in present-day forestry as ap-pears from table 6.

An important consequence of the historical devel-opment just described is that the Danish forest areais dominated by plantation forestry. Only relictsof original natural forest still remain. Today, for-esters, conservationists and natural scientists areincreasingly interested in investigating the specificfeatures of the original Danish forest.

2.2 Forest ownership

As shown in table 2, the forest area is 445,000ha (1990). 417,000 ha are under tree cover. Anestimated 85% of the forest area is Forest Re-serve under the Forest Act.

In table 3, the forest area is divided into own-ership classes. From this it appears that approx.70% of the area is on private hands in one wayor the other. Well over 30% is under publicadministration.

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

Looking at the present-day land use as it fol-lows from table 4, it is obvious that agricultureis the sector dominating the landscape. Forestmakes up only a minor part. On the other hand,the forest area is increasing from afforestation

1881 1907 1923 1931 1951 1965 1976 19901

206 324 367 391 438 472 493 (445)

Source: National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark, 19931 Not comparable to the former inventories.

Table 2. Development in size of the forest area, 1,000 ha (1990)

Denmark

of arable land. Since 1990 this increase is esti-mated to 10,000-15,000 ha. According to a gov-ernment decision from 1989, see section 4.1, itis a target of Danish land use policy to doublethe forest area in a rotation (60-100 years). Thisafforestation is expected to take place in all partsof the country. Attention is payed to maintain-ing profitability in the agricultural sector.

Part of the cultivated land is set aside in accord-ance with present EU-regulations.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

A basic feature of Danish forestry is the veryhigh number of small forest holdings. Thus, thereare close to 20,600 forest properties smaller than50 ha. At the other end only some 60 estatesexceed 1,000 ha. Furthermore, the medium-sized and big estates are generally composed ofa number of separate forests. The result of thisis that the forest area is highly fragmented. Ta-ble 5 shows the distribution of forest estates andforest area by size class. It follows that forestproperties sized less than 50 ha make up 106,100

ha or 24% of the total forest area. It is obviousthat such fragmentation leads to an enormouslength of the outer borders facing open areas.

2.3.3 Origin and distribution of tree species

It was mentioned in section 1.1 and 2.1 that for-ests in Denmark are basically of the broadleavedtype, but of historical reasons and supported bythe fact that the country is close to the sub-borealzone, a number of conifers have been intro-duced. Table 6 informs on the division of theforest area by species.

In the eastern part of the country including EastJutland, beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) is the domi-nating broadleaved species, but oak (Quercusrobur L.), ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.), birch(Betula spp.), alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.)Gaertner) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanusL.) to a varying degree play a part. Several ofthese species seem to be expanding their areas.Yet, in this part of the country as well as in oth-ers, Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karsten)is the dominating species except for some ofthe coastal areas.

Privately owned forests 45.4Foundations, organisations and independent institutions 6.5Danish Land Development Service 0.9Joint-stock companies, cooperative societies 15.8The National Forest and Nature Agency 25.6Other state-owned forests 0.9Benefices 0.3Counties and municipalities 4.6

Table 3. Forest area by ownership classes, per cent (1990)

Source: National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark, 1993

Cultivated land, market gardens, orchards 62Forests and plantations - incl. agricultural forests 12Meadows, marshland, moorland, sand dunes, bogs 11Lakes and streams 1Hedgerows, ditches, track roads 3Farmbuildings, farmyards and houses in rural areas 5Urban areas 4Traffic areas outside urban areas 2

Table 4. Area analysed by use, per cent (1982)

Source: Statistics Denmark, 1998a

Denmark

In the central and western part of Jutland, theimportant species apart from Norway spruce areSitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carrière),Serbian spruce (Picea omorica ((Pancic)Purkynê), Silver fir (Abies alba Miller), Grandfir (Abies grandis (D.Don) Lindley), Douglasfir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirbel) Franco),Western red-cedar (Thuja plicata J.Donn exD.Don), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), mugopine (Pinus mugo Turra), lodgepole pine (Pinuscontorta Douglas), Corsican pine (Pinus nigraArnold) and larch (Larix spp.). A great numberof these coniferous species are cultivated in theeastern part of the country as well.

Noble fir (Abies procera Rehder) and Caucasianfir (Abies nordmanniana (Steven) Spach) aregrown for christmas trees and greenery primarily.

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

Throughout this century, the growing stock hasbeen steadely increasing due partly to the in-creased forest area, partly to a change frombroadleaved to coniferous species. Yet, therehave been backlashes caused by gales and, asfor the last decades, by a general forest declinein Norway spruce. Also, there has been a gradualincrease in thinning intensity. The latest estimateshows a total growing stock of 55 M m3 corre-sponding to 132 m3 per ha under tree cover.Norway spruce and beech count 65% of this,see table 7.

It appears from table 7 that the annual incre-ment per ha under tree cover amounts to 7.9 m3.

Size class, ha No. Area, ha0-5 13,354 25,6875-10 3,273 22,09410-20 1,948 26,08220-50 1,078 32,22950-100 373 26,040100-250 280 45,368250-500 127 44,808500-1000 73 51,300>1000 57 171,783Total 20,563 445,391

Table 5. Forests and forest area by size classes (1990)

Source: National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark, 1993

Beech, Fagus sylvatica L. 16.2Oak, Quercus robur L. 6.7Ash, Fraxinus excelsior L. 2.2Sycamore, Acer pseudoplatanus L. 1.8Other broadleaves 5.2Norway spruce, Picea abies (L.) Karsten 30.3Sitka spruce and other spruce, Picea spp. 7.9Silver fir and other fir, Abies spp. 3.4Noble fir and Caucasian fir, Abies spp. 4.3Mountain pine and lodgepole pine, Pinus spp. 6.1Other conifers 8.3Permanently and temporarily uncovered area 7.6

Table 6. Forest area by species, per cent (1990)

Source: National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark, 1993

Denmark

From table 8 it is seen that the annual cutamounts to about 1.8 M m3. During the last 10years, the annual cut varied between 2.1 and 1.8M m3. This is somewhat below the estimatedannual volume increment of 3.3 M m3 as ap-pears from table 7. It should be concluded, then,that the standing volume has been increasingduring the last decade.

2.3.5 Climatic and biological forest threats

The dominating biotic threat in Danish forestryis root rot (Heterobasidion annosum (Fr.) Bref.)which plays a significant role in Norway sprucecultivation. Attacks from European spruce barkbeetle (Ips typographus) in edges of Norwayspruce stands exposed to wind is of some im-portance. A number of insects exert regular, of-ten local outbreaks. Lice (Dreyfusianordmannianae) is of major importance tochristmas tree production in Caucasian fir. Dur-ing the last decades, game has increased in den-sity. This is particularly true for roedear, whichcauses troubles in regeneration of broadleavedspecies. In some areas dense populations of reddeer are found.

Since the 1980s air pollution has been consid-ered a stress factor of substantial importance tothe vitality of forests. This perception is stillvalid, but today the forest decline is considered

a very complex prosess in which silviculturecomes into play.

Among abiotic factors, wind is of particularimportance. To a marked extent this influencesthe silvicultural conditions in coastal areas.Gales have caused much damage during thiscentury and at an increasing frequency. Thereare several examples of the equivalent of morethan one years cut being destroyed in a gale.Airborne salt from the sea has some influenceon the cultivation in coastal areas, particularlyin Norway spruce. Summer drought in someyears kills trees in forest stands. Late frost sig-nificantly influences the choise of tree speciesin the more continental parts of the country.

2.4 Silviculture

Traditional silviculture is based on the clearcutting system. This is particularly true in coni-fers, but the system is used in oak and beech aswell. Usually only one species is planted, butquite often more species are mixed in varieddesigns. This aims at either establishing perma-nent mixtures of species or creating possibili-ties for harvesting the species at different inter-vals during the rotation. The uniform systemplays an important part in beech silviculture andthere has been a tendency throughout the lastdecades towards an increased use of the sys-

Species Growing stock Annual incrementBeech, Fagus sylvatica L. 17.3 0.6Oak, Quercus robur L. 3.6 0.2Ash, Fraxinus excelsior L. 1.0 0.1Sycamore, Acer pseudoplatanus L. 0.8 0.1Other broadleaves 1.2 0.1Norway spruce, Picea abies (L.) Karsten 18.9 1.4Sitka spruce and other spruce 4.9 0.4Silver fir and other fir 3.1 0.2Noble fir and Caucasion fir 0.3 0.0Mountain pine and loblolly pine 1.9 0.0Other conifers 2.1 0.2Total 55.1 3.3

Table 7. Growing stock 1990 and mean annual volume increment 1990-2000 by species, M m3

(1990)

Source: National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark, 1993

Denmark

tem. A main reason for this is to avoidclearcutting. During the last years, concernsabout a „close to nature“ silviculture has beeninfluencing the debate among forestry profes-sionals and nature conservationists. The empha-sis here is put on systems based on unevenagedmixtures of particularly broadleaved species.This will eventually move silviculture away fromclearcutting. Small areas of forest, particularlyin south and east, are covered by coppice. Insuch areas, when owened by the National For-est and Nature Agency, it is a target to consoli-date previous forest management systems.

About 5% of the forest area is used for productionof christmas trees and greenery. This is a highlyspecialized form of silviculture based on inten-sively managed systems and using large amountsof fertilizers and pesticides. The trend is towardsan ecologically founded production banning pes-ticides and decreasing the use of fertilizers.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

To a great extent felling broadleaved trees takesplace by using chain saws. Logs are skid to for-est roads using small skidding machines. Themachinery used depends very much on the sizeof the property and the willingness of the ownerto invest in transport equipment. During the lastdecades, there has been a trend towards in-creased mechanization. Thus, the major part ofharvesting conifers is carried out by using har-vesters which cut, strip and divide the stem tolength. When using heavy machinery, which isthe case in some forest estates, a great deal ofattention should be paid to the risk of soilcompaction and root destruction. It is still com-

mon in many forest estates to employ their ownlabor for felling and skidding of logs and tim-ber, though the use of contractors for harvest-ing increasingly takes place.

The access to forest roads is generally good. Theaverage length of forest roads amounts to ap-proximately 3,500 m per 100 ha.

Standing sales is not widely used but may beincreasing. By far the most common is roadsidesales. The major part of the long distance trans-port to the sawmill is on road. Some transport ison rail, especially when crossing borders. Auc-tions are not used any more.

2.5.2 Timber uses

The total timber consumption cannot be calcu-lated from statistical tables, but it should be esti-mated at approximately 7.5-8.0 M m3 per year.This figure is based on an annual cut of approxi-mately 1.8 M m3, a self-sufficiency in coniferwood of 20-25% and in broadleaved wood ofclose to 100%, and an import of almost all paperconsumed.

It appears from table 8 that by far the greatestpart of the annual cut is sawnwood. This is trans-ported to and processed in sawmills. Usuallythe mills are designed for sawing wood fromeither conifers or broadleaves. A great numberof Danish sawmills are small. On the other handthe number of sawmills is large, around 200,but steadely decreasing. The main part of coni-fer wood is processed in medium sized millsranging from 30,000 to 90,000 m3 annual roundwood consumption. Hardwood processing isdominated by one large plant consuming closeto 500,000 m3 round wood annually.

Species Sawnwood Fuelwood TotalBeech 296 168 464Oak 30 26 56Other broadleaves 29 99 128Conifers 837 332 1.169Total 1,192 625 1,817

Table 8. Annual cut by species and assortment, 1000 m3 (1997)

Source: Statistics Denmark, 1998b

Denmark

Plants are found which produce somefiberboards and the like, using roundwood aswell as residues from sawnwood as raw mate-rial. Not more than approx. 25% of roundwoodfrom the forest ends up as sawnwood which canbe further processed for use in house construc-tions, furniture and the like.

Wood chips from conifers used for fuel in en-ergy plants play an increasing role. Today ap-proximately 25% of the wood production fromthe forest is used for this purpose.

There are only a few paper mills in Denmark.They produce approximately 200,000 tons ofpaper per year on the basis of recycled fiber.

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

The most important non-timber forest productsare christmas trees and greenery. The major treespecies are mentioned in section 2.3.3, but 5 or6 more species come into consideration.

Recreational access of the public comprises thepossibility of gathering berries and mushrooms.In many properties, the right to doprecommercial thinnings can be payed for. Veryimportant as far as NTFP are concerned issportsmens renting hunting rights. Importantgame is hare, pheasant, duck and deer.

Water supply from wells under forest land is ofgreat importance. Due to the increasing pollu-tion of water supplied from wells in urban areasand agricultural land, clean drinking water fromthe forest is considered essential and must beexpected to be still more so.

Grazing cattle in the forest is illegal, and so ispannage. The strong deterioration of the forestarea before year 1800 is partly explained byoveruse and mismanagement due to cattle graz-ing. The first Forest Act abandoned cattle andpigs in forest reserves.

2.5.4 Forest functions

More than 200 years ago, afforestation activi-ties were initiated in the western parts of Jut-land along the west coast. The task was to raiseprotection forest aiming at prevent any sand driftand dune formation. Protection forest in theseareas still plays an important role, and specificlegislation for the prevention of sand drift se-cures the upkeep of the forest. There is no spe-cial need for protection forest in other parts ofthe country. As it is understood from section 1.1,erosion in general is of minor importance.

As for the recreation and tourism forest plays akey role. This is certainly true when it comes toforests in urban areas and popular targets forforest visits. By counting numbers of visitors ithas been confirmed that recreational visits areof high value. Thus, at an investigation in 1993-94 it could be estimated that the total number ofvisits per year was 50 M. Walks, jogging as wellas riding and biking are of importance.

Since biodiversity came on the agenda, the focushas turned to forests containing significantbiotopes for a great many species. This impliesthat the attention of the forestry sector concern-ing the impact of forest management onbiodiversity should be a main issue in the future.This process also has started (see section 4).

The very strong fragmentation of the forest areamentioned in section 2.3.2 brings about a Dan-ish landscape effectively influenced by forest.One easily perceives the landscape as a scenerycontaining forest fragments, not a continuousforest cover embedded with a few open areasbut otherwise separated from the nonforestedpart of the landscape. The focal point is thatthese many forest fragments scattered all overthe country lead to a protection of the landscapeparticularly as far as wind is concerned.

Denmark

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

Forestry and the derived industry play a minorrole in the gross domestic product - GDP. In1997 the GDP at factor prices for forestry (in-clusive of christmas trees and greenery) was esti-mated to 150 M ECU corresponding to 0.1% ofGDP (Statistics Denmark, 1998a, 1998b). Manu-facturing of wood and wood products amounts to1,440 M ECU and manufacturing of pulp, paperand paper products to 1,300 M ECU. More thantwo thirds of the round wood for the wood indus-try come from import. It is thus found that forestryproduction and production in the wood industryin 1997 make up 1.9% of GDP at factor prices. Inthe above- mentioned GDP at factor price for for-estry, the production af christmas trees and green-ery is estimated to 80 M ECU.

Renting out hunting rights to sportsmen in gen-eral plays a significant role to private forest own-ers’ economy. In many forest estates the rentingout of hunting rights is considered as importantto the private economy as is the income from theproduction of christmas trees and greenery, andthe income from the wood production.

3.2 Employment

The number of full time employees in forestry,logging and related services in 1996 was esti-mated to 2,400 (Statistics Denmark, 1998a). Byfar the largest group, more than 80%, are male.For a number of years there has been a steadydecrease in occupation due, first of all, to in-creased mechanization in the logging process.It is expected that this trend will continue in theyears to come.

In the wood industry the number af full timeemployees in 1996 was estimated to 13,700.More than 80% are male. Rationalization of theindustry, i.e. fewer and bigger sawmills, leads toa gradual decrease in the number of employees.

The pulp and paper industry in 1996 counted

for a number of full time employees of 9,200. Inthe furniture manufacturing industry the numberof employees in 1996 was estimated to 21,300.However, part of the production in this industryis based on non-wood raw materials.

3.3 Profitability

An account of the general profitability in for-estry is not possible. First of all the basic eco-nomic conditions are dissimilar in public andprivate forestry. Public forestry, dominated bythe National Forest and Nature Agency, is re-sponsible for managing forest in a profitablemanner, but at the same time is faced with a greatmany commitments such as public access toforests, protection of nature, managing legisla-tion concerning a number of regulations, infor-mation service, game management etc. Thisimplies a range of cost intensive arrangementsresulting in a gross income far below zero. How-ever, it is politically acknowledged that a mainreason for society possessing public forests isthe gains mentioned above.

In private forestry, the size of the property is ofmajor importance to profitability. Small prop-erties are often part of farm properties or thelike and the economic profit is insignificant tothe overall economy of the owner. Moreover,the wood production in small forest propertiesis often low and wood quality bad, one reasonbeing that the forest is exposed to wind. Due tothe great number of small properties, see table5, the situation mentioned above is significantto Danish forestry.

As for the medium-sized and large private for-est estates, the profitability plays a major rolefor the owner. It is fundamental for his ability tokeep the property. The key figure used whenevaluating profitability in Danish forestry is theannual surplus per ha.

Information concerning the private foresteconomy, based on accounts for about 25% ofthe private forest area, is issued once a year bythe Danish Forest Association. The average sur-plus (inclusive of subsidies) per ha in 1996 was

Denmark

estimated at 112 ECU, 42 ECU of which comefrom forestry per se. State subsidies for privateforestry in 1996 made up approximately 9 ECUper ha and it is increasing.

In comparison, annual accounts from the Na-tional Forest and Nature Agency show that theaverage surplus corresponding to 42 ECU perha in private forestry is estimated at -66 ECU.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

At present forestry in Denmark is preliminarlyregulated by the 1996 Forest Act. This is the fourthAct, the first one being issued in 1805, see section2.1, the second in 1935, and the third in 1989.

These Forest Acts reflect a development in thepreferences in society over time and changes inthe public perception of forest being a basicnatural resource. In order to understand thisdevelopment, the central objectives in the For-est Acts should be revealed.

The main policy problem at the time of the firstForest Act was a severe over-exploitation and afear of timber famine. Therefore, the Act intro-duced the concept of Forest Reserves, implyinga separation of agricultural farmlands and for-est areas. This implicated that grazing in forestswas abandoned.

At the time of the 1935 Forest Act, the forestarea had expanded markedly and the manage-ment of forests had improved tremendously. Themain issue of the second Act was to safeguardhigh quality wood production to meet the in-creasing demands of society. To a minor extent,the Act also took care of environmental values.

In 1989 the forest policy problem was a discus-sion over forestry practice. Green organizationswere concerned with the public needs of changetowards a multiple-use forest management. Thethird Forest Act maintained wood production asa basic target, but its objectives were extendedto include multiple-use forestry. Additionally,

monitoring forest health became part of the Act.

The fourth Forestry Act of 1996 increases theemphasis on non-timber forest values. A mainrequirement is that of good and multiple-useforestry, but wood production, biodiversity,sustainability, and the environmental interactionbetween forest and surroundings are importantobjectives as well.

Coinciding with the development describedabove, a number of acts relevant to forestry havebeen passed over the last three decades. Theseacts are concerned with public access to privateforests, nature conservation, environmental pro-tection, nature resource management and thelike. It could be claimed that this bundle of actstogether reflect a National Forest Program.

In the 1969 Act on Nature Conservation, publicaccess to private forest was changed from a cus-tom into a legal right. The appearance of thisact was not without conflicts. It was, first of all,the result of increased demands in society forrecreation and it resulted from a concerted ac-tion from green organizations being opposed toprivate forestry.

An important innovation in forest-related legis-lation was the 1989 Act on Nature ResourceManagement. The comments on the act deter-mine the strategy for doubling the Danish for-est area over 60-100 years, see section 2.3.1.The 1992 Act on Nature Conservation confirmsthis resolution, meaning that at this point therewas a legal basis for the Government investingin state afforestation. Prior to this, rules wereintroduced in 1991 making it possible for pri-vate landowners to obtain subsidies for affores-tation. Since 1996, the Forest Act has been thelegal basis for private afforestation, includinggrant schemes for this activity.

The selection of areas for afforestation is con-tained in the Land Zoning Act, and is made bycounty authorities. In the beginning, it raised adebate as to the implications for the private land-owners, who felt uncertain about for instancethe consequenses on prizing and taxation of land.In the process of selection, designations aremade not only on areas for afforestation, but also

Denmark

on areas where afforestation would not be al-lowed (minus areas) even without a grant.

Other pieces of legislation are also of impor-tance to forestry, e.g. regulation on the use ofnitrogen, protection of water resources, regula-tion on the use of pesticides, conservation offlora and fauna, regulation on hunting.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The number of stakeholders in Danish forestryis very limited. The most important ones are theNational Forest and Nature Agency and theDanish Forest Association.

The National Forest and Nature Agency belongsunder the Ministry of Environment and Energy.It was established in 1987 by merging the StateForest Service and the Nature ConservationAgency. It plays a dual role. Partly it is the man-aging body that administers the forest area be-longing under the agency, see table 3. This obli-gation is carried out by local administrationsconnected with 25 state forest districts as wellas a central administration at HQ. Partly, theAgency is in charge of administering the ForestAct. Generally speaking, the National Forest andNature Agency is the most influential actor informulating forest policy.

The Danish Forest Association is the centralinterest organization for private forestry. Itcounts as its members the medium-sized andlarge estates, the Danish Forestry Extension,which is an organization for small forest prop-erties, the Danish Land Development Serviceand individual members. The National Forestand Nature Agency is an associate. The Soci-ety’s role is to issue information about accountsand statistics concerning private forestry, offersupervision on legislation, play a part in expor-tation of timber and the like. Moreover it is ac-tively involved in political lobbyism.

Among the stakeholders to be mentioned is alsothe Forestry Council advising the Minister ofEnvironment and Energy on forestry and relatedissues.

Also, the green NGOs are important stakeholdersinfluencing the political process when nature is-sues are on the agenda. The major organizationsare Denmark’s Nature Conservation Society withabout 250,000 members, and the Outdoor LifeCouncil which is an umbrella organization.

4.3 Forest policy tools

The essential policy tool is the legislation brieflydiscussed in section 4.1. Fundamentally, this pieceof legislation includes a number of restrictionsand regulative rules useful for managing forests.Among these, the concept of Forest Reserves andthat of good and multiple-use forestry could bepointed out. As emphasized above, the Forest Actalso comprises incentives aiming at improvingforestry by use of grant schemes.

Some regulations are directed towards specificmanagement activities. Thus, the Forest Actstates that it is not allowed to dispose more than10% of a property´s forest area for productionof christmas trees and greenery. Another exam-ple is that due to EU regulation, seedlings pur-chased from outside the property must comefrom certified seeds.

It should be noted that the number of restric-tions and incentives aiming at multiple-use andsustainable forestry is impressive and increas-ing. The staff at forest districts spend still moretime informing about regulations and grantschemes aiming at a politically based forestrydevelopment and ensuring their implementation.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

Over the last years, a clear trend could be ob-served directing forestry from being a separateand partly isolated sector towards being a moreintegrated component of society. This obviouslymeans that looking at forest policy tools atpresent implies that forests, cultivated lands,non-cultivated areas and even urban areas areconsidered an integrated and interrelated whole.Forest plays an important role in this complex.

Denmark

However, when it comes to the economic impor-tance of forestry it is still true that forestryconstitutes an in-significant share of GDP.

As appears from the comments on legislationrelated to forests it has been shown that overthe last years, legislation has become importantto more than one sector at a time. This appliesin connection with afforestation in that agricul-ture gets deeply involved. The same is true whenlooking at legislation concerned with natureconservation or nature protection in one way orthe other: Apart from the target areas, forests aswell as cultivated land are dependent on this kindof legislation. Thus, increasingly, legislation iscross-sectorial.

4.5 EU forest and forest-related policies

Policies negotiated and decided in the EU, to ahigh degree express the goals based on nationalpreferences. As one of the member states, Den-mark is obviously committed to arranging its leg-islation in accordance with decisions in the EU.

Based on the fact that attitudes on sustainablemultiple-use production, increased biodiversity,and improved ecological and socioeconomicstability are fundamentally the same in the EUas in Denmark, there are no major conflictingareas. Yet, conflicts may arise if Denmark de-sires to further its policy in a particular area,without being able to convince a majority ofmember states about its position. As an exam-ple could be mentioned, that at present Denmarkwants to diminish the amount of pesticides used,particularely in christmas tree plantations. Adecision has already been made by the Ministerof Environment and Energy as far as the stateforest areas are concerned. But it is still not suf-ficiently clarified whether the EU will agree onthat decision.

4.6 Forest education and research

Forest education takes place at two institutionsin Denmark. The Royal Veterinary and Agricul-tural University at present admits 60 studentsper year. The academic education is organized

with a propaedeutic year for practical training,three years for a B.Sc. and two years for a M.Sc.including writing a masters thesis. Master stu-dents can choose between four programs andmore programs are being planned. One masterprogram is directed towards Danish forestry andis based on education in ecological, economicand technical subjects. Others are directed to-wards Land Use in Developing Countries, andLandscape Management. Teaching is based onresearch.

Opportunities for post graduate education isoffered by the Graduate School for Veterinaryand Agricultural Sciences. This program is car-ried out in a collaboration between the RoyalVeterinary and Agricultural University and 13sector research institutes. The length of the Ph.D.study-program is three years.

Education of Forest Technicians takes place atthe Danish Forestry College which is associatedwith the National Forest and Nature Agency. 40students are admitted per year. The length of theeducation is close to four years and approximatelyhalf of it is practical training. There are two pro-grams directed towards forestry and landscaperespectively. The College also carries out voca-tional training, particularly for forest workers.

Basic forest research takes place at the RoyalVeterinary and Agricultural University. The Dan-ish Forest and Landscape Research Institute takescare of the applied research as well as informa-tion service. It belongs under the Ministry ofEnvironment and Energy. There is a co-opera-tion agreement between the University and theResearch Institute, and at present a more closeassociation between the two is being negotiated.

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges

As often stressed above, forestry in Denmarkmakes up a small sector with a diminutive in-fluence on national economy. This implies thatDanish forestry counts a rather small number ofactors, but nevertheless the political interest inforestry is positive and almost overwhelming.

Denmark

Trying to identify possible current conflictsseems to be a question of how the UNCED inRio has influenced the debate over the yearssince 1992.

It should be taken for granted that the Danishpopulation is satisfied with the forest when itcomes to the practicability for making use of itfor recreational purposes. Questionnaires in-forming on the recreational use reveals that thenumber of forest visits in many parts of the coun-try rank above comparable leisure activities.Estimates also show that there is high satisfac-tion with the character of forests.

This ascertainment contains in itself the possi-bility of a future conflict. Within organizationsthat are very conscious about and committed tonature, say in Denmark’s Nature ConservationSociety, WWF and Greenpeace, there are frac-tions which strongly support a radical transfor-mation towards forestry based on a“ close tonature“ development. This may lead to a situa-tion where all exotic tree species are put undera ban. The extent of changes resulting from thisis seen from table 6. Furthermore, it will bringalong a strong change in forest structure.Whether this change is acceptable to the publicis an open question.

On the other hand forest research, no doubt, hasto solve the central issue of providing a betterunderstanding of basic processes taking placein natural forests in order to ease a transforma-tion from the traditional management towards anature-oriented management. This will be animportant challenge in the next century, the rea-son being partly the consequence of the inter-national discussion on forestry issues over thelast decade, partly the experience with the gen-eral forest decline and the unstable forest eco-systems in Denmark. Therefore, the focus willbe on forests that are not founded on pure standsbut on species-rich and unevenaged stands.Clearcutting will be avoided and natural regen-eration will dominate.

The problem is to initiate such a transformationwithout harming the economic foundation for theexisting management. In state forests, transfor-

mation could be decided for political reasons. But,as appears from table 3, a great part of the forestarea is on private hands and thus cannot befundamentally changed without taking into con-sideration the economic mechanisms. Finally,one also has to consider the ethical perspectivebased on the fact that if a wealthy country is notwilling to safeguard a reasonable wood produc-tion, i.e. a production matching the wood con-sumption of that country to the greatest possi-ble extent at the end of the day, this may lead toan increased tension on tropical forests. Thedesire to be a role-model by establishing andmanaging a „close to nature“ sustainable forestthus may end up strengthening forest destruc-tion in the tropics.

Likewise it is a requirement that there is a con-tinued development of the political framework,which will refine a national forest program in-volving forest production and management thatare beneficial to the part of the world where theforest is most threatened. This means that the in-stitutional framework for a political developmentmust be satisfactory. At present, the Forest Actmakes up the political tool in dealing with thesignificant rules and regulations needed for thedevelopment of forests. Moreover the NationalForest and Nature Agency is the central institu-tion for developing future forest policy. On thethreshold of a new century it is important to makesure that the institutional dynamics is still thereas a guarantee for continued political develop-ment. And it is important that this political de-velopment conciders, with due care, the inter-national trend in forestry as well as the need for astill more sophisticated and scientifically basedunderstanding of forest functions. Finally, it isessential that forestry education is permanentlyadapting so that a holistic and optimal output offorest resources can be secured.

Denmark

Addresses of organizations related to forestry

Skov- og Naturstyrelsen, [National Forest and Nature Agency], Haraldsgade 53, 2100 KøbenhavnØ, Tlf. + 45 39 2720 00, Fax + 45 39 27 98 99

Dansk Skovforening, [Danish Forest Association], Amalievej 20, 1875 Frederiksberg C, Tlf. + 4533 24 42 66, Fax + 45 33 24 02 42

Forskningscentret for Skov & Landskab, [Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute],Hørsholm Kongevej 11, 2970 Hørsholm, Tlf. + 45 45 76 32 00, Fax + 45 45 76 32 33

Institut for Økonomi, Skov og Landskab, [Department of Economics and Natural Resources],Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Tlf. + 45 35 28 22 32, Fax + 45 35 28 26 71

Skovskolen , [Danish Forestry College], Nødebovej 77A, 3480 Fredensborg, Tlf. + 45 48 48 1343, Fax + 45 48 47 55 43

Det danske Hedeselskab, [Danish Land Development Service], Klostermarken 12, P.O. Box 110,8800 Viborg, Tlf. + 45 86 67 61 11, Fax + 45 86 67 15 17

De Danske Skovdyrkerforeninger, [Danish Forestry Extension], Amalievej 20, 1875 FrederiksbergC, Tlf. + 45 33 24 42 66, Fax + 45 33 24 42 66

Danmarks Naturfredningsforening, [Denmark’s Nature Conservation Society], Nørregade 2, 1165København K, Tlf. + 45 33 32 20 21, Fax + 45 33 32 22 02

WWF Verdensnaturfonden, [World Wide Fund for Nature], Ryesgade 3F, 2200 København N, Tlf.+ 45 35 36 36 35, Fax + 45 35 39 20 62

Vildtforvaltningsskolen, Kalø, [Wildlife Management School], Molsvej 34, 8410 Rønde, Tlf. + 4586 37 28 50, Fax + 45 86 37 23 65

Teknologisk Institut, [Technological Institute], Gregersensvej , P.O. Box 141, 2630 Tåstrup, Tlf. +45 43 50 43 50, Fax + 45 43 50 72 50

Miljø- og Energiministeriet, [Ministry of Environment and Energy], Højbro Plads 4, 1200København K, Tlf. + 45 33 92 76 00, Fax + 45 33 32 22 27

Danske Forstkandidaters Forening, [Danish Association of Graduates in Forestry], Strandvejen863, 2930 Klampenborg, Tlf. + 45 39 97 01 00, Fax + 45 39 97 01 19

information about forestry in Denmark

Skov- og Naturstyrelsen (www.sns.dk)Dansk SkovforeningForskningscentret for Skov & Landskab (www.fsl.dk)Institut for Økonomi, Skov og Landskab (www.kvl.dk)Skovskolen (www.sks.dk)Wood Creates Environment (www.trae.net)

References used in the text

Danish Forest Association. 1997. Regnskabsoversigter for dansk privatskovbrug 1996 [Accountsfor Danish private forestry 1996]. Beretning nr. 51. 85 pp.

Fritzbøger, B. 1994. Kulturskoven [The cultivated forest]. Gyldendal, Copenhagen. 440 pp.Graudal, L. and Kjær, E.D. 1997. En global alliance om bæredygtig skovanvendelse [A global

commitment on sustainable forest application]. Dansk Skovbrugs Tidsskrift 82: 260-276.Helles, F., Holten-Andersen, P. and Linddal, M. 1997. Forest economics in Denmark over five

decades. Skogsforsk 48: 123-143.Helles, F., Jensen, S.F. and Risvand, J. 1984. Den danske skovsektors samfundsmæssige betydning

[Macroeconomics of the Danish forest sector]. DSR-forlag, Copenhagen. 230 pp.

Denmark

Helles, F. & Linddal, M. 1998. Country report: Denmark. In Press.Henriksen, H.A. 1988. Skoven og dens dyrkning [Forests and silviculture]. Nyt Nordisk Forlag

Arnold Busck, Copenhagen. 664 pp.Jensen, F.S. & Koch, N.E. 1997. Friluftsliv i skovene [Forest recreation]. The Research Series no.

20. The Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute. 215 pp.Koch, N.E. 1980. Skovens friluftsfunktion i Danmark [Forest recreation in Denmark]. Det forstlige

Forsøgsvæsen i Danmark 37: 73-383.Larsen, J.B. 1997. Skovbruget ved en skillevej - teknologisk rationalisering eller biologisk

optimering? [The forestry dilemma - technological rationalization or biological optimation?].Dansk Skovbrugs Tidsskrift 82: 277-308.

National Forest and Nature Agency & Statistics Denmark. 1993. Skove og plantager 1990 [Forestsand Plantations 1990]. Danmarks Statistik, Copenhagen. 131 pp.

Statistics Denmark. 1998a. Statistisk årbog 1998 [Statistical yearbook 1998]. Danmarks Statistik,Copenhagen. 559 pp.

Statistics Denmark. 1998b. Landbrugsstatistik 1997 [Agricultural statistics 1997]. DanmarksStatistik, Copenhagen. 310 pp.

Acknowledgement

I am grateful to professor Finn Helles for reading and commenting on the manuscript and to SeniorLecturer Andreas Bergstedt for providing information about the wood industry.

Denmark

Finland

Finland

Author:Satu RäisänenOtto Brandtin polku 4 B 4200650 Helsinkitel: 050-3538 035

1 The country

1.1 Nature

Finland, one of the northernmost countries inEurope, is located between latitudes 60°N and70°N neighbouring to Sweden and Russia. Fin-land is the fifth biggest country in Europe bythe area of 388 145 sq. kms. Due to the lengthof the country (1100 km from south to north),the landscape and climate vary greatly from onepart of the country to another. The west coast ofFinland is a low-lying plain with several big riv-ers. The scenery on the eastern side, however,is an undulating mosaic of boreal forests andthousands of lakes. In the northern part of Fin-land, Lapland, high rounded fells are character-istic to the topography. The highest point of Fin-land at Haltiatunturi is only 1328 m from thesea level.

1.1.1 Climate

The Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf Stream affectthe climate in the whole Scandinavia as well asin Finland remarkably, making the climatewarmer than it is elsewhere at the same latitudes.The annual mean temperature in the south-west-ern Finland is +5°C degreasing gradually to-wards north, and being only -1°C at thetimberline in Lapland.

The length of the thermal growing season(number of days when the mean daily tem-perature exceeds +5°C) varies from 120 to 180days in a region with a closed forest cover(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

The mean temperature of the warmest month(July) is +17,5°C on the south-western coast and

+13°C in the northern areas. In February, thecoldest month of the year, the correspondingtemperatures are -5°C and -13°C. However, themean temperature in February in the very north-eastern corner is only -10°C due to the warminginfluence of the Arctic Sea. Similar dampingsof the temperature extremes can also be seen inthe areas close to the Baltic Sea.

In southern Finland the mean annual precipita-tion is 650-700 mm degreasing to 400 mm at thetimberline. The rate of evaporation is smaller thanthe precipitation in the whole country excludingthe south-western areas where evaporation ishigher during the summer time. The mean an-nual evaporation is 425 mm in the south and 200mm in the north. About 30% of the precipitationcomes as snow in southern Finland. In easternand northern areas the share is 40% or more. Thepermanent snow cover lasts for 4-5 months inthe south and 5-7 months in the north. The thick-ness of the snowpack varies from 20 cm in theÅland Islands to 200 cm in the hilly areas ofLapland. (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995)

1.1.3 The bedrock and the soil

The Finnish bedrock is very old. It is formedmostly of granite and gneiss, the types of rocksthat are composed of minerals very poor in nu-trients. There exists also small depositions oflimestone, dolomite and the Karelian schists.The last continental ice sheet drifted the loosesoil and stones away leaving the bedrock, if notexposed, covered only by a thin soil layer. Theaverage thickness of the layer is only 7 m. Thesoils are relatively young and mostly formed bythe last continental ice sheet. About 80% of theupland soils are glacial tills, mixtures of soilparticles of different sizes. Other common soiltypes are sorted soils (5%), sandy soils (11%)

Finland

and silt and clay soils (4%). The last mentionedare fertile and, thus, mainly in agricultural use.(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995)

Finnish forest soils are mostly podzols (Al-Fe-humus) with a typical profile of vertical layers.The mineral soil underneath the surface litterhorizon and the humus horizon can be dividedinto a grayish eluvial horizon (A-horizon) and areddish brown illuvial horizon (B-horizon) col-oured by the accumulated inorganic Fe<HTTP://www.vyh.fi>.

Another typical feature of the Finnish soils isacidity. The soils have been undergoing a natu-ral acidification ever since the last glacial pe-riod, but due to the human actions, such as theuse of fossil fuels, the speed of the process hasincreased. Also the ground water supplies, whichin general are relatively small, isolated and cov-ered by a thin soil layer, are fairly exposed topollution and acidity. <HTTP://www.vyh.fi>

1.1.4 Vegetation

The main vegetation zone in Finland is theboreal zone covering almost the whole countryexcluding only the southern coast which belongsto the hemiboreal vegetation zone, a transac-tion zone from temperate to boreal vegetation.The growing season on the hemiboreal zone is175-205 days. The boreal vegetation zone canbe divided into subzones by the length of thegrowing season. The west coast and the south-ern Finland belong to the southern boreal zonewhere the growing season varies between 160-175 days. Middle boreal vegetation zone, cov-ering the riverplains of west coast and some ar-eas in the eastern Finland have a growing sea-son of 140-169 days. The north-eastern and thenorthern parts of Finland belong to the northernboreal vegetation zone with a growing seasonof 100-140 days (Maanmittaushallitus, 1988).

In the oceanic-continental scale vegetation inmost parts of Finland should be classified closerto the oceanic than the continental end. The veryextreme conditions from both types are miss-ing, but the most oceanic areas can be found in

south-western Finland and in some areas ofLapland. The most continental conditions maybe found in Lapland. Overall, the vegetation inFinland is a mixture of both oceanic and conti-nental characteristics.

One of the most characteristic factors of theFinnish nature are the peatlands. Due to the hu-mid and cool climate one third of the country’sland area is covered by peatlands. In certain re-gions of the country their share of the land areacan be up to 60%. The total area of peatlands is8 921 000 hectares of which 52,3% is drainedand in forestry use (Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute, 1997a).

1.2 Society

Finland has been a democratic republic ever sinceit became independent in 1917. The president isthe head of the country’s foreign policy and alsoholds the supreme executive power with the gov-ernment of Finland. The legislative power isshared by the president and the one-chamber par-liament of 200 members. Juridical power is heldby the independent courts of justice.

1.2.1 Economy

Finland has experienced a massive structuralchange since the Second World War. Transitionfrom an agriculture based society to a post-in-dustrialised society have been extraordinarilyfast. Today Finland is a highly industrialised,largely free-market economy. Its key economicsector is industry; wood, metal and engineeringbeing its main branches. The share of differentindustrial branches of Finland’s GDP in 1996can be seen in table 1.

Branch %industry 37services 56agriculture 7Total 100

Table 1. The share of different sectors in Fin-land’s GDP (1996).

Finland

In the beginning of 1990s Finland fell into thedeepest economical depression of the centurywhich among other economical consequenceslead to the second highest unemployment fig-ures in the OECD countries. The situation hasimproved towards the end of the decade, forexample the unemployment in 1996 was “only“16,3% whereas in 1994 it was 18,4 (StatisticsFinland, 1997).

1.2.2 Population

The population of Finland, 5,1 million people, isdistributed unevenly on the vast land area. Popu-lation is concentrated on a small south-westerncoastal plain, and nearly 20% of the populationlive in the metropolitan area (capital Helsinki andthe surrounding cities), thus, leaving especiallythe northern and eastern parts of the country verysparsely inhabited. The mean population densityis only 16 people per sq. km varying from 135,7people per sq. km in the capital area and it’s sur-roundings to only 2,2 people per sq.km in theLapland (Statistics Finland, 1997).

Due to the structural and societal change, theconcentration of population to the densely in-habited area is ever increasing. Since the 1970sthere has been a remarkable migration from thecountryside to the cities, and from the northernand eastern Finland to the south-western coastalareas. At the moment the share of urban popu-lation is 65,1% (Statistics Finland, 1997).

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

After the end of the last ice age the land in Scan-dinavia was gradually occupied by vegetation.Pine and birch were among the first arriving treespecies and became dominant in the northernareas and on poorer soils in the southern area.Spruce spread to Finland over 4000 years agofrom Russia. Finally, about 2000 years ago, thepresent forest zones in Finland were more orless formed (Fritzbøger & Søndergaard, 1995).

The relationship between man and the northernconiferous forests began over 9000 years agowhen the first people, hunters, fishermen andnomads, moved to Finland. The effect of theiractivities, especially reindeer husbandry wasremarkable to the forests. Grazing, fires andcollection of wood affected the flora and faunasurrounding the permanent settlements. Thepopulation was limited, however, and outsidethe settlements the forest remained untouched(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

Permanent settlement lead relatively fast to thepractise of agriculture. Conversion of forests tofields, and especially slash-and-burn practisehad a strong influence on the Finnish nature. Asits greatest the slash-and-burn agriculture occu-pied ca. 4 million hectares of forest land andconsumed 10 million m3 of stemwood annually.When the population increased and slash-and-burn started to be over-exploitive, it was largelyforbade in 1734 (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

The pre-industrial use of forests consisted forexample of the wood used in mining and glassmanufacturing, sawn wood, and wood used asfuel. The most important was, however, the pro-duction of tar using at least 10 million m3 ofpine annually during the 17th and 18th centu-ries. The combined wood consumption of tarproduction and the slash-and-burn agriculturewas comparative to the current levels of indus-trial consumption (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

The industrialisation of forest sector first startedin the 19th century. A permit for establishingthe first steam-powered saw-mill was grantedin 1857 and mechanical pulp production wasstarted in 1860. First chemical pulp mills wereestablished in the 1880s. (Hannelius & Kuusela,1995) Especially the sawmill industry grew rap-idly increasing its production and wood demand,and was soon considered to be one of the great-est threats to Finnish forests. Together withslash-and-burn agriculture and tar producing, theselective thinning for providing rawmaterial forindustry caused a substantial reduction in thevolume and quality of Finnish forest resources(IUFRO, 1995).

Finland

In the 20th century the development of the for-est industry has continued. Whereas in the 1920sthe share of industrial wood was 20% of the to-tal removal of stemwood, nowadays the shareis 82%.(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995) However,despite the vigorous utilisation the forest re-sources have not decreased during the 20th cen-tury. Due to the investments in silviculture, thedrainage of peatlands and the thinnings, thegrowing stock has increased, and it seems tocontinue to grow also in the near future. Thesustainable annual allowable cut in 1996-2005is estimated to be 67 million m3 and in 2006-25about 70 million m3 (Hänninen, 1998).

2.2 Forest ownership

Private non-industrial ownership of forests ischaracteristic to Finnish forestry. Private citizensown 64% of the forest land area, about 8% isowned by companies and 28% is state- or com-munity owned. (Finnish Forest Industries Fed-eration, 1997b) Private forest owners also obtain80-85% of the total stumpage income from thetotal timber sales (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

Due to the societal changes (industrialisation,urbanisation etc.) the image of a typical privateforest owner has changed. Whereas a couple ofdecades ago a private forest was owned by afarmer residing permanently on the holding, nowhalf of the forest owners are city dwellers, mostlywage earners and pensioners.

Not only the structure, but also the interests andneeds of the forest owner class have changed.The emphasis has moved from the mere timberproduction towards the multiple-use forestry.This has been anticipated to lead to a problem-

atic situation from the forest industry point ofview. Their wood supply could became uncer-tain, if the forest owners were not so willing tosell wood. The effect of this change, however,has remined rather insignificant.

Third trend in forest ownership development isthe fragmentation of the forest holdings due tothe estate distribution. The current average sizeof a private forest holding is 26 hectares (Finn-ish Forest Association, 1997). The average sizeof a forest holding overall is 38 hectares (Finn-ish Forest Industries Federation, 1997a).

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Overview of the land

The total area of Finland, 338 000 sq.kms, con-stitutes of 304 000 sq.kms of land (90%) and34 000 sq.kms of water (10%), including ap-proximately 60 000 lakes (Statistic Finland1996). Forestry land covers 86% of the landarea, 10% is under agriculture use, and only 4%of the area is built up. The forestry land area intotal covers 263 000 sq.kms, which can be di-vided to three productivity classes. The classi-fication can be seen in table 2.

2.3.2 Tree species origin and distribution

There are altogether 31 tree species growing inFinnish forests, but traditionally mainly threespecies have had economic importance. The twodominant species, Scots pine (Pinus silvestris)and Norway spruce ( Picea abies) occupy over80% of the forested area. In the northernmostareas over 75% of the growing stock consists of

Class Share of total (according to (M)ean (A)nnual (I)ncrease) %Forest land (MAI over 1m3/ha) 76,2Scrub land (MAI 0,1-1m3/ha) 11,3Waste land (MAI less than 0,1m3/ha). 12,5Total 100

Table 2. The classification of the forestry land areas according their productivity and the share ofdifferent classes from the total forestry land area.

(Finnish Forestry Association, 1997)

Finland

pine alone. The main broad-leaf species is birch(Betula pendula and B. pubescens) accounting7,5% of the forest land (Finnish Forest Indus-tries Federation, 1997a).

The species composition of a typical forest viewchanges gradually when moving across the coun-try from the southern deciduous forests to themost extreme conditions in Lapland. The richestsoils in the south-western area grow species suchas oak (Quercus robur), ash (Fraxinus excelsior),elm (Ulmus sp.) etc. Finns refer to this group oftrees with respect as “the noble broad-leavedtrees“. In southern Finland Norway spruce is thedominant species, whereas in eastern Finlandbirch thrives at old slash-and-burn sites. In west-ern Finland, and increasingly towards north,Scotch pine is the dominant tree species. On moistsites in northern Finland one meets birch (espe-cially Betula pubescens) (Forestry Centre Tapio,1994). Scotch pine forms the northern timberlineabove which only fell birch (Betula tortuosa) canexist in the extreme living conditions.

2.3.3 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

The current growing stock volume in Finnishforests is 1 890 million m3 (1996). The share ofnon-industrial, private owned forests of the totalgrowing stock is 69%, 8% is located in companyforests and 18% in state forests. (Finnish ForestResearch Institute, 1997b) The average totalgrowing stock per hectare is 92m3/ha varyingfrom 140-159m3/ha in Southern Finland to 40-59m3/ha in Lapland. The mean annual incrementper hectare in the Finnish forests is 3,8 m3 whichaccounts to a total annual increment of 77million m3. The annual growth has increasedsteadily from the 1960s. Annual fellings andnatural loss are together about 60m3 (FinnishForest Association, 1997).

2.3.4 Forest threats

Changing environmental conditions have startedto weaken the health and sustainability of for-ests against the stress caused by natural factors.

Pollution affects trees by increasing the soil acid-ity and damaging the needles. The acidic depo-sition from the industry causes changes in thenutrient status of the soil. As already mentioned,the soils in Finland are naturally acidic and in-fertile, and thus vulnerable to increased soil acid-ity. The increasement of acidity accelerates nu-trient leaching and the dissolution of iron andaluminium compounds into the soil water.

Tree defoliation, the loss of leaves or needles, isone of the main parameters used to determine thestate of the health of the forest. Often, however,the significance of other causes for defoliation, forexample high tree age or fungal damage, are for-gotten. (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995) The defolia-tion of pines and broadleaves has slightly increasedduring the last few years. The degree of defolia-tion of coniferous forests in Finland 1992 wererelatively small in the European scale. A little lessthan 40% of the forests were slightly defoliated ofwhich one forth was severely defoliated(Metsätalouden ympäristötyöryhmä, 1994).

SulphurThe sulphur depositions from the industry andtraffic have decreased remarkably since the1980s. The critical level of sulphur is 7 kg/ha/year. In 1990 the amounts of sulphut depositionsin Finland were 7-10 kg in southern and 3-5 kgin northern areas. However, due to the deposi-tion of Russian smelters, the sulphur depositionwas 5-7 kg in the northern areas along the east-ern boarder (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

NitrogenThe decreasing of the nitrogen deposition hasbeen somewhat slower. The critical level being10-20 kg/ha/year the deposition in Finland var-ied from 10 kg/ha/yr in the south to 2 kg/ha/yrin northern areas (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

Biotic and abiotic factorsDamages caused by biotic and abiotic factorsresult in a loss of about 168,2 million EUR instumpage income annually. The economicallymost damaging pathogenic fungi areHeterobasidion annosum (Annosum root rot)and Gremmeniella abietina (needle cast). Insectdamages are caused by Diprion sp., Tomicus sp.

Finland

and Hylobius abietis. Also mole (Microtus sp.)and elk (Alces alces L.) cause damages in seed-lings and young stands of pine and birch. Themost common abiotic factors causing damagesin Finnish forests are wind and occasional sud-den changes in temperatures. (Metsätaloudenympäristötyöryhmä, 1994)

The greenhouse effectOne of the greatest environmental threats, thegreenhouse effect has been predicted to have agreater effect on the climate on areas close tothe North pole. In Finland the temperature dur-ing growing seasons could be 2-3°C higher andduring the winter 4-6°C higher than today. Thegreenhouse effect could also increase the pre-cipitation. These changes would cause the natu-ral coniferous zone to move towards north andbroad-leaved forests to replace them in Finland.The amount of damages caused by insects, fungior wind would increase, as would also the costsof forestry. That could be partly compensatedby the increase in the wood growth and yields(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

2.4 Silviculture

The management of boreal forests is a long-termcommitment due to the long rotation ages; atleast 60-80 years is required for a forest to reachthe harvesting maturity. The idea of managementis based on simulation of the natural forest suc-cession after a major disturbance (fire, wind,insects or disease). The silvicultural chain-of-custody constitutes of successional stages suchas regeneration, brushing and cleaning of theyoung sites, thinnings (precommercial and com-mercial), pruning, and fertilisation.

Each year, forest regeneration takes place on 165000 hectares which is nearly 0.8% of the wholeforest land (Finnish Forest Association, 1997).The result of the regeneration should be ahealthy young stand of adequate and even spac-ing and good quality. The Forestry Centre ad-vises forest owners to use natural regenerationwhen ever the prerequisites exist. Natural re-generation methods are the seed-tree method forpine and birches and the shelter-tree method forspruce (Forestry Centre Tapio, 1994). Most of

the sites are prepared by sculping or scarifica-tion. After a few decades of low interest the useof prescribed burning as site preparation methodis increasing while the forest ploughing has beenphased out.

If the favourable circumstances for natural re-generation do not exist, or there is a need tochange the tree species, the forest owner isobliged to use artificial regeneration methods.Sowing or planting after clearcutting is used onover 70% of the regenerated areas. The distri-bution of the total regenerated area to differentregeneration methods can be seen in table 3.

Regeneration Method Share of total, %Natural regeneration 29Sowing, pine 16Planting, pine 23Planting, spruce 22Planting, birch & others 10Total 100(Finnish Forest Association, 1997)

Table 3. The distribution of different regenera-tion method.

Stand tending, forest management of early de-velopment stages, includes chemical and me-chanical cleaning of the sites. Stand tending isdone to regulate the species composition and toprotect the main species from competition.Guidelines for managing this stage of stand de-velopment have been revised lately; now the aimis a mixture of coniferous and deciduous spe-cies. The species mixture improves the soil char-acteristics, reduces possible damages and in-creases biodiversity. Most of the tending isnowadays carried out mechanically, herbicidesare rarely used (Metsäteollisuus, 1998).

The neglect of stand tending is becoming a prob-lem in Finland. In 1996 tending was done onlyon 154 000 hectares, which is the smallestamount since 1970 (Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute, 1997a). The need of stand tending isurgent on 460 000 hectares of forest stands.Forestry Center Tapio has established a cam-paign for increased young stand tending in or-der to ensure the future wood supply (Nuorenmetsän hoidon kampanja, 1997).

Finland

Thinnings imitate forests natural developmentkeeping an even-aged forest structure as a goal.Damaged trees and trees of low quality are re-moved and the stand is opened up in order toprevent undesired competition. Thinnings aredone 1-3 times during a rotation depending onthe tree species and the growing conditions. Thetotal amount of thinnings done in 1996 wasabout 111 000 hectares of which 82 000 hec-tares were first thinnings (Finnish Forest Re-search Institute, 1997a). According to the re-sults of the National forest inventory there is acurrent need for first thinnings on 2,5 millionhectares of the forests. Arrears, sites where thethinnings are already late, account up to 400 000hectares. This neglect of management may leadto a decrease in the profitability of forests andexposes the stands to damages (Hynynen, 1998).The Forestry Center Tapio campaign refered toearlier is aimed also to eradicate these arrears.

2.4.1 Forest drainage

One third of Finland is covered by peatlands.Starting from the late 19th century peatlandshave been drained for agricultural and forestrypurposes accounting to 6 million hectares ofdrained area (Päivänen & Paavilainen, 1996).The era of ditching for forestry is coming to itsend, and the annual amounts of first drainages(draining at virgin areas) has decreased. In 1996the annual area of drained peatlands was 6300hectares, whereas in 1969 the number was 294100 hectares (Finnish Forest Research Institute,1997a). The Forest and Park Service has givenan example by ceasing first draining on statelands since 1994. (Forestry Centre Tapio, 1994)

Nowadays the main method of peatland man-aging is maintenance of drainage by drain clean-ing and supplementary ditching on sites wherethe tree stands have already developed vigor-ously (Forestry Centre Tapio, 1994). In 1996drain maintenance was performed on 68 500hectares of peatlands (Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute, 1997a).

As a whole peatland drainage has been success-ful in providing growth increments and valu-able yields in otherwise poor conditions. How-

ever, about 15% of the drained area is consid-ered to be unsuitable to maintenance (Päivänen& Paavilainen, 1996). These sites have been, orwill be let to grow wild again, or in some caseseven restored by cutting the trees and blockingthe drainage system.

2.4.2 Fertilization

The annual quantity of forest fertilisation wasat its greatest at the mid-1970s and has decreasedto almost non-existent during the 1990s. In 1975over 243 000 hectares were fertilised, but in1995 the corresponding figure was only 8 535hectares (Finnish Forest Research Institute,1997a). In the 1990s the emphasis has changedfrom the increase of the forest growth to vitalityfertilisations. The main idea is to prevent theadverse effects of nutrient deficiencies on thevitality and sustainable development of forests(Päivänen & Paavilainen, 1996).

The lack of nutrients is the limiting factor offorest growth in many poor peatlands. Fertilisa-tion has been a method to manage these sites.The main nutrients applied are nitrogen, phos-phorus and potassium. Wood ash has been usedas a fertiliser on nitrogen-rich sites accountingon a mean annual growth increase of 4-8 m3 perhectare (Päivänen & Paavilainen, 1996).

2.4.3 Recent changes in silviculture

In the 1990s many silvicultural practises have beenslightly revised to better accommodate the con-cerns for forest ecology and biodiversity. The newrecommendations advice the forest owner to con-sider also ecological, landscape and wildlife fac-tors, and other multiple-use factors of the forestbesides his/her economical goals. The main ideasof the new forest management recommendationsinclude:

- natural regeneration should be used wheneverfeasible;

- broad-leaved trees should be fostered in standsof conifers;

- forest treatment should be proceed with caution

Finland

alongside lakes and rivers, a protection zonearound them should be left untouched;

- habitats of endangered species and other keybiotopes should be preserved and maintained;

- the biodiversity after clear felling should bepreserved by leaving large trees, clumps oftrees and diseased and decaying trees on thesite.

Management of the environment has became a partof the daily actions in the forests. The Finnish For-est and Park Service started the development ofthe landscape ecology planning in Finland in 1994.The purpose of landscape ecology planning is toguide forestry in such a way that the typical faunaand flora to an area may remain as viablepopulations at all times. This is provided by ob-servation and mapping of valuable biotopes andhabitats of vast areas (hundreds of square kilome-tres) and by forming dispersal routes and so-calledstepping stones for the indigenous wildlife. Thelandscape ecology planning is performed keepingin mind all the important components of multiple-use forestry (Hallman, E. & al.,1996). By the year2000 all the state-owned land should be within thelandscape ecology planning program.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

On the average, felling of timber is carried outannually on 1,9% of the forest land, covering385 480 hectares (fig. 1991-1995). The shareof different felling methods from the totalfellings is shown in table 4.

The mechanisation of harvesting systems has beenrapid in Finland. Up until 1980s most of the wood

was sawn by forest workers with a chainsaws,and in 1996 the share of mechanised fellings wasalready 86% of the total. About 70% of thinningsand 90% of final fellings were mechanised (Finn-ish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

About 25-30% of all the wood harvested is so-called delivery wood felled by the owner andsold at the roadside. Most of the wood in pri-vate forests is sold by stumpage sale and har-vested by contractors working for the buyers(Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

In Finland, as in all the Nordic countries, woodis harvested using the cut-to-length method; thetrunks are cut into the required lengths alreadyin the forest. The main advantage of this method,which has been proved competitive also in othercountries, is that the transporting of trees out ofa thinned forest can be done without damagingthe standing trees. Damages are also preventedby using light and easily manoeuvrable machinesin thinnings. Harvesting on a soft or boggy landis usually done during the frozen ground andsnow cover (Hannelius & Kuusela, 1995).

2.5.2 Timber uses

Forests are the most important resource of raw-material in Finland. The total use of roundwoodin Finland was 61,7 million m3 of which forestindustry used 56,2 million m3. Around 8 mil-lion m3 of roundwood were imported. The shareof industry of the total use of roundwood is 91%(Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

There has been certain structural changes in thetimber use. Even though the total amount of for-est industry production have increased remark-

Felling method Share of total fellings, %Thinnings 46Clear-felling 29Seed-tree or Shelter-wood method 13Removal of seed-trees or shelter-trees 10Other felling methods 2Total 100 (Finnish Forest Association, 1997)

Table 4. The share of different felling methods from the total fellings.

Finland

ably, only slight increases of roundwood use canbe seen. The main reasons for this are the con-siderable reduction in the use of wood as fuel,the wood-saving methods used in forest indus-try and promotion of the degree of processing(less roundwood is needed per a production unit)(Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products and themultiple-use forestry

In addition to timber products Finnish forestsoffer a large variety of multiple-use products,material and non-material goods such as forestberries and mushrooms, game, possibilities forrecreation, nature conservation and landscapevalues. These are all included into the theme ofmultiple-use forestry which has become an evermore important part of the Finnish forest policy.The previous forest policy program, Forest2000, underlined the importance of multiple-useof forests, and remarked that the forests shouldbe utilised in such a way that it in a sustainableway meets the various needs of the population,and that the material and non-material overallbenefits are maximised. The importance of mul-tiple-use of the forests is ever increasing.

Berries and mushroomsIn 1996 there were 6 718 000 kg of commercialforest berries and 377 000 kg of commercialforest mushrooms collected from the forests. Thetotal value of these were 9,5 million EUR. It should,however, be noted that these figures exclude thehousehold use of berries and mushrooms, whichwould probably increase the value manifold (Finn-ish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

HuntingThe traditional way of utilising the forests, hunt-ing, is still practised by many Finns; there areabout 293 000 registered hunters in Finland. Fora great majority of them hunting is a way of rec-reation. Elk, waterfowl, forest game birds andhare are the most important game species. Mostof the bag of game goes to the household use,but the estimated value is 49,4 million EUR(Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

LichenIn some areas with dry, lichen-rich pine forestslichen (Cladonia alpestris) is picked for exportmarkets. In 1996 Finland exported a total of 254000 kg of lichen with a value of 1,3 million EUR.Over half of the exported lichen goes to Germany.

Reindeer husbandryIn Northern parts of Finland reindeer husbandryis a locally important source of livelihood. Ap-proximately 1,7 million hectares of forest landis grazed by reindeers producing 2,8 million kgof reindeer venison annually. Monetary valueof reindeer venison production is 13,5 millionEUR (Finnish Forest Association, 1997).

RecreationForests have also a social meaning for manyFinns. Forests provide peace and quietness forrelaxation, suitable sites for summer cottages,perfect terrains for hiking or skiing and suppliesof forest berries, mushrooms and game. Every-man’s right gives an opportunity for recreationalmost everywhere in the nature, but usuallyFinns use actual recreation and outdoor life ar-eas built for the use. Such areas provide out-door people with services such as marked paths,fireplaces and huts. There are over 7000 rec-reation areas in Finland (Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute, 1997a).

Landscape valuesIn the Finnish landscape, one can see simulta-neously the effects of the last continental icesheet, the development of the vegetation and theactions of man. An increasing interest towardslandscape management has brought up the ques-tion of preserving not only the natural landscapesbut also so-called cultural landscapes. Forestsare an important part of the Finnish landscape,and thus forest management is also managementof the landscape. The current forest managementrecommendations by the Forestry Centre Tapiounderline the management of special landscapessuch as forests near settlements and stands atthe top of a hill.

Table 5 presents the amount of nature conser-vation areas in Finland. In addition to these, vastland areas are under restricted forest utilisationaccounting the total amount of conservation ar-

Finland

eas to 4,2 million hectares. In order to be estab-lished, a conservation area should have an en-dangered species or ecosystem, or it should benaturally beautiful. Also cultural landscapes canbe preserved due to their rarity or special value(Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

The biological diversity is not very great in thenorthern coniferous forest. The total number ofspecies living in Finland is ca. 42 000. The shareof endangered species is estimated to be 4%,some 1 692 species (Finnish Forest Association,1997). About 48% of all the endangered specieslive in the forests or peatlands (Finnish ForestResearch Institute, 1997a). Causes leading thespecies to be threatened can be seen in table 6.Since most of the endangered species live incommercial forests the mere establishment of anetwork of conservation areas is not enough. Thenature has to be taken into consideration in everystage of the forest management. This has beenthe main aim in the new management recom-mendations and in the landscape level planning.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

The importance of the forest sector in Finland’seconomy is great, even though its share of GDPhas decreased during the last decades. In 1960the share of forestry of GDP was 8.7%, and thatof forest industries, 7,1%, while in 1996 for-estry accounted to 2,4% and forest industry to5,3% (Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997b).

In addition to the basic forest sector, also theforest cluster has an important role in Finnisheconomy. The forest cluster includes the forestproduct industry, paper, pulp, and harvestingmachine manufacturing, chemical industry andother related industries. Also services such asresearch and marketing, and automation tech-nology are included in the forest cluster.

The Finnish forest industry is highly export-ori-ented covering 29% of Finland’s total exports(Finnish Forest Industries Federation, 1997b). Theshare of production exported can rise up to 70-90% depending on the branch of industry (Finn-ish Forest Research Institute, 1997b). Paper,paperboards and converted products account to71% of the forest industry exports in 1997.

The share of sawnwood was 14% of the forestindustry exports while the share of pulp, plywoodand other wood products were under 10% (Finn-ish Forest Industries Federation, 1997b). In 1992the share of the whole forest cluster of Finland’sexport income was 41% and in net terms (sup-plied by domestic raw material) more than 60%.

The main markets for Finnish forest industry canbe found mainly in Europe with 78% of the ex-ports. The share of the European Union is 69%with Germany (18%) and Great Britain (17%)being the two most important partners. Otherimportant export areas are Asia (10%) and NorthAmerica (5%) (Finnish Forest Industries Fed-eration, 1997b).

European Union has been a very important mar-ket and production area to Finnish forest indus-

Type of nature conservation area Number of haStrict nature reserves 19 152 000National parks 31 731 900Wilderness areas 12 1 488 200Peatland reserves 173 416 200Protected herb-rich forests 53 1 200Protected old-growth forests 92 9 100Other special conservation areas 42 52 700Conservation areas 1382 69 800Total 1804 2 921 100(Finnish Forest Association, 1997)

Table 5. Nature conservation areas in Finland in 1996.

Finland

try even before joining it. Becoming a memberin 1995 improved Finland’s position and offereda possibility to be involved in decision making.As a member state in EU Finland is in the fu-ture stronger also in other markets.

The European integration and the globalisationof the world economy have offered a new chal-lenge to the forest industry. It is not only theclient and the sales organisations, but also theproduction capacity that is located abroad. Finn-ish forest industry companies have 22 paper andboard mills in western Europe and 5 elsewherein the world. In 1996 34% of paper and boardproduction capacity was located outside Finland(Metsäteollisuus, 1998).

The ownership of Finnish forest industry hasgreatly changed since mid-1980s. Several inte-grations and fusions have lead to a situationwhere the pulp and paper production is concen-trated in three major companies owning also halfof the sawnwood production in Finland. Thesethree companies (UPM-Kymmene, Enso andMetsä-Serla) are already among the leadingpaper producers in the world, but there are morefusions likely to come. Current issue is the fu-sion of one major Finnish company Enso with aSwedish Stora pending approval from the EU.

3.2 Employment

Due to the structural change the share of the la-bour force employed in the forestry sector is di-minishing. In the 1970s 20% of labour force wereinvolved in forestry whereas the share in 1996was only 6%. Immediate causes for the declineare the mechanisation of fellings, and the devel-opment of automatisation in forest industry (Finn-ish Forest Research Institute, 1997a).

In 1996 the total labour force in the forest sec-tor was 97 000. Forestry employed 25 000 peo-ple whereas forest industries offered employ-ment for 73 000 people. (Finnish Forest Re-search Institute, 1997b) The forest cluster em-ployed additional 25 000 people. Followingfrom the mentioned structural change the un-employment situation in the forestry sector isworse than in the society as a whole. Whereasthe overall employment situation improved andreached the unemployment situation of 16,3%in 1996, the unemployment among forestry la-bour was 23%. The unemployment in the forestindustry was, however, only 11,9% (FinnishForest Research Institute, 1997a).

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

Ever since the 1880s the main purpose of theFinnish private forestry legislature has been toprevent both the devastation and the inappropri-ate use of forest by its owner. Today, however,this is not enough. Due to the international envi-ronmental awakening, agreements made in Riode Janeiro in 1992 and in Helsinki Ministerialconference on the protection of forests in Europein 1993 and Finland’s membership in EU, Fin-land has reformed the legislation concerning for-estry as a whole. This has been essential for theinternational image of the forest sector.

The most important reformed laws concerningforestry are:- Forest and Park Service Act 1994;- The Act on Forestry Centres and the Forestry;

Development Centre 1996;- Forestry Act 1997;- Act on Financing of Sustainable Forestry 1997;

Cause Impact on reduction on numbers of threatened sp.Changes in tree species composition 30%Reduction in amount of decaying wood 27%Changes in forest stand age structure 13%Forest treatment, not specified 30% (Finnish Forest Association, 1997)

Table 6. Causes leading a species to be threatened.

Finland

- Nature Conservation Act 1997;- Act on Forest Owner’s Associations 1998.

The aims of the new Forestry Act is to promoteeconomically, ecologically and socially sustain-able management and utilisation of forests in sucha way that the forests offer a sustainable satisfac-tory yield while the biological diversity is main-tained. In order to maintain biodiversity, the For-estry Act lists certain important biotopes wherethe management is restricted. Such biotopes aree.g. neighbourhoods of springs and small lakes.The Act also defines standards for sustainableforestry; the minimal obligations for care and theminimal restrictions for the use of forests.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The question of forests and forest policies hasclearly became more public than it has been inearlier decades. During the 1960s, 1970s and tosome degrees still in 1980s the power in the for-est policies were in the hands of the few: thestate, the forest industry and forest owners madethe decisions. Due to the importance of forestsector to the national economy the major actorsin public sector have been the Ministry of Agri-culture, the Ministry of Finance and the Bankof Finland (Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

Today the group of stakeholders is much morediverse. The role of private forest owners has be-came ever more important due to the societalchange. Environmental organisations and othernon-governmental organisations are also increas-ingly taking part in the forest discussion. The newforest legislation is underlining the bottom-upapproach and participatory planning. These arein accordance with the international principlesof participatory planning approved at the Rioconference in 1992 (Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

4.3 Forest policy tools

The Act on Financing Sustainable Forestry wasmade to ensure the realisation of the new For-estry Act. The object of this act is to allocategovernment funding to measures that maintain

and promote sustainable forestry. Private forestowners are entitled to receive subsidies in casesof additional costs or economic losses.

The Forest Act contains also another new in-strument to promote sustainable forest manage-ment, such as the so-called regional target pro-grammes for forestry. These programmes aretargeted to identify the specific ecological, fi-nancial and social characteristics of each areaincluding also the goals and targets for the for-estry. The programme is drawn up by the ForestCentre in co-operation with all the partiesrepresenting forestry and other relevant partiesin the area.

The outcomes of these national programmes areutilised in the ongoing formulation process ofthe National Forest Plan (NFP), the Finnish for-est policy with an overall vision of “Sustain-able welfare from the diversity of forests“. Thespecific action programs defined under NFP willbe targeted to five areas: forest management,nature conservation, roundwood markets, inno-vations, and international policy.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

Forest policy is only a part of the policy groupaffecting the management of Finnish naturalforest resources. Due to the importance of for-ests in Finland and its economy several otherpolicies have a significant role on the forest sec-tor. These are, for example, environmental, taxa-tion, employment and economic policies.

The main focus of interpolicy co-ordination be-tween forestry and other sectoral policies hasshifted decisively due to the evolution of nationaland international forest policies in the 1990s. Indomestic economic policy, the question of inter-est earlier has been replaced by environmentaland international policies. For example, in 1994,the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and theMinistry of Environment launched together theEnvironment Programme for Forestry. Also au-thorities of environmental, nature conservationand forest issues and, some non-governmental or-ganisations were involved in formation of this

Finland

strategy for sustainable forest management inFinland (Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

Another example of the co-operation betweenthe main ministries dealing with forest issues isa forum for discussing Finland’s stands and themain lines of policies at the international arena(Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

4.5 EU forest and forest related policies

Finland became a member in the European Un-ion in the beginning of 1995 together with suchforest countries as Sweden and Austria, whichincreased the importance of the forest sector inEU. The forested area of the union was doubledand EU became a net exporter of forest prod-ucts. At the moment EU does not have any com-mon forest policy, but several regulations anddecisions directly and indirectly connected toforests are done in other branches of policies(Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

A conversation regarding the common foreststrategy in EU has risen lately. Compromisingand decision making may, however, be difficultdue to differences in ecological prerequisites inforests and variable interests and needs towardsthe forests.

The position of Finland on this matter is thatinstead of a common forest policy programmeEU should have a general forest strategy con-cerning the central questions. The national de-cision-making should, however, be maintained.The main targets of Finland for the EU foreststrategies are:

- To follow the principles of sustainable forestry;- To take into account the forests’ importance as

wood producers;- To recognise the importance of forestry in pre-

serving the vitality of rural areas;- To keep the forestry sector independent of the

subsidies;- To improve the operational environment of for-

est industry. (Hyttinen & Tikkanen, 1998).

4.6 Forest education and research

4.6.1 Education

Secondary level education in forestry and woodsciences in Finland is offered by 26 forestryschools. After the reform of the educational sys-tem in 1995 the secondary education in the for-estry field constitutes of the so-called basic de-gree in forestry (approximately. 2 years) and a3-year degree for a forest technician. After thesecondary level forestry and wood science edu-cation may be obtained in polytechnic schools(or Fachhochscules) (Kekkonen, 1996).

Academic education in forest and wood sciencesis given by the universities of Helsinki andJoensuu. Universities of technology in Helsinkiand Lappeenranta and the Faculty of ChemicalEngineering in Åbo Akademi are also offeringeducation in wood science. The Faculty of Ag-riculture and Forestry of the University of Hel-sinki offers academic education in the sustain-able use of natural resources in 12 of Faculty’sdepartments. Over 30 subjects are taught. InJoensuu the Faculty of Forestry is mainly con-centrating in disciplines of Environmental Man-agement of Forests, Forest Management andEconomics, Forest technology and Wood Indus-try. The Universities of Technologies offerhigher education in e.g. pulp and paper science,mechanical wood processing, wood industry andwood science. Several other universities con-duct forest-related research (Finnish Society ofForest Science, 1995).

4.6.2 Research

Besides the universities, the major researchorganisations in Finland are the Finnish ForestResearch Institute (FFRI aka METLA), TheFinnish Pulp and Paper Research Institute(KCL), The Foundation of Forest Tree Breed-ing, The Research and Development Departmentfor Timber Procurement and production at theFinnish Forest Industries Federation(Metsäteho), The technical Research Centre ofFinland (VTT) and The TTS-institute (FinnishSociety of Forest Science, 1995).

Finland

Approximately 350 researchers study forest re-lated questions in Finland. Over 200 of themare employed by the Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute (METLA) founded in 1917 and fundedmostly through the national budget (FinnishForest Research Institute, brochure).

The research is provided with a network of re-search forests and research stations. The elevenresearch stations of Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute and the Universities carry out both thenational and regional research. They are alsoresponsible for information exchanges betweenresearch and practical forestry. FFRI has also anetwork of research forests including over 140000 hectares of land with over 23 000 experi-mental plots (Parviainen & al., 1995).

Finnish forest research is involved in internationalco-operation, especially with our neighbouringcountries and in the European scale. The pan-European research projects have became moreimportant after joining the EU in 1995. In 1993Finland set up the European Forest Institute (EFI)an organisation of 106 member groups from 25European countries, to co-ordinate and imple-ment pan-European forest research. Finland isalso supporting forest research in developingcountries through FAO as well as through bilat-eral development projects (Palo, 1995).

The establishment of the Ministry of Environ-ment in 1982 has promoted the research inbiodiversity and forest ecosystem questionsthrough increased funding. Also the Academyof Finland has financed research on themultidisciplinary fields (Palo, 1995).

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges

5.1 Natura 2000

The Natura 2000 Network initiative has, with-out doubt, been one of the most difficult issuesin Finnish forestry lately. The process to createthe national proposition of the sites to be ofCommunity importance (SCIs) is still not quitefinished. Although 95% of the sites proposed to

be attached to the Natura 2000 Network are oldNature conservation areas or otherwise earlierprotected sites, the remaining 5% of new areashas caused 14 000 appeals, which delays theprocess. Almost 107 000 hectares of the newarea is private lands and 36 200 is owned by thestate. The process has been criticised of the pre-cipitancy and the lack of an analysis of the eco-nomic and social effects of the program.

Only 50 of the 200 habitat types included in theEU Habitats Directive exist in Finland. Alsoflora and fauna prioritised by EU to be protectedare very few in Finland. There are only 32 spe-cies of animals, 60 birds, 6 vascular plants and6 species of moss in Finnish nature that are in-cluded in the Natura 2000 Network (FinnishForest Research Institute, 1997b).

5.2 Forest Certification in Finland

International environmental agreements, as wellas the fact that a considerable number of Finland’sforest industry markets are located in areas wherethe consumers react sensitively to environmen-tal issues have brought up the question of na-tional forest certification.

The conversation regarding the need for certifi-cation has brought up the views of the nationalinterest groups. As a whole, certification hasbeen seen as a cost-effective way to present boththe general value goals and the strive for respon-sible forest management to the markets and es-pecially to demanding customers. Certificationis needed to present a good image of Finnishforestry and to promote marketing of forestproducts. The fact that most of the competitorsto Finnish forestry are active in promotingsustainability and certification, can also be seenas a pushing factor towards certification (Min-istry of Agriculture and Forestry, 1997).

The national Forest Certification Committee wasappointed in April 1996, and later the same yearleading environmental NGO’s (Non Govern-mental Organisation) together with the repre-sentatives of the organisations of forest ownersand the forest industry set up a national Work-

Finland

ing Group on Forest Certification Standards. Theaim has been to establish a internationally ac-ceptable forest certification standard. The For-est Certification Standards Proposal was draftedin 1997 and has been tested in three pilot areas.The aim is to introduce the Finnish forest certi-fication in the autumn of 1998<HTTP://www.smy.fi/certification>.

Finland

References:

Finnish Forest Association. 1997. Annual Ring 1997, Finnish forests, forestry and forest industries.Finnish Forest Industries Federation. 1997a. Evergreen. Finnish Forest Industries.Finnish Forest Industries Federation. 1997b. Facts and Figures statistics 1997.Finnish Forest Research Institute. 1997a. Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 1997. Gummerus

Kirjapaino Oy. Jyväskylä.Finnish Forest Research Institute. 1997b. Forest Finland in Brief 1997.Finnish Forest Research Institute. 1998. Brochure.Finnish Society of Forest Science. 1995. Research in Forest and Wood Science in Finland.Forestry Centre Tapio. 1994. Good forests for the good of all.Fritzbøger, B. and Søndergaard, P. 1995. A short history of forest uses. In: Hytönen, M. (ed.)

Multiple-use forestry in the Nordic countries. Gummerus Printing. Jyväskylä.Hallman, E., Hokkanen, M. and al. 1996. Alue-ekologinen suunnittelu. Metsähallituksen

metsätalouden julkaisuja 3/1996. Vantaa.Hannelius, S. and Kuusela, K. 1995. Finland the country of evergreen forest. Forssa Printing House Ltd.Hynynen, J. 1998. Nuorten metsien ja turvemaiden ongelmat. In: Hänninen, H. (ed.) Puuvarojen

käyttömahdollisuudet. Kustannusosakeyhtiö Metsälehti, Metsäntutkimuslaitos. pp.79-87Hyttinen, P. and Tikkanen, I. 1998. National Forest programs in Finland. (draft) European Forest

Institute. Joensuu.Hänninen, H. 1998. Johtopäätökset. In Hänninen, H. (ed.) Puuvarojen käyttömahdollisuudet.

Kustannusosakeyhtiö Metsälehti, Metsäntutkimuslaitos. pp.168-186IUFRO Subj. Group S6.07. 1995. News of forest history. Source of the forest history of Finland.Kekkonen, K. 1996. Metsä- ja puutalouden koulutuksen toimintaympäristö. In: Kekkonen, K. (ed.)

Metsä vastasi. Metsä- ja puutalouden koulutuksen arviointi. Opetushallitus.Maanmittaushallitus. 1988. Suomen kartasto vihko 141-1436. Elävä luonto, luonnonsuojelu. Suomen

Maantieteellinen seura.Metsäteollisuus ry.1998. Avain Suomen metsäteollisuuteen. Helsinki.Metsätalouden ympäristötyöryhmä. 1994. Metsätalous ja ympäristö. Maa- ja metsätalousministeriö.Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 1997. Development of the Forest Certification in Finland.

Publications of Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 6a/1997.Nuoren metsän hoidon kampanja. 1997. Kampanjasuunnitelma. Metsäkeskus Tapio.Palo, M. 1995. Continuity and Change in Finnish Forest Sciences. In: Nikinmaa, E. (ed.) Research

in Forest and Wood Science in Finland. The Finnish Society of Forest Science. pp. 4-16Parviainen, J., Kellomäki, S. and al. 1995. The Laws of Nature Rule in The Forests. In: Nikinmaa,

E. (ed.) Research in Forest and Wood Science in Finland. The Finnish Society of ForestScience. pp. 19-24

Päivänen, J. and Paavilainen, E. 1996. Forestry on peatlands. In: Vasander, H. (ed.) Peatlands inFinland. Finnish Peatland Society. Helsinki. pp. 72-83

Statistics Finland. 1997. Statistical Yearbook of Finland 1997. Karisto. Hämeenlinna.

Additional Sources:http://www.smy.fi/certification> Finnish Forest Associationhttp://www.vyh.fi>

Finland

Addresses of organisations related to forestry:

Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners, P.O. BOX 150, 00101 Helsinki,tel. +358 9 131 151, fax +358 9 1311 5409

The European Forest Institute (EFI), Torikatu 34, 80100 Joensuu, tel. +358-13-252 010, fax +358-13-124 393, http://www.efi.fi

Finnish Forest Research, Institute (METLA), Unioninkatu 40 A, 00170 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9-857 051, fax +358-9-8570 5677, http://www.metla.fi

Forestry Centre Tapio, Soidinkuja 4, 00700 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9- 15 621, fax +358-9-156 2232Finnish Forest Industries Federation, P.O. BOX 336, 00171 Helsinki, tel. +358-9-13 261, fax

+358-9-132 4445, http://www.forestindustries.fiThe Finnish Forest and Park Service, P.O. Box 94, 01301 Vantaa, tel. +358-9-857-841, fax +358-

9-85-784-219, http://www.metsa.fiFinnish Forestry Association, Salomonkatu 17 B, 00100 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9-649-0300, fax

+358-9-693-3466, http://www.smy.fiFinnish Particle Board Association, Rickhardinkatu 1B 19, 00130 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9-657-

122, fax +358-9-657-145The Finnish Society of Forest Science, Unioninkatu 40 A, 00170 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9-8570

5235, fax +358-9-8570 5677Finnish Sawmills, Säästöpankinranta 4 C, 00530 HELSINKI, tel. +358-9-711-088, fax. +358-9-

715-275, http://www.finnishsawmills.fi/Finnish Wood Research, P.O. Box 367, 02151 Espoo, tel. +358-9-4354-2022, fax +358-9-4354-2200Finnish Forest Foundation, P.O. Box 336, 00171 Helsinki, tel. +358-13-261, fax +358-132-4445Helsinki University of Technology/, Department of forest product, technology, Vuorimiehentie 1

02150 Espoo, tel. +358-9-4511, fax +358-9-451-4259, http://www.hut.fi/Units/Forest/index.htmlLusto, the Finnish Forest Museum and Forest Information Centre, 58450 Punkaharju, tel. +358-15-

345-100, fax +358-15-345-1050, http://www.lusto.fiMetsäteho, P.O. Box 194, 00131 Helsinki, tel. +358-9-135-521, fax +358-9-659-202Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Hallituskatu 3A, 00170 Helsinki, tel +358-9-1601, fax +358-

9-160-2190, http://www.mmm.fiMinistry of the Environment, P.O.Box 399, 00121 Helsinki, tel. +358-9-199-11, fax +358-9-1991-

9545, http://www.vyh.fiUniversity of Helsinki, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, P.O. BOX 27, 00014 HELSINGIN

YLIOPISTO, tel. +358-9-70 851, fax +358-9-708 5575, http://www.honeybee.helsinki.fiThe Forest Library, Unioninkatu 40 B, 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO, tel.. +358-9-1911, fax

+358-9-191 7619The University of Joensuu, The Faculty of Forestry, P.O. BOX 111, 80101 JOENSUU, tel. +358.13-

1511, fax +358-13-151 3590, http://gis.joensuu.fi

Finland

France

1 The country

1.1 Natural conditions

Topography & general descriptionWith a total of 550 000 km2 of territory, Franceis the biggest European country after Russia.The French territory is divided into 95 depart-ments plus 8 overseas departments and territo-ries.

The average altitude is 342 m (excluding Corse)but this average does not represent the diver-sity found in France. Indeed, the altitudes onthe territory range from 4807 meters for MontBlanc (the highest mountain in Europe) to sealevel. The presence of high mountainous ranges(the Alps, the Pyrénées), of relatively lower andolder mountains (the Massif Central, the Vosgesand Jura) and of plains and valleys testifies ofthis great diversity.

ClimateGlobally, the French climate is temperate withmore or less oceanic (or respectively continen-tal) influences. The average summer tempera-tures range from 17 to 22° C (1 to 6° C for thewinter season). As for rainfall, it is relativelywell distributed throughout the year. The an-nual rainfall is often below 600 to 700 mm onthe Mediterranean littoral coast but reacheshigher values on the western littoral coast (800to 1200 mm). While leaving the coastal influ-ences, the annual rainfall slightly drops to val-ues ranging from 700 to 800 mm excepted inthe mountainous areas where it quickly riseswith increasing altitude.

Four main types of climates are met in France:- the temperate maritime climate met on the west

France

Authors: A. Piel, S. Costa, J.L. Peyron.E.N.G.R.E.F., 14 rue Girardet, 54042 Nancy Cedex, FranceTel: 33 (0)3 83 39 68 32, Fax: 33 (0)3 83 30 22 54Emails: piel@engref.fr, peyron@engref.fr, costa@engref.fr

coast,- the temperate climate with a continental in-

fluence in the eastern part,- the Mediterranean climate characterising the

South eastern part,- the mountainous climate found in the Alps

and the Pyrénées.

Once more, it is interesting to note the signifi-cant diversity of climatic influences found onthe territory favouring numerous different habi-tats and environmental conditions.

SoilsSince the end of the quaternary, the French cli-mate has been favourable to biological activityand to a general phenomenon of soil leachingresulting in an acidification and a differentia-tion of two layers in the soils. This soil leach-ing characterises a majority of the soils met onthe French territory.

The main soils found on the French metropoli-tan territory are :- leached brown earth and brown earth,- leached hydromorphic soils (gley),- acid brown earth,- podzolic soils and podzol,- acid soils of high- and middle-altitude moun-

tains,- lime soils

Other data- 6 000 species of plant life can be found in

France (of which 200 are specific to the coun-try)

- 340 different sorts of cheese (almost one forevery day of the year).

- About 450 AOC wines- Almost 15 million hectares of forests.

France

1.2 Society

PopulationWith 58.6 million inhabitants, the average den-sity on the French territory is approximately107 inhabitants per km2 (INSEE, Annuairestatistique de la France, 1998). 75 % of theFrench population live in an urban environ-ment ranging from great urban centres (suchas Paris, Lyon …) to cities or villages.

IndustryAs shown in the table 1, the tertiary sector, with70 % of the GDP plays an important role inFrench economy.

France is one of the biggest agricultural pro-ducers in Europe. Agricultural production uses55 % of the land area. The principal agricul-tural products in France are sugar beet (1st inthe EU1, 2nd in the world), wine (2 nd in the EU,2 nd in the World), milk (2 nd in the EU, 5th in

Figure 1. Administrative map of France

1 Those ranks are given according to the volumes produced.

ESPAGNEMED MEDITERRANEE

CORSE

MIDI-PYRENEESLANGUEDOCROUSSILLON

PROVENCE-ALPESCOTE D�AZUR

AQUITAINE

LIMOUSIN AUVERGNE

ITALIE

RHÔNE-ALPES

POITOU-CHARENTES

OCEANATLANTIQUE

BRETAGNE

PAYS DELA LOIRE

CENTRE

BASSE-NORMANDIE

HAUTE-NORMANDIE

PICARDIE

NORDMANCHE

BELGIQUE

LUXEMBOURG

ALLEMAGNE

LORRAINE

ALSACE

ILE DE- FRANCE

BOURGOGNE

CHAMPAGNEARDENNE

SUISSE

FRANCHECOMTE

REGION

0 100 200 km

LANDIS

PYRENEES-ATLANTIQUES

GIRONDE

ARIÈGEPYRENEES-ORIENTALES

HAUIEGARONNE

MAUIESPYRENEES

LOT

AVEYRONLOI-ET-

GARONNE TARN-ET-GARONNE

DORDOGNE

TARN

AUDE

LOZEREGARD

HERAULT

BOUCHES-DU-BHÔNE

VAR

CORSEDU-SUD

HAUIE-CORSE

VAUCLUSE

ALPES-DE-HAUTEPROVENCEALPES-

MARITIMES

CHARENTE-MARITIME

CREUSEHAUIEVIENTECHARENTE

VIENNE

DEUX-SEVRES

VENDEE

CORRÈZE CANTALHAUTE-LOIRE

PUY-DEDÔME

ALLIER

INDRE

INDRE-ET-LOIRE

LOIRETLOIR-ET-CHER

EURE-ET-LOIRE

MAINE-ET-LOIRE

MAYENNESARTHE

LOIREATLANTIQUE

MORBIHAN

FINISTÈRE

CÔTES-D�ARMOR

ILLE-ET-VILAINE

ORNE

MANCHE

SEINE-MARITIME

SOMME

EURE

OISE

CHER

YONNE

CÔTE-D�OR

NIÈVERSAUNÈ-ET-

LOIRE

AUBE

HAUIE-MARNE

MARNE

AISNEARDENNES

NORD

PAS-DE-CALAIS

MOSELLEMEUSE

MEURTHE-ET-MOSELLE

HAUI-RHIN

BAS-RHIN

OSGESHAUIE-SAÔNE

DOUBS

AINRHÔNEHTE-

SAVOIE

JURA

SAVOIEISÈRE

DRÔMEARDÈCHE

HAUIES-ALPES

GERS

CALVADOS

Ville

Ajaccio

Bastia

Marseille

Toulon

Nîmes Avignon Digne

Gap

PrivasValence

St-Etienne GrenobleChambèry

AnnecyLyon

Bourg

Mende

Le PuyAurillac

rodezCahors

Albi

Carcassonne

PerpignanPoix

ToulouseAuch

TarbesPau

Mont-de-Marsan

Bordeaux

Agen

PèrigueuxTulle

Angoulènie

NiortLa Roche-Sur-Yon

Poitiers Châteauroux

Bourges

Tours

Blous

Orlèans

Chartres

Le Mans

Layal

NantesAngers

RennesQuimper

St-Brieuc

St-Lò

Alengon

Caen

Evreux

Rouen

Amiens

Beauvais

Lille

Arras

Laon

Paris

Auxerre

TroyesChaumont

Châlons-en-Champagne

CharlevilleMezieres

Metz

NancyBar-Le-Duc

Epinal

Strasburg

Colmar

BelfortVesoulBesangonDijon

Nevers

Mâcon

Lons-Le-Saunier

Moulins

Guèret

Lomoges GlermontFerrand

Mountauban

Montpellier

France

the world), beef (1st in the EU, 6 th in the world)and cereal (1st in the EU, 8 th in the world).

France also ranks first in the EU and in theworld for tourism.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

Firstly, it is worth insisting on the importanceof the evolution of French forestry and forestsas it can explain many of the current charac-teristics of the French forest resource. This evo-lution is basically characterised by changes interms of area, stumpage volume and stand type.

As shown in the figure 2, the general trend ob-served shows a regular increase of the globalwooded area in France resulting in a doubled

forested area since the end of the French revo-lution. The French revolution indeed charac-terised the beginning of a serious concern aboutthe worrying level of the forest resource. Itresulted in the establishment of a forest codein 1827 and the establishment of a deforesta-tion and an afforestation act respectively in1859 and 1860.

This historic increasing trend observedthroughout the last couple of centuries can beexplained by a long-standing afforestationpolicy but also by the improvement of agricul-tural productivity resulting in decreasing needfor agricultural lands throughout the nineteenthand twentieth centuries.

Several evolutions also appeared in the standtypes of the French forests corresponding to anevolution of the needs of the society. Many ofthe coppice stands were converted into coppicewith standards especially after 1669. At thebeginning of the nineteenth century, the valid-ity of the coppice with standard stands to an-swer the needs and uses of the society startedto be seriously discussed. Most of those standswere then converted into even-aged high for-ests. Despite this conversion, it has to be keptin mind that only half of the French forests areeven-aged high forests. Other silvicultural sys-tems, even-aged (coppice) or uneven-aged (cop-

Figure 2. The evolution of the forested area on the metropolitan French territory from the endof the eighteenth century to the end of the twentieth century (J.L. Peyron, 1997).

GDP % Jobs %Primary sector 2 5Secondary sector 28 27Tertiary sector 70 68

Table 1. Distribution of the GDP (Gross Do-mestic Product) and of the employment in 1995(%) (in C. Albalgli, 1998).

0

5

10

15

20

1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

7 Mha

15 Mha

Mill

ion

hec

tare

s

France

pice with standards, selection systems) kept aconsiderable share of the French forests. Thereis, for example, a long-lasting tradition of un-even-aged coniferous stands in some of theFrench mountainous regions.

This evolution of forested area and stand types,as well as the increasing proportion of conifer-ous trees, logically resulted in a significant in-crease of the standing volume of the Frenchforests which has been multiplied by 4 between1827 and the present day (refer to part 2.3.4).

2.2 Forest ownership

As shown in the table 2, the state and commu-nities forests (managed by or with the supportof the National Forest Office (ONF)) count for26 % of the total forested area. The majority ofthe French forests (three-quarters of the forestedarea) indeed belongs to private owners. Thoseprivate forests vary enormously in terms of sizeand type. The French private owners are mainlypersons (82 % of the area, 96 % of the owners)or corporations (18 % of the area, 4 % of theowners). 71 % of the private owners are indi-viduals and household and 25 % are farmers.Retired persons also represent a significantproportion of the French private owners (21%). Forest industries generally do not own for-ests in France.

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

As shown on the figure 3, the area and propor-tion of the wooded lands has increased sincethe last world war. It first increased relativelyquickly (+75 000 ha / year from 1950 to 1970)and its expansion seems now to be more mod-erate with an average expansion rate of 25 000ha / year from 1978 to 1989. The main expla-nations for this increasing trend observed liein the abandonment of agricultural lands andin the afforestation of fallow and moors.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

With more than 14 million hectares of wood-land forests and poplar plantation (table 3),France is one of the most forested lands of theEuropean Union (ranking third after Swedenand Finland)2.

As shown on the map of the figure 4, in termsof spatial distribution, the majority of theFrench forests are found in the eastern part ofthe country (Alsace) or in the mountainous ar-eas (Vosges, Jura, Massif Central, the Alps andthe Pyrénées). Most of the western part of thecountry is indeed characterised by a much lowerproportion of forested lands excepted for the“Landes” in the Southwest.

Table 2. Importance of the different ownership categories, in terms of areas and number ofowners (J.L. Peyron, 1997).Owner categories Areas Number of owners Mean area (ha)State 10 % 1 (1514 forests) 956 haCommunities 16 % 14 000 (11 000 communes) 163 haPrivate owners 74 % 3 700 000 2.6 ha

2 To this forest extent must be added the French forested area overseas which is to say an area of 8.8 millionhectares (8.3 of which are in French Guiana).

France

Table 3. The current extent and distribution of French forests

Source: SCEES: Teruti 1993, Agreste n°56.

Type of land use Area in 1993 (1000 ha) Proportion of metropolitan landWoodland, forests and poplar plantation 14 810 27.0 %Heathland, groves and thickets Maquis,garrigues Hedges and scattered trees 3598 6.5 %Total forested area 18 408 33.5 %

Figure 3. Overview of the types of land uses in France from 1950 to 1990(D. Normandin, 1995).

Figure 4. The current distribution of the forested area in France (J.L. Peyron, 1997)

Legend

0 - 10 %

10 - 20 %

20 - 30 %

< 30 %

5060708090

100110120130140150

1950 1960 1 9 7 0 1 9 8 0 1 9 9 0

Year

Non-agricultural lands

Forests and Woodlands

Agricultural lands

Fallow and moors

France

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

The French forest, with a total of 136 speciescan be said to be ecologically extraordinary rich.Table 4 shows that France’s forests consist ofmainly native hardwoods. Approximately 95% of the proportion of the national forested landare covered with native species.

Oak stands are almost one third of the nationalforested area (one fourth of the standing vol-ume) (table 5). Beech is also predominantwhich is a typical feature of France and theEuropean temperate zone. It must be kept inmind that French forests are characterised by anoticeable heterogeneity of stands, which areoften constituted of mixed species (71% of theFrench forests are mixed stands).

Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii, not men-tioned in the table) and Maritime pine (Pinuspinaster) are the first reforestation species.

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfelling

As already mentioned in the part 2.1, the totalstanding volume of the French forests has beenmultiplied by 4 since 1827. Between 1984 and1994, as observed in many European countries,the increase in standing volume is proportion-ately far higher than the increase in the corre-sponding areas. This could be given severalexplanations: the use of more dynamicsilvicultural practices, tree improvement(Landes) or also a possible general rise in pro-ductivity of forest ecosystems possibly linkedwith the growth in the level of the carbon di-

Table 5. Share of stand and tree species in the French forests

Source: the National Forest Survey, J.L. Peyron, 1997.

Species Area Standing volume(stand species) % (tree species) %

Quercus robur 18 % 13 %Quercus petraea 13 % 12 %Fagus silvatica 9 % 12 %Quercus humilis 6 % 2 %Castanea sativa 4 % 5 %Quercus ilex 3 % 1 %Fraxinus sp. 5% 2 %Other hardwood 9 % 15 %Pinus pinaster 11 % 10 %Pinus silvestris 9 % 8 %Pinus excelsa 5 % 7 %Abies alba 4 % 8 %Other softwood 7 % 5 %

Table 4. Native and introduced species in the French forests (in Indicators for the sustainablemanagement of French forests - 1994).

Trees occurring in forestsNative species Acclimatised species Exotic species Total

Number of Hardwood species 57 3 16 76Number of Softwood species 16 6 38 60Total 73 9 54 136Proportion of the nationsland covered in 1994 94.03% 5.97%

France

oxide in the atmosphere. French forests arecurrently in a timber capitalisation phase partlyexplained by the afforestation and reforestationprogrammes undertaken during the past 50years. The average volume per ha is now 138m3 rising by 14 % since 1984.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Biotic threats:Pests and diseasesThere is a great deal of variation from year toyear in the nature and intensity of the bioticagents threatening the French forests. Thesevariations rely essentially on the actual dynamicof the threatening insect or fungi population.Nevertheless, as shown in the table 6, it can beconsidered that an average of 2500 ha offorested areas per year are seriously damagedby pests and diseases.

Death often results from the combination ofweakening factors such as repeated droughtperiods, frequent defoliation or the explosionof an insect population such as bark beetles.Scolytus sp. and defoliating insects are respon-sible for 60 % of the damage observed inFrance. Fungi are also significant threats to theFrench forest resource: the Dutch elm disease,for example, caused the quasi-extinction ofUlmus minor on the French territory, Armillariaobscura seriously damages the Landes’ forestsand Heterobasidium annosum damages arequite common on Picea abies.

Fungi and insects are thus important threats tobe taken into account. Nevertheless, they arenot the only biotic threats. French forests alsohave to cope with serious damage due to big

game (especially large herbivorous mammalsduring the regeneration phase). The mostthreatening species are roe, red deer and rab-bits. In 1993, the average densities of roe andred deer were estimated to be respectively 5.98and 0.38 head per 100 ha (source: Ministry ofEnvironment & ONC). During the last decade,the red deer population seems to have increasedby 50% while the roe deer population has beenmultiplied by a factor of more than 3. Approxi-mately 12% of regeneration units receive spe-cial protection to avoid excessive damage bybig game. The set up of protection systemscould double or quadruple the price of a plan-tation respectively for roe and red deer. Thecosts of those regeneration protections is some-times covered for 40% by state subsidies butthey are still very difficult to manage and oftenrequire a big investment, which is not alwayspossible.

Abiotic threats:FiresThe intensity of the damage caused by fires inthe French forests varies considerably from yearto year but it can generally be said that, at thelevel of the metropolitan area, fires have a rela-tively low influence. Indeed, the average burntarea (forests and other wooded areas) gener-ally turned to be close to 0.25% of the totalforested area with an average of 5 000 outbreaksa year. Nevertheless, it should not be forgottenthat 80% of those fires occur in the Mediterra-nean region where approximately 1% of thearea is damaged by fires every year. In this re-gion, the rapid succession of fires is a seriousproblem as it can result in damaging erosionor in a degradation process in plant formationsculminating in guarrigue or maquis scrubland.

Table 6. Damage caused by pests and diseasesForested area requiring rehabilitation after 2 500 ha/yeardamage from pests and diseasesForested areas where significant growth losses 150 000 ha/yearcan be attributed to pests and diseasesForested areas where significant growth losses 50 000 ha/yearcan be attributed to pests and diseases withoutcalling into question the future of the stands

France

StormsThe global impact of storms on forests at thecountry level is very low even if from 1982 on,France has experienced locally a series of con-siderably damaging storms (Massif central,1982; North east, 1984; Brittany, 1987; north-ern half of France, 1990…).

PollutionPollution is also responsible for part of forestsdecline to the extent that a special service(called DSF) was created to monitor the healthof the French forest resource.

2.4 Silviculture

Despite the conversion process started 170 yearsago, only 48% of the French forests are even-aged high forests. In total 32% of the Frenchforests are still uneven-aged stands (coppicewith standards or selection systems). Selectionsystems can traditionally be found in moun-tainous areas.

The French silviculture is also characterised bya preference for the use of natural regeneration.Only 20% of the French high even-aged forestsare plantation forests.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

As shown in the table 8, in 1994, more thantwo-thirds of the French forests were classifiedas easy to log. In fact, only 6.5% of the area(5.9% of the total standing volume) were con-sidered as difficult to log.

There is consequently no major problems interms of accessibility and harvesting systemson most of the French territory. Lowland andhill forests, which represent more than 60% ofthe inventoried area are in great majority char-acterised by an easy or an average access thanksto the development and introduction of moreand more forest roads and tracks. Forest har-vesting and accessibility is more a problem in

Table 8. Accessibility of French forests in 1994Logging category Area (ha) Area (%) Volume (thousands m3) Volume (%)Easy 9 422 077 67.1 1 325 869 71.5Average 3 103 772 22.1 418 845 22.6Difficult 916 127 6.5 109 168 5.9Not loggable 607 558 4.3 unknown -Total 14 049 534 100 1 853 882 100

Table 7. Evolution in the stand structures of the French forests (EFI proceedings No 17, 1997)Stand types Area %Even-aged high forest

Hardwood mainlyFrom natural regeneration 16%From artificial regeneration 3%

Softwood mainlyFrom natural regeneration 12%From artificial regeneration 17%

Coppice (even-aged, hardwood) 20%Coppice with standards (uneven-aged, hardwood) 26%Selection system (uneven-aged, softwood) 6%

France

the mountainous regions especially on steepsloping terrain (which represent a little less thanone quarter of France’s forests).

2.5.2 Timber uses

In France, the timber harvest is lower than thebiological production of forests. Indeed, Frenchforests represent a growing stock of 1.8 billionm3 increasing by 75 million m3 annually and ofwhich only 45 to 50 million m3 are harvestedper year.

Fuelwood harvested is generally not sold onthe wood market. It comes from forests but alsofrom other wooded areas such as hedges orthickets. The total volume of sawlogs, veneerlogs, pulpwood and other industrial wood har-vested has considerably risen in the recentyears from 26 in 1982 to 32 million m3 in 1992.

The average consumption of wood in Francein 1992 was estimated to be of 61 million m3

RE (Roundwood Equivalent) which corre-sponds to an average consumption of slightlymore 1 m3 per inhabitant per annum.

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

HuntingHunting in forests represents in France a sumof about 150 million ECU, of which less than15 % actually benefits private forest owners.The product of hunting has significantly in-creased (by a factor 2.3) over the last 20 yearsin the state owned forests. From 1983 to 1993,the extraction of big game increased by a fac-tor 2 for red deer and by 2.5 for roe deer andwild boar which testifies of the rising impor-tance of the hunting activity in France.

The forest mushrooms harvestMushroom picking is a traditional activity inFrance taking the form of professional or oc-casional mushroom gatherers. It is thought thatthe value of the annual harvest of edible mush-rooms may reasonably be estimated at an aver-age of 91.50 million ECU (up to more than150 million ECU for good years). Most of thisharvest is consumed domestically.

Other products or servicesForests can also produce a great variety of otherharvestable non-timber products (such as pineresin, honey, lichens, cork …) but the harvestof most of those products is said to be on thedecline.

2.5.4 Forest functions

Protective functions:Soil and Water physical protectionMore than 350 000 ha of the State owned for-ests are managed with a priority of protectingthe physical environment in terms of soil andwater. Two public forest protection series (pri-mary and secondary physical protection series)ensure an adapted management prioritisingphysical protection in sensible areas. Theseareas are mainly mountainous areas subjectedto landslides, rock falls, avalanches or gullying.Coastal dunes management is also subjected toan adapted management giving priority to pro-tection and public access to prevent the break-ing up of the Atlantic dunes.

Water quality protectionThis concerns the forests located around drink-ing water catchment including mineral watersources.

Table 9. General description of the timber uses in France (source : SCEES/EAB – DERF)Volume (1000 m3) Value (million ECU)

Volume of sawlogs, veneer logs 21 494Volume of pulpwood and other industrial wood 10 631Volume of fuelwood 14 511Value of timber after logging (except home consumption) 1598.89

France

Other socio-economic functions:Public access and recreationFrance is characterised by a proportion of 0.25ha of forest per inhabitant. More than one fifthof the French forests are marked by a relativelyhigh tourist’s pressure, at least high enough tobe considered as one of the major priorities forsetting up of an adapted forest management.Private owners may try to close their forest butthey often tolerate (officially or not) public ac-cess.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

The social and economic importance of the for-est industries in the national economy shouldfirst be stressed. The wood sector consists ofapproximately 90 000 firms and it represents1.5 % of the French Gross Domestic Product.Approximately 2.6 % of the jobs (salary earn-ing or not) offered in France are found in theforest and wood sector.

This so-called wood chain in France includesall branches from production, logging, and

transformation to the marketing of wood. Theseactivities, without considering the fuelwoodsector, currently consume approximately 61million m3 RE (Roundwood Equivalent) peryear which is to say about 1 m3 per year andper inhabitant. Recycling, notably of waste pa-per provides for a quarter of those needs (16million m3 RE) while the rest of it (three-quar-ter) comes from the transformation of raw wood(50 % corresponding to structural timber, 50% to pulpwood).

The French forest and wood sector togetherpresent a structural deficit of about 13 millionm3 RE in volume (essentially pulps and paperboards, furniture, coniferous sawn wood) andstays one of the sector showing the most im-portant deficit in the French trade balance.

3.2 Employment

It is very difficult to determine precisely thenumber of jobs offered by the forest and woodsector especially when trying to estimate thenumber of persons self-employed working inthe silviculture or the harvesting branches. Thenumbers found in the table 10 are consequentlyjust estimates useful to give an idea of the im-

Table 10. Estimated jobs in the forest and wood sector (in thousands of full-time jobs) in 1991(D. NORMANDIN & J.L. PEYRON, 1997).Fields of activity Employed Self-employed Total number of jobsSilviculture & forest services 16.1 16.1Forest harvesting 7.0 21.0 28.0Total primary sector 23.1 21.0 28Mechanical wood working 92.0 6.5 98.5Sawn wood 23.5 3.0 26.5Panels, veneers, impregnation 12.5 12.5Furniture industry 89.8 20.0 109.8Paper and cardboard industry 105.8 0.8 106.6Paper pulp 2.0 2.0Total secondary sector 287.6 27.3 314.9Wood-working industries 38.0 3.0 41.0Wood-processing industries 249.6 24.3 273.9Total first and secondary sectors 310.7 48.3 359Wood-building industry 108.1 23.8 131.9Trade in wood-based products 82.5 82.5Total primary, secondary and tertiary sectors 501.3 72.1 573.4

France

portance of the forest and wood sectors inFrance. The number of jobs in the forest sector(excluding the work of forest owners) wouldbe 570 000 of which 90 % are wage- or salary-earning employment.

The relevance of the wood building industriesand trade in wood based products as sectors ofemployment offered by the forest and woodbranches can sometimes be discussed. If con-sidering only the fields more directly linked tothe forest such as production, harvesting, woodworking and wood processing, the number ofjobs would be approximately 360 000 full-timejobs (of which 310 000 are wage- or salary-earning employment). This represents a shareof 6 % of the total number of jobs offered bythe primary and secondary sector in France.

As shown in the figure 5, employment in for-estry (silviculture and logging/harvesting jobs)only covers 7 % of the total number of salary-

earning jobs offered in the primary and sec-ondary sectors of the forestry and lumber busi-ness.

In terms of evolution of the employment situa-tion in the context of strong international com-petition, it can be said that the French forestsector is rather strong and only suffered fromlimited staff losses in the course of the past twodecades.

3.3 Profitability

As shown in the table 11, the forests and woodsector industries represent a significant shareof the total added value of the combined pri-mary and secondary French sectors. It is alsoworth insisting on the fact that most of thisadded value is created downstream i.e. with thewood-working, wood-processing, furniture andpaper industries.

Figure 5. Salary-earning jobs of the primary and secondary sectors offered by the wood andforest sector (D. Normandin & J.L. Peyron, 1997).

Table 11. The value added by the French forests and wood sector industries.

Added value(thousand millions ECU)

Silviculture & forest harvesting 2.5Wood-working and processing industries 3.6Furniture industries 3.4Paper & cardboard industries 5.2Total 14.7Share in the primary and secondary sectors 5.3 %Share in the Gross Domestic Product 1.5 %

Source: Daly-Hassen & Peyron, 1995.

Silviculture

Forest harvesting

Wood-workingindustriesWood-processingindustries

5 %2 %12 %

81 %

France

Foreign tradeForest exploitation and logging show a favour-able trade balance. Nevertheless, all the othersectors either show a small deficit balance (saw-ing) or a worrying one (furniture, pulpwood).The deficit of the wood and paper sector forthe last decade was approximately 3 thousandmillion ECU / year. It can then be said that theFrench forest sector consequently suffers froma real lack of profitability. This is due to therelative weakness of the second transformationindustries compared to those of other Europeancountries.

It is also important to stress that France is anet receiver of softwood timber while it is a netexporting country for hardwood species. Theglobal deficit balance observed consequentlyresults from an inadequacy between the avail-able resource in the country (mainly broad-leaved species) and the requirement of theFrench industries (essentially conifers).

Splitting of the forest property and lack of ver-tical integration in the forest sector.The splitting of private forest property, the rela-tively small size of the wood processing indus-tries and the lack of vertical integration in theforest sector result in higher “supplying costs”,themselves leading to a significant loss of com-petitiveness of the French industries. Indeed,cutting a tree from the forest and processing itto obtain the final product sometimes necessi-tates the intervention of two or three interme-diaries leading, for each transaction, to a mul-tiplication of the final supplying cost and con-sequently reducing the competitiveness of thefinal product. Reducing those “supplying costs”is currently one of the challenges for the Frenchforest industries.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

The current French policy aims to meet soci-ety’s expectations in the following ways :- by enhancing the forests potential for eco-

nomic and social use,

- by preserving and improving its ecologicalwealth and variety of landscape,

- by increasing efforts to create a balanced ru-ral environment.

Forest planningThe importance of forest planning in order toadapt forest management to the owner’s andsociety’s expectations was realised long ago inFrance. Forest management, to be effective andsustainable, necessitates planning taking longterm objectives into consideration and leadingto more precise, concrete and formal prescrip-tion applying to periods of 10 to 30 years.

Public and community forests (26 % of theFrench forests) are managed under a manage-ment plan which is written under the responsi-bility of the French National Forest servicecalled O.N.F. (Office National des Forêts) cre-ated in 1966. Those management plans haveto be approved by the French ministry of Agri-culture representatives, who ensure that theoperations planned for the forest are conformedto the general guidelines defined by the nationalor regional forest policy.

Forest planning is also an obligation for pri-vate forests over 25 ha (which represent 27 %of the French forests).

This is done thanks to a working plan of op-erations called P.S.G. (Plan Simple de Gestion).Those PSG also have to be coherent with theguidelines of the O.R.F. (OrientationsRégionales Forestières) and have to be approvedby the C.R.P.F. (Centre Régional de la PropriétéForestière). The CRPF are local organisationswhose mission consists of translating and ap-plying the national directive at a regional levelfor private forests. They are in fact a part of thepublic administration ruled by the forests own-ers themselves. Making sure that the PSG writ-ten verifies the criteria set up at the nationallevel is one of their overriding missions. Asfor the ORF, they are general guidelines workedout at the regional level by regional forest andforest product committees, where all the part-ners concerned are represented (responsible forthe national forest policy, nature protection as-sociations).

France

Finally, it appears that forest planning (takingthe form of either a management plan or aP.S.G) is an obligation for half of the Frenchforests. The quality of management is not nec-essarily conditioned by the formalisation of amanagement plan. Nevertheless, the prepara-tion of such plans, which have to be approvedby professional or governmental agencies of-fers the opportunity to have control on themanagement of the French forests. It also hasto be kept in mind that those management plans(for private, state or community forests) are notthe only planning documents existing inFrance. There are lots of other regional guide-lines and documents which provide the man-ager, who so desires, with a general frameworkfor his silvicultural thinking and activities. Fi-nally, it is estimated that almost all France’sforested area (92.7 %) is covered by a plan-ning or general guideline document (DERF,1994).

Forest protectionProtecting the forest resource is a relativelylong-lasting tradition in France. It started withthe limitation of the clearing in 1669 and be-came a very serious concern after the Frenchrevolution. Indeed, a Forest Code was estab-lished in France in 1827 and was followed bythe establishment of afforestation and defor-estation acts.

The main legislation of the current policy interms of afforestation and deforestation inFrance is the deforestation law according towhich any clearing in a private woodland(which would be bigger than 4 ha) needs anofficial authorisation. Nevertheless, deforesta-tion below 4 ha are not completely free as theycan limited and restricted especially for wood-lands with a protection or/and conservationvalues. Those measures, completed by a tax onclearings, have been set up more to reduce de-forestation than to totally forbid them.

The set up of protection forest series, the map-ping of ZNIEFF3, ZICO4, special zones (ZPS5,ZSC6) and other sites of ecological interest arealso some of the protective measures existingin France at the moment. It must be noticedthat those measures influencing the nationalforest policy have in fact to be associated withthe French land use planning policy.

Reference monitoring of the French forest re-sourceThis is also one of the priorities in the Frenchforest policy. This follow-up includes a perma-nent survey of the French territory by the IFN(Inventaire Forestier National) (evolution of thesurface, standing volume, yield of the forests).There is also a more qualitative follow up try-ing to keep an eye on the health of the Frenchforests. This is for example the whole networkof scientists of the Forest health department(Département Santé des Forêts) or the nationallong term survey of forested ecosystems calledRENECOFOR .

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The major current actors of the French forestpolicy are :- the government, being both a forest owner

and the responsible for the French forest re-source sustainable use and management at thenational level,

- the French national forest service (ONF),- the communities also own part of the French

woodlands and forests,- the private forest agencies :- regional and local agencies (CRPF, Chambre

d’agriculture),- forest owners associations,- organisms for forest management and mar-

keting of forest products,- research and extension organisms (IDF,

3 Zone d’intérêt écologique, faunistique et floristique4 Zone importante pour la conservation des oiseaux5 Zone de protection spéciale des oiseaux6 Zone spéciale de conservation

France

AFOCEL, ARMEF, FOGEFOR…)- other actors such as :- forest logging industries,- wood processing industries,- the ONC (Office National de la Chasse),

standing for the French hunters,- various environmental associations ...

4.3 Forest policy tools

There are basically three main objectives forthe range of forest policy tools existing inFrance:1. protection of the French forest resource,2. to fight the splitting of properties in order toachieve larger management units,3. to encourage long term investment.

During the last 50 years, numerous forest policytools have been set up with a view to achievethose general objectives.

The establishment of a tax system aiming topreserve the existing forest resource was initi-ated as early as the 30’s. The current range oftaxes in France goes from income taxes towealth, property, inheritance taxes...

Grants are also used as an inducement to for-estry thanks to the FFN (Fonds Forestier Na-tional). The FFN, set up in 1946, is responsi-ble for most of the grants allowed in France(for both private and public or community for-ests). The means of assistance provided fromthe FFN are of three forms: materials, cashgrants and loans. The FFN is a fund internal tothe forestry sector so that it could isolate itselffrom variations in government provision ofmoney. Until 1991, the FFN was financed ondeductible charges levied on all products of thewood-processing industry consumed in Francebut the use of this specific tax system stoppedin 1991 as the European Court considered thatit was not adjusted to the free EU trade. Greatdifficulties have then been encountered by theFFN to compensate the lack of this tax rev-enue. One of the solutions consisted in increas-ing the proportion of general public funds inthe financing of the organisation. Despite these

efforts, the total source mobilised by the FFNhas become significantly lower than what it wasbefore 1991: 65.9 millions ECU in 1994 com-pared to 123.1 millions ECU in 1990. Thismoney is normally spent on general aims ofthe forest policy. It is not, for example, nor-mally devoted to the improvement of sawmills(as it could have been in former arrangements).

The main forest grants currently existing inFrance are basically subsidies or exemptionfrom taxes (complete or partial). Those grantsare summarised below.

Subsidies- forest investment of state forest revenues- global subsidy to community forestry- national forest fund & other national subsi-

dies- European subsidies and associated national

funds- regional and local subsidies

Exemption from taxes- for plantations- for forest sales, donations, legacies…- for forests in the frame of wealth taxes- for changes of value

Finally, the organisation of research, develop-ment and vulgarisation systems can also be con-sidered as an useful instrument for the propermanagement of French forests.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other nationalpolicy areas

The objectives defined for forestry in France(ranging from timber production to environ-mental and recreation concerns) imply that themanagement of the French forest resource can’tbe ensured just thanks to a forest policy docu-ment. The management of the French forestresource is also a concern for the land man-agement and the environmental policies.

Forests are indeed mentioned in the buildingand urban land use code (Code de l’urbanisme)with, for example, the classification of forested

France

zones as protected area (article L411.1) or assensitive natural areas (article L130.1) on theland use plan (Plan d’Occupation des Sols).

Many areas submitted to protection measures,on behalf of the French environmental policy,are forested. This could explain the existingrelation between the environmental and theforest policy in France. The legislation for themanagement of French natural reserves, is setup of protection series or the inventory of spe-cial interest natural habitats (such as ZNIEFF7,ZICO8, ZPS9 or ZSC10) undertaken in the frame-work of the national environmental policy con-siderably influence the management of a sig-nificant proportion of the French forests.

4.5 EU forests and forest related policies

Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)The CAP started relatively recently to have adirect influence on forest management inFrance. In 1992, the European Community pro-posed a grant system for the afforestation ofagricultural lands (CEE n°2080/92 - 06/06/92).This system has been then slightly modified tosuit the French conditions and adopted in 1995(Prime au Boisement des Terres Agricoles(PBTA) - D94-1054 - 01/12/94).

This PBTA is only one amongst all the initia-tives taken by the CAP. Its effect on afforesta-tion rates is sometimes discussed all the morethat it is challenged by lots of other CAP regu-lation systems such as for fallow lands for in-stance.

4.6 Forest education and research

The organisation of forest research in Franceis rather complicated due to the existence of adouble system of education at the university

level but also to the diffusion of semi-publicorganisations which are generally largely fi-nanced by different departments.

The main forest research organisation existingin France is the INRA (Institut National de Re-cherche Agronomique) and to a lesser extentthe AFOCEL (Association Forêt Cellulose) andCEMAGREF (Centre de Machinisme Agricoleet de Génie Rural des Eaux et Forêts). Researchco-ordination inside the INRA is guaranteedby two joint bodies. The Higher Council of Ag-ricultural Research (which establishes the gen-eral objectives and priorities of the organisa-tion and maintains a close relationship withthe productive sector) and the Scientific Com-mittee (which promotes the set up of interdis-ciplinary research projects guiding long termactivities).

A wide range of numerous small researchgroups also contribute to forest research inFrance. The ENGREF (French Institute of For-estry Environmental and Agricultural Sci-ences), for example, can be considered as oneof those research stations.

Forest education in France is also quite com-plicated. It relies on different education andtraining systems depending on the final quali-fications which are aimed for.

Skilled forest workers and technicians receivea complete formation essentially relying onfieldwork. The forest workers are generallytrained in Agricultural colleges (BEPAforestier) while the technicians, qualified formiddle management posts, receive a two yearformation called BTS forestier (standing forBrevet de Technicien Supérieur).

As for MSc, their formation is basically en-sured in France by the ENGREF (the FrenchInstitute of Forestry, Agricultural and Environ-

7 Zone d’intérêt écologique, faunistique et floristique8 Zone importante pour la conservation des oiseaux9 Zone de protection spéciale des oiseaux10 Zone spéciale de conservation

France

mental Sciences). Indeed, there is no faculty offorestry in France.

Two different training are ensured in theENGREF. The forest managers called IF(Ingénieurs Forestier) are qualified to super-vise the work and management of technicianson an average 15 000 to 30 000 ha forest dis-trict. The GREF engineers (Génie Rural desEaux et Forêts) tend to be trained for higherresponsibility tasks.

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

Structural weakness of the French forest sectorThe problems faced by the forest industries inFrance (mainly originating in the splitting ofthe private forest property and the lack of ver-tical integration and the resulting high supply-ing costs) have already been stressed in thisreport (refer to 3.3). Those problems consider-ably reduce the competitiveness of the Frenchwood sector and are consequently consideredas some of the major priorities for the forestsector welfare.

Improving the French forest industries’ com-petitiveness could then be considered as one ofthe main challenge for the current French for-est policy. Intensifying the relations betweenthe forest owners, forest managers, forests har-vesters and other middlemen could be one ofthe solutions.

Sustainable forest management andecocertification.Another challenge could be linked to the con-stantly rising environmental requirements.

There has been indeed, relatively recently, aninternationalisation of all the debates about for-estry. Since 1992 (UNCED conference hold inRio) and the June 1993 Helsinki conference,the concern of a sustainable management ofthe forest resources has taken an internationaldimension. France took part in this internation-alisation and especially tried to implement thedecisions and principles discussed at the inter-

national level. For example, the document enti-tled “ The sustainable Management of FrenchForests ” published in April 1994 describes thecommitments undertaken by the French gov-ernment at the UNCED conference and at theMinisterial Conferences on the Protection ofEuropean Forests hold in Strasbourg in 1990and in Helsinki in 1993.

Besides, this problematic of sustainable man-agement has already been integrated in the ORFand there is currently a project to include it tothe next French forest orientation law.

As for ecocertification, France took actively partin setting up the document written to adapt theISO 14 000 standards to the forest sector. Inthis document, the problem of the splitting offorest property for setting up of an efficientecocertification scheme has been seriously con-sidered (mainly due to the French insistence).Nevertheless, there is currently noecocertification scheme used in France andgetting prepared to use one in the short termcould be considered as another challenge forFrench forestry.

Integration in the European system.French industries were very sensitive to thecurrency devaluations which occurred in 92-93 in some European countries. In this con-text, the set up of a single currency (which isgoing to be established for 11 out of the 15 cur-rent EU member countries) will probably befavourable to the French forest industry.

Reconsideration of wood as a building mate-rialThere is no true tradition of timber use in thebuilding industry in France. Promoting the useof wood as a construction material could con-sequently be another challenge to be taken intoaccount for the French forest strategy in thecoming years.

The Versailles symposiumThe Versailles symposium was organised on theCSFPF’s initiative. It aimed at giving to all theparties involved in sustainable forest manage-ment a chance to give their opinion and re-sulted in a series of considerations.

France

The emphasis was put on the fact that long termforestry management needs to be debated bythe whole community. It must also be imple-mented by all the forest partners and to insurethat the European forestry sector remains com-petitive it is essential that the ecocertificationprocedures take into account the small forestownership specificities. People also expressedthe wish that this long term management andauthentication partnership founded on the Hel-sinki and Lisbon conferences and based on rel-evant geographical negotiations be expanded.

The Bianco reportThe French government entrusted Mr Biancowith the preparing of a report aiming at intro-ducing a bill on forestry modernisation (dueto be brought in front of the French parlia-ment in 1999). In his report, Mr Bianco rec-ommends the drawing up of a long term planschedule and states its objectives:

- To improve the productivity of the whole in-dustry (particularly by increasing the amountof wood harvested, improving the marketingand ecouraging industrial investments).

- To set up a sustainable forest managementcertification (resulting from a co-operation be-tween all the partners).

- To draw up a plan relating to the use of woodin the construction business (by launching ad-vertising campaigns for the use of wood as amaterial and systematically using wood inpublic buildings).

As far as the means are concerned, Mr Biancoopts for the territorial and contractual approachbased on negotiations between all the partnersinvolved.

France

Organisations related to forestry

ONF, 2, Avenue de St Mandé, 75 012 PARISMinistère de l‘ Agriculture et de la Peche, 78,rue Varenne, 75 007 PARISCEMAGREF, Direction générale, Parc de Tourvoie, BP 44, F 92163 Antony Cedex, Tel: 33+ (1)

40 96 61 21INRA, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 147, rue de l‘Université, 75338 ParisCEDEX 07, Tel: 01 42 75 90 00, Fax: 01 47 05 99 66FNSPFS, Fédération Nationale des Syndicats de Propriétaires Forestiers Sylviculteur, 6, rue de la

Trémaille, 75 008 PARIS, Tel: 01 47 20 36 32FNB, Fédération Nationale du Bois, 1, Place André Malraux, 75 001 PARIS, Tel: 01 42 60 30 27IFN, Domaine des Barres, 45 290 NOGENT sur VERNISSON, Tel: 02 38 28 18 00ENGREF, 19, Avenue du Maine, 75 015 PARISFIF, 14, rue Girardet, 54 042 Nancy CEDEXIDF, 23 Avenue Bosquet, 75 007 PARIS, Tel: 01 40 62 22 80AFOCEL, 164, Bd Haussmann, 75 008 PARISANCRPF, 34, rue Hamelin 75 116 PARIS, Tel: 01 47 20 68 15RFF, Revue Forestière Francaise, ENGREF, 14, rue Griradet, CS4216, F54 042 NancyAFOCEL, Association Foret Cellulose, Domaine de l‘Etancon, 77 370 NANGIS, Tel: 01 60 67

00 30UIB, Union des Industries du Bois, 30, avenue Marceau, 75 008 PARIS, Tel: 01 47 20 62 66

References

Used referencesAgence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l’Energie. (undated). La gestion des vieux papiers

et cartons en France – Bilan et perspectives.Albagli, C. 1998. Conjoncture 98 – Le nouveau bilan économique, politique et social du monde.Chiron, S. and Souiller, C. 1991. Economie forestière: analyse des politiques forestières de

différents pays industrialisésCosta, S. and Peyron, J.L. 1997. Structural changes in roundwood and forest product market in

Europe - Data on roundwood market structure in France.DERF, the department of forestry and countryside, ministry of agriculture, food and fisheries.

1995. Forestry policy in France.De Monza, J.P. (ed). 1991. L’Atlas des Forêts de France.De Monza, J.P. (ed). 1989. Le Grand Atlas de la France rurale.Edition bilingue – Collection Graphagri Forêt Bois. 1996. La Forêt et les Industries du Bois

1996.EFI Proceedings No 17. 1997. Demand and supply analyses of roundwood and forest products

markets in Europe - Overview of present studies.EUROFOR 1 - Parlement Européen - Tome 1. 1994. L’Europe et la forêtEUROFOR 3 - Parlement Européen - Tome 3 .1997. L’Europe et la forêtGrayson, A.J. 1993. Private forestry policy in Western Europe.Hummel and Hilmi. 1989. Forestry policies in Europe, an analysis - FAO forestry paper 92.

Indicators for the sustainable management of French forests (1994).INRA – IUFRO, Occasional paper No 9, (1997). Sustainable forest management - contribution

of research.INRA. 1998. Prospectives : la forêt, sa filière et leurs liens au territoire - Tomes 1 et 2Institut de Promotion et d’Etudes de l’Ameublement. Meubloscope’97

France

Leveque, F. and Peguret, A. .1997. Forêts et Industries du Bois – Structures et Performances:Rapport de M. J.L. Bianco au premier ministre – Revue Forestière Française L-6-1998.Economica. pp. 493-606.

Liagre, J. 1997. La Forêt et le droit – Droit Forestier et Droit Général applicables à tous bois etforêts.

Lochu, S. CTBA . 1996. Bois de construction 1995.Normandin, D. 1995. Les évolutions d’usage des sols en France : constats, perspectives, incidences

des politiques, effets sur la forêt – Cours d’économie forestière.Pettenella, Dr. D. 1987. FAST Occasional papers - No 170, Forestry research in the European

Community: a reviewPeyron, J.L. 1997. Les institutions, cultures et systèmes d’organisation appropriés pour la prise

en compte de long terme forestier.Prudhommeaux, M.J. and Le Corroler, C. 1996. SESSI. Les industries du Bois.Shmidt et al (eds). 1998. New requirements for University Education in Forestry - Proceedings of

a workshop held in Wageningen (Netherlands) in 1997, DEMETER SERIES 1.Tome II - ARBORA - Actes du troisième colloque Sciences et Industries du bois - Bordeaux.

1990. De la forêt cultivée à l’industrie de demain.

Web-sites

Inventaire Forestier National (IFN): http://www.ifn.fr Office National des Forêts (ONF): http://www.onf.frInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA): http://www.inra.frCIRAD département Forêt: http://www.cirad.frMinistère de l’Aménagement du Territoire et de l’Environnement: http://www.environnement.gouv.frComité 21 http://www.comite21.orgUnion de Coopération Forestière Française: http://www.ucff.asso.frExperts forestiers: http://www.arbores.comCOPACEL http://www.copacel.frENGREF: http://www.engref.frCEMAGREF: http://www.cemagref.frLe Centre Technique du Bois et de l’Ameublement (CTBA): http://www.ctba.frFédération Nationale du Bois (FNB): http://www.fnbois.comMeuble France http://www.meublefrance.comL’Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l ‘Energie (ADEME) http://www.ademe.fr

France

Georgia

1 The country

Georgia is located in the central and westernparts of the Transcaucasian region. Its northernborder chiefly extends along the crest of theMain water-divide ridge of the Great Caucasus(Caucasioni). Its eastern border near MountTinov-Rosso slopes down to the southernpiedmonts of the Great Caucasus, stretchesalong the lower River Alazani and approachesthe area where Alazani flows into theMingechaur water reservoir. Its southern bor-der extends along the River Iori and the water-shed of the rivers Iori and Kura, intersects therivers Kura and Debeda, stretches along theLoksky and Nialiskursky ridges, intersects theriver Chorokhi and approaches the Black Sea.In the west, Georgia is washed by the Black Seafrom the Psoy river mouth to Sarpi Town. Thetotal length of the border is 1968,8 km, the landborder stretching for 1660.4 km.

Georgia borders on the Russian Federation inthe north, on the Republic of Azerbaijan in theeast, on the Republic of Armenia in the south,and on Turkey in the southeast. Georgia’swestermost and easternmost points are at 40°05’ and 46° 44’ E. Its southernmost and north-ernmost points are at 41° 07’ and 43° 35’ N.Georgia extends vertically from the Black Sealevel to an altitude of 5068 m (Shkhara Peak).Georgia’s total area is 69.95 thousand sq. km.

1.1 Natural conditions

Georgia is a mountain land. Mountains and foot-hills (Kolkhida, Kartli, and Alazan plains) cover87% of its territory. Georgia’s diverse nature isdue to its geographic position, relief, etc. High-

lands and mountains of medium height occuralong with low mountains, piedmonts,intermontane plains, lowland, and plateaus.

Georgia’s basic orographic units are:1 The Great Caucasus (Caucasioni) Mountain System;2 The Georgian Intermontane Province;3 The Minor Caucasus Mountain System (Meskhetian-Trialetian ridge);4 The South Georgian Highlands.

The Likhsky ridge divides the country into WestGeorgia and East Georgia and is responsible fordifferences in landscape.

1.1.1 Geological structure

Georgia is located in the Alpian foldbelt of Eura-sia. Complex geological structure, the mobileEarth’s crust, and active neotectonic movementsare characteristic. Georgia’s geological structureis basically formed by Mesozoic and Cenozoicdeposits. Older Precambrian and Palaeozoicrocks are scarce.

Georgia’s reliefs are genetically diverse. Reliefsgenerated by tectonic and petrogenic processes,gravitation, erosion, glaciation, karst formation,human activities and other factors occur.

1.1.2 Climate

Georgia’s climate is highly varied. It is affectedby the fact that Georgia lies at the boundarybetween the moderately humid subtropicalMediterranean, the dry continental Aral-Caspianbasin province, and arid Frontal Asian highlands.

Georgia

Author:Georgy Nikolaevich Gigauri,Professor, Director, Institute of Mountain Forestry,Georgian Academy of SciencesMindely 9, Tbilisi, Georgia

Georgia

Humid subtropical climate dominates in WestGeorgia, whereas moderately humid and drysubtropical climate with a much smaller amountof precipitation prevails in East Georgia. Con-tinental climate is also characteristic of the SouthGeorgian Highland. A variety of climatic zonesranging from a humid-subtropical zone to a per-petual snow-and-glacier zone occurs over a rela-tively small territory. The main factors affect-ing Georgia’s climate are the Black Sea, whichlies in the west, and high Caucasian ridges thatprotect Georgia from cold air coming from thenorth. The Black Sea smoothens air tempera-ture variations and contributes to abundant pre-cipitation, particularly in West Georgia. Meanannual precipitation varies from 400 to 4500 mm(on the Chakvian Ridge slope in the vicinity ofMount Mtirala near Batumi). Maximum precipi-tation zones occur at latitudes of 300-500 to3500 m a.s.l. in West Georgia and at latitudes of1200-3500 m a.s.l. in East Georgia.

In Georgia, air temperatures are highly contrast-ing. The highest mean annual air temperature isobserved in Sukhumi (+15° C) and the lowest tem-perature (- 12.5° C) in the Caucasian Ridge at analtitude of 5000 m a. s. l. The warmest winter is onthe Kolkhida Plain where mean January tempera-ture is +5 to +7° C. In Georgia, vertical air tem-perature gradient varies from - 0.2 to - 0.9° C.

Owing to its geographic position, Georgia is sup-plied with a substantial amount of sun heat. Thelength of sunshine ranges from 1350 to 2520 h/year. Radiation balance is maximum in the hu-mid subtropical zone (52-53 ccal/cm2) and mini-mum in the Great Caucasus high mountain zone(25 ccal/cm2). Because Georgia’s relief is highlyrugged, general air circulation is transformed andthe climate is diverse. Therefore, Georgia is splitinto 13 markedly different climatic provinces.

1.1.3 Soils

Georgia has a variety of soil types. Almost allknown soil types occur there. Each type is sub-divided into zones, subzones, provinces, andsubprovinces, depending on soil-forming con-ditions. Georgia falls into 48 soil provinces and169 subprovinces.

Three major soil provinces are:

1) The West Georgia soil province: It is locatedbetween the Black Sea and the Likhian Ridge.Lowland bog and podzol soils, hummocky-hilly piedmont red and yellow earths occuralong with mountain-forest and mountain-meadow soils.

The mountain-forest zone occupies a large terri-tory in the medium-height mountain region domi-nated by brown forest soils. Podzolic burozemsoils are common in the upper part of this zone,particularly in the dark coniferous forest zoneformed by Nordmann fir and Oriental spruce.Podzolic brown forest soils dominantly occurunder the canopy of spruce, fir, and beech stands.Forests grow on these soils over a large area.

2) The East Georgia soil province: is representedby plains, foothills and mountain ranges thatlie east of the Likhian Ridge.

Chestnut and chernozem soils occur in the drysteppe and steppe zone. Brown soils are com-mon in the Eldarian neardesert and in the south-ern Iorian plateau. Chestnut (grey-brown) soilsare encountered in the Gardabanian,Marneulian, Rustavian, and Samgorian steppesand in the southern Iorian plateau, particularlyin the Taribanian and Natbeurian steppes. Dark-chestnut, chestnut, and light-chestnut soils aredifferentiated.

Chernozem soils are widespread in the elevatedpart of the Iorian plateau and in the Samgorian,Garedgian, Azamburian and particularlyShirakian steppes.

Cinnamon brown soils are common in mostpiedmont and low-mountain areas.

In East Georgia, the mountain-forest zone cov-ers a large area in the Great Caucasus, theTrialetian and Somkhitian ridges. Brown soils arewidespread in the lower part of this zone, andbrown forest soils are common in its middle andupper parts. Mountain-meadow soils occur inalpine and subalpine belts in the highland zoneof East Georgia.

Georgia

3) The South Georgia soil province: which in-corporates the Javakhetian, Tsalkian-Janisianand Erushetian highlands, Nialiskurian Ridgeslopes, the Alakhtsikhian basin, etc. There,mountain chernozems formed at an altitude of1500-2200 m a.s.l. and meadow chernozem-like soils predominate and grade upwards intomountain-meadow soils. Brown forest soils arewidespread in the mountain-forest zone, darkbrown forest dominating in spruce and fir for-ests that grow on northern slopes and their thin,poorly developed varieties occurring on steepslopes. The stable structure of mountain-for-est soils is due to a high percentage of humusand high absorbing capacity.

1.1.4 Vegetation cover

The diversity of Georgia’s vegetation cover isdue to a variety of physico-geographic and soil-climate conditions, complex relief, the contrast-ing pattern of altitudinal belts and the fact thatthe territory lies at the contact of geneticallydifferent phytolandscapes. Georgia exhibits abroad range of plant formations from neardeserttypes that occur at piedmonts in the most aridareas of East Georgia to exuberant forests af-fected by humid, almost subtropical climate inthe Kolkhida mountain province and bizarrecryophilic (cold-resistant) highland vegetation.

Georgia has about 5000 wild floral plant spe-cies and some 8300 spore plant species (75pteridophyte, about 600 moss, 600 lichen, 5000fungus, and 2000 alga species).

A high level of local endemism is characteristicof Georgia’s vegetation cover. Some relicts, suchas Medvedev’s birch, Pontic oak, Imeretianbuckthorn, Kolkhida moonseed, wingnut, Cau-casian blueberry, Caucasian laurelcherry, somerhododendron species, etc., have survived. Thegenus Epigea is now represented by only threespecies: one grows in Japan, one in NorthAmerica, and one in Georgia (Adjaria).

Substantial differences in climate between Eastand West Georgia are responsible for differencesin their vegetation cover: West Georgia has noforest-free belt formed by semi-arid and arid

vegetation; forests cover plains and mountainslopes at sea level and above. Therefore, in WestGeorgia the simpler vertical zonation profile isrepresented by four major belts: a forest belt(from sea level to 1900 m), a subalpine belt(1990-2500 m a.s.l.), an alpine belt (2500-3100m a.s.l.) and a nival belt (over 3100 m a.s.l.).

In East Georgia, the vertical zonation of veg-etation is more complex. Six major belts aredifferentiated:

1) a neardesert, dry steppe, and arid thin forestbelt (150-600 m a.s.l.);

2) a forest belt (600-1900 m a.s.l.);3) a subalpine belt (1900-2500 m a.s.l.);4) an alpine belt (2500-3000 m a.s.l.);5) a subnival belt (3000-3500 m a.s.l.) and6) a nival belt (over 3500 m a.s.l.).

Forest-free formations of semi-arid ecosystemsdominated by mountain-steppe vegetation alsooccur locally in the forest and subalpine beltsof the South Georgian Highland.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Population

According to the 1989 census of the population,Georgia’s total population was estimated at5401000 (table 1), including 3 758 000 Geor-gians (69.6% of total population). Georgia is amulti-national state. Other nations and minori-ties are Armenians (8%), Russians (6.3%),Azerbaijanians (5.6%), Ossets (3.0%),Abkhazians (1.7%), and others (5.8%).

The diversity of native conditions is responsi-ble for population density, economic develop-ment and the irregular distribution of popula-tion in the territories discussed. The Northmountain zone located on the southern slopesof the Great Caucasus that dominantly have deepgorges and steep slopes is the least populatedpart of Georgia: it is inhabited by not more than5% of total population, as compared with 8% inthe South mountain zone. Most people (87%)live in the intermontane depression zone, whichextends from west to east, and in the Black Sea

Georgia

belt - the most densely populated provinces ofGeorgia with both rural and urban population.Population density is much higher in this zone(up to 200-250 people per sq. km) than inmountain zones.

Forty-three per cent of the popultation live in WestGeorgia and fifty-seven per cent in East Georgia.Average population density per sq. km in Georgiais 78 people. East Georgia is more densely popu-lated (82 people/ sq. km) than West Georgia (73people/sq. km) presumably because Tbilisi, thecapital city of Georgia with a population in excessof 1 million, is located in East Georgia.

The areal distribution of population clearly ex-hibits a vertical zonation pattern: populationdecreases from an altitude of 600 m a.s.l. up-wards, so that- 85.1% of the total population live at an alti-

tude below 800 m a.s.l.;- 11.8% live at an altitude of 800 to 1600 m a.s.l.;- 3.1% live at an altitude of 1600 to 2400 m a.s.l.

The upper boundary of the populated territoryis at an altitude of 2400 m a.s.l.

1.2.2 Economy

Georgia is an agrarian and industrial country. Ag-riculture is a well-developed sector of Georgia’seconomy. Viniculture, fruit growing, horticulture,tea growing, citrus fruit growing, field husbandry,and cattle breeding are of primary importance.Georgia is recognized as a classical country fa-mous for viniculture and fine wines. Georgia isthe birthplace of the oldest wheat varieties.

Georgia’s priority industries are mechanical en-gineering, metallurgy, power engineering, coaland manganese production, chemical, light andfood industries. Tremendous volumes of oil aretransported from Azerbaijan via Georgia to West

Europe.

1.2.3 Political structure

Georgia is a sovereign, independent, democraticcountry. The legal basis of the state system isprovided by Georgia’s Constitution endorsed bythe Parliament on 24 August, 1995. It is statedin the Constitution that the Parliament is a su-preme executive body elected every 4 years bygeneral secret ballot. The country is headed bya President who is elected every 5 years by gen-eral secret ballot. Georgia is a member of theGeneral Assembly of the United Nations. Thestate language is Georgian. The City of Tbilisiis the capital of Georgia.

The Abkhazian Autonomous Republic (capitalcity Sukhumi) and the Adjarian Autinomous Re-public (capital city Batumi) are part of Georgia.

Georgia is a developing country. However, it hasa high intellectual potential, original old spiritualand material culture, a variety of natural resourcesand a favourable geopolitical position. It is hoped,therefore, that Georgia will soon overcome theongoing financial and economic crisis.

Georgia is now at the initial stage of transitionto a market economy. The main goals of thecountry are: a) to overcome the economic crisis in the near future; b) to speed up transition to market economy and privatization of state property; c) to steadily supply the population and economy with energy resources; d) to improve the social and economic insur ance of the population; e) to develop transportation facilities; f) to attract foreign investors and seek for for eign credits.

Unit of measurement Total West Georgia East GeorgiaArea 1000 hectares 6950.0 3195.0 3755.0Population 1000 people 5401.0 2324.0 3077.0Population density per sq. km 78 73 82

Table 1. Distribution of Georgia’s population in big regions.

Georgia

2 Forest resources and their use

In Georgia, forests are of national value. Theymarkedly differ from each other in geographicdistribution, biological properties and ecologi-cal characteristics, which, in turn, is primarilydue to a variety of their genetic, growth, andformation patterns.

2.1 Forest history

The background of Georgia’s flora, includingforests, is complex and largely obscure. It isknown from the literature (A. Dolukhanov, 1981)that Eocene flora substantially differed from thepresent flora. It is most similar to the present In-dian-Australian tropical flora with its evergreenwoody species. Climate, relief and vegetationhave considerably changed subsequently. Ther-mophilic plants have died out to give way to cry-ophilic species that grew earlier in the mountains.It is assumed that forest-free drought-resistantplant formations have spread over large areas inthe Caucasus since Myocene time, when landexpansion was active enough to let them spreadfrom the arid centres that had formed by that timein the eastern Mediterranean.

Gradual cooling of climate resulted in the com-plete disappearance of tropical flora (in thepresent sense). In Pliocene time, foothill beltvegetation was affected by humid climate. It waschiefly represented by subtropical forest eco-systems and dominated by deciduous species inthe upper storey of stands. At higher latitudes,forests spread in mountains under moderatelywarm climate conditions. Many woody specieshave survived there.

The earliest evidence for Georgia’s forests wasprovided by old Greek and Roman authors.Some well-known Greek scientists and think-ers, such as Herodotos, Hypocratos,Xenophonthos, Strabonos and others, note thatthe Georgian tribes that lived in the Caucasusand in Minor Asia owned forest-rich territories.They also note that ship-building timber wasproduced in Kolkhida. Valuable information onGeorgia’s nature, particularly forests, is provided

in chronicles on the invasion of Mongols, Per-sians, Turks, etc. and in some travel notes. Ital-ian missionary Arcanjello Lambert (18th cen-tury) and German scientist, member of the St.Petersburg Academy Anton Guldenstedt (18thcentury) collected valuable data on the speciescomposition of forests in Georgia.

Georgian Medieval historic sources provide vo-luminous data on Georgia’s forests and timberindustry. For example, Forest Service wasfounded by the Tzar in Middle Ages for forestprotection and management. Based on the typeof property, forests were subdivided into state-owned, church-owned, and rural types. The Bookof Laws written by Tzar Vakhtang VI containedclauses on forests. Of great value is the contribu-tion made by well-known 18th-century Georgianscholar Vakhushti Bagrationi who presented in-teresting data on Georgia’s forests in his book“Geographic description of Georgia”. He was thefirst European scientist to call attention to verti-cal zonation in the distribution of the vegetationcover, particularly forest vegetation.

In the late 19th-early 20th centuries, wood con-sumption in industry, transport, and agriculturehad substantially increased. Large-scale loggingconducted by big timber companies caused anappreciable damage to forests. In many areasforests were thinned or completely cut. Sometimber products were exported.

2.2 Forest ownership

In 1921, Soviet power was declared in Georgia,all forests were nationalized and became stateproperty. In the early 1930s, about 20% of state-owned forests were granted to collective farmsfor permanent use. In 1984, collective farmswere abolished and forests have been supervisedever since by governmental bodies. All forestsin Georgia are now state-owned. Forests aremanaged by:- the State Forestry Department (about 2,480

000 ha);- the State Department of Protected Territories,

Nature Reserves, and Game Management (ca.54,000 ha). There are no private forests inGeorgia.

Georgia

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Land utilization

Georgia has versatile agriculture. Total agricul-tural land area is 3.1 M ha, including 0.8 M haof ploughland and 1.7 mln. ha of hayland andpastures. Georgia has 0.16 ha of ploughland and0.62 ha of agricultural land per capita. The mainsectors of agriculture are grain farming, vini-culture, fruit growing, subtropical cultures (teaand citrus fruit growing), potato growing, to-bacco production, animal husbandry, etc.

2.3.2 Distribution and functions of forests

According to 1996 data, Georgia’s total for-est area is 2,988 000 ha, including 2,752.3thousand ha of forested area. The percentageof forests is 39.8%.

For more information on Georgia’s forests, seetable 2.

Table 2 shows that the percentage of forests ismuch higher in West Georgia (52%) than in EastGeorgia (29%) and that forest productivity ismuch higher in West Georgia (average reservesper ha 173.2 m3) than in East Georgia (averagereserves per ha 134.4 m3) primarily because soilsand climate are mare favourable for forest veg-etation in West Georgia than in East Georgia.

The highest percentage of forests estimated ver-tically is reported from the middle and upperforest zones.

Forests fall into mountain (98%) and plain (2%)types, the latter type being chiefly represented by

Kolkhida lowland forests. Total wood (standingtimber) reserves are estimated at 434 M m3. Aver-age reserves per ha are 158 m3 Total mean woodincrement is 4.6 M m3 (1.8 m3 per ha). Forestedarea per capita is 0.51 ha and wood reserves percapita are 80 m3.

The percentage of forests is higher in Georgiathan in Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Greece,Spain, Poland, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine,Belarus, etc.

Forests fulfil various functions. From table 3 onecan see that Georgia’s forest fund is dominated bysoil-protecting and water-regulating resort forestsand green-zone forests that cover a total area of 2779.1 thous. ha (over 93% of all forests).

The areal distribution of forests in Georgia isirregular. Forests occupy over 50% of some ar-eas such as Gagra, Gulripshi, Mestia, Lentekhi,Oni, Borzhomi, Akhmeta, etc., but they arescarce (less than 10%) in other parts of the coun-try, eg. Dedoplistskaro, Ninotsminda,Akhalkalaki, Tsalka, Kazbeki, Gardabani, etc.The distribution of forests on the basis ofhillslope steepness is as follows: up to 10°-5.5%;11-20°-16.5%; 21-30°-34.8%; 31-40°-34.8%;41° and above - 8.4%. Most forests (78%) growon steep (at least 21°) mountain slopes.

The distribution of forests in terms of altitude a.s.l.is irregular, too. Forests that grow at an altitude upto 500 m make up 7.3% of total forest area; thosegrowing at an altitude of 501 to 1000 m accountfor 19.5%; forests that occur at an altitude of 1001to 1500 m make up 35.5%; those occurring at analtitude of 1501 to 2000 m account for 30.7%,and those growing above 2001 m make up 7.0%.Consequently, most forests (92.7%) grow onmountain slopes from 501 m a.s.l.

Indices Total for Georgia West Georgia East Georgia1. Forested area, thousand hectares 2752.3 1650.0 1102.32. Percentage of forests 39.8 52 293. Wood reserves, mln. (m3) 434.0 258.8 148.24. Average reserves per ha (m3) 158.0 173.2 134.45. Forested area per capita, (ha) 0.51 0.71 0.366. Wood reserves per capita, (m3) 80 123 48

Table 2. Specific information about the forests of Georgia

Georgia

Such distribution of forests in terms of moun-tain slope steepness and altitude a.s.l. createssome farming problems in mountain forests.

In West Georgia, mixed subtropical forestsformed by alder and Pterocarya species grow atsea level to an altitude of 500 m in the Kolkhidadepression. Imeretian oak (Quercus imeretinaStev.), zelkova (Zelkowa carpinifolia), Europeanchestnut (Castanea Sativa Mell.), oriental beech(Fagus orientalis Lipsky), European ash(Fraxinus excelsior L.), persimmon (DiospurusLotus L.), box-tree (Buxus colchica), wingnut(Pterocarya caucasica C.), fig (Ficus carica L.),maple (Acer platanoides L.), Pitsunda pine(Pinus pithyosa Stev.), hornbeam (Carpinuscaucasica A.), Caucasian linden (Tilia caucasicaRupr.), etc. occur in this belt. Shrubs are repre-sented by Grecian laurel (Laurus nobilis L.),laurelcherry (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.),bladder-nut (Staphylea colchica Stev.), Cauca-sian blueberry (Vaccinium arectostafhylos L.),Pontian and Ungerna rhododendron(Rhodedendron ponticum and R. ungerna), etc.

The chestnut forest belt occurs at an altitude of500-600 to 1000-1100 m a.s.l.There, chestnutgrows together with hornbeam, Gartvis oak,Caucasian linden, maple, forest pear, etc. Lau-rel, Pontian rhodedendron, Caucasian blueberry,etc. are encountered in the undergrowth.

In East Georgia, the arid thin or light forest beltoccurs at an altitude of 300-400 to 500-600 ma.s.l. under dry climate conditions (precipitation200-300 mm/year). Xerophytic plants, such as

turkterebinth pistache (Pistacia mutica Fisch etmey), hackberry (Leltis caucasica Willd), andjuniper (Juniperus foetidissima Willd and J.Oblonga), are common there. Iberian oak (Q.iberica) forests grow at an altitude of 500-600to 1000-1100 m a.s.l. Oak occurs together withEuropean ash, hedge maple, hornbeam, andOriental hornbeam. Medlar, dogwood, and spin-dle-tree are encountered in the undergrowth.

In West and East Georgia, the vertical distribu-tion of forests at altitudes above 1000-1100 ma.s.l. is as follows:

Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky)-domi-nated forests grow on mountain slopes at alti-tudes of 1000-1100 to 1500-1600 m a. s. l.; bothunmixed and mixed, dominantly uneven-aged,multi-storeyed beech forests mixed with Cau-casian hornbeam, European ash, Caucasianlinden, Norway maple, Oriental spruce, andNordmann fir occur. Laurelcherry, Caucasianrhododendron, Pontian oak, Caucasian blue-berry, etc. are encountered in the undergrowth.Biogroups of common woody species with bio-logical and sylvicultural characteristics of theirown are abundant in small to relatively largezones in beech forests and in other stands, de-pending on external growth conditions such asrelief, soils, climate, exposure to sunlight, slopesteepness, etc. This all shows the biological di-versity of these forests.

Mixed and unmixed dark coniferous forestsdominated by Nordmann fir and Oriental sprucechiefly grow in West Georgia at altitudes of1400-1500 to 2100-2300 m a. s. l. Uneven-aged,

Function of forests Forest area, 1000 ha Percentage of Georgia’stotal forest area

1. Nature reserves 168.9 5.72. Forests formed by valuable woody species 4.7 -3. Green zone of cities and industrial centres 265.7 8.94. Close-zone resort forests 115.1 3.95. Remote-zone resort forests 775.5 26.06. Soil-protecting and water-regulating forests 1623.1 54.37. Protecting and commercial plain forests 35.0 1.2Total 2988.0 100

Table 3. Distribution of forests based on their functions.

Georgia

multi-storeyed dark coniferous forests, particu-larly fir stands, have a high vertical density ofcanopy. Four to five independent age genera-tions (storeys) of stands are differentiated. Thesoil cover is dominated by brown forest soils.Podzolic brown forest soils occur in sprucestands on plains and gentle slopes. Forest veg-etation is formed by highly productive fir andspruce stands mixed with beech, aspen, linden,yew, forest pear, mountain ash, etc. Pontian rho-dodendron, laurelcherry, Caucasian blueberry,Caucasian rhododendron and other plants oc-cur in the undergrowth.

The subalpine forest belt extends from 2000-2100 to 2200-2400 m a.s.l. Forest-meadow andmountain-meadow soils are common. Forestvegetation is dominated by thin forests consist-ing of high-mountain maple (Acer Trautfeter),Litvinov birch, mountain ash, goat willow, Ori-ental spruce, and Nordmann fir. Oriental beechis occasionally encountered. High grasses arewidespread on subalpine meadows.

Depending on forest density, total forested areais distributed as follows:- low-density (0.3-0.4) forests account for 17.5%

of all forests;- medium-density (0.5-0.7) forests - 79.1% , and- highly dense (0.8-1.0) forests - 3.4%.

Georgia’s forests are dominated by medium-den-sity stands. A high percentage of low-densitystands is due to large-scale cutting. In the past,cutting instructions were often violated, so thatat least 40-50% of wood reserves were cut at atime. As a result, highly dense forests have beenstrongly thinned, their productivity has decreased,and the general state of the forests has deteriorated.

The age distribution of forests is irregular, too.Forests fall into the following age groups:- young stands cover 6.3% of total forest area,

and their wood reserves account for 1.5% oftotal wood reserves;

- medium-aged stands make up 32.9 and 17.1%,respectively;

- immature stands-17.9 and 17.1%, respectively,and;

- mature and older stands- 42.9 and 59.6%.

Depending on productivity (quality class), Geor-gia’s forests are subdivided as follows:- highly productive stands (classes I-II) cover

21% of total forested area;- medium-productivity stands (class III) - 44.9%

and;- low-productivity stands (classes IV-V)-33.7%.

Consequently, highly productive and medium-productivity stands make up 2/3 (66%) of Geor-gia’s forests primarily because the soils and cli-mate are favourable for their growth and becausemajor forest-forming woody species, such asbeech, fir, pine, etc., have some characteristicsof their own.

2.3.3 Forest composition

The woody species composition of Georgia’sforests is highly diverse. About 400 woody andshrub species are known, each forming an indi-vidual plant and animal community. However,only some species form big ecosystems, whereasmost trees and shrubs occur as individualbiogroups in forests dominated by major for-est-forming species. Therefore, Georgia’s for-ests are biologically diverse. The compositionof forests primarily depends on relief, climate,the physicochemical properties of soils, etc. thataffect the genesis, growth, development, andformation of forests. However, forests are notpassive. Being nature’s active vital force, for-ests substantially affect the environment.

Although hundreds of various trees and shrubsgrow in Georgia’s forests, major forest-formingwoody species are Oriental beech, Iberian oak,Nordmann fir, Sosnovsky pine, Caucasianhornbeam, European chestnut, alder, birch, Ori-ental hornbeam, etc. (table 4).

One can see from table 4 that Georgia’s forestsare dominated by deciduous species (83.5%).

Other valuable species that form stands and indi-vidual biogroups or grow individually are Cau-casian linden, European ash, elm, Imeretian oak,high-mountain oak, daphne willow, zelkova, hophornbeam, forest pear, wild apple, box-tree,Pitsunda pine, yew, hawthorn, bladder-nut, per-

Georgia

simmon, dogwood, walnut, etc. Pitsunda pine,Imeretian oak, elm zelkova, box-tree, yew andother plants are in Georgia’s Red Data Book.

It should be noted that in Georgia, forests aredominantly formed by native stands, which isnot the case in many European countries wheresuch forests are scarce. Artificial stands makeup not more than 5% of all forests.

Primeval (virgin) beech-fir-spruce forests that arescarce in many European countries have survivedin Georgia over an area of about 500 000 ha athigh altitudes in narrow mountain river gorges.They are unique in composition, genesis, growthpatterns, formation, and productivity.

Analysis of experimental data collected by theInstitute of Mountain Silviculture, GeorgianAcademy of Sciences, has shown that primevalforest is a very complex living ecological systemwhere biologically different, closely relatedplants and animals co-exist and collectively af-fect the environment. In primeval forests, or-ganic matter is permanently exchanged, formedand destroyed in a cyclic manner; old genera-tions of trees, shrubs, herbs and other living or-ganisms die out to give way to new generations.

The distribution of undisturbed (primeval) for-ests in terms of major forest-forming species isas follows:- Oriental beech-dominated stands – 356,100 ha;- Nordmann fir-dominated stands – 117,000 ha;- Oriental spruce-dominated stands – 27,400 ha.

Structurally, these are uneven-aged, multi-sto-reyed forests in which at least 4-5 age genera-tions or storeys can be differentiated. Every treeor its biogroup has its own biological andphytocenotic position in a complex mosaicbiogeocenologic pattern. Primeval forests ex-hibit the entire spectrum of biological growthand development stages from seedlings and un-dergrowth to big old trees. Some huge trees are50-70 m high, 2.0-2.5 m thick and 500-700 yearsold. In the dark coniferous forest, where theGagra forestry farm operates (Gaga river gorge),we cut a 668-year-old, 65.4 m high, 2.52 m thickmodel Caucasian fir-tree. In such stands wood

reserves vary from 1,600 to 1,800 m3 and meanannual wood increment is 10-15 m3.

Such high forest productivity indices are pri-marily due to optimum climate and soil condi-tions and the biological characteristics of gen-esis, growth, and formation. The nature of pri-meval forest is perfect, there are no unneces-sary constituents (so-called “production waste”),its metabolism is closed, and all plants, animalsand microorgamisms live in harmony and af-fect each other. In primeval stands the quantita-tive distribution of trees in terms of thicknessand height is uneven, has several peaks and thedistribution sequence is asymmetric. In prime-val fir-beech forest the quantitative distributionof trees on the basis of thickness is as follows:

Trees that have a thickness up to 20 cm accountfor 43.5%;24-40 cm - 30.2%;44-60 cm - 11.3%;64-80 cm - 4.4%;84-100 cm - 3.6%;104-120 cm - 2.6%;124-140 cm - 1.8%;144-160 cm - 1.2%;164-180 cm - 0.9%;184-200 cm - 0.7%.

The structure of primeval beech, fir and spruceforests primarily depends on the height distribu-tion of trees. The mosaic pattern, compactnessor heterogeneity of these forests are caused bysome native spatial distribution characteristics oftrees. This heterogeneity is observed in both theupper and underground parts of stands. The rootsystem of primeval forests is multi-storeyed, too.The amphitheatre-like distribution of trees grow-ing on mountain slopes contributes to better lat-eral illumination and, consequently, providesmaximum sunlight for the trees.

To illustrate the height structure of primevaluneven-aged fir stands, let us subdivide theminto storeys.

1) The upper storey (storey I) is formed by treesthat vary in height from 40-45 to 60-70 cmand in thickness from 120 to 250 cm. They

Georgia

make up 10% of all trees in the stand.2) The middle storey (storey II) consists of 30-

40 m high, 60-120 cm thick trees that accountfor 18-20%.

3) The middle storey (storey III) is built up by 150m high, 24-56 cm thick trees that make up 30%.

4) The lower storey (storey IV) is formed by 7-15 m high, 10-20 cm thick trees that accountfor 40%. They grow slowly in height and thick-ness because of poor illumination.

The genesis and growth of primeval mixedbeech-fir-spruce forests in time and space areshown below.

Variant I1) Mixed fir-spruce-beech stands. Stands formed under their canopy are:2) Mixed beech-fir-spruce stands. Stands formed under their canopy are:3) Fir-spruce-beech stands.

Variant II1) Mixed beech-fir-spruce stands. Stands formed under their canopy are:2) Mixed fir-spruce-beech stands. Stands formed under their canopy are:3) Mixed beech-fir-spruce stands.

Studies have shown that the above successionis chiefly caused by the fact that Oriental beechis more light-demanding than Nordmann fir andOriental spruce. Because the canopy of darkconiferous forest is more transparent than thatof beech forest, it contributes to natural beechregeneration. Spruce and fir are successfullyregenerated in the denser and shadier beech for-est canopy. The compositional succession ofthese forests is a permanent process. The con-stituents of one forest formation penetrate an-other formation.

Forest-forming woody species Area, 1000 hectares % relative to totalforest area

coniferousNordmann fir 189.8 7.0Oriental spruce 138.6 5.0Sosnovsky pine 122.1 4.4Junipers 4.1 0.1total 454.6 16.5

hardwood deciduous speciesOriental beech 1,175.6 42.7Iberian oak 291.0 10.5Caucasian hornbeam 274.9 10.0European chestnut 106.0 3.9Oriental hornbeam 48.1 1.8Other hardwood deciduous species 54.3 2.1Total: 1950.2 70.8

softwood deciduous speciesAlder 200.0 7.3Birch 73.4 2.8Other deciduous species 25.1 0.9Total: 298.5 10.9

Other woody species 12.1 0.4Shrubs 36.9 1.5

Total: 2752.3 100

Table 4. Distribution of forests in terms of major forest-forming woody species.

Georgia

2.3.4 Growing stock

Based on 1996 data, Georgia’s total wood reservesare estimated at 4,34.1 M m3, including:- coniferous stands - 121.9 M m3 (28.1% of total

reserves);- hardwood deciduous stands - 290.3 M m3

(66.9%);- softwood stands - 20 M m3 (4.6%);- other woody species - 0.66 M m3 (0.1%);- shrubs - 1.24 M m3 (0.3%).

The biggest wood reserves are formed by Ori-ental beech-dominated (224.7 mln. m3, 51.8%)and Nordmann fir-dominated (74.7 mln. m3,17.2%) forests. Total mean annual wood incre-ment is 4.6 mln. m3. Mean annual wood incre-ment is 1.7 m3/ha.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Georgia’s forests are heavily damaged by vari-ous entomological pests and diseases. Theshrinkage of elm-trees caused by graphyosis(Graphium ulmi) and European chestnut can-cer (Graphynectria Endothia parasitica) are themost harmful diseases. Forest pests are gypsymoth (Ocnerea dispar), brown-tail moth(Nygmia phaeorhea), loopermoths(Operophthera brumata, Eranis defoliarea), barkbeetles (Dondroctonus micans, Ips typographus,Ips sexdendatus, Ips acuminatus), etc.

Silvicultural and biological methods(entomophags, pheromones, biopreparations,etc.) are basically used to control forest pestsand diseases.

Because prophylaxis is well-organized, large-scale forest fires do not occur in Georgia.

2.4 Reforestation

Although the percentage of forests is Georgia ishigh (39.7%), close attention has always beenpaid to reforestation in forest-free areas. Refor-estation started on a scientific basis in 1890. Thelargest-scale reforestation was carried out after

the Second World War. For example, seedlingswere planted over an area of 41 000 ha in 1926-1946 (including protective reforestation), 102.2thous. ha in 1947-1970, 162.0 thous. ha in 1971-1990, and over 10.5 thous. ha in 1991-1998.

About 70 woody species and shrubs, such aspine, fir, beech, oak, ash, chestnut, Persian wal-nut, maple, black locust, cypress, sumac, al-mond, forest pear, bush cherry-plum etc., areplanted. Sosnovsky pine, scrub pine, ash, blacklocust, are used in protective reforestation alongwith some introduced plants, e. g. Bolle’s pop-lar, Eastern poplar, Japanese cryptomeria, Ori-ental plane tree, Italian and evergreen cypress,etc. Pine accounts for 30% and trees of the wal-nut family 16% of the total area covered by for-est cultures. Some steps are taken to contributeto natural forest regeneration, so that it substan-tially exceeds the extent artificial reforestation.

2.5 Silviculture

According to final cutting instructions, voluntary-selected cutting, group cutting, and gradual cut-ting systems are allowed in Georgia’s mountainforests and clear (strip) cutting in plain forests.

In mountain forests, felling is carried out andwood is utilized in order:a) to retain and strengthen soil-protecting, wa ter-protecting and other functions;b) to prevent erosion;c) to naturally regenerate economically valuable woody species by seeding;d) to increase the productivity and general state of forests.

Cutting techniques are selected with regard forthe biological characteristics of woody species,forest type, mountain slope steepness, the ex-posure of slopes to sunlight, reforestation con-ditions, the erodible resistance of soils, etc.

In mountain forests voluntary-selected cuttingprevails.

In addition to final cutting, all types of thinningare used, depending on the composition, age anddensity of forest and relief.

Georgia

2.5.1 Timber uses

The percentage of harvested timber generally ac-counts for 65.7% of the total amount of wood pro-duced. Timber is chiefly used in industry (furni-ture production, woodworking, etc.), construction,transport, agriculture, etc. Firewood is used forheating. There was a pulp-and-paper plant inZugdidi, West Georgia, but in 1992 productioncame to a halt because of the lack of raw material.

2.5.2 Non-timber forest products

Forests are used for other purposes, e.g. collect-ing wild fruit and berries such as dogwood, ha-zelnuts, medlar, persimmon, Caucasian sumach,currant, gooseberries, blueberries, forest pear,wild apples, bladder-nut, etc. and medicinalplants, e.g. dog rosa, raspberries, St. Johnswort,plantain, sage, celandine, etc.

2.5.3 Conservation

Being of great nature conservation value, Geor-gia’s forests help maintain and increase the bio-logical diversity of landscape and stabilize theenvironment.

3 Forest economy

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy

Forests are now managed on the basis of theState Programme for the sustainable develop-ment of forest economy approved by the Gov-ernment and President of Georgia in December1997 and the Strategy for the development offorest economy elaborated together with theWorld Bank. These acts describe basic goals inreforestation, forest fire and pest protection, themulti-purpose utilization of forest resources,social, economic and financial issues, the ex-pansion of the existing forest road network, theupdating of technical facilities on forestry farms,etc. Special attention is paid to the developmentof a mechanism of transition of the forest sector

to market economy and the implementation ofthis policy. Almost all woodworking and furni-ture companies had been privatized by 1996.However, they can hardly operate nowadaysbecause there are no raw materials and theirproducts have high cost price and are uncom-petitive. Only roundwood is exported, which iseconomically unprofitable.

Some steps will be taken to attract foreign in-vestors and to update the logistics of logging,timber, and woodworking companies. Somejoint harvesting and woodworking companieshave been founded.

3.2 Employment in the forest sector

As of 1997, 11,202 people work in the foresteconomy sector (including 9,697 people in theState Forest Protection Department) and 1,505people in timber industry. By the year 2005,20,684 people are expected to work in the for-est sector (including 13,708 people in the pro-duction sector) and 6,792 people in the com-mercial sector of timber industry.

3.3 Profitability

Profit made by selling forest products is deter-mined as a difference between the incomeachieved by selling forest products and theirproduction and sale costs.

Companies export forest products and excludeexport tariffs from the income achieved. Thelevel of profit made by selling forest products(rate of profit, profitability) typically varies from20 to 30%.

Georgia

4 Forest policy

4.1 Forest legislation (its development andlegal structures, forest-related environmen-tal protection laws)

Before Georgia joined Russia (1801), its legis-lative acts had always had clauses on forest pro-tection and rational forest management.

After joining Russia, all forest relations havebeen formed in accordance with Russia’s forestlaws. In 1921, Soviet power was established andall forests in Georgia were declared state prop-erty. In 1924, Georgia’s first Forest Code wasaccepted, and the forests were subdivided intoforests of state and local value.

In 1931, all forests in the USSR were dividedinto two zones: a timber industry zone and aforest-cultural zone. Georgia’s forests of resortimportance were incorporated in the timber in-dustry zone. It was a mistake because forestswere thinned over large areas and forest reserveswere exhausted.

In accordance with the Act endorsed by theGovernment of the USSR in 1943, differenti-ated forest economy was declared, and all for-ests were subdivided into three groups: I, II, andIII. Based on the Act approved by the Govern-ment of Georgia in 1945, Georgia’s forests weresplit into groups I and II. Most forests (96%)were included in group I. They fulfilled water-regulating, soil-protecting, climate-controllingand other social and ecological functions.

In 1967, new final cutting rules were approved.In 1978, a new forest law developed with re-gard for the forest laws of the USSR was en-dorsed. In 1995, the Parliament of Georgiachanged the law and made some supplements.A new Forest Code is now being developed. Thedraft project will be approved by the Parliamentand President of Georgia.

In 1958, the Law on Nature Conservation inGeorgia” was approved for the first time inGeorgia. In 1996, the Parliament of Georgiaendorsed a new law “On Protection of

Georgia’s External Environment” with a clauseon forest protection.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest-relatedpolicies

4.2.1 Government forestry bodies

Forests are managed by the State Forestry De-partment in Georgia, by the State Departmentsin the Abkhazian Autonomuos Republic and theAdjarian Autonomous Republics and by districtsylvicultural enterprises.

The forests studied by the V. Z. Gulisashvili In-stitute of Mountain Silviculture are managed bythe Gorian and Didgorian experimental farms andthe Tsitelkhidian Experimental Forest Station.

In protected territories, nature reserves and wild-life areas forests are managed by the State De-partment of Protected Territories, Nature Re-serves and Game Management.

About 160 000 ha of forests are still being man-aged by the Ministry of Agriculture and Foodof Georgia.

4.3 Forest policy tools

Some instructions, methods and standards, suchas new final cutting and thinnng instructions(1993), new rules for selling standing timber,an instruction on responsibility for violation offorest laws (1986), schemes for planting forestcultures (1998), etc. have been worked out andapproved for the implementation of forest laws.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

Georgia’s forest policy is pursued in accordancewith national policy because all forests are de-clared state property and all principal and stra-tegic forest management problems are solvedby the state.

Georgia

4.5 Forest education and research

The Tbilisi State University was founded in1918. It has the Agronomy Department openedto train specialists in forestry.

In 1924, the first group of silviculturists wasgranted university certificates. This work wassupervised by Prof. S. Z. Kurdiani who foundedGeorgia’s first School of Forestry.

In the early 1930s, the Tbilisi Forest- TechnicalInstitute was founded. Its Forestry Departmenttrained forestry engineers until 1938.

In 1938, the Tbilisi Forest-Technical Institutewas closed and the Forestry Department becamepart of the Georgian Institute of Agriculture, nowthe Georgian Agrarian University, which trainsspecialists in forestry. Every year 25silviculturists get higher education certificates.The Borzhomi School of Forestry, now Schoolof Construction, trained silviculturists who gotsecondary education certificates.

The pioneer study of Georgia’s forests was con-ducted in the mid-19th century in the BorzhomiEstate owned by Grand Duke Mikhail,Russiantzar’s brother, under the supervision of Y.Medvedev and A. Gamrekel who also workedout the first forest management project forBorzhomi Gorge forests. Subsequently, Prof. S.Z. Kurdiani and other scientists continued tostudy biology of forest species.

Systematic large-scale studies in silviculture,forest management, forest inventory and otherfields started after opening the Tbilisi ForestResearch Institute (1945), now the Institute ofMountain Forestry, Georgian Academy of Sci-ences, founded by Prof. V. Z. Gulisashvili.

The native characteristics of forest are also stud-ied by the Forestry Department of the GeorgianAgrarian University, the Institute of Botany(Georgian Academy of Sciences), the Tbilisi andSukhumi Botanical Gardens (Georgian Academyof Sciences).

The Institute of Mountain Forestry is Georgia’sleading research institute where silvicultural

problems are studied and silvicultural practicesare done on a scientific basis. It was the leadinginstitute of mountain forestry in the former So-viet Union.

The priority fields of research done by the insti-tute are:a) the biological and silvicultural characteris tics of forests;b) the genesis, growth, and evolution of major mountain forest formations;c) the social and ecological (soil-, water-, cli mate-regulating, etc.) functions of forests;d) development of rational and effective scien tifically-based regeneration and natural re forestation methods;e) working out environmentally acceptable fi nal

cutting and thinning rules to maintainthesustainability and inexhaustibility of forestresources; the theoretical and practical aspectsof selective economy;

f) the biological and ecological characteristics of forest pests and diseases; working out inte-grated pest protection systems with an empha-sis on biomethods.

Georgia

Organisations connected with the forest sector:

The State Forestry Department of Georgia, Mindeli St., 9, Tbilisi 380086.The State Department of Protected Territories, Nature Reserves and Game Economy, I.Chavchavadze Prospect., 84, Tbilisi 380062.The Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources of Georgia, M. Kostava St., 68, Tbilisi380015.V. Z. Gulisashvili Institute of Mountain Forestry, Georgian Academy of Sciences, Mindeli St., 9,Tbilisi 380086.Georgian Agrarian University, 380031, 13 th kilometre on the Military Georgian Highway.L. A. Kanchaveli Georgian Institute for Plant Protection, I. Chavchavadze Prospect, 82, Tbilisi380062.N. Ketskhoveli Institute of Botany, Georgian Academy of Sciences, Kodzhorskoye Shosse, 1,Tbilisi 380007.I. Dzhavakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Botany and Ecology Chairs, Universitetskaya St., 10,Tbilisi.Tbilisi Botanical Gardens, Botanichaskay St., 15, Tbilisi 380005.Batumi Botanical Gardens, Georgian Academy of Sciences, 384533, Batumi, Makhindjauri.Sukhumi Botanical Gardens, Georgian Academy of Sciences, Chavchavadze St., 2, Sukhumi 384933.Lesproject Company, I. Chavchavadze Prospect, 84, 380062.Georgian Project and Design Institute of Sylviculture, I. Chavchavadze Prospect, 84, 38002.Tbilisi Forestry Research Institute, Gaprindauli St., 2, Tbilisi 380054.Association of Georgian Foresters, Mindeli St., 9, Tbilisi 380086.Green Association, David Stroitel Prospect, 82, Tbilisi 380082.Association of Georgian Hunters and Fishers, I. Chavchavadze Prospect, 75, Tbilisi 380062.Georgian Association for Nature Conservation, I. Chavchavadze Prospect, 35, Tbilisi 380062.

References

Gigauri, G. N. 1980. Basic principles of forest management in Georgia’s forests. Tbilisi. Izd. SabchotaSakartvelo (in Georgian).

Gigauri, G. N. et al. 1987. Caucasian pine forests. Tbilisi. Izd. Sabchota Sakartvelo (in Russian).Gigauri, G. N. 1979. Transcaucasian mountain forests.-In: Mountain forests. Izd. Lesnaya

Promyshlennost, Moscow (in Russian).Georgian Soviet Encyclopaedia. 1981. Tbilisi (in Russian).Forest Encyclopaedia, vol 1. 1985, Izd. Sovetskaya Encyclopaedia.Dolukhanov, A. G. 1964. Georgia’s dark coniferous forests. Tbilisi. Izd. Georgian Academy of

Sciences (in Russian).

Basic literature for silvicultural studentsAbashidze, Y. L. Dendrology, parts I and II. Tbilisi. Izd. Ganatleba (in Georgian).Aptsiauri, S. A. Practical course in forest inventory. Tbilisi. Izd. Ganatleba (in Georgian).Bregvadze, G. S. Forest cultures. Tbilisi, Izd. Ganatleba (in Georgian).Berozashvili, A. G. Reclamative afforestation. Tbilisi. Izd. Ganatleba (in Georgian).Gigauri, G. N. Practical course in forest management. Tbilisi. Izd. Sabchota sakartvelo (in Georgian).Gulisashvili, V. Z. General silviculture. Tbilisi. Izd. Ganatleba (in Georgian).Margvelashvili, N. Y. Forest inventory. Izd. Ganatleba, Tbilisi (in Georgian).

Georgia

Germany

1 The Country

1.1 Natural Conditions

Situated in the center of Europe, Germany of-fers a tremendous variety of natural geographicregions in a comparatively small area.Topographically, Germany can be divided intothree major areas. The Northern German low-lands stretch from the coasts of the North andBaltic Seas to the foothills of the low secondarymountain ranges. The relief of this area includesthe glacially influenced moraine landscapes withtheir characteristic hills and lakes as well as themore uniform, flat areas created by maritime andfluvial deposits. The second major topographicarea contains the German low mountain rangesfrom the southern edge of the lowlands to theDanube river. This region is characterized by avaried relief created by mountain ranges of verydifferent ages and origins. There are the geo-logically old mountains (for example the Black(Schwarzwald) and Bavarian Forests(Bayerischer Wald)), which are mainly made upof crystalline rocks. Volcanic processes duringdifferent periods formed other landscapes suchas the Vogelsberg and parts of the Eifel, whilemountain ranges like the southern GermanSwabian Alp consist predominantly of sedimen-tary rocks. The third major topographic area,south of the Danube valley, contains the smallGerman portion of the Alps, including the broadfoothills of that mountain range. Landscape andgeology of this region are strongly influenced byglacial and fluvial deposits originating in the Alps.The southern boundary is marked by the abruptlyrising wall of the Alps, which mainly consists ofdifferent kinds of limestone in this area.

Due to Germany’s central location in Europe, theclimate shows both maritime and continentalcharacteristics. The average temperature in Julylies between 15°C (coastal areas, lower moun-tains) to 20°C (upper Rhine Valley). During thecoldest month, January, the average temperaturevaries between 2°C in the north-western flatlandsand below - 4°C at the higher elevations. Annualprecipitation in the northern lowlands and at lowerelevations in the South varies between 500 to1000 mm per year, while reaching up to 2000mm and more in the highest mountain regions ofthe Alps (Statistisches Jahrbuch 1997).

Considering the complex geology and differentclimatic influences, soil taxonomy in Germanyis too complex to be treated in a brief overview.Brown soils dominate in the low mountainranges and in wide parts of the Alpine foothills,while lime soils are found in the Alps and insome low mountain ranges (Swabian Alp). Dif-ferent kinds of Podsols and wetland soils (moor,riverain) dominate in the northern flatlands(Seydlitz 1984). A good overview of forest-rel-evant soils is given by Rehfuess (1990).

Before humans began to interfere with nature,more than 80% of Germany was covered bydeciduous forests. Red beach (Fagus sylvatica)was the dominant species in most forests. Oak(Quercus petrea, Q robur) originally dominatedforests in the dry and warm basins of centralGermany. Conifers (mainly Pinus sylvestris;Abies alba and Picea abies in the mountains)could be found in certain areas at higher eleva-tions in the mountains and in the drier parts ofeastern Germany. Forest-free areas only existedin extreme sites such as moors or in the highestmountains above the tree line (Ellenberg 1996,Mantel 1990).

Germany

Authors:Dr. Ulrich Schraml & Georg WinkelInstitut für Forstpolitik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgBertoldstraße 17, 79085 FreiburgPhone: +49/761/2033721Email: schraml@ruf.uni-freiburg.de

Germany

1.2 Society, Economics and Politics

In 1996, Germany had a population of approxi-mately 81.8 million. At 229 people per squaremeter, it is one of the most densely populatedcountries in Europe. The distribution of thepopulation is quite uneven. More than 70% livein cities with more than 10,000 inhabitants.Densely urbanized agglomerations like theRhine-Rhur-area with more than 11 million in-habitants stand in stark contrast to sparsely popu-lated areas in large parts of north-eastern Ger-many, northern Bavaria, or the Eifel region inthe West (Statistisches Bundesamt 1997). Es-pecially since Germany’s reunification, there hasbeen a tendency of migration from eastern Ger-many into the West, not including the fast grow-ing metropolitan area of Berlin.

Germany is a highly industrialized nation. Interms of overall economic performance, it is thethird largest in the world, and in regard to worldtrade, it was ranked second in 1996. In 1997,the gross domestic product reached 1,811,000million ECU, which translates into a per capitaamount of 21,890 ECU. The huge difference ineconomic power between the former eastern andwestern part of the country still represents amajor problem. In the West, 66.5 million peo-ple (81% of the total population) produce1,607.8 billion ECU (89% of the gross domes-tic product), while in the former GDR 15.5 mil-lion people (19%) produce only 203.4 billionECU (11%) (Statistisches Bundesamt 1997).

The foreign trade balance is positive, with a1996 surplus of 53 billion ECU, emphasizingGermany’s self-image as an export nation. The

Figure 1. Germany and its Federal States (Länder)

MECKLENBURG-WESTERN POMERANIA

BRANDENBURG

SCHLESWIG-

LOWER SAXONY

SAXONY-ANHALT

SAXONY

POLAND

CZECHREPUBLIC

AUSTRIA

SWITZERLAND

FRANCE

BELGIUM

NETHERLANDS

DENMARK

HESSE

SAARLAND

LUX.

BAVARIA

BADEN-WUERTTEMBERG

BERLIN

HAMBURG

BREMEN

HOLSTEIN

THURINGIA

RHINELAND-PALATINATE

NORTH-RHINE/WESTPHALIA

Germany

most important industrial branches in 1994 in-cluded: building and construction trade (80 bil-lion ECU), electrical engineering (48.9 billionECU), automobile industry (46.23 billion ECU),mechanical engineering (43.4 billion ECU), andthe chemical industry (36.77 billion ECU). With655 billion ECU (36% of the gross domesticproduct in 1996), the service sector representsthe biggest economic sector today, even surpass-ing the industrial sector (585 billion ECU; 32%).The agricultural sector, including fishery andforestry, produces not more than 19 billion ECU(1% of the gross domestic product) (StatistischesBundesamt 1997).

Probably as a result of the tremendous struc-tural changes, especially in the former GDR, andunder the pressure of globalization, unemploy-ment has become a serious problem in Germa-ny’s society. This, along with the resultingsocietal changes, has driven environmental con-cerns from a top position in the polls on soci-ety’s general awareness (Schaub 1998). In early1999, more than 4 million German people werejobless (Bundesministerium der Finanzen 1999).

Germany is a parliamentary democracy with afederalistic structure. The legislative body con-sists of the German parliament, the Bundestag,and the Bundesrat, an assembly of the regionalgovernments of the German states(Bundesländer). The executive is formed by acabinet of ministers, headed by the German chan-cellor. The President of the Republic, albeit thehighest public office, has mainly representativefunctions. The jurisdiction (Federal Court andConstitutional Court) is endowed with a highdegree of influence and control over both the leg-islative body and the government (Rudzio 1996).

2 Forest Resources and their Uses

2.1 Forest History

Starting in the Neolithic and continuing duringthe Celtic age, humans began to have a visibleimpact on the nearly pristine forests of Germany.Especially in geographically favorable areas suchas the Rhine Valley, the onset of agricultural landuse as well as the emerging need for timber prod-

ucts changed the face of the landscape. Whilethis trend continued during the Roman era, whichmainly influenced the south and west of the coun-try, most parts of Germany still contained a closedforest cover at the beginning of the early MiddleAges (Hasel 1985, Mantel 1990).

Throughout the Middle Ages, and up until 1750,periods of population growth with the ensuingsettlement of formerly uninhabited areas in themountains were followed by times of popula-tion decrease caused by wars and diseases. As aconsequence, periods of clear-cutting and inten-sive use of the forests interchanged with peri-ods of deserted landscapes and increasing natu-ral reforestation. Formerly native forests (suchas those owned by the German kings) were givenas fiefs to feudal or clerical lords. Rural andurban communities also acquired forests.

At the end of the 18th century, the growing popu-lation and the developing industry caused astrong increase in the demand for timber as fueland construction material, and the need for farm-land and settlement areas led to a serious dev-astation of the remaining forests. Fearing a short-age of timber, intensive efforts gave birth to aregulated forestry. Sustainability became themajor goal in timber production. Afforestation,mainly of devastated areas such as heathlands,led to a slow increase in Germany’s forestedarea. Compelled by impoverished soils as wellas (later on) influenced by the doctrine of netreturn, even-aged coniferous forests (mainlyPicea abies and Pinus sylvestris) gained increas-ing importance, replacing the former, richlystructured broadleaf forests (Hasel 1985).

During and especially after each of the two WorldWars, the population’s demand for timber as wellas reparation cuttings once again decreased thegrowing stock of the forests. Coniferous specieswere still used as the predominant trees in thereforestation of clear-cut areas, and later in theafforestations induced by the agricultural crisis,leading to the present dominance of coniferouswoods. In the last decades, afforestations in ruralareas led to an increase in the total forest area. Inwestern Germany, the forest area increased from6.95 million ha in 1950 to 7.4 million ha in 1989(BMELF und. c).

Germany

Forest ownership

20 %

46 %

34 %

Private forests

State forests

Communal forests

Figure 2. Forest ownership in Germany (source: BMELF und. b)

2.2 Forest Ownership

At the beginning of the 19th century,secularization of clerical property and the elimi-nation of many small German territories led togrowing state forest holdings. Some membersof the nobility kept their forest property even inthe times of the Republic; today, they representan important group of forest owners. Commu-nal forests developed in different ways fromregion to region. Depending on the dominanceof Roman or German law, respectively, the com-munities—as a modern political body—kept theproperty, or the individual members becameforest owners (Hasel 1985). After World WarII, different changes in forest ownership tookplace in eastern Germany. Some private forestswere expropriated, others were managed by theofficial forest service. At least about 90% of theforest area in the former GDR was managed bystate institutions according to principles of uni-form authority. Today, laws determine the resti-tution and the reprivatization of forests in the”new” Federal States (Sasse 1996,Brandenburgisches Ministerium für ELF 1998).The present distribution of forest ownership inGermany is shown in figure 2.

Almost half of the German forests are underprivate ownership. This includes about 600,000ha of forest land administrated by the FederalTrusteeship Office in eastern Germany. The pri-vate forests are often split up into small parcels.An estimated number of more than 1 millionGermans own less than 1 ha forest land each(Volz, Bieling 1998). The figures for forest en-terprises published in the official statistics aregiven in table 1.

Especially in the south-western parts of the coun-try, very small and disjunct parcels of wood-land cause problems for effective forest man-agement, leading to the reparceling of forestland. Privately owned forests dominate in Ba-varia, North-Rhine/Westphalia, and inBrandenburg. State forests in Germany aremainly owned by the Federal States (Länder)(about 30 % of all forests); 4% of all forests areadministrated by the federal Government(mostly used by the military). A high percent-age of federal (national) forest is found in Hesse.Communal forests make up about 20% of thetotal forest area. Large ratios of such forests existin Baden-Wuerttemberg, Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate.

2.3 Land Use and Forest Resources

2.3.1 Global Overview of the Land Use

Table 2 gives an overview of the land use inGermany in 1993. Agricultural use, based ontotal area, represents the most important type ofland use in Germany. Forests grow on about 30%of the country’s land area.

2.3.2 Extent and Distribution of the Forests

107,390 km2 are covered with forests. Thereare tremendous differences in the distributionof forests (see table 3).

Big contiguous forests can be found in most lowmountain ranges (e.g., in the Palatinate Forest

Germany

(Pfälzer Wald, Rhineland-Palatinate), BavarianForest (Bayerischer Wald, Bavaria) or the north-ern Black Forest (Schwarzwald, Baden-Wuerttemberg)) as well as in the flatland regionswith poor soils (e.g., in Brandenburg, parts ofLower Saxony). Contiguous forest-free areasexist mainly in parts of Northern Germany(Schleswig-Holstein), but also in some areas ofthe South (e.g., in the agriculturally used areasof Lower Bavaria).

2.3.3 Tree Species: Origin and Distribution

As mentioned earlier (see 2.1), present-day for-ests in Germany are vastly different from the natu-ral forests of the past. As a result of 200 years ofregulated forestry as well as centuries of humanimpact, coniferous instead of broadleaf forestsare predominant in Germany today. Figure 3 givesa general impression of the distribution of treespecies (dominant tree species in mixed forests)in present-day Germany.

Coniferous forests make up about two thirds ofthe total forest area in Germany. 39% of theseforests are exclusively soft-wood forests con-taining a single tree species; another 25% of thesoft-wood forests are also dominated by onespecies but include an admixture of other treespecies (up to 10%). About 35% of these can beconsidered conifer-dominated mixed forests.

Unlike the widely dominating spruce and pine,other conifers gain importance only on a regionallevel. Silver fir (Abies alba) still is a characteris-tic tree in parts of the southern German moun-tain forests, while Douglas fir (Pseudotsugamenziesii) as the most commonly planted foreignconifer species is found with increasing frequencyon different sites. Two species of larch (Larixdecidua and L. kaempferi) also occur in differentparts of Germany (Burschel, Huss 1997).

Hardwood forests are dominated by beech (Fagussylvatica) and oak (Quercus robur and Q. petrea).In contrast to the soft-wood forests, 54% of theseforests are mixed forests (admixture reaches morethan 10% of the area). Besides beech and oak,maple (Acer pseudoplatanus and A. platanoides),ash (Fraxinus excelsior) and other broadleaf treescan be relevant to forestry. While hardwood for-ests, as the former dominant forest type, aremostly limited to their natural habitats, the distri-bution of coniferous forests now widely extendsbeyond the boundaries of their original occur-rence (Ellenberg 1996, Burschel, Huss 1997).

2.3.4 Total Growing Stock, Growth and TotalFellings

The average growing stock in German forestsis about 270 solid cubic meters of standing crop/

Enterprises Forest area of the enterprisesnumber 1000 ha area in percent area per enterprise (ha)

Farms1 277.224 1509,5 16 5,4Forest enterprises1 156.404 8000,0 84 51,1Total 433.628 9509,5 100 21,9

Table 1. Structure of forest property (source: BMELF 1999)

1 Enterprises with 1ha of forest or more

settlement traffic area agricultural forest area water other areas total areaarea(I) area areas

% area of 7,1% 4,6% 54,7% 29,2% 2,2% 2,2% 356,970 km2

Germany

Table 2. Land Use Germany 1993 (source: Statistisches Bundesamt 1997)

1 includes buildings, free spaces, recovering areas and cemeteries

Germany

ha (BMELF und. b). There exists an obviousdifference between eastern Germany (the formerGDR) with about 210 solid cubic meters ofstanding crop/ha, and the western part of thecountry with about 300 solid cubic meters ofstanding crop/ha. The average increment of theGerman forests is estimated at 6 m3 per yearand ha. Table 4 gives an overview of the totalfellings in Germany in recent years, and furthersubdivides the total amount according to themost important groups of tree species.

About four fifth of the total felling occurs inconiferous forests, due to their larger area per-centage and higher average increment compared

with hardwood forests. As the table shows, theannual average felling does not reach 40 mil-lion m3 (excluding the year 1990, with the im-mense effects of a major storm catastrophe).According to the results of a forest resource as-sessment, felling in Germany could be increasedup to 57 million m3 without violating the prin-ciple of sustainability. In this regard, only about70 percent of the increment potential is currentlybeing used (BMELF und. b).

Figure 4 shows the development of total fellings,comparing the ”old” and the ”new” FederalStates. The storm catastrophe of 1990 is evi-dent, as are the reduced fellings in the new states

Federal State Forest area (%) Forest area(Bundesland) (1000 ha)Baden-Wuerttemberg 38 1.353Bavaria 36 2.526Berlin 18 16Brandenburg 34 993Bremen 0 0Hamburg 4 3Hesse 41 870Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania 23 532Lower Saxony 23 1.068North-Rhine/Westphalia 26 873Rhineland-Palatinate 41 812Saarland 35 90Saxony 27 502Saxony-Anhalt 21 424Schleswig-Holstein 10 155Thuringia 32 522Germany 30 10.739

Table 3. Forest area of the German Federal States (source: BMELF und. c)

Figure 3. Tree species distribution (Source: BMELF und. c)

Area percentage of tree species groups

Picea ablesPinus sylvestrisother conifersFagus sylvaticaQuercusother hardwoods

32%

11%

9%

14%

6%28%

Germany

(the former GDR) after Germany’s reunification(increase of growing stock; management prob-lems in re-privatized forests (BMELF und. c)).

2.3.5 Threats to the Forests

The forests in Germany are especially affectedby harmful insects, fungi and browsing by deer.Following the severe storm damage in 1990, barkbeetle populations (especially Ips typographusand Pytogenes chalcographus) increased dra-matically in some regions, causing serious calami-ties in the coniferous forests. Butterfly masspropagation (especially Lymantria dispar), pos-sibly favored by the warm summers in the mid-1990s, also had a damaging impact on broadleafstands. Major calamities due to Lymantriamonacha and Panolis flammea infestations oc-curred especially in eastern Germany’s pure Pinussylvestris forests.

As an important example of detrimental fungi,Heterobasidion annosum should be mentionedwhich causes red ring rot on Picea abies. Fun-gal infections as well as insect mass propaga-tion often occur in the wake of major abioticcalamities which weaken the forests.

Browsing by red deer (Cervus elaphus) and roedeer (Capreolus capreolus) can lead to consid-erable damage in crops and young stands, al-though there are wide regional differences. Se-lective pressure due to browsing threatens theregeneration of some of the rarer conifers andbroadleaf tree species in certain areas. In addi-tion, bark-peeling by unadapted red deerpopulations causes serious damage, mainly inspruce stands (occurring in up to 10% of allspruce stands (BMELF und. b)).

Management Total felling Spruce1 Pine1 Beech1 Oak1

period in 1000 m3 in 1000 m3 and in 1000 m3 and in 1000 m3 and in 1000 m3 andpercent ( ) percent ( ) percent ( ) percent ( )

1990 75,021 54,595 (72.8) 11,004 (14.7) 8,017 (10.7) 1,405 (1.9)1991 31,884 19,400 (60.8) 5,540 (17.3) 5,939 (18.6) 1,005 (3.2)1992 28,009 16,742 (59.8) 4,761 (17.0) 5,518 (19.7) 988 (3.5)1993 28,259 17,138 (60.6) 4,782 (16.9) 5,372 (19.0) 967 (3.4)1994 34,616 21,777 (62.6) 5,816 (16.8) 5,959 (17.2) 1,066 (3.1)1995 39,342 22,019 (56.0) 8,477 (21.5) 7,472 (19.0) 1,374 (3.5)1996 37,016 21,246 (57.4) 7,080 (19.1) 7,347 (19.9) 1,343 (3.6)1997 38,207 23,035 (60.3) 8,027 (21.0) 6,081 (15.9) 1,064 (2.8)

Table 4. Total fellings in Germany (source: BMELF 1998)

1 tree species groups contain: Spruce: Picea abies, Abies alba, Pseudotsuga menziesii; Pine: Pinus sylvestris,Larix spec.; Beech: Fagus sylvatica, other broadleaf trees without oaks; Oak: all oaks (Quercus robur, Q.petrea, Q. rubra)

Figure 4. Development of total fellings in Germany (source: ZMP 1998; BrandenburgischesMinisterium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten 1998)

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

Old Länder

New Länder

In 1

000

m3

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

Germany

Without doubt, storms constitute by far the lead-ing cause of forest damage. The dramatic win-ter gales of 1990, e.g., left about 75 million m3of storm-damaged timber in their wake, whichrepresents about twice the amount of Germa-ny’s regular annual harvest. Snow and ice break-age lead to considerable damage especially inthe Alps and in the low mountain ranges, butmay also occur in the flatlands. Middle-agedpure stands of Pinus sylvestris often are subjectto serious damage by wet snow. Although for-est fires occur quite frequently during dry peri-ods in the summer and spring, they usually donot play a major role as a forest calamity. Be-tween 1991 and 1995, forest fires damagedabout 1,800 ha (0.02% of all forests), on aver-age. The highest fire danger is encountered inthe large, dry pine forests of north-eastern Ger-many (e.g., Brandenburg) (BMELF und. b).

In the 1980s, the so-called Waldsterben (forestdie-back), a widespread thinning of the tree tops,became the first crucial topic in the ongoing dis-cussion of the threat caused to forest ecosys-tems by anthropogenic atmospheric immissions.The annual state of the forests report, using topthinning as a health indicator (e.g., BMELF1996a), shows an improvement in the overallhealth of the forests compared to 1995. Accord-ing to the 1996 report, 20% of the trees showvisible damage (1991: 25%; 1995: 22%). Whileconiferous forests show a continuing tendencytoward improvement, broadleaf forests haveremained at previous levels of damage or, in caseof the oaks, even show a trend toward furtherloss of leaves.

2.4 Silviculture

The age-class high forest system is the domi-nating silvicultural system in Germany, appliedto 97% of the forests. About 2% of all forestsare uneven-aged forest (Plenterwald), while just1% is managed as coppice or coppice with stand-ards forest, the silvicultural systems most fre-quently found in former centuries.

The age-class high forest system in Germanyshows a large scale of variation. On the one hand,

there are even-aged pure conifer forests (mainlyPicea abies and Pinus sylvestris) managed un-der clear-cutting or strip felling systems. On theother hand, selective cutting, shelterwood sys-tems with long regeneration periods, or femelcuts create mixed forests with a rich vertical andhorizontal structure. The Plenterwald system(uneven-aged forests used by selective cutting)is restricted to shade-tolerant tree species andsuitable sites. This system is characteristic infarmer-owned forests of the Black Forest moun-tains, but it is also occasionally applied in otherparts of Germany.

The wide variety of silvicultural systems whichcharacterize the German forests has its roots inan amalgam of varied historical backgrounds anda wide range of natural sites and tree species aswell as the varied concepts of how to managenature. In the 18th century, Hartig already de-scribed shelterwood systems (Burschel, Huss1997). Different types of strip systems were de-veloped by C. Wagner et al. (Wagner 1912). Asa reaction to the doctrine of net return, theDauerwald-movement (”Lasting” forest move-ment) developed in the early 20th century (Möller1922), which regarded the forest as a single or-ganism from which trees should be harvested inselective cuttings. Despite the fact that naturalregeneration is a commonly accepted goal ofGerman forest administrations, only 40% of allregeneration occurs through natural regeneration(with an increasing tendency). There are alsomixed systems where both artificial and naturalregeneration are applied. Table 5 gives an over-view of the silvicultural systems applied to themost common tree species in order to achievenatural regeneration.

Due to the historic and legal background as wellas the goal of harvesting stems of big diameters,rotation periods in Germany are long, reachingbetween 100 and 140 years in most coniferousforests and up to 200 years or more in valuableoak forests. For the most part, the achievementof forest goals (dimension, quality) determinesthe time for stem harvest in today’s forests, re-sulting in more flexible rotation lengths.

Germany

2.5 Forest Production

2.5.1 Harvesting Systems and Accessibility

The density of transportation routes variesgreatly between eastern and western Germany.In the West, it reaches an average of 54.4 m/ha(source: Federal Forest Inventory 1986 - 1990,BMELF und. b). Half of those roads are nar-rower than 3 meters, which means limited ac-cessibility for trucks. Skidding track densityreaches 64 m/ha. All in all, the accessibility ofwestern German forests meets the requirementsby the forest management. Nevertheless, thereare regional deficits in accessibility, especiallyin mostly privately owned small forests.

In 1991, the road density in eastern Germanylay at about 24m/ha (BMELF und. b). Since onlyabout one third of the forest roads are in decentrepair, accessibility for trucks is critical, espe-cially in the winter. Moreover, at 31m/ha theskidding trail density is lower in the East.

Tree species Silvicultural system Importance of natural regenerationPicea abies strip fellings, Femel, shelterwood; Plenter common at higher elevations;

increasing trend at low elevations, tooPinus sylvestris small clearcuts, strip fellings (possibly mainly used on poor sites (costs)

Shelterwood with a short regeneration period (5 to 10 years))

Fagus sylvatica shelterwood, Femel, relatively long very commonregeneration periods (10 to 20 years)

Quercus spec. Shelterwood system, short regeneration rare, mostly planting, sowingperiod (5years)

Table 5. Silvicultural systems applied to the most common tree species in order to achieve natural regeneration (source: Burschel, Huss 1997)

Figure 5. Distribution of timber and timber-based products in Germany, 1995Source: Forstabsatzfond 1998

Paper products 25%

Timber Distribution

Export 29%

not known 7%

Buildings 17%

Energy 19%Packaging 3%

Since German forestry is varied and makes useof different silviculture methods, a number ofdifferent harvesting systems are applied, de-pending further on topography and accessibil-ity. Much of the timber harvest is still donemanually, with chain saws. As a consequenceof the major storm calamities of 1990 and theensuing immense amount of storm-damaged tim-ber, harvesting machines became established inGermany. Today, they play an important role inthe small-diameter timber harvest (especially forthinning in pure conifer stands). Due to the cur-rent tendency toward selective cuttings, mixedstands and the large target dimensions of trees,harvesting machines are unlikely to reach theoverall importance in Germany which they haveattained in northern Europe, e.g.

2.5.2 Timber Uses

Figure 5 shows the distribution of timber (includ-ing fellings, waste paper and import) in Germany,

Germany

based on the results of an extensive timber distri-bution analysis (Forstabsatzfond 1998).

The overall consumption of timber in 1995 layat about 89.5 million m3 roundwood equivalents(ZMP 1998). An overview about the total timberbalance of Germany in 1995 is given in table 11.Tables 6 and 7 give an overview of stemwoodand industrial timber use in Germany in 1993.Imported timber is also included in the table.

As indicated in table 6, sawmills are the mostimportant timber users in Germany. Other im-portant stemwood users include the veneer (non-coniferous logs) and plywood industries (conif-erous logs). Export is also of importance, withan increasing tendency. In regard to industrialwood, particle board production and wood pulpare the most important users in Germany. Over-all, fuelwood does not play an important role,although it attains local importance, especiallyin rural regions.

2.5.3 Non-timber Forest Products

Non-timber forest products do not reach higheconomical importance (between 2 and 3% ofthe total output of forestry (BMELF und. c)) inGermany. The gathering of mushrooms and ber-ries mostly occurs on a non-commercial level,and the use of pine resin, formerly practiced ineastern Germany, is discontinued today. Theproduction of Christmas trees and boughs is onlyof limited regional importance. Christmas tree

plantations, especially on formerly farmed pri-vate land, are on the rise in rural regions closeto metropolitan areas, where they attain someeconomic importance. Hunting occurs in a regu-lated fashion under a hunting district system.Owners of a contiguous area (forest, farmland and/or fishing areas) of more than 75 ha have the hunt-ing rights on their property, while game tenantsare required to lease a contiguous area at least 150ha in size, or 250 ha in some of the Federal States.Hunting and forest utilization lead to conflicts inmany regions (Deutscher Jagdschutz-Verband1998, Schraml 1998, Syrer 1987).

2.5.4 Forest Functions

Forest functions can be divided into three ma-jor complexes (Nießlein 1985). Economical use(in Germany, mainly timber production) istreated in chapters 2.5.2 and 3. Protective andrecreational functions of forests are of high andstill increasing importance in densely populated,highly industrialized Germany. Relevant protec-tive functions include water protection (filter andretention effects); immission protection againstair pollution and noise; climate protection (Glo-bal CO2 reservoir and local climate protection);soil protection, including erosion control; land-scape protection; and the protection of biotopesand species (BMELF und. b, Böswald 1998,Enquete-Kommission 1994).

The recreational use of forests is perhaps themost important forest function in metropolitan

Coniferous logs(I) Non-coniferous logs(I)User 1980 1993 1980 1993Sawmills 12.3 16.98 2.81 1.69Veneer mills 0.03 0.03 0.33 0.19Plywood industry 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.36Poles 0.11 0.02 - -Pitprops 0.38 0.08 0.18 0.11Export 0.89 2.62 0.21 0.23Other 1.52 - 0.9 -Railroad Ties - - 0.24 0.04Total 15.46 19.96 4.99 2.62

Table 6. Timber (stemwood) uses in Germany, 1993 (source: NABU 1996)

(I) in million m3

Germany

and touristically used areas. By law, all forestsare subject to general access by the populationfor the purpose of recreation (Federal and StateForest laws). According to some studies, an av-erage 168 people/ha annually enter the forestsfor recreation, while in metropolitan areas thatnumber may increase to 1,000 visitors/year/haand more (BMELF und. c).

The goal of ”multiple use forestry” is the care-ful utilization of forests, ensuring the fulfillmentof economic, protective and recreational func-tions within the same area (Dietrich 1953,Nießlein 1985). This objective is stated in allforest laws. In special forest function maps, mostforests are classified according to their impor-tance in terms of environmental protection andrecreational use. Besides the high importanceof ”forest functions” in forest policy, the theo-retical concept of ”forest functions” has beendiscussed in detail in Germany’s forest sciencecircles in recent years (see Burschel 1994, Blumet al. 1996, Mantau 1997).

3 Forest Economics

3.1 Forests and Forest Industries in theNational Economy

Measured against the overall gross domesticproduct of Germany, forestry plays a minor rolein the national economy, e.g. accounting for only0.2 to 0.3 percent in Baden-Wuerttemberg(Lückge, Nain 1997). On the other hand, Ger-

many’s timber production is able to cover twothirds of the demands of the timber and paperindustry (BMELF und. c). The forest industrycontains 39,050 individual enterprises whichproduced a turnover of about 54.7 billion ECUin 1994 (see table 8). In 1991, the share of theforest industries reaches 1.2% of the Germannet domestic product. Table 8 gives an overviewof the West German forest industries.

The degree of concentration in the forest indus-try sector is comparatively low. Small and me-dium sized enterprises, located mainly in denselywooded areas, are important supporters of ruraldevelopment. Large enterprises have becomeestablished in capital-intensive areas such as thepaper industry or wood-based paneling. In thosesectors, international competition has led to co-operation with other EU-countries.

The development of the eastern German forestindustry, impacted by the break-down of the un-profitable production plants in 1990/91, is stillundergoing rapid changes. This offers a rare chanceto gather data on the rebuilding process of a mod-ern industry. Table 9 shows the relations betweeneastern and western forest industries in 1991.

Table 10 gives an overview of the amounts andvalues of some forest industry products.

Germany’s timber market is traditionally charac-terized by a net import overhang. In 1995, thisoverhang amounted to about 20 million m3. Ta-ble 11 shows the overall timber balance in 1995.

Coniferous industrial wood I Non-coniferous industrial wood I User 1980 1993 1980 1993Wood pulp 2.4 2.33 0.01 0.02Chemical pulp 0.54 0.43 1.12 0.76Particle boards 2.68 2.03 2.27 0.94Fiber boards 0.08 0.29 0.16 -Lightweight boards 0.55 0.03 - -Charcoal - - 0.06 -Export 1.46 2.94 0.12 0.46Storekeeping and fuel 0.17 - 1.34 -Total 7.88 8.05 5.08 2.18

Table 7. Timber uses (industrial wood) in Germany (source: NABU 1996)

(I) in million m3

Germany

Branch Enterprises Workers Turnover (million ECU)

Wood working* 2,634 46,904 6,773Wood processing* 11,986 283,012 28,057Small craft business** 22,500 77,421 4,147Timber trade 1,774 23,830 6,652Pulp, wood pulp, paper, and cardboard 147 44,544 9,057Total 39,050 475,711 54,686

Table 8. Forest industries: enterprises, workers, turnover in the forest and paper industry 1994 inWest Germany

*Large-scale enterprises of the manufacturing industry and industrial small-scale businesses**Enterprises or firms with less than 20 workersSource: BMELF und. b, Statistisches Bundesamt 1997

Old Länder (in 1000m3) New Länder (in 1000m3)Saw timber 12526 795Veneer 425 16Particle board 7441 26all semi-finished wood products 23167 841

Table 9. Production of selected semi-finished wood products in the old (former FRG) and new(former GDR) Federal States in 1991.

Table 10. Saw wood and fiber products in 1995*

Timber product Amount in 1000 Value in million ECUm3/ m2

Saw timber 13,242 m3 2,581Plywood 456 m3 355**Particle board 8,157 m3 2,041Fiber board 153,177 m2 327

Wood availability Wood dispositionRemovals (Calendar year) 40.0* Stock Increase 1.0Waste Paper 30.5Non-energy use of waste wood 0.9** Consumption 89.5Import 83.6 Export 64.5Total timber availability 155.0 Total timber disposition 155.0

Table 11. Total timber balance in Germany, 1995 (in million cubic meters converted to roundwoodequivalents)

* partly estimated** estimated Source: BMELF und. b

*only enterprises with more than 20 workers**in 1996Source: Statistisches Bundesamt 1997

Source: BMELF und. c

Germany

Figure 6 shows the development of import andexport of timber and timber-based products inrelation to the calculated consumption. The tim-ber import figures do not reveal a clear trend inthe past years. A declining tendency inroundwood imports is reported, while the im-port of processed timber products, especiallyfrom the Central and Eastern European states,has increased during recent years. This trendmay be caused by the involvement of Germancompanies in these countries. Total timber ex-ports (compare also roundwood) have increasedin recent years and show an ongoing upwardtrend (BMELF und. b).

3.2 Employment

In 1992, between 90,000 and 100,000 peoplewere employed in the German forestry sector(only former Western Germany), representingabout 0.3 % of all employees in West Germany.On the other hand, about 600,000 to 800,000people each year work in temporary jobs of vary-ing duration in the forests (Löffler 1992). On aregional level, the forestry employment sectorreaches a higher importance in economically lessdeveloped rural areas, where a larger percent-age of forestry jobs occur. This also increasesthe importance of the forest industry, which

employed 476,000 workers in 1994 (BMELFund. b). Table 8 shows the distribution ofworkplaces in the forest industry.

3.3 Profitability

Table 12 shows the data from the Federal Min-istry of Agriculture’s test network of forestryenterprises (BMELF und. b), subdivided accord-ing to the three main types of forest ownershipin Germany. Profitability in the test network isdefined through the difference between incomeand expenses (net return). State subsidies areexcluded from the table calculations, but stateassistance on the forest office level, both free ofcharge or at reduced fees, is included.

The data illustrate the critical profit situation ofthe forestry enterprises despite the continuingupward trend in the past years. The reasons forthis situation are the continually increasing ex-penses of the forestry enterprises in relation tostagnating income. Despite the increase in pro-ductivity of forest workers (1960: 8; 1990: 1.7productive working hours / cubic meter woodharvested / year (Löffler 1992)), the harvestingcosts per cubic meter have increased (consider-ing inflation). On the other hand, timber pro-ceeds as the major income of the forestry enter-

In m

illio

n m

?

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

ImportExportConsumption

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 6. Import, export and consumption of timber and timber-based products, converted toroundwood equivalents source: ZMP 1998

Germany

prises have decreased during the past decades,if inflation is considered.

There are obvious differences in profitabilityamong the different types of forest ownership.These differences are in part due to a further causeof the critical situation, called social function orburden of the forestry. According to one study, in1991 32 ECU/year/ha were expended for theimprovement of infrastructure (communal forests42, state forests 33, private forests 24 ECU/ha/year) (BMELF 1991). Legal restrictions (for ex-ample the far-reaching prohibition of clearcuts)as well as increasing incentives by the federalgovernment (e.g., the promotion of hardwoodplantations) influence the forest management andrestrict the possibilities of optimal economic ac-tion. The growing importance of promotion bythe government is shown in figure 7.

4 Forest and Forest-related Policy

4.1 Legislation

The basic legal standards for German forestry areset by the Federal Act on Conservation of Forestsand Promotion of Forestry, enacted in 1975 (inthe following referred to as Federal Forest Act).This act outlines basic guidelines which are speci-fied, elaborated and, if needed, supplemented bythe 16 Federal States (Länder). While federal andstate legislations are competitive concerning thepromotion of the forest production (Art. 74, Abs.17 Constitution), the Federal Government is re-stricted to drafting a framework for the legislationdealing with nature conservation and landscapemanagement (Klose and Orf 1998; Wagner 1996).

The important elements for the conservation andsustainable management of forests are outlinedin the Federal Forest Act. They include 1) theobligation to manage the forests in a proper andsustainable fashion; 2) the forest owners’ duty toreplant cut-over stands; 3) the definition of regu-lations for precautionary action in regard to en-vironmental protection, limited clear-cut areas,protection of immature stands, the duty of tend-ing and forest opening, and adequate forest man-agement planning; 4) conversion of forests intoanother form of land-use requires approval bythe responsible authority; 5) promotion is pro-vided jointly by the Federal Government andthe federal states; 6) forestry framework plan-ning serves the regulation and improvement offorest structures and is geared toward safeguard-ing the forest functions; 7) protection and rec-reation forests with specially regulated manage-ment procedures and measures are to be desig-nated for the avoidance of dangers and disad-vantages to the population.

Furthermore, there are several acts coveringspecial issues of forests and forestry, e.g., theForest Seed and Seedlings Act, the Act for theCompensation of Forest Damage, and the For-estry Sales Fund Act. In addition to these legalbases, a number of regulations can be found inother acts which partly relate to forests and for-est management, e.g., 1) Nature ConservationAct (Federal Government and Länder); 2) Fed-eral Hunting Act (Federal Government andLänder); 3) Federal Immission Control Act(Länder); 4) Federal Regional Planning Act andRegional and Landscape Planning Act (Länder);5) Act on Environmental Impact Assessments(Federal Government).

Year State forest Communal forest Private forest (> 200 ha)income expenses net return income expenses net return income expenses net return

1981 345 325 20 397 278 119 380 283 971989 359 392 -33 346 332 14 438 343 951993 217 415 -198 246 322 -76 323 339 -161995 344 412 -68 332 323 9 373 339 34

Table 12. Development of the economical situation of the forest sector (in ECU/ha)

Source: BMELF und. b, data from the ministries network of forestry enterprises

Germany

1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 19940

20000

40000

60000

80000

In 1

000

EC

U

Promotion of forestry

Figure 7. Development of financial support in forestry as part of the joint task ”Improvement ofAgricultural Structures and Coastal Protection”

Source: BMELF und. b

4.2 Agents in Forest Policy and Related Fields

In Germany, a large number of organizations andassociations are concerned with forestry, includ-ing scientific, professional and commercialgroups. Until now, the organizations concernedwith forest policy were often considered part ofthe forestry sector if their names contained theword ”forest” (e.g., Zundel, Schwartz 1996). Afew years ago, in addition to the traditionalagents, a number of ”new” organizations—suchas environmental groups—began to focus theiractivities on the forest sector (Volz 1997). En-dowed with high public credibility, many envi-ronmental groups developed their own forestprogrammes. Until now, the governmental de-partments and forest associations have played aleading role in the decision-making within thepolitical process, followed by politicians, sci-entists and the media (Weber 1993).

The development and the implementation ofspecific programs for the forestry sector ismainly carried out by the Ministry of Food,Agriculture and Forestry. However, in somepolicy areas other ministries are also concerned,e.g., the Ministries of Economics, the Environ-ment, and Developmental Aid (Hofmann 1997).

The federal states each have their own Depart-ments of Forestry. Traditionally, these are oftenconnected with the agricultural sector, and—inrecent times—increasingly with the Depart-ments of the Environment (Zundel, Schwartz1996). As a result of the combination of differ-ent duties, the State Departments of Forestry are

very influential. They are responsible for theformulation and the implementation of pro-grams, they manage the state forests, and theyare in charge of timber supply and non-timberbenefits. Finally, the forest services influencethe management in community and private for-ests by way of extension as well as financial andtechnical support (Krott 1996).

Prior to the German reunification in 1990, theestimated number of associations concernedwith forestry was about 60 (Weinberg 1989).Not all of these held political importance on asupra-regional level. Two types of associationscan be distinguished: organizations with amainly economic objective (forest owner’s in-terests, employee’s interests), and those support-ing idealistic values (education of members andthe public, battling forest decline) (Nembach1993, Weinberg 1989, Mantau 1996).

The German Forestry Council (DeutscherForstwirtschaftsrat, DFWR) aims at integratingthe entire forest sector (DFWR 1996). The or-ganization has a particular position in the de-velopment of policy since it provides a forumfor discussions for representatives of all owner-ship types, including professional associationsand scientists. The results of the council’s de-liberations are usually passed on to the govern-ment for implementation. However, the jointpreparation of statements and the resulting con-stant struggle for compromises partly paralyzesthe work of the DFWR.

Germany

The most powerful member (based on the numberof votes) is the Working Group of German Asso-ciations of Forest Owners (ArbeitsgemeinschaftDeutscher Waldbesitzerverbände AGDW), repre-senting the interests of both private and commu-nity forest owners. While the representatives ofprivate and community forest owners are regardedas powerful as the state forest administrations, as-sociations which support idealistic goals (e.g., theProtective Association for the German Forest,SDW) occupy a less powerful position (Mann1998). The influence of trade unions (e.g., theTrade Union for Horticulture, Agriculture andForestry, former GGLF, now IG BAU) and otherprofessional associations (e.g., Association ofGerman Foresters, BDF) lies somewhere betweenthe two extremes (Mann 1998).

4.3 Forest Policy Tools

The legal framework represents an influentialforest policy tool, containing important restric-tions of the forest owners’ scope of action. Anoverview of the legal handicaps can be found insection 4.1. General and forest-specific planningis another important tool of forest policy, influ-encing the field of forest management (Nießlein1985). Forest Framework Planning as an inte-grative approach is covered in section 4.4. For-est inventories as the major basis for local for-est planning are obligatory in state or commu-nity-owned forests every 10 to 20 years. Theyare also usually carried out in larger private for-ests, as they are supported by the governmentand represent an important basis for tax write-offs in case of calamities (BMELF und. b).Policy tools in Germany’s state forest policy arebased on the three major goals: 1) strengthen-ing forest enterprise capacities; 2) promotion ofthe competitiveness of timber; 3) increasing thestability of forests (BMELF und. b).

4.4 Forest Policy in Relation to Other Areasof National Policy

There is an urgent demand for cooperation offorestry with other sectors. However, as forestryhas more or less clearly defined boundaries sepa-rating it from other sectors within society, com-

munication on an everyday level is often insuf-ficient (Krott 1995). Although cooperation be-tween forestry and other sectors is consideredill-developed, forestry and its counterparts dorealize the importance of inter-sectoral commu-nication and cooperation in the fields of ruraldevelopment (agriculture), environment, andindustry (economy).

Due to the close connection between forestry andagriculture in private entities, the relationship ofthe two sectors is often described as symbiotic.Hence, ”agri- and silviculture” (Land- undForstwirtschaft) has become a well-establishedexpression. As a rule, one would expect the co-ordination of both sectors to be successful, sinceforestry and agriculture are combined under oneministry at the federal level and in most of thefederal states. Nevertheless, the goals of the sec-tor policies and the utilization of instrumentsdiffer (Hachenberg 1985, Thoroe 1986), and theprograms formulated for each sector usually donot promote coordination (e.g. BMELF 1996b).

Based on the long tradition of sustainability, Ger-man forest owners and forest administrations seethemselves in an environmentalist role. There-fore, protection of the environment and environ-mental policy are considered a substantial partof forest policy (Nießlein 1985). The competenceof governmental organization in the implemen-tation of environmental policy is subject to spe-cific regulations. However, the fact that the for-est owners’ right to manage their own forests isconsidered more important than environmentalissues frequently leads to a conflict of interestbetween the authorities and their clients, whichimpedes cooperation (Wagner 1996).

The cooperation of forestry and timber industryhas led to the establishment of a certain institu-tional basis. Joint councils, committees and organi-zations—paid and supervised by both forest own-ers and the timber industry—were founded, e.g.,the Committee for Development and Cooperationof Forestry and Timber Industry (Ausschuß fürEntwicklung und Zusammenarbeit der Forst- undHolzwirtschaft beim BMELF), the Special Agencyfor Renewable Resources (FachagenturNachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V.), and the TimberWorking Group (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Holz e.V.)

Germany

(Mantau 1996). Another example is the campaignto promote the image of timber (Forstabsatzfonds-Imagekampagne). Moreover, an exchange of in-formation between forest owners and the timberindustry is guaranteed through a joint publication(Holz-Zentralblatt) and symposia with representa-tives of both sectors (e.g. Bartelheimer, Volz 1991).

While no inter-sectoral cooperation exists be-tween institutions and different interest groups, acertain level of cooperation is realized in the for-est planning process. In general, the Federal For-est Act stipulates for forestry framework plan-ning to improve the forest structure and to aid inthe attainmment of the goals of the Federal For-est Act. Therefore, forest agencies contribute toforest-related matters in the land-use planningprocess (Wrede 1993). Forestry framework plan-ning is expected to become part of the manage-ment plans of forest enterprises and to be incor-porated in the overall planning process of the fed-eral states. Until now, only four states have com-pleted a forest framework plan (BMELF und. c).This is due to a lack of well-defined goals, and tounspecified target groups, a dominance of natu-ral and economic matters in the planning proc-ess, and inadequate cooperation of forest authori-ties with other sectors (Nießlein 1985).

4.5 EU Forest Policy

The competence and the involvement of EUagencies in the field of forest policy are beingwatched very carefully in Germany (Halpap,Zundel 1993; Wagner, Flasche 1999). A numberof policies are actually beneficial, although theymean restrictions to the development of nationalforestry.

Since the control of air pollution represents agoal of supra-national character, the GermanFederal Government strongly emphasizes thisparticular part of European environmental policy(BMELF und. b). The implementation of cer-tain regulations concerning the protection offorests against atmospheric pollution has beenachieved through Germany’s participation in aEuropean forest health monitoring system(Europäische Kommission 1996a, 1996b). Themonitoring is organized on state level (e.g.,

Bayerische Staatsforstverwaltung 1995). Ger-man federalism is also an important factor inthe implementation of the EU’s Natura 2000-concept, too. The expected restrictions for theforestry sector are one reason for the ongoingopposition in some of the federal states againsta high number of protected areas (Damó 1999,Europäische Kommission 1998).

The incentives for afforestation offered by theEU under the Common Agricultural Policy haveled to an overall increase in afforestation areasin Germany (1985: 1312 ha; 1990: 2447 ha;1992: 6156 ha; all data concerning West Ger-many (BMLEF und. c)). However, the expectedeffects on the agricultural use of the landscape(e.g. Philipp 1987) were not reached(Europäisches Parlament 1998). In Germany,afforestation is often criticized by environmen-talists, who point out that afforestation takesplace especially on marginal soil sites withoutagricultural attraction but of high ecologicalimportance (NABU 1996).

The goals of the EU Regional Policy also touchthe national and state forest policy. Eastern Ger-many is placed in a position to be able to resortto EU funds, with the resulting possibilities forimprovement in the forestry sector (BMELF und.b). Some rural areas of western Germany wereincluded in Objective 5b-promotion. Local ini-tiatives as well as some of the Leader II-projectscan lead to benefits for forestry enterprises(BMELF 1996c).

4.6 Forest Education and Research

Forest education and research have a broad ba-sis in Germany. Opportunities for the trainingof well-educated personnel are provided by fouruniversities in Germany: Freiburg (Baden-Wuerttemberg), Göttingen (Lower Saxony),Munich (Bavaria), and Tharandt (Saxony). Alluniversities are involved in national and inter-national research programs. A specialized tech-nical education can be gained at so-called”Fachhochschulen” (non-university higher edu-cation). There are five facilities which offer edu-cation on this level: Weihenstephan (Munich),Hildesheim/Holzminden (Göttingen),

Germany

Rottenburg, Schwarzburg and Eberswalde. Thefederal government and the state forest admin-istrations maintain forest research institutionswith the purpose of ensuring a close connectionbetween practical experience and research.Moreover, there are several schools for forestworkers in Germany.

5 The Main Current Conflicts andChallenges in Germany

An overview over the actual relationships be-tween different agents within the forestry sectoris given in chapter 4.4. Moreover, figure 8 offersa view on some traditional parties of conflict.

However, this view is somewhat outdated sincenew actors have entered the political arena. Inthe last decades, forest owners, agencies, andforestry associations have agreed upon commonideologies and management concepts, whichhelped to avoid conflicts. Examples are the For-est Function Theory of Victor Dietrich (1953) andthe term ”appropriate forest management”. Theseconcepts were important preconditions for thefostering of cooperation and coexistence of dif-ferent forestry agents. Thus, they were integratedin nearly all regulations under German forest law,to promote not only the interests of the forestowners but also the demands of society.

Today more than ever, the relationship betweenthe different agents of forest and environmentalpolicies is rife with conflict. Moreover, compe-tition exists between forest authorities and otherstate organizations that are responsible for en-

vironmental concerns. Examples include 1) themapping of biotopes; 2) the management of pro-tected areas; 3) the interpretation and implemen-tation of specific laws; and 4) increasingly im-portant, the overall goals of forest management.A closer look at these conflicts is given byHelstöm and Welp (1996).

A current example of a conflict and the possibil-ity of new alliances is the ongoing discussion ofcertification/labeling of timber. Environmentalgroups demand the introduction of internationalcertificates in Germany as part of a worldwideprocess to ensure sustainable forestry. Especiallythe Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) has be-come an important agent in the field of certifica-tion in Germany. Most of the ”traditional” agentshave reacted with reservations to the demand andhave outright rejected it, with the following ar-guments: 1) a tried and tested national forest leg-islation ensures sustainability and proper forestmanagement; 2) the difficult economic situationof forest enterprises and the ownership structure(see table 1) speak against the introduction of thenew financial ”burden” of certification (Firnhaber1996, Institut für Forstpolitik 1996, BMLEF b).Today, some agents, mainly environmentalists,trade unions and some forest owners, supportthe FSC-process (Institut für Forstpolitik 1996,Gemeinde und Städtebund Rheinland-Pfalz1998) while others, such as the German For-estry Council (DFWR), have presented alterna-tive concepts to certification.

The current debate over the goals of forestry ismainly fueled by the difficult situation of forestenterprises due to unfavorable economic condi-tions and the low budget of the public sector.

Figure 8. Traditional conflicts in the forest sector (source: Mann 1998)

trade unions andprofessional associations(IG BAU, BDF)

associations withidealistic goals (SDW)

forest administrationsof the Länder

private and communalforest owners(AGDW)

Germany

Consequences can be observed in many areas:1) Forest enterprises aim to improve their eco-nomic situation; therefore, forestry intensifies tim-ber cuttings. This may cause conflicts with thedemands of the public (Weber, Mann 1997). 2)Forestry attempts to inform the public about itsnon-timber benefits and to commercialize thecorresponding services. 3) The reduction of em-ployees leads to a decreasing number of mem-bers in associations and unions, and therefore toa loss of influence. 4) In recent times, forest au-thorities have been losing financial and person-nel resources. This reduction of financial grantsand technical aid diminishes the possibilities forconsulting and thus the state agencies’ influenceon forest management in private (Krott 1996a)and community forests (Dinkelaker 1999). 5)There is an ongoing discussion about privatiza-tion of the state forest management, which is ex-pected by some to result in increasing levels ofinnovation and profitability in Germany’s stateforestry (Borchers 1996).

In summary, important agents within Germanforest policy fear being ”ruled from outside”(Krott 1996b). ”Economic and structural crises”of the sector (Oesten 1995, Nießlein 1995, Mann1998), and the promotion of the participationof various social groups in decision-makingprocesses through international agreements,such as Agenda 21 (Weber 1998), create mainchallenges for the future.

Germany

Further sources of Information (National Forest Inventory)

BMELF (undated) Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany.Bundeswaldinventur 1986-1990. Volume I, II, Bonn.

BMELF (undated) Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany.Bundeswaldinventur -eineWertung. Bonn.

Organizations related to Forestry:

Federal MinistryBundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten (Federal Ministry of Food, Agri-

culture and Forestry), Rochusstr. 1, 53123 BonnRepresentatives of different interestsDeutscher Holzwirtschaftsrat (German Forest Industries Council) Bahnstraße 4, 65205 WiesbadenDeutscher Forstwirtschaftsrat (German Forestry Council) Münstereifeler Straße 19, 53349

RheinbachArbeitsgemeinschaft Deutscher Waldbesitzerverbände (Working Group of German Associations

of Forest Owners), Meckenheimer Allee 77, 53115 BonnIndustriegewerkschaft Bauen-Agrar-Umwelt (Union for Building-Agrarian-Environment)

Bockenheimer Landstraße 73-77, 60325 Frankfurt a. M.Deutscher Forstverein (German Forestry Association) Konrad-Schwarz-Straße 2, 34305 NiedensteinBund Deutscher Forstleute (Association of German Foresters) Lohmühlenstaße 9, 50422 WirgesSchutzgemeinschaft Deutscher Wald (Protective Association for the German Forest) Meckenheimer

Alle 79, 53115 BonnStiftung ”Wald in Not” (Foundation ”Forests in Danger”) Godesberger Allee 142-148, 53175 BonnNaturschutzbund Deutschland (NABU) (Nature Conservancy Federation of Germany) Herbert-

Rabius-Straße 26, 53225 Bonn

Organizations for techniques, marketing and informationKuratorium für Waldarbeit und Forsttechnik (Committee for Forest Operations and Forest Tech-

nology), Spremberger Straße 1, 64823 Groß UmstadtAbsatzförderungsfond der Deutschen Forstwirtschaft (Foundation for Increasing Sales of German

Forestry), Godesberger Allee 142-148, 53175 BonnZentrale Marketinggesellschaft der Deutschen Agrarwirtschaft mbH (CMA) (Marketing-Society

of German Agricultural Industries), Koblenzer Straße 148, 53177 Bonn.Auswertungs- und Informationsdienst für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten e.V. (AID) (In-formation Service for Food, Agriculture and Forestry), Konstantinstraße 124, 53179 BonnFachinformationssystem Ernährung, Land- und Forstwirtschaft (FIS-ELF) Postfach: 20 14 15, 53144

Bonn

Scientific and educational organizationsDeutsche Gesellschaft für Holzforschung (German Society for Timber Research) Bayerstraße 57-

59, 80335 MünchenBundesforschungsanstalt für Forst- und Holzwirtschaft (BFH) Leuschnerstraße 91, 21031 HamburgBayerische Landesanstalt für Wald und Forstwirtschaft (LWF) Am Hochanger 11, 85354 FreisingLandesanstalt für Wald und Forstwirtschaft (Thüringen) Jägerstraße 1, 99867 GothaFachhochschule für Forstwirtschaft Schwarzburg 07427 SchwarzburgFachhochschule Rottenburg, Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft, Schadenweilerhof, 72108 RottenburgFachhochschule Weihenstephan, Fachbereich Forstwirtschaft 85350 Freising

Germany

References cited in the text

Bartelheimer, P.; Volz, K.-R. (1991). Chancen und Probleme für die Forst- und Holzwirtschaft imgeeinten Deutschland. Forstliche Forschungsberichte München, 113.

Bayerische Staatsforstverwaltung (1995) Waldklimastationen in Bayern. Ein forstlicher Beitragzur Klimavorsorge. München.

Blum, A; Brandl, H.; Oesten, G.; Rätz, Th.; Schanz, H.; Schmidt, S.; Vogel, G. (1996).Wohlfahrtsökonomische

Betrachtungen zu den Wirkungen des Waldes und den Leistungen der Forstwirtschaft. Allg. Forst-u. J.-Ztg. 5, 89-95.

Borchers, J. (1996). Privatisierung staatlicher Forstbetriebe: eine ökonomische Analyse zur De-regulierung im Bereich der Forstwirtschaft. Freiburg Universität, Schriften zur ForstökonomieBand 13, Frankfurt.

BMELF (undated a). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. DasBundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten. Bonn.

BMELF (undated b). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Forest Reportby the Federal Government. Bonn.

BMELF (undated c). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. NationalerWaldbericht. Bonn.

BMELF (1991). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Belastungen derForstbetriebe aus der Schutz- und Erholungsfunktion des Waldes. Schriftenreihe des BMELF,Heft 399. Bonn.

BMELF (1996a). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany.Waldzustandsbericht. Bonn.

BMELF (1996b). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Für eine nachhaltigeund leistungsfähige Forstwirtschaft: Forstpolitisches Konzept von Bundesminister JochenBorchert. Bonn.

BMELF (1996c). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. National ProgressReport in Forestry. Bonn.

BMELF (1996d). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Aktionen zurländlichen Entwicklung - Bundesweites LEADER II-Seminar. Bonn.

BMELF (1997). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Waldbericht derBundesregierung. Bonn.

BMELF (1998a). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Holzmarktbericht2/97. Bonn.

BMELF (1998b). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Land- undForstwirtschaft in Deutschland. Daten und Fakten 1998.

BMELF (1999). Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, Germany. Agrarbericht 1999.Bonn.

Böswald, K. (1998). Present and Future Options of Forests and Forestry for CO2-Mitigation inGermany. Proceedings: Carbon Mitigation Potentials of Forests and Wood Industry. Work-shop, Munich Freising, June, 19-21. Berlin.

Brandenburgisches Ministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten (ed.) (1998).Verantwortung für den Wald - Die Geschichte der Forstwirtschaft in der SowjetischenBesatzungszone und der DDR. Potsdam.

Bundesministerium der Finanzen (ed.) (1999) Die wirtschaftliche Lage in der Bundesrepublik,Monatsbericht 2/99, Bonn.

Burschel, P. (1994). Holzproduktion als ökologische Rechtfertigung des Forstberufes. AllgemeineForst Zeitschrift 12, 622-631.

Burschel, P. and Huss, J. (1997). Grundriß des Waldbaus. Berlin.Damó, T. (1999). Forstpolitische Probleme bei der Umsetzung der FFH-Richtlinie in Deutschland,

Germany

Diplomarbeit an der Universität Freiburg.Dietrich, V. (1953). Forstwirtschaftspolitik. Hamburg.Deutscher Jagdschutz-Verband, German Hunting Association (1998) (ed.) DJV-Handbuch, Mainz.DFWR, Deutscher Forstwirtschaftsrat. (1996). Der Deutsche Forstwirtschaftsrat 1992-1995.

Rheinbach.Dinkelaker, F. (1999). Der Gemeindewald in der Kommunalpolitik: am Beispiel des kommunalen

Waldbesitzes in Baden-Württemberg. Diss. Univ. Freiburg.Ellenberg, H. (1996). Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen. Stuttgart.Enquete-Kommission ”Schutz der Erdmatmospähe” des deutschen Bundestages (ed.) (1994). Schutz

der grünen Erde - Klimaschutz durch umweltgerechte Landwirtschaft und Erhalt der Wälder.Bonn.

Europäische Kommission, GD VI.F.II.2, (1996a). Europäisches Programm für die intensiveÜberwachung von Waldökosystemen. Brüssel.

Europäische Kommission (1996b). Der Waldzustand in Europa. Brüssel.Europäische Kommission (1998) Mitteilung der Kommission an den Rat und das Europäische

Parlament über eine Strategie der Europäischen Union über die Forstwirtschaft. Brüssel.Europäische Kommission, GD XI.D.2 (1998). Natura 2000, 6/1998, p. 6.Europäisches Parlament (1998). Bericht über den Bericht der Kommission an den Rat und das

Europäische Parlament über die Anwendung der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 2080/92 zur Einführungeiner gemeinschaftlichen Beihilferegelung für Aufforstungsmaßnahmen in der Landwirtschaft,A4-0346/98, Brüssel.

Firnhaber, A. (1996). Bewertung des FSC-Ansatzes zur Zertifizierung nachhaltigerWaldbewirtschaftung unter mitteleuropäischen Bedingungen. Institut für Forstpolitik,Untersuchungsbericht II/1996, Freiburg.

Forstabsatzfond (ed.) (1998). Distribution des Holzes in Deutschland 1995. Bonn.Gemeinde und Städtebund Rheinland-Pfalz (1998). Zertifizierung in der Forstwirtschaft. Gemeinde

und Stadt, Beilage 4/98, Heft 3/98.Gögelheym, J. (1998). Privater Waldbesitz gestern, heute und morgen. Unveröffentl.

Vortragsmanuskript. Westernhohe.Hachenberg, F. (1985). Abhängigkeit oder Bindungen in der Forstwirtschaftspolitik. Holzzentralblatt

78, 1169-1170.Halpap, A.; Zundel, R. (1993). Einfluß der Europäischen Gemeinschaften auf die Forst- und

Holzwirtschaft der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Schriftenreihe des Bundesministers fürErnährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten, Reihe A: Angewandte Wissenschaft, Vol. 419, Münster.

Hasel, K. (1985). Forstgeschichte. Hamburg and Berlin.Hellström, E.; Welp, M. (1996). Environmental Forest Conflicts in Germany - from National to

International Concern. European Forest Institute Working Paper No. 11, Joensuu.Hofmann, F. (1997). Die Behandlung der Thematik Wald und Forstwirtschaft im Deutschen

Bundestag. Diplomarbeit Universität Freiburg.Institut für Forstpolitik (1996). Holz aus nachhaltiger Forstwirtschaft - Risiken und Chancen einer

Zertifizierung. Tagungsband I/1996, Freiburg.Klose, F. and Orf, S. (1998). Forstrecht. Münster.Kroth, W. and Bartelheimer, P. (1993). Holzmarktlehre. Hamburg.Krott, M. (1995). Öffnung und Bündnispartner einer Forstwirtschaft unter Druck. Forst und Holz

23: 739-742.Krott, M. 1996a. Analyseansatz für Privatwaldpolitik der Staatsforstverwaltungen. Krott, M., Marosi,

Gy., Góla, J. (eds.) Beziehungen der Staatsforstverwaltungen zu privaten Waldeigentümernund deren Verbänden. Eurpoaforum Forstverwaltung 6. Mátrafüred.

Krott, M. (1996b). Forstpolitische Selbststeuerung als Herausforderung für Wissenschaft und Praxis.Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt 115: 97-107.

Germany

Löffler, H. (1992). Arbeitswissenschaft. Weihenstephan.Lückge, F.J. and Nain, W. (1997). Wertschöpfung der Forstwirtschaft in Baden-Württemberg. All

gemeine Forst und Jadgzeitung 168, 21-26.Mann, S. (1998). Konflikte in der deutschen Forstwirtschaft: Konflikttheoretische Analyse der

forstlichen Diskussion über die Krise der Forstwirtschaft. Aachen, Zugl.: Diss. Univ. Freiburg1997.

Mantel, K. (1990). Wald und Forst in der Geschichte: ein Lehr- und Handbuch. Hannover.Mantau, U. (1996). Verbände und Organisationen der Forst- und Holzwirtschaft: Erfassung und

Darstellung. Hamburg.Mantau, U. (1997). Funktionen, Leistungen, Wirkungen oder ganz was Neues? Allgemeine Forst

Zeitschrift/Der Wald 15, 826-827.Maydell, H.-J. (1996). Role of the Government in Forest Management - German Experience. In:

Schmithüsen (Ed.) Forstwiss Beiträge der Professur Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie 17, Expe-riences with Public Forest Ownership and Joint Management Systems, Proceedings of the IUFROForestry Conference Pushkino, Moscow Region, Russia, June 1994, 183-191.

Möller, A. (1922). Der Dauerwaldgedanke, sein Sinn und seine Bedeutung. Berlin.NABU, Naturschutzbund Deutschland (1996). Forstwirtschaft in Deutschland. Bonn.Nießlein, E. (1985). Forstpolitik. Hamburg and Berlin.Nießlein, E. (1995). Um die Zukunft der deutschen Forstwirtschaft. Holz-Zentralblatt 10, 181-

186.Nembach, P. (1993). Darstellung der forstpolitisch bedeutsamen Verbände in der Bundesrepublik

Deutschland. Diplomarbeit Universität Göttingen.Oesten, G. (1995). Zur forstökonomischen Diskussion über das Leitbild einer nachhaltigen

Waldwirtschaft. Forst und Holz 6, 171-175.Ollmann, H; Thoroe, C. (1995). Zur Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der deutschen Forst- und Holzwirtschaft.

Arbeitsbericht des Instituts für Ökonomie 95/1. Bundesanstalt für Forst- und Holzwirtschaft,Hamburg.

Philipp, W, (1987). Die Aufforstung als Beitrag zur Lösung des Überschussproblems in derLandwirtschaft Bayerns. Forstliche Forschungsberichte München; 84, München, Zugl. Diss.Univ. München 1987.

Rehfuess, K.E. (1990). Waldböden : Entwicklung, Eigenschaften und Nutzung. Hamburg.Rudzio, W. (1996). Das politische System der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Opladen.Sasse, V. (1996). Transition in Forestry - Recordings in the new German Federal States. In:

Schmithüsen (Ed.) Forstwiss Beiträge der Professur Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie 17, Expe-riences with Public Forest Ownership and Joint Management Systems, Proceedings of the IUFROForestry Conference Pushkino, Moscow Region, Russia, June 1994, 192-200.

Schaub, G. (1998). Politische Meinungsbildung in Deutschland - Wandel und Kontinuität deröffentlichen Meinung in Ost und West. Bonn.

Schraml, U. (1998). Die Normen der Jäger: Soziale Grundlagen des jagdlichen Handelns, Augsburg.Zugl. Diss. Univ. Freiburg.

Seydlitz (1984) Weltatlas. Berlin.Spiecker, H. et al. (1996). Growth trends in European forests: Studies from 12 countries. Berlin,

Heidelberg.Statistisches Bundesamt (Federal Statistical Office) in Wiesbaden (1997). Statistisches Jahrbuch

für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Stuttgart.Syrer, E. (1987). Jagdrecht und Interessensgruppen. Diss. Univ. München.Thoroe, C. (1986). Zur Subventionierung von Landwirtschaft und Forstwirtschaft – Ein Vergleich.

Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift 9/10, 190-193.Volz, K.-R. (1995). Zur ordnungspolitischen Diskussion über die nachhaltige Nutzung der

Zentralressource Wald. Forst u. Holz, 6, 163-170.

Germany

Volz, K.-R. (1997). Waldnutzungskonzepte und ihre forstpolitische Bewertung.Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt 116, 291-300.

Volz, K.-R., Bieling, A. (1998). Zur Soziologie des Kleinprivatwaldes. Forst u. Holz 3, 67-71.Wagner, C. (1912). Der Blendersaumschlag und sein System. Tübingen.Wagner, S. (1996). Naturschutzrechtliche Anforderungen an die Forstwirtschaft. Augsburg.Wagner, S. and Flasche, F. (1999). Rechtliche Grundlagen und Inhalte einer Europäischen

Forstpolitik - konkretisiert am Beispiel des Arten und Biotopschutzes sowie der EU-Strukturpolitik. Institut für Forstpolitik, Untersuchungsbericht I/1999, Freiburg.

Weber, N. (1993). Entstehung und Implementation der Bannwaldbestimmung des Waldgesetzesfür Bayern. Diss. Univ. München.

Weber, N. and Mann, S. (1997). Der postmaterialistische Wertwandel und seine Bedeutung für dieForstwirtschaft. Forstarchiv 68, 19-24.

Weber, N. and Schnappup, C. (1998). Partizipation - ein neues Grundprinzip in der Forstpolitik?Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung, 169, 168-174.

Weinberg, G. (1989). Forstliche Verbände: Systematisierung, Ziele und Aufgaben. DiplomarbeitUniversität Freiburg.

Wrede, C. H. (1993). Der forstbehördliche Fachbeitrag zum nordrhein-westfälischenLandschaftsplan und die Auswirkungen auf die Forstwirtschaft. Frankfurt/M.

ZMP, Zentrale Markt- und Preisberichtstelle (1998). ZMP-Bilanz Forst und Holz 1998. Bonn.Zundel, R., Schwartz, E. (1996). 50 Jahre Forstpolitik in Deutschland (1945 bis 1989). Berichte

über Landwirtschaft, 211. Münster-Hiltrup.

Useful Internet AddressesForestry education and sciencesUniversity of Freiburg http://www.forst.uni-freiburg.de/University of Göttingen http://www.uni-goettingen.de/fb/Forst/University of Dresden (Tharandt) http://www.forst.tu-dresden.de/University of Munchen (Freising) http://www.forst.uni-muenchen.de/Forest Research Institute of Baden-Wuerttemberg http://fva.forst.uni-freiburg.de/ Forest Research Institute of Bavaria http://www.lwf.uni-muenchen.de/Popular forestry journalsAllgemeine Forstzeitschrift/Der Wald http://www.blv.de/afzForst und Holz http://www.forst-und-holz.de/

DatabasesInformation about Food, Agriculture and Forestry http://www.dainet.de/fiself/Information about Food, Agriculture and Forestry http://aid@aid-online.de/ Ministries responsible for forestryGermany http://www.bml.deBaden-Wuerttemberg http://www.mlr.baden-wuerttemberg.de/Bavaria http://www.stmelf.bayern.de/Brandenburg http://www.brandenburg.de/land/melf/Lower Saxony http://www.niedersachsen.de/ML1.htmMecklenburg-Western Pomerania http://www.mv-regierung.de/lm/index.htmlRhineland-Palatinate http://www.rheinland-pfalz.de/index2.htmSaxony-Anhalt http://www.ml.sachsen-anhalt.de/Thuringia http://www.thueringen.de/tmlnu/index.html

Greece

1 The country

1.1 Natural conditions of the Hellenic areaProf. Dr. Dr. Dimitrios Kotoulas, Head of theDepartment of Forestry and Natural Environ-ment

The natural environment which the trees of theforest are born into, and in which they growand die, is formed by three natural factors: theearth’s relief, its climate and its geology. Onlywhere the combination of these three factors isfavourable can a forest develop.

The Hellenic area, whose main natural factorsare described below, stretches to the southernpoint of the Balkan peninsula and displays com-plex horizontal and vertical fluctuations. Itstotal surface (131,957 square kilometres) isdivided into that of the mainland (82%) and ofthe islands (18%). The sea which surrounds itfrom three sides; the interrelationship towards

the North by means of the mainland highlanddistricts of the Balkan peninsula; and its mainland connection from North to South, amount-ing to a total of 791,8 km, hold a significanteffect over the formation of its ecological envi-ronment.

Table 1 shows that 65,42% of Greece’s totalsurface area has an altitude of more than 200metres, in other words it displays mountain-ous characteristics. The remaining landscape,although under 200 metres, is, however, mainlyhilly and barren in nature. Flat land, suitablefor farming, constitutes 25% of the total area.Consequently, Greece, although mountainousin character, is in fact an undulating landscapeof moderate elevation.

The favourable position Greece holds as far asits latitude is concerned, the fact that all threeof its sides are surrounded by seas, and the in-tense fluctuation of its relief at altitudes rang-

Greece

Author:Paulos SmirisAristoteles University of ThessalonikiDepartment of Forestry and Natural Environment Laboratory of SilvicultureP.O.Box 26, GR-54006 Thessaloniki, GreeceTel.: +30 31 998013 and 992761, Fax: +30 31 992761

Contact person:Chariklia NakouAdministration Building, University CampusTel. +30-31-995199 and 995196

Table 1. Distribution of the steps of altitude in the Hellenic area

Steps of Area Surface Mean slopealtitude (m) (%) of soil (%)200 flat 34,58 3201 - 600 hilly 34,83 8601 - 1000 semi-mountainous 19,61 9 – 151001 - 1500 mountainous 6,93 16 – 301501 - 2000 very mountainous 3,55 30 – 402001 - 2500 sub alpine 0,35 41 – 652501 - 3000 trans alpine 0,15 65

Greece

ing up to 2.917 metres, form within its area avariety of climatic variations.

The Greek climate generally appears to haveMediterranean-type features: rainfall duringwinter, spring and autumn and drought in con-junction with high temperatures during sum-mer, as well as a significant amount of sun-shine. At the coasts and islands, especially inthe southern parts of the country a marine cli-matic type is predominant, while in the northand interior of the country a continental-typeclimate is prevalent.

Distribution of the most significant meteoro-logical factors in the Hellenic area, with re-gards to vegetation are as follows:

As for air temperature, significant changes arenoticed from place to place. The annual rangeof temperatures (the difference between thelargest and the smallest temperature of the year)ranges from 13°C (islands of the SoutheasternAegean) to 23°C and over (North and CentralMacedonia). The Greek climate is influencedby isotherms of 19,5 °C and 14,5 °C.

The annual average of relative air humidityranges between 60% and 70% and is impor-tant. The more humid areas are in the North-western districts, Central Macedonia, Corfu andthe Aegean islands near the coasts of Asia Mi-nor, while less humid are the areas of Attiki,Argolida, Corinth, Laconia, as well as the Cyc-lades. Generally, humidity decreases from theIonian towards the Aegean sea.

Annual precipitation, found in the Hellenic area,is not negligible. In the flat areas it ranges from400 to about 1,200 mm, while it increases withaltitude, exceeding 2000mm in the mountainousparts of Western Greece. Its distribution duringthe year is uneven. Rainfall appears duringspring, autumn and especially winter, while thesummer months are generally dry. In themountainous regions, especially towards thenorthern districts of the country, most of theprecipitation falls as snow. Table 2 shows thatrainfall is heavier in the mountainous regions.From the distribution of amounts of the meanannual precipitation in the Hellenic area, pre-sented in table 3, it arises that in Greece mostof the areal coverage receives an annual amountof precipitation from between 1001 to 1400mm(22,32%). Consequently, although Greece givesthe impression of being a dry country, due toits summer drought, it does in fact receive asubstantial amount of rainfall.

Due to the variety of rock formations whichmake up the Hellenic area, and through thedynamic nature of earth-forming processes, thegeological structure of Greece is complex. Asseen in table 4, showing the extent of the vari-ous petrological formations, it is evident thatin the Hellenic area the most recent sedimen-tary rocks are the most prevalent - by area -followed by limestone and slate.

Thus, the various land formations, all suitablefor the development of forests, are dependentupon the geological structure and climate as-sociated with each of our areas.

Table 2. Fluctuation of various climatic factors in Greece in connection to the altitude

Altitude (m) Mean annual Mean annual number Mean annual air Mean annualprecipitation of days with of at least temperature (oC) temperature(mm) 10 mm of precipitation range (oC)

<200 <760 <23 <16,2 <29,0201 - 600 761 - 1050 23 - 30 16,1 – 13,6 29,0 – 30,0601 - 1000 1051 - 1320 31 - 37 13,5 – 10,8 30,0 – 30,71001 - 1500 1321 - 1680 38 - 46 10,7 – 7,6 30,7 – 31,81501 - 2000 1681 - 2020 47 - 55 7,5 – 4,3 31,8 – 33,02001< 2021< 55< 4,3< 33,0<

Greece

Formation of the Hellenic area with its climate,relief and geological structure is favourable forthe development of forests. In Greece there areno deserts, nor are there spaces that are cov-ered permanently or for long periods of time,by snow and ice. Greece has the natural privi-lege that forests are able to prosper over al-most all of the country up to an altitude of 1800till 2000 metres (ASL) (tree line), in otherwords on 99,5% of its surface, and this treecover can offer opportunities for many benefits.

2 Forest resources and their usesAssoc.Prof. Dr.Paulos Smiris

2.1 Forest history

A forest is a group of trees and bushes that livetogether on a large piece of land in such closerelation to one another and at such a distancefrom each other that their canopy create a dis-tinctive environment – a forest environment –and when together with other members of theplant and animal kingdoms, they create a dis-tinct ecosystem.

When the Achaeans settled in Greece, theGreek mainland was covered from itscoastlands up to the sub-alpine zone with thickforests, in which lived numerous species of wildanimals and birds (Homer, Plato et al.). As thepopulation gradually increased and civilisationdeveloped, the demand for timber and arableland grew, and this was by necessity satisfiedthrough reckless and destructive tree-fellingand clearing of the forests. As early as the 4th

and 5th centuries B.C. according to Plato, themountains of Hymettos and Parnitha were al-ready bare. During the Roman and Byzantineeras, as well as the period of Turkish rule, de-struction of the forests continued, especially inthe coastal regions.

After Greece gained its independence from theOttoman Empire the first serious attempts toexploit the forests in a rational way were madeby Bavarian foresters, who came to the coun-try with King Otto.

- 1836: Enactment of the first basic legislationand establishment of the first forestry admin-istration.

- 1877: Dissolution of the forestry administra-tion and assumption of its duties by the gen-darmerie.

- 1896: Establishment of the Forestry Schoolat Vitina with the aim of providing profes-sional training for forestry staff.

- 1911: Foundation of the Forestry Departmentat the Ministry of National Finance.

- 1917: Establishment of the Forestry Schoolat the National Metsovio Polytechnic in Ath-ens.

- 1920: Enactment of Law 1687 regarding lo-cal Forestry Service staff and Law 2036 re-garding the administration of forests and taxa-tion fo forestry products.

- 1921: Forestry Service split up between thePolice Force and the Ministry of Finance.

- 1924: Codification of forestry legislation anddivision of the country into 14 Inspectorates,55 Forest Districts and 65 Forest Peripheryoffices.

Table 3. Distribution of annual precipitationof the Hellenic areaSteps of mean annual Surface (%)precipitation<400 1,72401 - 600 21,76601 - 800 32,74801 - 1000 17,841001 - 1400 22,321401< 3,62

Table 4. Distribution of petrological formationsin GreecePetrological formation Surface (%)Limestone rocks 19,50Flysch rocks 8,48Slate rocks 18,35Sedimentary rocks 24,00Igneous rocks 12,58Alluvium 15,87Various 1,22

Greece

The period 1931-1940 can be described as adecade of organisation and progress since aseries of laws improved the Forestry Serviceand set out the aims for the exploitation andprotection of the forests. During the period1941-50, on account of the war, no significantwork was carried out in connection with theforests.

From 1951 up to the present day continuousefforts have been made to restore and improvethe forests, to prevent soil erosion and flood-ing, to develop game-keeping and fish-farm-ing, to increase the number of national parks,to carry out recreational and mountain tourismprojects, and also to establish and improve ur-ban forests.

2.2 Forest ownership and land use

The total land area of Greece is 13,195 740 haof which 25.4% (3,359 186 ha) consists of pro-ductive forests, 23.9% (3,153 882 ha) non-pro-

ductive forests, and the remainder other formsof land use (range lands 13.7%; crop lands33.6%; industrial land 1.1%; and areas of wa-ter 0.7%). As for the ownership of forested land,65.4% belongs to the state, 12.0% is commu-nal, 9.8% is owned by co-operatives, 4.8% ismonastic and 8% is privately owned.

2.3 Forest distribution and forest growth

Table 5 shows the distribution of forests inGreece according to tree species in ha. Beech,fir, black and Scots pine usually occupy the cool,moist levels of the country’s mountain ranges.

The main types of soil are brown forest soils,acidic forest soils and soil of the Rendzina type,on which grow, Quercus sp., Castanea sativa,Miller., Pinus halepensis, Mill. and Pinus brutiaTen. forest-types usually occupy the dry tomoderately cool levels of the lower mountainranges. The predominant types of soil are thebrown and reddish-brown forest soils.

Table 5. Distribution of forests in Greece according to tree species and forest production.

Name Area (ha) (%) Merchantablevolume (m3)

SoftwoodsAb. Bor. Regis, Matt 543,308 8.34 43,133 020P. halepensis,Mill and P. brutia, Ten 567,731 8.72 13,634 886Pinus nigra, Arm 281,692 4.33 13,892 819P. sylvestris, L 20,955 0.32 2,341 835P.leucodermis,Ant 8,300 0.13 2,029 000Pinus pinea, L 108 - 117,736Ab.bor.regis,Matt and P. nigra, Arm 4,762 0.07P. excelsa, Lint 2,754 0.04 856,395Total 1,429 610 21. 95 77,349,481

HardwoodsF. sylvatica, L-F. moesiaca, Maly 336,640 5. 17 27,693 914C. sativa, Mill 33,081 0.51 0.5124,145 321Quercus sp. 1,471 839 22.60 1,925 067Pl. Orientalis, l 86,579 1.33 231 525B. pendula, Zoth 1.437 0.02 5,067 467Evergreen trees 60,757 651Total 1,929 576 29.63

Productive forests 3,359 186 51.58 138,107 132Non productive forests 3,153 882 48.42 2,755 829

Greece

The principal types of silvicultural system inGreece’s forests are as follows: high forests36.4%; coppice 46.8%; and coppice with stand-ards 16.8%. The average growing stockamounts to 62.4 m3/ha; more specifically, 80m3/ha for conifers and 48 m3/ha for broad-leaved trees. The mean annual increment is2.76 cubic m (2.48% for conifers and 3.12%for broad-leaved trees). The mean annual tim-ber cut is 1.6 m3/ha.

2.4 Silviculture

From the above one may conclude that Greeceis poor in forests and that its forests are poor interms of growing stock, with a low to averagetimber quality. This, of course is not a result ofthe way it has so far been managed by the for-estry services, but due to the impact on forestsfrom grazing and other activities.

Furthermore, it is a fact that virtually half theGreek forests are coppice and need to be con-verted. In silvicultural terms, it is possible,through cultivating the forests andreafforestation, both to increase the proportionof forest coverage from 25 to about 35% andalso to improve productivity, quality andgrowth.

On this last point, in Greece, the demand forrecreation, in recent years, has risen in boththe forests near towns and also those in moreremote mountain areas. Likewise, the increasein demand for water has rendered it necessaryto manage forest ecosystems in such a way asto ameliorate the water budget problems inwatersheds and produce a correct water bal-ance.

Finally, public sensitivity towards protection ofthe environment has greatly increased, to theextent that, to date, 10 areas have been desig-nated national parks, 1 virgin forest and a largenumber of forests aesthetic areas. To purelydesignate a virgin forest, however, may not bepossible in the present day.

2.5 Forest threatsProf. Dr. Stephanos Markalas

Abiotic factorsThe climate of Greece is characterised by lowprecipitation during the warm months of theyear. Thus, drought is a very important envi-ronmental factor, responsible for many director indirect tree damages, especially in yearswith a prologed dry period or during periodsof successive dry years. For example, drought(in combination with unfavourable soil condi-tions) causes remarkable losses in young affor-ested stands. Other abiotic factors such as highor low temperatures, strong winds, snowfalls,etc., cause from time to time some damage inforest stands.

PollutionIn recent years, some research results indicatethe existence of air pollution in forest ecosys-tems, but so far it has not been correlated withspecific tree health problems. The fact that al-most all Greek forests consist of native treespecies, in combination with the dry climateand the prevalence of calcareous forest soils,indicates that the problem due to air pollutionwill be insignificant, also in the near future.

Forest firesDuring the last decade we had, annually inGreece, about 1,500 forest fires affecting an areaof about 48,000 ha. From these fires, 550burned in woodlands and 950 in brushlandsand grasslands, which affected 17,000 and31,000 ha respectively. The most fire-endan-gered forest species are Pinus halepensis Milland Pinus brutia Tenn, which constitute thecoastal forests in the lowest and southernmostpart of the country. Causes of the fires aremainly attributed to indirect or direct humanactivities (negligence 32%, accidents 3%,arsons 29%), since only 3% of the total numberare lightning-caused fires; the rest 33% are at-tributed to unknown reasons.

DiseasesThe diseases occuring in Greek forests are prac-tically the same as those found in other Euro-pean countries, but due to the existing dry cli-

Greece

matic conditions they are not as important.During this century, three introduced diseases,which have spread nearly all over the country,are of great economic importance, because theythreaten the existence of their host plants. Theseare: the Chestnut blight (Cryphonectriaparasitica), the Dutch elm disease(Ceratocystis ulmi), and the cancer of cypress(Seiridium cardinale).

InsectsFrom the great number of insects attacking for-est trees in Greece, there are some species whichattain significant numbers to cause serious eco-nomic losses. The most important group arethe bark boring insects (especially Scolytids).They are secondary in their attack, preferringstands suffering from other stress factors, caus-ing death of the attacked trees. As mentionedabove, drought is the primary stress factor re-sulting in weakened trees of low resistance, andsusceptible to insect attack. Outbreaks of barkboring insects are common in coniferous stands(mainly fir and pine stands) during or after dryperiods. From the numerous foliage feedinginsects, it is worth mentioning the pineprocessionary moth (Thaumetopoeapityocampa), which causes sustained outbreaksmostly in pine afforestations, and the gypsymoth (Lymantria dispar), exhibiting periodicoutbreaks in oak stands (mostly Quercuscoccifera L).

2.6 Forest productionDr. Elias VOULGARIDIS, Professor

Greece is a Mediterranean country and, throughits long and turbulent history, its land has beensubjected to large-scale deforestation and en-vironmental destruction. As a result, nowadays,the percentage of forest area is low and thegreatest part of the forests are in need of reha-bilitation. According to the last census, forestland covers 25.4% of the land-total of Greecebut forest productivity is low. A significant partof the country (23,9%) is covered by forest ar-eas that are mostly evergreen hardwoods andmany of them are used as grazing areas.

The annual production of wood from state for-ests is only 2,707,000 m3 which corresponds to786,000 m3 wood for technical use and1,921,000 m3 for fuelwood (table 6). The mainspecies producing wood for technical use arepine (mostly black pine), fir, spruce, beech,poplar and, to a small extent, oak and chest-nut. Most of the wood produced by the Greekforests is of a small dimension (<25 cm in di-ameter). Such wood, amounting to 40% of thetotal production (i.e. 1,200,000 m3), is producedby coppice oak forests and used mostly asfuelwood. Other significant quantities of small-dimension wood are produced by coppice chest-nut and beech forests as well as evergreenhardwoods. The quality of such wood is rela-tively low due to the presence of a high pro-portion of growth abnormalities (juvenile andreaction wood, poor stem forms, etc.), that re-sults in some negative effects on the quality offinal products and on processing costs. The

Table 6. Annual production of wood from Greek state forests.

* Includes sawlogs, poles, mine timber, veneer logs and wood utilized for particleboards, fiberboards andpulpwood.** At least other 300,000 m3 of wood are produced from private, communal, monasterial and other forests.

Wood category Hardwoods Softwoods Totalm3 % m3 % m3 %

Industrial wood* 380,000 48.3 406,000 51.7 786,000 29(wood of technical use)Fuelwood 1,615,000 84.1 306,000 15.9 1,921,000 71Total** 1,995,000 73.7 712,000 26.3 2,707,000 100

Greece

proper use of small-dimension wood, that con-stitutes most of the production from the for-ests, is for biomass utilisation. In Greece, how-ever this is still a problem because of a largewood deficit of wood. The deficiency of woodresults in imports of wood and wood productsreaching an amount of 1,852,000 m3 annually(table 7). Thus, demands for the successful con-version of small-dimension wood into techni-cally and economically high-value wood prod-ucts are expected to increase in the future.

2.6.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

Harvesting of wood in Greece is based on the“sustained yield” principle. This is employedin combination with natural or artificial regen-eration and secures the continuous productionof wood and conservation of forest ecosystems.A management plan which determines theyearly yield and the silvicultural system is aprerequisite before harvest.

Selection system is the principal method ap-plied to productive forests of pine, fir, spruceand beech. For coppice forests of oak, chestnutand evergreen hardwoods clear cutting on smallareas is performed.

The forests in Greece are mostly found in moreor less remote and not easily accessible moun-tains. The road density for the productive for-ests is now about 20-25 m/ha with an optimumof 27-30 m/ha.

Harvesting operations are not extensivelymechanised due mainly a) to the fact that theproductive forests are in the mountains andground topography (slopes over 35%) does not

allow use of mechanised vehicles and b) tosilvicultural practices which take into accountnatural regeneration aspects, protection of for-est ecosystems, and aesthetic and recreationaldemands.

A characteristic of the harvesting system ap-plied (shortwood system) is the completeprocessing of felled trees to logs at the fellingsite or stump area. This processing includestopping, delimbing, bucking and (crosscuttinginto logs), and debarking (for conifers only).Then the logs are transported to storage yards,or lay-bys at forest roadsides. They serve as tem-porary depots for the storage of harvested woodawaiting sale or shipment and the eventualtransportation of timber to forest industries forfurther processing.

Felling, bucking and topping are accomplishedby a chain saw. Delimbing is done by a chainsaw and, to a small extent, by axe. Debarkingof conifer logs is performed in the forest by anaxe and, rarely, by spud. Skidding is donemostly by animals (horses, mules) and to a verysmall extent by wheeled or crawler-typeskidders, cable systems and forwarders.

Forest workers are trained mostly on-the-job,and by short courses. They are seasonal andpayment is based on units of volume produced.

Harvesting of timber in state forests (65% oftotal) is done by a) hiring worker co-operativesor independent crews, direct supervision ofworks and selling the wood from the ForestService and b) by worker cooperatives that paya fee to the state to acquire the right to harvestwood under specific regulations and supervi-sion from the Forest Service and sell it. No wood

Table 7. Annual Imports of wood and wood products.Category of products Quantity, m3

Round wood, m3 200,000Sawn wood, m3 400,000Veneers, m3 2,000Pulpwood (equivalent round wood volume) 1,200,000Others 50,000Total 1,852,000

Greece

is sold on the stump. In private forests, super-vision by the Forest Service is indirect. Themanner of sale is by auction.

2.6.2 Timber uses

The woodworking industry in Greece showeda rapid development in the 1960s and 1970s.Today it consists of 2,482 factories or smallwood processing units in the primary process-ing and 20,838 factories mostly small units inthe secondary processing, sectors and employsabout 75,000 people.

Products from, and type of wood industries,include poles and posts, sawmills, flooring (par-

quet), railroad ties, veneer and plywood,particleboard, fiberboard (MDF),thermomechanical pulp, paper, boxes andcrates, match, preservation, furniture, oleoresindistillation and a great number of small enter-prises. The wood working industries in Greeceare shown in tables 8 and 9. Part of thesawnwood, plywood, veneers and paper andpaper boards are produced from imported for-est products. In particle board production about40% of its raw material consists of woodresidues and fuelwood. Exports are limited tosmall quantities of certain products (oleoresin,gum rosin, turpentine, plywood, particleboard,etc.). Most of the wood industries are small andmedium-sized enterprises.

Table 8. Wood working industries (1990)

Table 9. Secondary and tertiary processing industry

Type of factories Number of Number of Workers/plant Degree of Utilizationfactories workers capacity (%)

Sawing and other Mechanical ProcessingSawmills 463 3,660 6 40Floor-parquet mills 45 605 14 46Box-mills 210 1,799 9 47Other small enterprises 1,680 4,624 3 22Sub-total 2,398 10,688 4.5 33Wood Panel – IndustryPlywood plants 7 1,050 150 45Particleboard plants 7 665 95 80Veneer plants 6 350 29 36Fiberboard plants 1 120 120 80Sub-total 21 2,185 104 62Chemical - Processing IndustryWoodpulp 1 800 800 45Oleoresin 12 180 15 35Charcoal 50 200 4 10Sub-total 63 1,180 19 42Total 2,482 14,053 5.7 37

Type of factories Number of factories Number of Workers Workers/plantPaper-paperboard 410 10,200 28Wood working shops 9,910 21,800 2.2Furniture 10,518 28,550 2.7Total 20,838 60,550 2.9

Greece

2.6.3 Non-timber forest products.

Additonal forest products are oleoresin (fromAleppo pine trees), briarwood (from Ericaarborea L), Christmas trees, basket - weaving(willow) coppice, fruits, ornamental, pharma-ceutical, and aromatic plants, and organic soil(humus), etc.

Regarding pine resin, yearly production is nowabout 5.000 tons- down from about 30.000 tonsin the 1960´s. The decline is mainly attributedto the diminishing interest of workers due tolow income. Resin is produced by tappingAleppo pine (Pinus halepensis Mill), and iscollected after debarking the limbs and treat-ing with sulfuric acid paste. Most resin is ex-ported mainly in the form of rosin.

Other exudates (excretions) include mastickfrom Pistacia lentiscus var. chia or latifoliaand styrax (storax) from Liquidambar orientalisL. . Organic substances like tannins and col-ouring materials are extracted from wood, bark,foliage, and fruits and flowers of certain forestspecies and used in leather- making (tannins),for dyeing textiles (coloring materials) and forproduction of other products.

Briarwood is commonly used in making thebowls of tobacco smoking pipes. It comes fromtumor-like outgrowths that develop between theroot and stem of white heath (Erica arborea L),an evergreen shrub. Preference for these tumorsis attributed to fire resistance, lack of odor whenheated at high temperatures, fine grain, goodpolish, and attractive figure.

In addition, forests contribute to animal produc-tion by providing food for wildlife and grazinglivestock, production of honey, etc.

3 Forest economicsAssist. Prof. Dr. Athanasios Christodoulou,Assist. Prof. Dr.Vaios Blioumis, Prof. Dr.Nikolaos Stamou.

3.1 Forest and Forest Industries in nationaleconomy

3.1.1 General

The contribution of forestry to the nationaleconomy is small if the wood production sec-tor is only considered. This contribution (incurrent prices) is 0.17% on average of the GDP(min 0.14 and max 0.19%) for the period 1990-1994 and 2.04% (min 0.86 and max 1.22%) ofthe GDP of the primary production sector.

Some of the important forest service activitiesare shown in table 10. Total expenditure in theforestry sector is shown in table 11.

Furthermore, some economic features of Greekforests which are expressed in indices, arequoted: size of forest per capita of population0.25 Ha, average annual cut 2.5 million m3 ,number of employed people 35,000 , numberof working days/year 2.1 million, employmentin forestry/total employment 1.19%, and addedvalue 0.1 billion ECU.

Table 10. Selected forest service activities

Year Reforestation Ha Forest road construction Km Hunting licenses1990 4657 921 3272551991 4140 1092 3312101992 4592 1118 2904361993 4653 1193 2909601994 4406 1408 2737841995 3320 1077 2722031996 1963 1017 252524

Greece

3.1.2 Forest industries

The Greek industry of wood and furniture is asector of economy which utilises not only in-digenous but also imported raw materials. Ingeneral, these firms, are characterised by: arelatively small size per firm, technologicalunderdevelopment, under-utilisation of the es-tablished equipment, a lack of standardisationand quality control , low productivity, and asmall degree of vertical integration.

Specifically, the following observations mayapply:- The Greek industry of wood and furniture is

characterised by a large diversity in size fromfirms being small saw-logging factories up toorganised industrial units.

- There is a broad scale of capacity utilisationboth within and between the diverse sizeclasses of the industry. On average only 45%of the established capacity is utilised. This factdenotes the amount of waste within the pro-ductive force and indicates possibilities to en-courage full employment and capacity-utili-sation through better organisation and man-agement of the firm.

- When looking at the raw material being used,with the exception of the small-scale facto-ries, it comes from local production in fluctu-ating proportions depending on the kind offirm (e.g. sawn wood factories 85%, boxingwood factories 55%, parquet factories 80%,plywood factories 10%, particle board facto-ries 100%, and veneer factories 5%).

- The geographical distribution of industrialwood firms within Greece is characterised bythe biggest rate of accumulation of first de-

gree manufacturing units in northern Greeceand mostly in Macedonia.

Wooden furniture enterprises- In general, a characteristic of the enterprises

is their small comparative size, seen whenlooking at furniture factories, both nationallyand at the community level, (based on thenumber of employed people).

- Raw materials used by the Greek furnitureindustry are largely imported from overseas,meaning that the industry is strongly depend-ent on them.

- The greatest accumulation rate, of these en-terprises is in the area of the capital, followedby northern Greece.

- Most of the entrepreneurs used to be woodcraftsmen before they become furniture busi-nessmen.

- The trade in furniture exports is at low levelsand characteristically in negative balance. Theimports are mainly from E.U. countries,whereas exports are made to the Middle East.

Wood trade enterprisesProblems occurring within the wood trade en-terprises are related to:1) The countries characteristic trait in import-

ing large amounts of timber and timber prod-ucts and

2) the contemporary particularities of theGreek, European, and world wood marketwhich are the following:

- Rapid rate in the reduction of forests and for-est lands at a global level;

- A decline in the production of tropical timberand its availability outside the developingcountries.

Table 11.Total expenditure in the forestry sector (in million ECU, current prices)Year Forest Reforestation Road Miscellaneous Managerial Total

protection construction expenses1990 16.79 12.70 11.17 40.63 49.61 130.911991 27.93 12.68 12.00 43.20 45.00 140.811992 27.95 14.88 13.00 49.70 44.60 150.121993 29.99 15.72 11.14 52.10 47.17 156.131994 44.98 16.66 11.34 45.21 52.50 170.681995 38.71 13.13 10.83 47.58 52.89 163.141996 37.27 11.85 12.71 54.76 80.56 197.15

Greece

- The restriction imposed by wood-producingcountries in regulating the amount of woodannually harvested, in order to establish suf-ficient stocks and ensure the future availabil-ity of primary material for their own woodindustry.

- The merchandising of products from the ma-jor Greek wood industries in order to com-pete with the European wood industries, alongwith the constantly increasing productioncosts within Greece.

- The standardisation of wood production fromthe Greek forests is rarely systematic and isunlikely to serve the demands of the wood in-dustries.

- The trend of the Greek consumer towardsimported products is greatly enforced by thehigh prices and low quality of Greek wood-furniture products.

3.2. Market

As already mentioned, our country is stronglydependent on imports of timber and timberproducts resulting in a big gap in the wood tradebalance. Our needs are not met by domesticproduction except in only a very few productssuch as fuelwood, particle board, veneer sheets,and plywood (sawlogs 24%, sawnwood 50%,fiberboard 14%, paper-paperboard 50%, pulp78% ).

Regarding Greek imports, taking into accountthe period 1985-91, the following remarks arestressed:

- The value of timber and timber product im-ports for this period is 4.72% of the value ofthe country’s total imports (for the years 1995and 1996 the respective rates are 5.14% and4.2%). The total value of the country’s an-nual imports is changing from year to year atan average annual rate of 18.6% whereas therespective value of timber products is chang-ing at an average rate of 24.2%.

- Timber imports, compared with the importsof such basic products as crude oil, iron, andmeat, from the viewpoint of overcharging thetrade balance of Greece, occupy second placeafter crude oil and its products.

- The value of timber imports and every kindof timber product consists of 36.12% of woodand wood products, 12.98% of pulp and50.90% of paper with increase rates of 24.3%,13.8% and 27.0% respectively.

- When looking at the share in value of annualimports among unprocessed, semi-processedand its final products (paper is not included)the semi-processed wood comes first with ageometric mean rate of 67.44% against15.90% and 15.09% of the unprocessed andfinal products, respectively.

- When looking at the global share in value ofimports (paper excluded), Europe comes firstwith a rate of 67.73%, America with 16.88%,Africa with 14.56% and Asia 0.77%.

Regarding the period 1992-96, table 12 showsthe import and export of timber and timberproducts.

Table 12. Imports and Exports of Timber and Timber products for the period 1992-1996 (valuein million ECU, current prices)

*Temporary data

Year Wood and cork Pulp and waste Cork and wood Paper, Totalpaper manufactures paperboard, etc.

(except furniture)Imports Exports Imports Exports Imports Exports Imports Exports Imports Exports

1992 153.06 21.18 42.87 0.89 92.27 30.20 363.34 44.97 651.55 97.241993 134.59 27.73 33.27 2.07 79.76 31.13 410.62 44.24 658.24 105.171994 168.54 19.83 49.67 2.38 96.44 34.92 447.74 47.58 762.39 104.711995 169.08 13.10 98.28 1.98 120.70 38.93 608.32 67.83 996.37 121.851996* 168.08 9.07 62.06 1.92 97.71 32.17 553.84 76.22 881.69 119.39

Greece

Share in the value of imported paper and pulp tototal imports into the country from timber andtimber products during the seven-year period1971-77 was equal to 58.7% while in 1995 itamounted to 70.9%.

Theoretically, we should consume more than3/4 of the average annual production inroundwood of the Greek forests in order to coverour annual needs of imported pulp and paper.

3.3 Employment

In the mountainous area of Greece, three basicforms of soil exploitation co-exist (forestry,stock breeding and agriculture) in which for-estry employs about 35,000 people. However,the absence of any care and policy for the de-velopment of this specific area, as well as theun-planned development of big cities has ledto the mountain areas having a low-level qual-ity of life and to desertification with severemigration inland and overseas, especially dur-ing the period 1945-75.

In addition to the above number of employedpeople consideration should also be given toadditional sources of employment, which take:a) 13 million working days/year (due to graz-ing of the forest lands), b) 400,000 workingdays/year from the production of honey and c)400,000 working days/year for the collectionof products such as fuel material, tobaccosticksetc.; in other words a sum of 14 million days/year.

The employment of workers in the wood, cork,furniture and paper and paper products enter-

prises is shown in table 13. The 73,423 em-ployed people in these sectors cover 10.3% ofthe total number of employed in the manufac-turing sector.

However, if we also take into account the asso-ciated networks of handicraft factories and in-dustries (glued substances, fabrics etc.) as wellas the commercial shops, then in the abovenumber of 74,000 employed people we shouldadd another 100,000 workers.

3.4 Profitability

Profitability is the existing relationship betweenthe annual profit gained by the enterprise andits investment capital (own capital or/and for-eign).

Based on the broader meaning of the term prof-itability some of the indices being used for itsdetermination are as follows: Net Present Value(NPV), Equivalent Annual Income (EAI), SoilExpectation Value (SEV), Benefit/Cost ratio (B/C), Payback Period (PP), Real Internal Rate ofReturn (RIRR), and these terms have been usedfor the estimation of the efficiency in varioussectors.

In general, concerning Forestry in Greece, prof-itability indices are not estimated for two basicreasons:a) because Forestry has a strong social dimen-

sion in the Greek mountainous and semi-mountainous areas.

b) because outputs from Greek Forestry focusless on wood production and more on the en-vironmental role of the forests under specific

Table 13. Number of manufacturing establishments and average annual employment by branch(Census,1988)

Branches Establishments Average annual employmentNumber % Number %

Wood and cork 12720 53.4 30947 42.1Furniture and fixtures 10484 44.1 30476 41.5Paper and paper 594 2.5 12000 16.4productsTotal 23798 100 73423 100

Greece

Greek conditions (protection against soil ero-sion, enforcement of water reserves, protec-tion against streams and floods, protection ofbiodiversity and genetic reserves etc.). How-ever, this role for methodological reasons wasnot quantified yet and was not included inthe profitability indices.

4 Forests and forest related policies Professor of Forest Policy, Dr Anastassios C.Papastavrou, Associate Professor of ForestPolicy (Forest Recreation Policy), DrAthanassios C. Karameris, Assistant Professorof Forest Policy (Forest Valuation and Account-ing), Dr Nikolaos E. Anagnos, Assistant Pro-fessor of Forest Policy (Forest Legislation andLaw), Dr Christos V. Goupos, Lecturer of For-est Informatics, Panagiotis D. Lefakis

Forests and forest lands in our country, consti-tute a national wealth, because they providegoods and services that contribute to an im-provement in the quality of life, hence, theyare protected by the Constitution of the year1975 and current Forest Legislation.

The increasing needs of our society, as theydepend on forests, justifies the enacting of adynamic forest policy, which will be realisedbased on forest legislation. Analysis of the For-est Policy objectives should be acquired throughthree basic general guidelines, which are goals,formation and means.

The goals are defined, based on the needs ofour country, which should be served by forestresources, after considering previously analysedproblems that confront an organised society.

Policy formation ordinarily involves many de-cisions made by different people. It is usually acontinuing process of further modifying poli-cies which already exist. So this forest policy(which is not unique but a set of policies) canbe more effective to achieve the goals definedwith specific criteria, especially when the gen-eral conditions (social, economic, technologi-cal, biological, etc.) differentiate within time.Hence, the differentiation of the above condi-

tions and the presentation of forests not onlyas an economic, but as environmental and so-cial good, impose to respect the principles ofsustainable forest benefits, multiple-use of for-ests and forest lands, finances in a wide socio-economic meaning and sensitivity, and totalquality, with sustainable development effort.

4.1 Legislation

The Constitution of the year 1975, has charac-terised the natural and cultural environment ofGreece as a subject of great interest and spe-cial adaptations. That fact is an important stagein the constitutional history of the country.

However, by article 24, paragraph 1, of theGreek Constitution, it is prohibited to changeland use in State forests and forest areas. Thatprohibition is not valid when agricultural ex-ploitation is excelled or other use that is im-posed by the public interest.

Also, in article 117, paragraph 3, of the GreekConstitution, it is not allowed by the legislatorthe possibility of setting any kind of time orother restrictions or exceptions in the compul-sory reforestation of state and private forestsand forest lands, which are destroyed by fire orany other cause.

Forest legislation used many protective meas-ures such as: implementation of a forest own-ership survey and forest cadastral survey, pro-tection of flora and fauna, proclamation of ar-eas to in danger from fires, the special charac-ter of allowable interventions into the forests,the inaction of punishments for law violatorsof forest legislation, the characterization of for-ests and forest lands as natural parks, monu-ments of nature and declared protected areasfor greater protection.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The actors involved with forests are:a) ownership actors,

Greece

such as 1) the State; 2) physical persons: i)owners, ii) co-owners; 3) corporate bodies: i)corporate bodies under public law, ii) corpo-rate bodies under private law, and

b) exploitation actors,such as 1) state forests: i) the state itself, ii)private owners, iii) free forest work coopera-tives, and; 2) private forests, i) private owners,ii) free forest work cooperatives and iii) otheractors (ecological organizations, hunting soci-eties, cattlebreeders e.t.c.)

Forest policy, is a set of policies (wood produc-tion, recreation-tourism, national parks, wild-life and fishery, wetlands, watershed protectionand soil conservation, grazing and soil conser-vation, grazing and livestock, mining, specialuses, conservation of the environment andmaintenance of the aesthetic values) that isenacted uniquely by the State, who is the ma-jor owner of forests and forest lands, throughthe Forest Service, in the state forests andthrough forest policy supervision in private for-ests.

4.3 Forest policy tools

The protection and development of forestry wasalways done through five-year developmentproject plans, which were created by the Min-istry of Agriculture and were indispensablebased on the previsions mentioned goals.

Now, our country has adopted the policy of thetotal development and exploitation of forestsand the natural environment. This policystarted in the year 1985 and until today co-fundsprograms from the E.U. with a duration of 5 to7 years.

These programs are : functional programs offorest measurements, programs within theRegulation 867/90, programs about Regulations2157/92, 2158/92, the program INTERREG II,the regional programs and the program aboutRegulation 2080/92.

The restrictions, that appear during the reali-sation of projects about protection and devel-

opment of forest and forest lands, refer to: lackof great forest complexes, lack of integrateddevelopment projects, existence of propertyrights into forests, the relief and difficult eco-logical conditions, the defective organizationof Forest Service, lack of environmental stud-ies, lack of effective design and, mainly, thelack of adequate funds.

The motives for the private sector to try andcarry out development projects are: a) economicmotives, mainly co-funding from E.U., b) man-agement motives, that is the extra money perkilo of resin for resin-collectors, the free sup-ply of resin-collection tools from the ForestService, the improvement of their income withtheir participation in other works and the mo-tives for forest cooperatives to acquire the ex-ploitation of cut, and c) the motives for infra-structure works in the private sector, that con-tribute in the improvement of wild life, andresult from Regulation 2328/91 and projectLeader II of the E.U. The motives for the ad-vancement of recreation activities inside pri-vate forests, are derived from supplementaryState-funds, while for the public forests, areusually, derived from the Forest Service by sign-ing contracts for projects with Local Authori-ties. These projects are funded by LEADER IIor by the Regional Development Programs(RDP).

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other nationalpolicy areas

Forest policy is connected with other nationalpolicy areas, such as: agricultural, urban, eco-nomic and economic development policy.

Concerning the relationship between forestpolicy to agricultural policy, reference is madeto the occupation of forest workers from theagricultural areas, improvement of agriculturalincome, and mainly the adjustment of water-shed equilibrium. In parallel, the relationshipof forest policy with urban policy deals withthe expansion of cities (sprawl) with respect tothe natural environment and conservation ofecological equilibrium, the development of rec-

Greece

reation areas, suburb green zones, etc. The rela-tionship of forest policy with economic policyrefers to the wood, that is used in forest indus-tries and as a raw material which has huge con-sequences in the commercial-equilibrium (im-ports-exports) and in the payment-equilibrium.Finally, the relationship of forest policy andeconomic development policy deals with themanagement, improvement of forests (aestheticforests, hygienic forests) and the natural re-sources, that consist of tourist attraction poles,with the proper infrastructure. These policiescontribute to the regional development of thesemountain areas which need a better quality oflife.

4.5 E.U. forest and forest related policies

The E.U. interacts in the area of forest policyand refers to: protection of forests, research andprofessional training, wood commerce and itsproducts, and the development of enterprises(Brussels 1959). An integrated forest policy wasnever applied by the E.U. Mainly, the E.U. pro-vided the member-countries with forest projectsfor reforestation, road-openings, protection offires, special measurements for the improve-ment of degraded Greek forests, torrent rear-rangement and with various regulations.Within the framework of the international con-ference SILVA (1986) is recognized the greateconomic, ecological and social value of for-ests and has to be autonomously protected asan ecosystem.

4.6 Forest education and research

Forest education, at university level, takes placesolely at the Department of Forestry and Natu-ral Environment at the Aristotle University ofThessaloniki. The course lasts five years. Inparallel, there are three Technological Educa-tional Institutes (T.E.I.) in Drama, Karditsa andKarpenisi, that in three years give a technicaland applied oriented degree.

There are also Institutes for Professional Train-ing, after basic education (Lykion) for several

areas of Forestry (forest protection, natural parksguides, etc.). There are also forest-guards andforest-workers who are respectively trained inaction, before they start to work in the ForestService.

In Greece, research is taking place in Univer-sities and Forest Research Institutes. The teach-ing personnel in the Department of Forestryand Natural Environment intensively deals withresearch in all the separate fields of Forestry.The research is funded by Ministries and theE.E.. There are also many postgraduate stu-dents who practice research for their Ph.D. the-sis.

There are also two university forests in PertouliTrikala (3.300 ha) and Taxiarchi Chalkidiki(6000 ha), where several research projects andmethods are applied.

The two Research Institutes deal with currentforestry problems and focus in the forestry fieldsof biology, ecology and less technical or eco-nomic subjects.

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

Relationships between different actorsIt is a fact, that there are many conflicts of in-terest between the different goals of forestpolicy, mentioned above, which are directlyrelated to the various uses, as they are men-tioned in the set of policies, which are trans-formed from non-compatible to compatible withthe adoption of the principle of equal priorityand dominating uses. Hence, private forestowners aim to change the character of forestlands when there is an economic value, whilein parallel, the authorities officially establishthe policy for conservation and increase of for-est lands and resources. On the other hand, leg-islative interventions appear continually, thatde-characterise forest lands.

From the exploitation actors, the private mer-chants and free forest co-operatives have as aunique target the increase of produced wood

Greece

and disregard the sustainability of the forests.However, these relationships are in harmony,because the forest policy is individually enactedby a powerful, high actor, who is the GreekState.

Issues arising from the UN ConferenceThe Rio Conference imposes in the Countrieswhich participated and signed, the conserva-tion of biodiversity and the sustainable use ofits elements and the precise division of advan-tages from the exploitation of genetic resources.

Especially, in Rio, there were adopted threeimportant agreements, which are also adoptedfrom Forest Service and refer to: a) the Agenda 21, which consists of a global

action program for the advancement of sus-tainable development. As it concerns forests,in chapter 11 of the Agenda 21 about con-frontation of deforestation, sets the founda-tions for conservation, management and de-velopment of forest resources.

Hence, it urges countries to develop a commonforest policy in order to confront successfullythe phenomenon of deforestation,b) the Declaration of Rio, for the Environment

and Development, that defines the rights andobligations of countries in relation to the prin-ciples for the environment and development,and

c) Statement of Principles for Forests, a legallynon obligatory document, that consists the“first international common conscience”about forests. In parallel, it constitutes prin-ciples for an international agreement overmanagement, conservation and sustainableecological exploitation and development of alltypes of forests.

Changes in the relative importance of differ-ent forest functionsDuring the last years, important changes areobserved in the various forest roles, which re-fer to the sector of watershed protection, waterproduction, development of wildlife and fish-ery, development of aesthetic values of land-scape and the protection of the environment,recreation inside forests, the development of

mountain tourism and the protection ofbiodiversity (fauna-flora).

During the coming years, the State should movein multiple use levels, in order to achieve itstargets. The State should proceed in solvingownership problem together with other vari-ous rights (grazing, fuel, wood, e.t.c.) that cre-ate continuous problems, with implementationof the forest cadastral survey.

It is also intended to enact a new and moresevere regulation which aims at the protectionof forests and the parallel correct applicationof older regulations. The financial reinforce-ment through projects, the lessening of foresttaxes and a more effective organisation of theForest Service, will also solve some of the prob-lems of Greek Forestry.

Forest education and research have become veryintense during the last decades. It is necessaryto exist a direct and constant feed-back rela-tion between theory, research and forestry inaction in order to achieve better results.

Role of the StateThe State will play a very important role in theprotection, extension and sustainable develop-ment of forests and the natural environment inthe coming decades, and that is the conserva-tion of forests as public ownership (status quo),the harmonization of forest legislation to themodern needs of society with parallel law-cod-ing, the continual co-fund from the E.U. andthe organizational and functional changes ofForest Service towards the direction of decen-tralization with a powerful Central Adminis-tration.

Hungary

1 The country

1.1 Nature

Hungary is in the middle of the Carpatian Basin.The territory of the country is about 93.000 km2

. The country can be divided into six maingeographical regions, which more or less coin-cide with the main forestry regions. The maindata of these regions is given in table 1.

1.1.1 Soils

Though the territory of the country is relativelysmall there is a wide variety in different soiltypes, ranging from rough sand and chernosyomin the Great Plain to very productive forest soilsin the mountains and in Southern Transdanubia.

1.1.2 Vegetation

Roughly 7-8 % of the Hungarian forest are com-posed of stands of beech. These stands needan annual precipitation of 700-800 mm, while theaverage relative humidity in June at 2 pm shouldexceed 60 %. Within beech stands other speciescan either be mixed on a large rate, or their slightpresence in a scattered way may also betolerated. Among them certain species of maples(Acer platanoides, Acer pseudoplatanus), abasswood species (Tilia cordata) and in thesouthern Transdanubian region the silver limetree (Tilia argentea) a few sessile oaks (Quercuspetraea) and some elms (Ulmus spp.) can befound. On more stony sites for beech theEuropean ash (Fraxinus excelsior) may alsooccur.

Hungary

Authors:János Gál, associate professorInstitute of Forest Property Managementhead of the Department of Forest ManagementUniversity of Sopron, P.O. Box 132, 9401 SopronPhone: +36 99 518 163, Fax: +36 99 311103Email: jgal@larix.efe.hu

Károly Mészáros, associate professordirector of the Institute of Forest Property Managementhead of the Department of Forest Policy and EconomicsPhone: +36 99 329 911Email: uzemtan@efe.hu

Table 1. Area and climatic data of the main geographical and forestry regions of Hungary (Countryreport on Hungary by K. Mészáros)

Area Annual Annual mean Territory Forestedprecipitation mm temperature C ha land %

West Transdanubia 750 8.5-10.5 721,110 28Southern Transdanubia 600-800 9.5-10.5 1,284,485 23The Little Plain (Kisalföld) 550-650 9.8-10.6 500,810 15Transdanubian Mountains 550-800 8.5-10.5 835,554 30Northern Mountains 500-1000 6.0-10.0 1,146,607 35The Great Plain 500-700 9.0-11.0 4,814,488 10

Hungary

On terrains at lower level where annual precipi-tation is more than 650 mm and the meantemperature is higher than 10 degrees C and therelative humidity is about 50-55 % there are mixedstands of oak and hornbeam. These trees preferthe various types of brown forest soils. Thesestands have usually two canopy layers. Theupper layer is mainly composed of sessile oak(Quercus petraea), while the lower canopycontains shade tolerant species, such ashornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and more rarelythe small leaf lime tree (Tilia cordata). Typicalmixing species is the mazzard cherry (Prunusavium), in Western Transdanubia the Spanishchestnut (Castanea sativa) and in SouthernTransdanubia the silver lime tree (Tiliaargentea).

On lower hilly lands, in dryer climatic conditionssingle-storey oak stands dominate. The mostcharacteristic species is the sessile oak (Quercuspetraea) and the turkey oak (Quercus cerris).Typical accompanying trees are species ofmountain ashes (Sorbus spp.), the wild servicetree (Sorbus torminalis) and the English fieldmaple (Acer campestre). Occasionally the ash(Fraxinus ornus) and some wild fruit speciescan be found.

The lands on the plain can be characterized bythe vegetation of forest steppe. The climate isso dry that without supplementary water thegrass lands formed there have a varying andincomplete density. For the survival of forestadditional ground water or flood is needed. Themain species of natural forests is European oak(Quercus robur) with some white poplar(Populus alba).

Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) standsmake up about one sixth of the Hungarian for-ests. The species was introduced in the coun-try several hundred years ago.

The plantations of hybrid poplars are very use-ful, especially in flood areas. These poplarsrequire rich soil and a certain amount of groundwater obtainable by the roots.

1.2 Society

The population of the country is 10.246.000, thepopulation density is 110,1 inhabitants/km2. Thepopulation is annually decreasing by 50.000people, which is the population of a small town,despite of the fact that Hungary became a tar-get land for immigration for citizens of Hungar-ian origin of the neighboring countries andcitizens of other countries as well.

After the change of the political system in 1989Hungary changed its economical system fromthe centrally planned system to the marketeconomy, and the transition process is still onthe way. According to its economical indicatorsHungary is an industrial country with developedagriculture. The per capita GDP was 537.000forints, thus 4.273 USD in 1996.

In the former systems aiming at full employmentthe number of employed was about 5 Million.By now this value decreased to 4 Million. Thenumber of unemployed is 500.000 (this meansan unemployment rate of 11 %) The remaining500.000 from the active population belongs tothose already not under unemployment supportand those with early retirement. The latterincreased the number of retired to the 3.200.000of today, which was originally unproportionalas well.

The foreign debt of more than 20 Billion USDand its interests meant a considerable, nearlyunsolvable problem to the nations economy. In1996 the proportion of the private economy isover 70%. The total amount of export was 12,5billion USD, and the import was 15,1 billion USD.Out of the 40 million people coming to Hungarythere were 21 million tourists.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

Hungarian people have been living since 1100years in the Carpathian Basin where half of thearea had been covered by forest at the time ofthe settlement. With growing population, the

Hungary

forest area has decreased. At the turn of thecentury, immense treeless plains characterizedthe consequence of unrestrained deforestation.This situation turned to even worse followingthe first world war when the wood supply of thecountry became an insoluble task as most ofthe forest area was annexed to neighboringcountries. The area of Hungary decreased in1919 from 28.3 million to 9.3 million hectares, thepopulation from 18 millions to 7.6 millions. Theforest area decreased from the pre-war 7.4 millionto 1.2 million hectares. The remaining forestswere on the least productive lowland and hillyareas. Previous wood wealth and flourishingwood export was quickly followed by woodshortage and the necessary timber could onlybe imported.

On a proposal of foresters a forest policy hasbeen accepted which prescribed to increase theforest area, first of all on the treeless lowlandarea, to increase the productivity of existingforests and to economize on produced and im-ported wood.

2.2 Forest ownership

During the last century ownership and manage-ment conditions changed several times consid-erably, which influenced the productivity andthe aims of forestry. The ownership structurechanged after World War I because of the de-crease of the Hungarian territory, and after WorldWar II because of nationalization and theestablishment of cooperatives and the largescale afforestation on agricultural land. Thesocial, economic transition had the last and basicinfluence on the branch, at the beginning ofwhich two sectors were typical. 69 percent offorests were state owned (Forest Companies,State Farm Companies, Forest Companies con-trolled by the Ministry of Defense or by theWater Conservancy), 30 percent were ownedand utilized by agricultural cooperatives. Thecompensation and privatization processeschanged this status, when 730.000 ha forests(39-40 percent of the total forest area) wereprivatized.

State property was privatized in the compensa-tion process, implemented in two steps. The firstallocations were done on forest areas managedby state owned forest companies until spring1993. As the demands were not satisfiedcompletely by the first allocations, afterassessing the supplementary demands, addi-tional allocations were made in 1994-95. By 1995the first stage of compensation auctionsfinished, and since 1995 the additionally allo-cated forest areas can be privatized. Presentlywe are in the stage of consolidation aiming atstarting forest management activities on theseforest lands.

Another procedure of the ownership changewas, when the ownership rights of the land ofthe former co-operatives was given to individu-als in the compensation process. By the end ofthe eighties about 1300 agricultural co-opera-tives had bits and smaller and greater fragmentsof forests. By this time co-operative forest man-agement developed mostly with additional woodprocessing as well. The individual ownershiprights of property proportions were assignedby the land delivery committees, which wereformed out of the owners. The land deliverycommittees ceased to exist by 31 December 1996,remaining matters were assigned to the countyAgricultural Offices. According to the 1992 ActII. owners could obtain forests (or grazing land)in one piece, undivided. Thus in case of propertyproportion ownership there are many ownerson one area. On 32.7 percent of the forest areawhich was expected to be privatized, ownershipchanges were registered by forest authorities,and an efficient owner circle can start theireconomic activities. One of the consequencesof the forest ownership changes on such anunprecedented scale is that members of thesociety have become directly interested inmatters concerning forest management, as thenumber of private forest owners is about 252.000.The ownership changes include a considerableincrease in the number of smallholders. In 1996there were 52,640 smallholders. The specificmanaged area is 3.14 ha/piece in case ofindividual smallholders and 173.37 ha/piece incase of associated smallholders. One owneracquired property rights at an average of 1.4

Hungary

places, thus the average parcel size is 1.2 ha, thespecific forest area is 1.3 ha/person. Thisproperty structure has mainly developedthrough the compensation process. In case ofproperty proportion ownership of former co-operative forests there is one owner for every 3ha. The forest area belonging to a smallholdercircle who are unable to operate is significant:366,899 ha, partly because of the unclearedownership conditions and partly because oflacking the means for starting the operation. Itis very dangerous for the forest stand that partsof forest area are temporarily unowned. There isa risk involved in the fact, that the new ownersdo not have appropriate forestry traditions, asthe proportion of small private forest propertieswas even before World War II relatively low,and the descendants of former forest ownersform only a small part of the developing newprivate owner circle. One of the reasons for thisis the privatization of the areas which wereafforested within the scope of the large scalestate afforestation program.

2.3 Land use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

The area proportions of land use categories arein table 2.

2.3.2 Tree species origin and distribution

The distribution of the forest area by speciesand ownership is shown in table 3.

2.3.3 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

The growing stock is 317 million m3. During theperiod from 1945 up to now the growing stockof 150 million m3 in 1945 has more than doubled.The main cause of the increase of growing stockis the large scale afforestation program, and theforest structure transformation implemented asa forest policy principle of great importance, theaim of which was to diminish the broadleavedhardwood stands from sprouting. The growingstock also increased from 1990 to 1998, to whichalso contributed harvesting, which was left outduring the transformation period, besides affor-estation done in this period. 85 percent of thegrowing stock (m3) is composed of broadleaved

Table 3. Distribution of forest area by species and main ownership categories. State Forest Service,01.01.1996

Species State owned Private owned Total1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha %

Oak 268 28 90 14 358 22Turkey oak 143 15 41 6 184 11Beach 87 9 16 3 103 6Acacia 109 11 214 33 323 20Other hardwoods 114 12 47 7 161 10Poplar 54 5 98 15 152 10Other softwood 39 4 51 8 90 6Conifers 154 16 92 14 246 15Total 968 100 649 100 1617 100% 60 40 100

Table 2. Main land use categories in Hungary.National Statistics 1996Land use category %Agriculture 65,4Forest area 18,7Other (settlements,industry, transportation) 15,9

Hungary

species, where the 26 percent ratio of oak is sig-nificant. The further order is: conifers 15 percent,turkey oak 13 percent, beech and black locust12-12 percent, poplar 6 percent. The great ex-tent of afforestation is the main reason for thegreat proportion of the age groups 0-20 years(31 percent) and 20-40 years (29 percent).

Annual harvesting was 6.604.000 gross m3 in1996 compared to 8,0-8,6 Million in the 80s andto the increment of 11,4 Million m3. Mainly finalcuts were less than the allowable cut (only 80%of the possible final cuts according to forestmanagement plans was utilized!).

Clearcuts form still an overwhelming part of thecutting, their proportion is about 78%. The 22%proportion of regeneration cuts includes coppiceregenerations. The proportion of regenerationfrom seeds is only 1/3 within this proportion.

2.3.4 Forest threats

In Hungary, within the frameworks of the com-plex forest protection program, there is foresthealth monitoring system based on a 4 by 4 kmgrid, which is part of the forest health monitor-ing system ICP Forests covering the whole Eu-rope.

The health status of the Hungarian forestsshows a considerable decline in the last twodecades. Since 1988, based on the Hungarianobservations, which are totally compatible withthe European data acquisition system, the pro-portion of the healthy trees dropped from 79%of 1988 to 43% in 1996. Defoliation struck mainlyoak and acacia, while beach, hornbeam and othersoftwoods remained relatively healthy. Theproportion of the dead sample trees alsoincreased, the 2% proportion of the previousperiods increased to 3.1%.

Damages affect most often the crown, but theproportion of stem damages is also consider-able. Amongst the latter we have to mentiondamages attributed to humans, which is one ofthe most avoidable form of damages. Not negli-gible is damage on the stump and damagecaused by wildlife.

2.4 Silviculture

The basic principles of the close-to-nature for-est management and silviculture on an ecologi-cal basis are those internationally accepted.According to these preference is given to close-to-nature stands with mixed structure and mul-tiple canopy layers. Clearcuts are avoided, andpreference is given to natural regeneration,wherever possible.

The results of research work in the establishednet of forest reserves help to understand theundergoing processes in the natural forests, andthese experiences improve close-to-nature for-est management. Stands kept for gene-reservescan be sources of propagation of native spe-cies. The increasing importance of mixturespecies and stand edges can help to maintainbiodiversity.

The management principles outlined above aresuitable for the desired prevention in forest pro-tection. Even in case of damages the use ofchemicals should be avoided (or selectivechemicals can be used) and biological means ofprotection should be preferred.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting system, accessibility

The importance of the species in harvesting ispresented in table 4.

Reducing the gross values by 20% loss we getthe amount of utilized forestry assortments, 4.840m3 (table 5).

70-80 % of the harvesting operations - formerlydone with own machines and workers - arecarried out by entrepreneurs even in the stateowned forest companies as a result of the priva-tization.

The mechanization of harvesting operations isinfluenced by the changes mentioned above andby the hard economical situation. Instead ofmodern, special big machines, formerly used bythe companies, the use of cheap equipment is

Hungary

typical (chain saws, tractors with adapters,carriage, hand equipment, etc.). Because of thisthere is a decrease in the level of mechanization.

As a result of the socio-economic changes thecentral control of the technical developmentdisappeared. The forest companies use theirfinancial resources unconcentrated. Despite ofthis there is a need for elaboration of the princi-ples of mechanization both on national andregional level. From the market side the purchaseof small machines which are gentle to the foreststand and soil are encouraged.

60% of the harvesting is carried out with wholetrunk method, and 40% with assortment method.

The pace of building forestry roads, belongingto the infrastructure of harvesting decreasedconsiderably. The overall length of forestry roadswith pavement is 3000 km, the length of builtroads is 2700 km. The opening up of the forestsis 9,5 km/ha, considering the non-forestry roadsin forest areas as well.

Road construction is subsidized by the state.This subsidy applies to the maintenance of for-estry railroads as well, because these operatewith loss (total length is about 150 km).

The specific cost of harvesting done by the for-est companies themselves is about 4,5-8 Euro/m3 (including transportation costs). Havingentrepreneurs do the work the owner has to paya price lower by 30-40%.

2.5.2 Timber uses

The different timber uses by species are shownin table 6.

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

The non-timber forest products are not signifi-cant in Hungarian forests. As an example honeyproduction in black locust land can be men-tioned.

2.5.4 Forest functions

The social functions of the forests have becomemore and more important for the society, theofficial forest policy has acknowledged them,when multipurpose forestry has become gen-eral. The first afforestation efforts on the GreatPlain in Hungary were also justified by the fa-vourable effects of the forests on public health.Our first forest law of 1879 highlights the pro-tective effects of the forest. The proposal of the

Table 4. Gross volume of felling by species. State Forest Service, 01.01.1996

Species Gross volume harvested (1000 m3) Proportion %Oak 980 15,3Turkey oak 724 11,7Beach 550 7,9Acacia 1370 18,8Poplar 1500 21,6Other broadleaved 613 11,5Conifers 867 13,2Total 6604 100

Table 5. Net volume of felling by assortments.State Forest Service, 01.01.1996Assortment Proportion %Veneer and sawlog 24,7Other sawn wood 5,1Pitprops 0,8Pulp wood 20,4Misc. industrial wood 4,0Total industrial wood 55,0Fuelwood 45,0

Hungary

Hungarian delegation at the 7th World ForestryCongress of Buenos Aires (Madas, A. 1972)determined the basic functions of forestry,namely wood production, protection and socialfunctions which can appear together, but not toan equal extent. Forest function distribution ofHungarian forests is shown in the table 7.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

The Hungarian economy turns to a course ofgrowth nowadays; the basic economic struc-tures have already been formed, the privatisa-tion has finished and 75% of the GDP comesfrom the private sector. The agriculture has sur-vived one of the most serious crisis in this cen-tury. The crisis is indicated by the GDP share ofagriculture, forestry and fishery, and the indexesof the gross agricultural products. The stagna-tion period prior to the change of the economicstructure, the change in the ownership, and thetransition of the production structures causeda difficult situation in the Hungarian agriculture.

On the other hand the favourable natural condi-tions (soil, climate) provide a remarkablecomparative benefit in the region.

The share of forestry inside gross agriculture isnot remarkable, the GDP share is almost 1%. Inthe past few years forestry production hasdeclined, only 70-80% of the allowable cut wasutilised. The amount of reserves given in allow-able cut area and volume has increased. Theperformance of the state forest management was88-89% and that of the private forest manage-ment was 74-80% in 1995 and 1996. These datashow that the weaker performance of privatesector gradually disappear. The production inprivate forestry has started, but the unclearownership relations are still an obstacle to theforest management in the private forests.

3.2 Employment

There is virtually no data available on theemplyment situation in private forests. It canbe assumed, that the planned afforestation pro-gram will positively contribute to solving em-ployment problems in areas with high unem-ployment rates.

State forest companies used to have their ownlabor force for solving their forest managementtasks. The number of employees in these com-panies decreased by about 60% compared tothat before the political change. The companiessolve their labour force problem by employingindependent enterpreneurs.

Table 6. Timber uses by species. Hungarian forestry, 1995 by Prof. J. RumpfAssortment structure of the species, species groups (%)

Assortments Oaks Turkey oak Beach Acacia Poplar Other broadl. Conifers TotalSawlog 26,7 11,9 43,0 13,9 57,1 15,0 32,6 28,7Mining wood 0,4 0,9 - 4,8 - 0,1 0,7 1,0Paper wood 0,2 3,5 10,3 0,4 15,8 4,7 25,9 8,5Pulp wood 5,5 14,3 5,4 1,9 12,4 19,2 22,2 11,5Other industrial 1,7 1,3 0,9 9,4 6,6 1,9 5,8 4,0Fuelwood 65,5 68,1 40,4 69,6 8,1 59,1 12,8 46,3Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Table 7. Area distribution of forests by primaryfunctions. State Forest Service, 01.01.1996

Primary function Area proportionWood production 79,3%Protection 15,1%Recreation 2,4%Other (e.g. experiments) 3,2%

Hungary

The employment of entrepreneurs instead ofown workers and production means started al-ready in the last decade, and became more im-portant after the change of political system. Theproportion of their employment is high espe-cially in harvesting, and is already more than80% and over 50% in transportation. Someforest estates and companies employ only en-trepreneurs in harvesting and transport. Thereis a tendency towards employing entrepreneursin the biological part of the production (soilpreparation, afforestation, tending, nurseries)

Despite of the full employment of entrepreneursthere is no price-rising monopoly effect, theyare rather underpaid. Because of this they useall their income for living, and cannot establishfunds for amortization, which represents aproblem in solving future problems.

The initial problems with the quality and prop-erness of the work are disappearing even withthe newest entrepreneurs, but it is worthwhileto have the companies own workers do the mostcomplicated tasks if the quality of the work is tobe guaranteed. This is because the low entre-preneur prices force even those people to dolow quality work who would otherwise providegood quality of work.

For the entrepreneurs who are not in the posi-tion to acquire big machines and have only littlecapital simple, such effective and safe workingsystems were elaborated that can easily be man-aged and deliver acceptable results with lowcosts. Instead of the previous solutions withbig machines and lots of personnel new tech-nologies are being developed based on spatialsystem, and these are proposed to the entrepre-neurs.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

The regulation of the Hungarian forest manage-ment started by forest maintenance (1426, 1565,1770, 1838). The regulatory enactment since thelast century were a concomitant symptom of the

major social and economical changes. So afterthe Austrian- Hungarian compromise (1867), in1897; after the end of the first Word War (1918)in 1935; after the second Word War the forestAct that fitted to the Communist economicalstructure born in 1961; and after the last politicaland economical changes (1990) the new forestAct was born in 1996. We would like toemphasise the still valid provisions of the firstHungarian forest Act (Act NoXXXI of 1879):designation of shelter forests, prohibition ofgrazing; obligatory and systematic use of themanagement plans in forest management; andestablishing the forestry authority of first andsecond instance.

The Forestry and Environmental Protection Act(Act No. IV of 1935) was our first EnvironmentalProtection Act. The paragraphs on the stateforests management and the association of theforest possessors formed the primary conditionsof the high level and trouble-free forest man-agement. The Act No. VII of 1961 extended theuse of the forest management plans to all foreststands. The Act No. LIV of 1996. handles theforest as a complex ecosystem, where themaintenance of forest serves the interest of thewhole society, therefore forests should bemanaged only in harmony with the commoninterest. The primary conditions of the sustain-able forestry activities are detailed regulationsof rights and liabilities. Very important part ofthe Act is the determination of the functions ofeach forest stand, where the rules of the for-estry are in harmony with its functions. The Actinitiates the regional forest planning and keepsthe obligatory forest management planning. Itis an important point of the Act that obligatoryintroduces the Domestic Forest Stand Database.Hungary did internationally a pioneer work inthe creation of this database. Further paragraphof the Act deals with the environmentalprotection, hunting and game management.These regulations have important influence onforestry.

Hungary

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The social basis of the forest policy has sub-stantially changed in the past 8 years with theappearance of private forestry, and through theownership relations the society’s interest inforestry has increased. Considering the approxi-mately 250.000 owners, nearly 10% of the popu-lation came into contact with forestry. Withinthese owners there is a distinction between for-est owners living in towns and in rural areas.The members of the society became more sensi-tive to environmental problems such as foresthealth. The use of the infrastructural servicesof the forests became common in the last dec-ades, and the new users and the new ownersare in many cases refusing to allow people visittheir forests. The economical crisis was disad-vantageous for the protection of the privateownership, and with the decreasing living stand-ard the so call “social crime”, crime in order tomake a living appeared, especially in the case offorests.

Besides the traditional special associations(Association of Hungarian Foresters, Union ofForestry Workers) both the state owners andprivate owners have their organizations forprotection of their interests. The Union of For-est Companies represents the interest of forestcompanies in the Forestry Board of Representa-tives of Interest, in which other organizationssuch as the Agricultural Chamber, the Associa-tion of Agricultural companies and the Asso-ciation of Common Forest Owners and other or-ganizations of private forest owners take part.

The interest of the “professional” environmen-tal protection organizations and the different“green” organizations turned also towards for-est management. The nature protection move-ments have a serious criticism towards forestmanagement, but also towards the “profes-sional” nature protection.

These factors altogether imposed an improve-ment in the public relations activity of forestry.Organizations protecting interests developed amarketing program with the slogan “natural

wood” to promote forest management. TheForestry Office of the Ministry of Agriculturepublished materials aimed at the young genera-tions. The state owned forest companies alsospend considerable amounts of money onprojects popularizing forest management. In1997 they launched the program “The Week ofthe Forests” where foresters gave informationabout forestry to the students mainly in ruralelementary schools.

4.3 Forest policy tools

The system of aims of the Hungarian forestmanagement are determined within the frame ofthe National Agricultural Program. Within itsaims, forest management accepted a separatepart of the program. The aims of the nationalforest management are:

- preservation of the characteristics of the Hun-garian forest management,

- building on the Strasbourg, Helsinki and Lis-bon decisions of ministers, responsible for for-ests, safe and expanding satisfaction of thecomplex economical and social claim to forestin a long term,

- in harmony with protection of environment andnature, land utilization and soil protection.

Afforestation should be considered as a nationaltask. The forest area relative to the productiveland has to reach 25-27% in the future. Theafforestation rate should reach 20,000 hectares/year after the year 2000. Resources for the newafforestations should be both national and EUfunds.

Forest management is financed by the so called“Forest production fund”. This is a special fi-nancial fund managed by the State Forestservice, and finances reforestations andprecommercial thinnings on a unit price (perhectare) basis. The sources of the fund are pay-ments of the forest owners and companies aftereach felled m3 of timber.

Hungary

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other nationalpolicy areas

Forest policy is in strongly related to agricul-tural policy and was defined in 1997 as a part ofthe National Agrar Programme. In this pro-gramme the role of the forest management wasto take part in the programme of rational landuse and environmental-friendly technologies.The rational use of agricultural areas throughafforestations is one of the main elements of theNational Agrar Programme.

The role of the forests in the National Programmeon Environmental Protection is also veryimportant, where the advantages of close-to-nature forest management are stressed.

4.5 EU forest and forest related policies

Forestry aspects of the connection to the EU.The EU summit in Madrid in 1995 suggested tothe countries the development of an agriculturalstructural program, to be financed by theEuropean Union. According to this suggestionthe Ministry of Agriculture developed a pack-age of measures in accordance with the Agri-cultural Strategic Plan of the EU and the Mod-ernization Program of the Hungarian Govern-ment. In the above mentioned document thereis a special emphasis on new afforestation as ameasure for the development of the ownershipstructure. In the plan for measures elaboratedby the Ministry of Agriculture there is a sepa-rate chapter dealing with afforestation. Thematerial has been handed to Brussels in 1996.

We consider forest management as an essentialpart of agriculture, and in this system forest canplay a unique role in the rural development,alternative land use and nature protection.

Production of environment friendly wood is notunder any preference or restriction in the EU, soin this area the marketing according to qualitycan be accomplished in harmony with theEuropean conventions.

4.6 Forest education and research

The main and only institution of academic levelforestry education in Hungary is the Faculty ofForestry of the University of Sopron (formerlythe University of Forestry and Wood Sciences).The average annual number of forestry gradu-ates is 50 forest engineers, 40 engineers for thewood industry.

The secondary school level forestry educationtakes place in four towns, and annually 200foresters graduate from these schools.

The main state institute for forestry research isthe Forest Research Institute, which celebratedit’s 100 year anniversary in 1999. The researchinstitute was founded in Selmecbánya, wherethe higher forestry education also started. Theinstitute has several research stations in thecountry, and each station has its own main re-search topic.

5 Main current conflicts andchallanges in each country

Agrar sectorWithin forest management the connection of ag-riculture and forestry play an important role interms of land use. Afforestation of about 700.000ha former agricultural land is anticipated.

Wildlife managementDue to its beneficial natural conditions Hun-gary has an excellent quality wildlife popula-tion, which represents a considerable naturalvalue. Both on areas of agriculture and forestmanagement the too high density of game popu-lation leads to conflicts, where the populationdensity is not in accordance with the naturalcapacity of the habitat.

The number of hunting districts increased withthe new law on hunting to 1145 compared to thenumber of 875 in March 1997, the averagedistrict size decreased from 9180 ha to 7020 ha,which means that with hunting right assignedto land ownership more and smaller huntingdistricts were formed. The number of leased

Hungary

districts increased from 757 to 779, beside 120forest company owned and 366 owner owneddistricts. In Hungary there are 50.000-55.000Hungarian and some 20.000-22.000 foreignhunters. In addition to this there are 3.000 “pro-fessional” hunters.

The interest in protection of capability of the“hunting society” is very strong. In forest policymaking this group has a stressed importance,because in the past years we saw considerableconflicts of interest especially in the sometimessevere damages caused by wildlife to foreststands.

Nature protection in Hungarian forestsSource of conflict is the primary function andthe art of regeneration of the protected areasafter passing the law on nature protection andthe prohibition of clearcuts on some areas.Sources of local conflicts could be:

- limitation on the areas of clearcuts (max. 3 ha)and regeneration cuts (max 5 ha)

- on protected areas monocultures should beavoided where possible

- final cuts are allowed only near the biologicalrotation age (or close to this age). The defini-tion of biological rotation age allows for a widerange of ages for agreement.

Because the law on nature protection extendsthe definition of the protected forests to the ar-eas of National Parks, nature protection areasand landscape protection areas which representnearly half of the forest covered area of the coun-try, forest management in these areas is a serioustask for the Hungarian forest management, andrequires considerable financial resources.

Hungary

References

Tájékoztató az 1995. évi erdoállomány-gazdálkodásról; (Report on the forest management in 1995)Földmuvelésügyi Minisztérium, Erdészeti Hivatal, Budapest 1996.

Forstwesen - Holzindustrie 1995 (Datenblätter); Ministerium für Landwirtschaft; Budapest 1996. 4 p.Rumpf J.: Forstunternehmer in der ungarischen Holzernte; Beiträge zur forstlichen Verfahrenstechnik,

VDF Hochscholverlag AG an der ETH Zürich, 210-222 p. 1994.Rumpf J.: Situation von Forst- und Holzwirtschaft in Ungarn; Forum während der Interforst ’94,

Mitteilungen des KWF, Gross-Umstadt, 65-69.p., 1994.Die ungarische Forstwirtschaft; Herausgeber: Forstamt des Landwirtschaftsministerium, Verlag

Aqua; Budapest 1996. 36 p.Solymos, R. (editor) 1997. Role and development of forest management. Hungary on the turn of the

millenium. Strategic research in the Hungarian Academy of SciencesSolymos, R. 1997. Integration strategy of the forest management to the EU. Budapest, 1997Mészáros Károly Country Report in Proceedings “National Forest Programmes” Freiburg, 1998

Organisations related to forestry

Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Forestry, Mr Gábor Barátossy, president, Budapest, Kossuthtér 10

State Forest Service, Mr Péter Csóka, general director, Budapest, Széchenyi u. 14., 1054, Tel : +36 11310708, Fax: +36 1 1126112, E-Mail: ersz@mail.matav.hu

Forest Research Institute, Mr Ernô Führer, general director, Budapest, Frankel Leo u 42-44, 1023,Tel: +36 1 3261769, Fax: +36 1 3261639, E-Mail: h9439fuh@ella.hu, http://www.erti.hu

University of Sopron, Mr József Koloszár, rector, Sopron, P.O. Box 132, 9401, Phone +36 99 312240,Fax: +36 99 311103, E-Mail: rectoro@efe.hu

Web-sites

http://www.efe.hu University of Sopronhttp://larix.efe.hu University of Sopron, Faculty of Forestry, Dept. of

Forest managementhttp://www.erti.hu Forest Research Institutehttp://www.fagosz.hu Forestry and wood industry professional organizationhttp://larix.efe.hu/oee/index.html Hungarian Forestry Associacionhttp://larix.efe.hu/forestry/alferd.html Association on Forests in the Hungarian Planes

Ireland

1 The Country

This report deals with the Republic of Ireland.However, some of the general statistics are pre-sented for both the whole of the island of Ire-land and for the Republic.

1.1 Natural Conditions

Ireland is an island of approximately 8.44 mil-lion hectares of which 7.03 million hectares inthe Republic of Ireland and 1.41 million hec-tares in Northern Ireland, situated in North West-ern Europe (51.50N to 55.50N and 5.50W to100W). No part of the country lies more than113 kilometres from the sea. As a result the cli-mate is distinctly maritime in nature. The NorthAtlantic drift brings with it ever changing fron-tal systems and depressions, giving Ireland mild,damp winters and cool cloudy summers. Rain-fall may vary from 3,000 millimetres in moun-tainous parts along the west coast to 750 milli-metres in the Dublin region on the east coast.The absence of extremes in temperature is fa-vourable to the growth of a wide range of agri-cultural and forest species.

The centre of the country is a low, limestone-floored plain surrounded by an almost continu-ous rim of higher ground. Through occasion-ally hilly, this central plain rarely exceeds 100meters in elevation. The coastal mountains areextraordinary in their geological diversity. The

main features are the basaltic plateau’s in thenorth east, the granite mass of the Wicklowmountains in the east, the parallel, old red sand-stone ridges of the south, the bare limestonepavements of the west and the quartzite peaksof the north west. Although these mountainshave been reduced in height by weathering anddenudation, they still dominate the landscapeof the country. Superimposed on this landscapeis abundant evidence of the glaciations of thePleistocene. These glaciations were responsiblefor a variety of hill, mound and ridge deposits,such as eskers, kames, moraines, drumlins anddeltas, which occur in large numbers across thecountryside. Many lakes dot the central plainand many peat bogs now fill ancient lake ba-sins.

Much of the country is covered with glacial tilldeposits, from which most of the soils have beendeveloped. The composition of the till materialfor the most part reflects the composition of theunderlying rock formations. However, variationin soils is also the result of climatic, ecologicaland topographic factors.

An excess of precipitation over evapo-transpiration over large areas of the country hasresulted in a tendency towards podzolisationwhere drainage is free, while gleying and peatformation are common where drainage isimpeded. The predominant soil types arepodzols, brown earths, gleys and peats.

The Republic of Ireland

Author:Dr Ir Maarten NieuwenhuisDepartment of Crop Science, Horticulture and ForestryUniversity College DublinBelfield, Dublin 4IrelandTel: +353-1-7067004 / 7067756, Fax: +353-1-7061104Email: Maarten.Nieuwenhuis@ucd.ie

Note: This report is largely based on: Growing for the Future, A Strategic Plan for the Development ofthe Forestry Sector in Ireland, Department of the Marine and Natural Resources (Anonymous. 1996).

Ireland

1.2 Society

Politically, the island of Ireland is divided intothe Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland,which is part of the United Kingdom. Internallythere are twenty-six counties in the Republic andsix in Northern Ireland. The country is also di-vided into four ancient provinces: Ulster in thenorth, Leinster in the east, Munster in the southand Connacht in the west. Of these, the last threeare wholly within the Republic while Ulster isdivided, three of its nine counties being in theRepublic and six in Northern Ireland.

The population of the island is currently about5 million people, of whom 1.5 million live inNorthern Ireland and 3.5 million in the Repub-lic. Before the Great Famine of 1846-48 thepopulation of the island was 8.5 million. Dur-ing the famine over a million people died and afurther million emigrated. Emigration becamea cure for rural distress. As a result, the popula-tion continued to decline for the remainder ofthe nineteenth century and by 1900 the figurewas down to 4.5 million.

In the Republic of Ireland more than 1/3 of theentire population live in the ‘Dublin area’, whilethe population density in parts of western Ire-land may be as low as 23 people per square kilo-metre. The average population density is 60people per square kilometre. With increasingindustrialisation and migration to urban areas,the proportion of the population deriving a liv-ing from agriculture and other land related en-terprises is declining.

2 Forest Resources and their Uses

No legal definition of the terms ‘forest’ and ‘for-estry’ exist in the Republic of Ireland. In practi-cal terms, a forest has been defined as an areaof at least 0.5 ha (sometimes reduced to 0.2 hain the case of broadleaves) with a minimumwidth of 40m over no more than 2/3 of its length,with at least 50% canopy cover by trees (some-times subjectively reduced to 20% during therecently completed national forest inventory).

The term ‘forestry’ covers the theory and prac-tice of the whole constitution and managementof forests, and the utilisation of their(merchantable and non-merchantable) products.

2.1 Forest History

When man first arrived in Ireland about 9,000years ago, the country was covered in mixedbroadleaf forest, mainly oak, with pine and birchon higher ground and on poorer soil. The earlyinhabitants cleared small local areas, but overthe centuries forest clearance increased as a re-sult of pressure from population increases, set-tlements, pasture, tillage, and later colonisationand commercial exploitation.

By the 1600s it is estimated that only about 12%of Ireland was covered in forest, and the exploi-tation intensified as the use of wood becameincreasingly important. It was used for ships,buildings, barrels and as firewood and charcoalfor iron smelting and glass making. Oak barkwas also used in large quantities for leather tan-ning. By the early 1700s Ireland had become atimber importing country.

During the relative political stability from the1700s to the late 1800s, some owners of the greatestates began to improve their land and planttrees. The forests again declined, however, withthe passing of the Land Acts in the late 1800sand the transfer of ownership to the tenant farm-ers. By 1905 the area under forest was just over100,000 hectares, or about 1% of the land area,while fuel and timber shortages during the FirstWorld War further reduced the forest cover.

State forestry began in 1903, with the acquisi-tion of Avondale House in County Wicklow asa forestry training centre and with the acquisi-tion of the woodland areas of some estates. Ac-quisition and planting of other land by the Statefollowed over subsequent decades, to the ex-tent that public forests now total about 390,000hectares, which is over 5% of the land area andalmost 70% of all forests in Ireland today.

Afforestation by the private sector remained ata very low level until the end of the 1980s, when

Ireland

improved grants became available. Afforestationincreased since then to the extent that in 1995 itamounted to 23,460 hectares. Of this figure, 74%was carried out by farmers. Total forest cover (pub-lic and private) in Ireland is now about 570,000hectares, or 8% of the country’s land area.

2.2 Forest Ownership

Today only 27% (or 143,000 hectares) of Irishforests are in private ownership. This gives Ire-land the second lowest percentage of privateownership in the EU. Particularly noteworthyis the rate at which private forest ownership isincreasing. The ratio between State and privateafforestation has changed considerably in recentyears. During the period 1985-95 private for-estry increased its share of the total annual af-forestation from 14% to 60% (Figure 1).

The largest single landowner and forest ownerin Ireland is Coillte Teoranta, the state-ownedcommercial forest company. By the end of 1995its estate comprised 427,000 ha of which390,000 ha are productive forests. There are9,300 private forest owners, who on averageown circa 10 ha of forest. Twenty farm forestryco-operatives have recently been set up in 14counties. The purpose of these co-operatives isto provide a planned approach for farm forestrydevelopment and to maximise its benefits (com-mercial, social and environmental) for the farmerand local communities.

2.3 Land Use and Forest Resources

2.3.1 Global Overview of the Land Use

Of the total land area of 7.03 million hectares inthe Republic of Ireland, 8.2% is covered withforests. Agriculture is the land-use on 80.2% ofthis total area and the remaining 11.6% is usedfor other purposes, such as roads, towns andindustry.

2.3.2 Extent and Distribution of the Forests

The Republic of Ireland’s forests of 570,000hectares are stocked to varying intensities andreflect varying levels of silvicultural manage-ment and treatment. Forestry is essentially con-cerned with wood production and in this regardeconomic and strategic analyses focus on whatis known as the ‘Productive or Planted ForestArea’. In Ireland’s case, this now amounts to464,000 hectares. In addition to the aforemen-tioned Productive or Planted Forest Area, thefollowing features of the national estate requireto be acknowledged, not least because of theincreasing international emphasis on the non-wood benefits of forestry:- broadleaf scrub / undeveloped woodland;- unstocked woodlands;- privately-owned woodlands not regularly man-

aged;- areas reserved for the preservation of wildlife

habitat.

Public Private

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 19950

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

Year

Figure 1. Public and private planting (including reforestation)1985 - 1995.

Ireland

These areas cover in excess of 100, 000 hectaresand while they would not tend to generatesignificant wood production benefits, they canprovide other benefits such as recreation andamenity. There are certain constraints on theavailability of data, notably for older privatelyowned woodlands. A national inventory of for-ests is currently being carried out.

2.3.3 Tree Species

Native SpeciesIreland’s native woodlands comprise mixedbroadleaves such as oak (Quercus petraea(Mattuschka) and Quercus robur L.), elm (Ulmusprocera Salis.), ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.), al-der (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.), hazel (Corylusavellana L.) and birch (Betula pendula Roth).The existing broadleaf woodlands include theremnants of the indigenous forest (about 5,200ha of which is protected in national parks andnature reserves) and old woodland and scrub.

Commercial SpeciesThe main species used for commercial forestryare ‘exotic’ or non-native conifers, which growparticularly well here. The main species usedare Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.),Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. var.latifolia Wats.) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsugamenziesii (Mirb.) Franco) from the north-westcoast of North America and Norway spruce(Picea abies (L.) Karst.) from northern Europe.

Sitka spruce is the most attractive commercialspecies because it grows particularly well in Ire-land, having a growth rate well in excess of theEU average, and because it is suitable for mostsites. The afforestation programme has there-fore concentrated almost exclusively on thisspecies, to the extent that it currently accountsfor about 60% of the productive forest estateand 65% of current annual afforestation. Thepredominance of this non-native species hasbeen the subject of criticism, particularly forenvironmental reasons, in recent years. As Ire-land has no indigenous conifers, the alternativeson the peat soils are limited to birch. On thebetter mineral soils, oak and ash are possibleindigenous alternatives. However, these alter-

natives will not produce the same financial re-turns as the exotic conifers.

The level of broadleaf afforestation was very lowup to the early 1980s, averaging less than 500hectares per annum or 3-4% of total annual af-forestation. As a result of the positive differentialin favour of broadleaf species in both the affor-estation grant and premium schemes of recentyears, the level of broadleaf afforestation has in-creased to 4,500 ha or about 20% of total affor-estation in 1995 (25% of private afforestation,3% of Coillte afforestation). Oak is particularlysuitable to a range of sites. Broadleaf species are,however, expensive to establish and maintain andtake much longer to reach maturity.

Future Species MixThe overall species mix and in particular theproportion of Sitka spruce within the afforesta-tion programme will determine the date by whichthe required critical mass of timber output canbe achieved (see section 5). The lower the pro-portion of Sitka spruce, the longer delayed willbe the achievement of critical mass. On the otherhand, broadleaves can offer high value-addedend-uses and often have a high labour contentin the specialist furniture and woodcraft areas.They can also replace imports of tropical tim-ber. A reliable supply of suitable raw material isessential to the development of an indigenousbroadleaf processing capacity.

Taking site suitability and the need for diversi-fication into account, the following species pro-portions, on a national basis, are consistent withthe achievement of critical mass by 2035:- 60% of sites - Sitka spruce is the best financial

option;- 20% of sites - Sitka spruce could be replaced

by other conifers without substantial yield lossand

with timber quality benefits;- 20% of sites - best suited to broadleaves.

2.3.4 Growing Stock, Increment and Removals

The growing stock in 1995 was 45.0 million m3

and the annual increment 3.3 million m3. Sixtytwo percent of the growing stock consists of

Ireland

Sitka spruce, Lodgepole pine takes up 21%,Norway spruce 5%, Scots pine (Pinus sylvestrisL.) 3%, other conifers 6% and broadleaves 3%.The average growing stock is low, at around 100m3 ha-1, as a result of the age class structure ofthe forests (see Figure 2). Just over 50% of theproductive forest estate is under 25 years of age.

The forest estate is highly productive, the over-all average yield is 8.5 m3 ha-1 an-1, while theaverage yield class for all conifers is 14 m3 ha-1

an-1. However, there are significant differencesbetween species. Most of the new plantings inthe last five years have shown yield classes inexcess of 20 m3 ha-1 an-1.

At present roundwood removals come almostsolely from fellings on Coillte owned lands. In1995, Coillte sold 2.1 million m3 of timber, ofwhich 1.4 million m3 was sawlog and 700,000m3 pulpwood, and in 1996 over 2.4 million m3

were sold, 1.5 million m3 of sawlog and 900,000m3 of pulpwood. In the same year the timber flowfrom private forests was only approximately200,000 m3. By the year 2015, annual timber pro-duction is expected to reach 4.5 million m3.

2.3.5 Forest Threats

Pests and DiseasesIreland is fortunate in having relatively few for-est pests and diseases, a low risk of forest firesand little evidence of damage from air pollution.Ireland as an island and by reason of its isolated

geographic location is uniquely protected fromexotic forest disease and dangerous pests. How-ever all forests, especially those in which onespecies predominates, are at risk from insect andfungal attack. Indigenous pests and diseases suchas Fomes can be controlled through timely inter-vention during forest operations.

The importance of protecting the forest resourceis recognised, and Ireland participates in EU for-est health surveys and has developed a foresthealth contingency plan which includes regularsurveying of the forest estate and nurseries andthe application of strict plant and timber importcontrols. The various EU Directives on planthealth and forest condition are being applied.

Wind DamageAt present, the only real damage to Irish forestsis caused by wind. Both endemic and cata-strophic windthrow result in the premature fell-ing and salvaging of significant areas annually.However, the recent move towards more pro-ductive and less exposed sites for afforestation,combined with better afforestation and manage-ment techniques, will result in a reduction ofthe percentage of total harvest volume comingfrom wind-damaged stands.

Deer DamageUntil recently, deer management was not con-sidered essential. This has resulted in restric-tions in species selection and excessive amountsof deer damage in certain parts of the country.However, this problem is being addressed

Figure 2. Age distribution of Ireland’s forests.

Pre 1920 1920/29 1930/39 1940/49 1950/59 1960/69 1970/79 1980/89 1990/95

10,000

0

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

Public Private Total

Age Class

Ireland

through the integration of deer management withforest management.

2.4 Silviculture

The tree species planted depends on the site andsoil potential. Establishment operations includefertilisation (where required), cultivation, drain-age, fencing and weed control and, where neces-sary, access roads and fire protection measures.Sufficient trees must be planted to ensure a vi-able crop of satisfactory timber quality. At presentthis indicates the planting of 2,500 trees per hec-tare for conifers and more for broadleaves. Afterplanting, maintenance operations include drainmaintenance, protection against browsing by ani-mals and vegetation control.

Thinning operations can commence as early as15 years with the purpose of transferring growthto the better trees. Pruning operations, whichmay commence shortly thereafter, reducebranching and consequent knotting in the tim-ber. Bud pruning may be needed for broadleavesto produce good tree shape. Thinning can beundertaken either mechanically or motor-manu-ally (chainsaws). In addition to transferringgrowth to the better trees, thinning representscash flow for the owner. There are usually 3 to5 thinnings in a conifer rotation which removeabout 50% of the crop yield over the rotation.Usually a crop is finally removed by clearfellingalthough in some cases a shelterwood system isused. Reforestation is predominantly carried outby planting, although natural regeneration ofSitka spruce has been successfully used in sev-eral parts of the country.

In Ireland, the rotation period for conifers is typi-cally 40 to 50 years while the rotation period forbroadleaves ranges from about 55 years in thecase of ash to over 100 years in the case of oak.

Both herbicides and pesticides are currentlybeing used, especially during afforestation and,to a lesser extent, during reforestation. In addi-tion, fertilisers are applied where site quality andspecies requirements demand this. It is envis-aged, that the use of these materials will be sig-nificantly reduced, if not eliminated, during the

next 10 years, as we move away from first rota-tion forestry and more sustainable forest man-agement practices are implemented.

2.5 Forest Production

2.5.1 Harvesting and Transport

Wood production from the existing forest es-tate is projected to increase from 2.2 million m3

in 1995 to 2.8 million m3 by 2000 and 5 millionm3 by 2035. Harvesting is carried out on a vari-ety of site types. It is important that the machin-ery used is suitable to the individual site, thenature of the forest operation and the protectionof forest soils and trees and crop stability. Thisapplies particularly to thinnings. A full assess-ment of mechanised harvesting needs by capac-ity and type in relation to anticipated forest out-put has yet to be carried out.

Harvesting and transport are significant cost el-ements of timber production, which can rangefrom 30% to 80% of the mill gate price depend-ing on the timber category.

Harvesting OperationsMost harvesting is currently carried out onCoillte’s forest estate, as privately owned for-ests are in general young and immature. An in-crease in the harvesting and transport of timberfrom small and dispersed plantations is in pros-pect as privately owned forests mature. Thereis a general lack of skills in, and knowledge of,harvesting among private forest owners whichwill become more critical. Training courses inharvesting operations, which include safety el-ements, are provided with the support of theForest Service.

There is an increasing trend towards mechani-sation in forest harvesting. The ratio betweenmotor-manual and mechanised harvesting iscurrently (1996) estimated at 40:60. This tendreflects greater concentration on costefficiencies, problems with availability of la-bour, technological development and increas-ing demands for quality and precision in fell-ing, measurement and presentation. For largeharvesting areas, chainsaw operations present

Ireland

difficulties in relation to manpower availabil-ity, productivity, safety and reliability.

Most harvesting is now carried out by privatesector contractors, working either for the tim-ber producer (i.e. Coillte) or for the purchaserof the timber (i.e. sawmills or the panel boardindustry). Circa half of Coillte’s annual harvestvolume is sold standing, the remainder is soldat road side or at mill gate. The majority of tim-ber is sold by electronic auction.

The dominant harvesting system is theshortwood system, with felling by chainsaw ormechanised harvester and extraction by for-warder. A scheme has been in place since 1989which assists the development of mechanisedharvesting capacity by providing grant assist-ance towards the cost of purchasing harvestingmachinery. In the period 1991 to 1996, a totalinvestment of ECU 27.5 million in machines hasbeen supported, at a total grant cost of ECU10.75 million. There is a high dependence onimported machines. Imported machines are usu-ally developed in other countries by referenceto their particular sites and conditions. The de-velopment or adaptation of machinery for diffi-cult Irish sites and of small-scale harvestingequipment has not achieved its full potential.

Timber TransportAll substantial forest properties require internalforest roads and tracks for access and internaltransport. Coillte alone constructs around 150to 200 km of new roads annually (Anonymous.1997a). A grant scheme, supported by the EU,has been in place since the early 1980s to assistin their construction. To date the scheme hassupported the construction of over 1,500 km offorest roads involving grant assistance of someECU 11.6 million. Once removed from the for-est, timber has to be transported for processing.Because of the location of forests in remote ar-eas, non-national (county) roads are often sub-jected to heavy forest traffic for which they werenot designed. This is a source of concern in manyareas. It has been estimated by Coillte that up to2,000 km of non-national roads are sub-standardfor forest transport. Of these, 600 km have beenidentified as priorities and limited funding forimprovement was provided by the Department

of the Environment in 1995. It is expected thatfurther funding will be committed for this pur-pose by that Department in the remaining yearsof the current Structural Funds round. The De-partment of the Environment has estimated thecost of upgrading the 2,000 km of non-nationalroads already mentioned at ECU 62.5 million.

Coillte has recently begun to transport timberby rail for the purposes of supplying raw mate-rial to the new OSB plant in Waterford Port.

Environmental ImpactsIn the context of growing concern about theenvironment generally it is acknowledged thatharvesting and transport can have adverse ef-fects on the landscape, cause soil erosion,threaten wildlife habitats and give rise to sitedamage, road damage and contamination ofwatercourses. It is necessary to reconcile thisconcern with the prospective marked increasein timber harvesting and transport operationswhich will reflect the increasing output fromIreland’s forests and to provide adequate assur-ance that safeguards for the environment are inplace. As yet there are no national comprehen-sive codes of practice or standards applicableto harvesting and transport. However, the For-est Service is in the process of drawing up acode of ‘best forest practice’ which will includethe harvesting and transport sectors.

2.5.2 Timber Uses

Sitka spruce timber is suitable for a wide vari-ety of end-uses such as structural timber, fenc-ing, palletwood and pulpwood and is the main-stay of the current wood processing industry.Its fast growth rate does, however, result in alower level of timber quality than for other coni-fers (e.g. Norway spruce, Douglas fir) and thespecies is not generally suitable for use as a fin-ishing timber for interior applications.

Timber output is classified according to size asfollows:- pulpwood (the smallest logs): 7-14 cm diam-

eter - these logs are used for stakewood andalso as raw material for panel boards;

- small sawlog: 14-20 cm diameter - these are

Ireland

used for the production of pallets, crates andlight construction timber;

- large sawlog: 20 cm+ diameter - the primaryproduct is structural lumber.

Other forest based outputs include, for exam-ple, foliage, bark, nursery plants, Christmastrees, transmission poles etc. Timber productionin 1995 totalled some 2.2 million m3, of which1.4 million m3 was sawlog and 0.8 million m3

was pulpwood. Coillte as the largest produceraccounted for 2.1 million m3. Residue materialin the form of chips and sawdust is used for panelboards or for energy, and bark can be used inhorticulture.

In the industrial processing sector (sawmills andpanelboard mills), the supply of timber is fullyutilised by existing and planned processing ca-pacity. This situation is expected to continue intothe second decade of the next century.

There are about 100 sawmills in Ireland, althoughthe 10 largest process approximately 80% ofsawlog production. These mills are small by in-ternational standards and employ between 50 and250 people. Total direct employment in the millsis approximately 1,500. Sawmills in Ireland aremostly family owned businesses which wereoriginally developed to service local markets.Sawmills currently process some 1.4 million m3

of sawlog per annum with resultant sawnwoodoutput of approximately 700,000 m3. Currentproduction capacity far exceeds supply.

There are four panel board mills in Ireland -Finsa Ltd. in Scariff which produces chipboard,Willamette Ltd in Clonmel which producesMedium Density Fibreboard (MDF), LouisianaPacific Coillte Ireland Ltd which produces Ori-ented Strand Board (OSB) at Waterford Port andMasonite in Carrick-on-Shannon which pro-duces moulded door facings.

There are about 400 firms in the Irish furnitureindustry, which is made up of a large number ofsmall and dual-purpose (furniture and joinery)firms and relatively few medium sized commer-cial firms. There is no dominant product cat-egory. While the industry uses wood as a rawmaterial, it is not fully integrated with the exist-

ing forest resource or other forest industries, andonly a very small amount of its timber is sourcedin Ireland.

2.5.3 Non-timber Forest Products

Christmas tree and foliage production are thetwo most important non-timber forest products.The four largest Christmas tree growers all havefarms over 400 ha. In addition, there are about20 medium-sized growers (8-20 ha) and sev-eral small growers. The main species is Noblefir (Abies procera Rehd.), but Coillte is alsogrowing pine, spruce, Douglas fir and a smallquantity of Nordmann fir (Abies nordmanniana(Stev.) Spach). In 1996 Coillte put 100,000Christmas trees on the market and a further100,000-200,000 were produced by privategrowers. The Irish home market absorbed about250,000 trees, the rest were exported, mainly tothe UK. Major growth potential in the produc-tion of Christmas trees has been identified, withready markets in continental Europe where an-nually an estimated 60 million trees are bought.

In 1997, Coillte, by far the largest producer offoliage in Ireland, exported 200 tonnes of Noblefir foliage out of a total production of 500 tonnes.

2.5.4 Forest Functions

ConservationHistorical events have left Ireland with a smallarea of indigenous forest, much of which is nowprotected by conservation measures. About5,200 hectares of semi-natural forests are pro-tected in national parks and nature reserves. Inaddition, the proposed Natural Heritage Areas(NHA’s) and Special Conservation Areas(SCA’s) listed by the National Parks and Wild-life Service include other important woodlandecosystems.

Amenity and RecreationThere is a substantial and growing interest bythe public generally and a wide variety of inter-est groups in the use of forests for recreationand education. While there is no formal right ofaccess to forests, State-owned forests have in

Ireland

general been open to the public since the early1970s, when the Forest Service began to developthe ‘open forest policy’ through the creation offorest walks, nature trails, forest parks and otherspecialised facilities. Access to these forests hasbeen maintained by Coillte Teoranta since it wasestablished in 1989. Access to privately ownedforests is at the discretion of the owner. APlanned Recreational Forestry Scheme was in-troduced in 1992 by the Forest Service whichsupported a limited number of planting projectsand the provision of facilities. Two new grantschemes, the Urban Woodland Scheme and theAmenity Woodland Scheme were launched inMarch 1996. The former aims to promote andsupport woodland development by local authori-ties, with community involvement, for amenityand recreational purposes. The latter scheme isaimed at encouraging other landowners to bringforward projects covering a wide range of rec-reational, sporting and leisure pursuits whichhave the potential for positive economic andsocial impact at local level. Both new schemesplace particular emphasis on the improvementand use of old woodlands.

Benefits and CostsEnvironmental costs and benefits can be signifi-cant in the case of forestry but quantifying themis a difficult task, as the methodologies used arerelatively new and are not yet widely accepted.There has not been a full treatment of this issue,which would include an estimation of the valueplaced on environmental costs, in relation forexample to afforestation on peatlands andchanges in landscapes. Two recent assessmentsconsidered the issue of environmental benefitsin relation to afforestation in Ireland (NiDhubhain and Gardiner, 1994; Anonymous.1996). The most obvious and easily measurableexternal benefit of forests is the opportunity forrecreational activities and the studies have esti-mated an annual value of ECU 2.8 - ECU 3.6million in this regard. The median figure of ECU3.1 million is equal to approximately 9% of thecurrent stumpage (sale of standing timber) incomefrom forests. More tentative estimates of the ben-efits of carbon sequestration, tourism and ‘pres-ervation value’ are ECU 4.9 million, ECU 16.25million and ECU 3.4 million respectively, giving

a total estimate of the annual indirect benefit ofexisting forests of ECU 27.65 million.

One of these studies has also estimated the ben-efits which would arise from additional affores-tation to be worth ECU 36.25 million, in rela-tion to a 20% increase in the area under forestwhen the additional afforestation is on marginalland. This is based on the contingent valuationmethod and it is of interest that about 75% ofthe additional value arises from the first 10%increase in the forest area, which suggest thatthere are high but diminishing environmentalreturns from afforestation.

Public AccessContinuing public support for forestry develop-ment, particularly in the context of increasingafforestation levels, will depend to a large ex-tent on an active policy of encouraging the use,wherever possible, of forests for amenity andrecreation purposes, as well as for the produc-tion of timber. Forests are seen to have benefitedfrom a large public investment in the past andthere is a high expectation that publicly-ownedforests, at least, will be open to the public.

3 Forest Economics

3.1 Forest and Forest Industries in theNational Economy

It is estimated that in 1993 the sawnwood andpanel board sub-sectors alone contributed ECU108.75 million to GNP (i.e. 0.3% of GNP). Thevalue added to industrial input timber andwooden furniture is estimated at ECU 207.5million.

At present Ireland supplies over 50% of thedomestic requirement for structural or construc-tion grade timber (approximately 550,000 m3).Exports, chiefly to the UK, consist mainly ofpalletwood and amount to approximately250,000 m3. The outlook for the European andworld markets for timber is positive, with sig-nificant growth projected over the coming years.The UK has a high net import requirement andhas been the main market for Irish timber. Irish

Ireland

MDF has established itself as a quality leader inEurope, and the OSB mill at Waterford Port willmake Ireland the largest producer of this productin Europe.

3.2 Employment

Direct employment in forestry is estimated tobe approximately 7,000 (management, harvest/haulage, primary processing, distribution, andadministration and support). While direct em-ployment is relatively small, it represents animportant source of employment in areas whererelatively few alternative employment prospectsexist. Total direct and indirect employment hasbeen estimated at 16,000. It is anticipated thatover 11,000 new jobs could be created in for-estry from now to the year 2020. The biggestincrease will occur in harvesting and haulage,followed by the primary processing industry.More than half of all new jobs created are ex-pected to arise in the period 2000 to 2010 asincreased processing capacity comes on stream.

While it is likely that some jobs will be lost inthe sawmill sub-sector in the short term as theindustry moves towards rationalisation, theselosses will be more than compensated for overtime by job creation in the new paper and pulpprocessing sub-sectors and by additional jobsin the sawmill sub-sector in the longer term astimber volumes increase. However, this situa-tion is likely to change as more agricultural landis planted. The amount of agricultural employ-ment displaced is very difficult to calculate,since it involves making assumptions about sev-eral different variables.

It should be noted that the type of employmentbeing created is very different to that being re-placed. Agricultural employment is often poorlypaid and many farmers are under-employed. Bycontrast, forestry would create reasonable well-paid, permanent, full-time and part-time jobs.This type of employment could have a regen-erative effect on rural areas. Young people aremuch more likely to remain in rural areas to takeup a job in forestry, which would be on a parwith alternative jobs in urban areas, than to takeover a farm. Furthermore, jobs created in for-

estry will utilise best available technology,whereas the agricultural employment displacedis likely to use out-of-date technology. It cantherefore be assumed that the new forestry jobswould be more sustainable in the long term thanthe displaced agricultural employment.

3.3 Profitability

The estimated real rate of return on investmentin forestry (Sitka spruce) is 5%, including landcosts and exclusive of grants and subsidies, basedon industry assumptions on costs, prices and yieldmodels (see section 4.3 for information on taxa-tion). At higher cost levels (as used by the ForestService) a rate of return of 4.3% is achieved. Thisrate is satisfactory, given the relatively high cur-rent cost of land. However, the very long periodbefore payback is achieved would, in the normalcourse, make investment unattractive to inves-tors, private landowners and farmers. Investmentin broadleaf forestry yields lower returns becauseof the long rotation periods.

The fundamental financial arguments for trans-ferring agricultural land to forestry are strong.If subsidies and price support did not exist, for-estry would offer a better return than the aver-age return from conventional cattle and sheepenterprises, assuming current technologies, costsand world prices for output. The trend in theCommon Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform isto move away from price support towards di-rect income support for farmers, which may beincreasingly de-coupled from agricultural pro-duction. In these circumstances, forestry wouldbecome increasingly attractive from both a na-tional and individual point of view. However,the estimated annualised income from forestrywithout subsidy is purely notional and is unlikelyto attract farmers.

If subsidies are included, the evidence showsthat forestry is reasonably competitive with cat-tle and sheep enterprises, even though these ac-tivities are currently more heavily subsidised.Forestry should be attractive to part-time farm-ers with lower than average incomes per hec-tare from drystock enterprises.

Ireland

4 Forest and Forest Related Policies

4.1 Legislation

Current forestry legislation consists of:- the Forestry Act, 1946, which sets out the Min-

ister’s functions in relation to forestry, estab-lishes the felling licence procedure and pro-vides for the compulsory acquisition of landfor forestry;

- the Forestry Act, 1956, which amended theprovisions in relation to the compulsory ac-quisition of land;

- the Wildlife Act, 1976, sections 53 and 55,which permits some of the Minister’s powersunder the Forestry Acts to be used for wildlifepurposes;

- the Forestry Act, 1988, which establishedCoillte Teoranta and increased the penaltiesfor offences under the 1946 Act.

Other legislation of relevance to forestry is:- the Local Government (Planning and Devel-

opment) Acts, 1963 to 1992, in relation to themaking of Tree Preservation Orders by localauthorities and general planning permissionlegislation;

- the European Communities (EnvironmentalImpact Assessment) Regulations, which, interalia, provide for environmental impact assess-ment (within the context of planning permis-sion) for initial afforestation and for the con-version of broadleaf high forest to conifers.

The Forestry Acts, 1946 and 1956, require re-view as they reflect the prevailing circum-stances at a time when:

- the forest estate was much smaller;- timber shortages following the Second World

War required strict control of felling;- afforestation was in the main a State operation

requiring the acquisition of land;- the concerns of the Minister with responsibil-

ity for forestry were concentrated onsilvicultural and wood supply issues and didnot encompass issues such as the environment,amenity and multi-purpose forestry.

In addition, the current felling licence proce-dure is proving cumbersome in the context of

the increasing volume of timber being harvestedas the forest estate matures.

4.2 Actors in Forest and Forest-relatedPolicies

The Forest Service, which is a Division of theDepartment of the Marine and Natural Re-sources, has overall responsibility for forestrydevelopment in Ireland. The Department’s re-sponsibilities include national forestry strategy,development of public and private forestry, ad-ministration of forestry grant and premiumschemes, forest protection (plant health matters),control of tree felling, forestry awareness andpromotion, support of research in forestry andforest products and the encouragement of mul-tiple-use forestry. The Department is also re-sponsible for relations with the European Com-mission and a variety of international bodies onforestry and for expenditure in Ireland of EUfinancial support for forestry development.

Coillte Teoranta is the State-owned commercialforestry company, established in 1989, whichnow owns most public forests. At the end of1995 it owned a forest estate covering some390,000 hectares, valued at about ECU 1.2 bil-lion. Some 70% of Ireland’s total forest area isin Coillte ownership, reflecting the hithertodominant role of the State in forest establish-ment. Coillte’s principal objectives (as set outin the Forestry Act, 1988) are to:- carry on the business of forestry and related

activities on a commercial basis and in accord-ance with efficient silvicultural practices;

- establish and carry on woodland industries;- participate with others in forestry and related

activities consistent with its objects, designedto enhance the effective and profitable opera-tion of the company;

- utilise and manage the resources available to itin a manner consistent with the above objects.

Complimentary activities of Coillte include thesale of nursery stock and Christmas trees,sawmilling, provision of comprehensive forestryand arboricultural services including tree sur-gery, planting and landscaping, engineering,

Ireland

forest research, as well as the development ofleisure facilities and amenity parks.

The Society of Irish Foresters, founded in 1942,promotes forestry and the forestry profession byorganising field days, study tours, seminars andother events, as well as through its publications.This society also represents the professionalconcerns of Irish foresters.

The Tree Council of Ireland, founded in 1985, isa voluntary organisation composed of the repre-sentatives of all voluntary and professional asso-ciations, institutes with environmental concerns,government departments, local authorities andeducational and research institutes. As such itembodies a great diversity of tree-related inter-ests. Its aims are to promote the propagation,management and conservation of trees, and todisseminate knowledge about trees and their care.

Forbairt, the national development agency un-der the Department of Enterprise, Trade andEmployment, is involved in the development ofstandards relevant to forest products. It also of-fers business advice and administers grantschemes to assist in the promotion and devel-opment of the forestry industry. In addition, theForbairt Forest Products Department providesstrategic and operational support for the expand-ing timber processing sector.

The Irish Timber Growers Association (ITGA)was established in 1997. It has over 600 mem-bers and is the representative body of the pri-vate woodland growers. Its objectives are thedevelopment and expansion of the private for-estry sector, and the commercial developmentof the wood chain in co-operation with State andother agencies. It provides advice, education andtraining to the private estate owners.

The Irish Timber Trade Association representsIrish timber traders and works closely with theother sectors of the forest industry. Its concernsinclude the raising of standards and quality oftimber products.

The Irish Forestry Contractors Association(IFCA) is the representative body for contrac-tors working in all sectors of the forest industry

from plantation establishment to timber harvest-ing and haulage.

The Irish Timber Council (ITC) was founded in1918. It represents the Irish sawmill owners. Its16 members (who own 20 mills) represent 80%of the Irish sawmilling industry’s processingcapacity.

The Faculty of Agriculture, University CollegeDublin is the only educational establishment inthe country offering degree (Graduate and Post-Graduate) courses in Forestry and is heavilyinvolved in research related to silviculture, for-est management and forest harvesting.

Crann, which has as its main objectives: toheighten the appreciation of trees in the com-munity; to encourage local involvement in for-estry projects; to conserve and develop thebroadleaf woodland resource; and increase theplanting of broadleaves.

4.3 Forest Policy Tools

Since 1981, a number of important forestry de-velopment programmes have been supportedfinancially by the EU and have resulted in a sig-nificant increase in afforestation in recent years.

The Western Package Scheme: This scheme wasintroduced in 1981 to provide grant aid to farm-ers in disadvantaged areas for the afforestationof marginal agricultural land suitable for for-estry. The take-up under the scheme was lowbecause of adherence to traditional farmingmethods in the target area, the older age profileof the potential participants and the lack of in-come for 15 years until first thinning age.

The Compensatory Allowances Scheme: Thiswas introduced in 1987 to compensate farmerswho afforested all or part of their land, to en-courage alternative land use as part of a policyto reduce agricultural surpluses. The responseto the scheme was again poor.

Forestry Operational Programme (FOP) and theOperational Programme for Rural Development(OPRD): Both of these programmes were in-

Ireland

troduced in 1989 and ran until 1993. They in-cluded a variety of measures to support affores-tation, woodland improvement, reconstitution ofwoodlands, forest road development, forest har-vesting, recreational forestry, nurseries, foresttraining, awareness campaigns and back-upmeasures such as assistance for research. Un-der the 1989-1993 programme a total of just over80,000 hectares was afforested, by the privatesector and Coillte Teoranta.

The Forest Premium Scheme: This was launchedin 1990 and provided an important new incen-tive for forestry development by means of an-nual payments to farmers. The payment struc-ture was designed to favour the planting of bet-ter quality land.

Operational programme for Agriculture, RuralDevelopment and Forestry (OPARDF- ForestrySub-Programme) 1994-1999 and the CAP For-estry Accompanying Measure: Both theOPARDF and the Forestry AccompanyingMeasure to the Common Agricultural Policy(CAP) were introduced in 1994. The latter wasone of three measures which accompanied theCAP reform; the others relate to farmer retire-ment and agri-environment. The Rural Environ-ment Protection Scheme (REPS) was introducedin 1994 under the latter measure. The ForestryAccompanying Measure is designed to encour-age alternative use of agricultural land througha range of grant aid for afforestation and pre-mium payments. The grant differentials favourthe afforestation of diverse species andbroadleaves in particular. The highest premiumlevels are payable to farmers. The main elementof the current forestry programme is an annualafforestation target of 25,000 hectares, sup-ported by grants and premiums. Grants are avail-able for afforestation, woodland improvementor reconstitution, urban and amenity woodlands,forest roads, forest harvesting machinery, for-est nurseries and forestry training. Provision isalso included to support development measuressuch as feasibility studies, pilot projects, pub-licity programmes and farm forestry services.

In order to qualify for the afforestation grant,the landowner has to present a forest manage-

ment plan drawn up by a professional qualifiedforester.

Another important policy tool in relation to for-estry is the approach to taxation adopted by thegovernment. A summary of the relevant taxa-tion schemes follows.

Income Tax and Corporation Tax: the profitsaccruing to an individual or a company fromthe occupation of woodlands managed on a com-mercial basis and with a view to the realisationof profits are exempt from both income tax andcorporation tax. Company distributions out ofexempt profits in respect of woodlands are ex-empt from tax.

Capital Gains Tax: gains arising on the disposalof felled timber are not chargeable to capitalgains tax. In a case where an individual disposesof woodlands, capital gains tax is chargeable onthe lands only and not on the trees growing onthe lands. Capital sums received by an individualunder a policy of insurance in respect of thedestruction of trees or damage to them are freefrom capital gains tax.

Value Added Tax (VAT): forestry is regardedfor VAT purposes as an agricultural activity. Aperson engaged in forestry and whose sales con-sist exclusively of his/her own forest produce istherefore not required to register for VAT, al-though he/she may elect to do so.

Gift Tax and Inheritance Tax Relief: gift tax andinheritance tax are payable on gratuitous benefitsof property taken by a beneficiary from a ben-efactor during a benefactor’s lifetime or on hisdeath. Generally speaking, tax is payable on themarket value of the property taken. A privatelyowned forest is liable to gift and inheritance taxwhere taken as a benefit under a gift or inherit-ance. However, where the beneficiary is an‘Irish’ farmer as defined, the taxable value ofthe woodland is the open market value less 55%or ECU 250,000, whichever is the lesser. In thecase of other beneficiaries, the 55% relief ap-plies to the market value of the growing planta-tion but not to the lands on which it is growing.

Ireland

Stamp Duty: any deed executed under seal issubject to stamp duty, so a licence to enter andcut timber is liable to ECU 12.50 stamp duty.The Finance Act, 1990 introduced an exemp-tion from stamp duty on the value of trees, wherethe instrument transferring the lands on whichthe trees are growing contains a certificate con-firming that commercial woodlands are grow-ing on a substantial part of those lands.

4.4 Forest Policy in Relation to OtherNational Policy Areas

4.4.1 Nature Conservation

As the forestry programme is based on plantedforests and still relies to a great extent on theafforestation of previously unplanted areas, thechanges in local environments which this alter-native land use involves are the major environ-mental concerns of the forestry programme. Itis a specific provision of the Government’s cur-rent programme that forestry development willbe compatible with the protection of the envi-ronment.

Certain sites are explicitly excluded from theafforestation programme, i.e. area which areprotected or qualify for protection under EUDirectives 79/409 and 92/43 on the protectionof Wild Birds and the Protection of Habitats.

Large scale afforestation has hitherto been sub-ject to a requirement for planning permissionand Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) ata level of 200 hectares for initial afforestationand 10 hectares for the replacement of broadleafhigh forest with conifers. Recent adjustmentshave reduced the 200 ha threshold to 70 ha, anda new provision for incremental or add-on for-estry at a threshold of 70 ha of aggregate affor-estation within a three year period by a singleowner has been introduced. Grant-assisted af-forestation below those thresholds is controlledby means of conditions attached by the ForestService to grand approvals. In particular in-stances, the formulation of such conditions mayinvolve referral of cases to the relevant Stateagencies and local authorities in relation to im-

portant landscape areas, proposed NHA’s, ar-chaeological sites and sensitive fisheries sites.In addition, standard guidelines have been de-veloped in consultation with relevant State agen-cies in relation to forestry development and thelandscape, archaeology and fisheries, with whichcompliance is a condition of grant aid. Proce-dures are also being put in place for notifica-tion to local authorities of afforestation propos-als greater than 25 ha and for the designation bylocal authorities of areas of particular environ-mental sensitivity.

4.4.2 Agriculture

A series of agri-environmental measures wereintroduced in Ireland as a result of the Agri-En-vironmental Programme agreed by the Councilof Agriculture Ministers in May 1992. As a re-sult of these measures , the Rural Environmen-tal Protection Scheme (REPS) was launched inIreland in 1994. The scheme is designed to pro-vide farmers with an incentive to farm in ac-cordance with environmental protection andconservation measures. The REPS scheme is afive year scheme, whereby a farmer enters intoa contract with the Department of Agricultureto farm in accordance with an agri-environmen-tal plan drawn up by an approved planningagency. Since the introduction of the scheme, athird of Irish farmers and almost a third of theagricultural land have become part of REPS. Af-forested land is not eligible for REPS payments.However, a REPS farmer who wished to afforestpart of his/her land may do so once a revised planfor the farm is produced, excluding the afforestedland from further REPS payments.

A second scheme, introduced in Ireland in 1993,is the extensification scheme. Farmers are paidadditional headage payments if their stockingdensity is below 1.4 livestock units per hectare.The impact of the introduction of this schemehas been that land which had little agriculturalvalue (and might have been afforested) in thepast, could now play an important role in ensur-ing that farmers stayed within the stocking den-sity limits set in the extensification scheme.Heretofore, farmers had afforested their land of

Ireland

poorest quality without having any adverse im-pact on their agricultural income.

The net result of the introduction of both theseschemes is that competition for land, especiallymarginal agricultural land, has increased. Theimpact on afforestation rates has been signifi-cant. Afforestation rates fell substantially in 1997and there is little evidence of a recovery in 1998.

4.5 EU Forest and Forest-related Policies

Ireland is one of the European countries to havesigned and is committed to the Helsinki Proc-ess, and is also a signatory of the Statement ofForest Principles adopted at United NationsConference on Environment and Development(UNCED). However the forestry sector in Ire-land is unique in the European context, in that itis based primarily on plantation forests. Thispresents some challenges in responding to thesecommitments. The “Forestry Principles”adopted at the UNCED conference in 1992 re-iterated the importance of plantation forests:

“The role of planted forests…as sustainable andenvironmentally sound sources of renewable en-ergy and industrial raw materials should be rec-ognised, enhanced and promoted. Their contri-bution to the maintenance of ecological processes,to offsetting pressure on primary/old growth for-ests, to providing employment and developmentshould be recognised and enhanced.”

The Sustainable Development Strategy for Ire-land refers to the need to adopt a SustainableForest Management framework (Anonymous.1997b). The framework is expected to be setout in the National Sustainable Forestry Plan.The current and proposed initiatives for sustain-able forestry at a national level, listed in theSustainable Development Strategy include:- requiring, in certain circumstances, environ-

mental assessment of some afforestation pro-posals;

- requiring planning permission for some affor-estation proposals;

- reviewing forestry legislation to reflect sus-tainable forest development;

- developing a code of best forest practice (cur-rently being completed by the Forest Service);

- implementing the strategic plan for forestry;- identifying areas sensitive to afforestation; and- reviewing and developing environmental

guidelines for forestry.

In addition, Coillte Teoranta is currently con-sulting with a wide range of stakeholders, in-cluding the general public and special interestgroups, in order to develop its own principles,criteria and indicators for the sustainable man-agement of its estate (Anonymous. 1998).

4.6 Forest Education and Research

4.6.1 Education and Training

Third level forestry education is provided inUniversity College Dublin. The 4-year Gradu-ate degree programme is a wide-ranging coursewhich covers subjects such as silviculture, for-est economics, management, protection, harvest-ing, computing and data handling as well aswood science issues, and includes a practical 6months work experience period. UCD also pro-vides Post-Graduate (Higher Diploma, Mastersand Ph.D.) programmes. The University of Lim-erick provides a Bachelor of Technology degreein Wood Science and Technology. A Diplomain Science, specialising in Forestry, has com-menced in the Waterford Institute of Technol-ogy. In addition, a Diploma in Technology spe-cialising in Forest Management will commencein the Galway Institute of Technology in 1998.This institute also offers full-time courses infurniture making and design.

Teagasc, in conjunction with the Department ofthe Marine and Natural Resources, providesforestry training courses for farmers. The basicCertificate in Farming, provided by Teagasc andknown as the ‘Green Cert’, contains two mod-ules on forestry. There is a substantial forestrycontent in the one-year, full-time course atBallyhaise Agriculture College, Co. Cavan.Coillte provide training for both its own staffand others in forest management skills and op-erations in their training centre.

Ireland

4.6.2 Research

Forestry research has been carried out since the1950s by the Forest Service of the Departmentfor the Marine and Natural Resources. Since theestablishment of Coillte in 1989, such researchin now undertaken by Coillte, Forbairt and thirdlevel institutions, with a small input from theindustry.

On the wood growing side, the key R&D enti-ties are Coillte and University College Dublin.Timber technology R&D is currently carried outby Forbairt and a small number of centres asso-ciated with third level colleges. The Departmentof the Marine and Natural Resources directlyfunds a number of research projects in Coillteand Forbairt which are closely related to theOperational Programme for Agriculture, RuralDevelopment and Forestry 1994-99. Researchis also undertaken with EU support through Pro-grammes which are generally under the aegis ofDirectorate XI of the European Commission.

Current R&D activity ranges from nursery tech-niques to end-product development of sawmilland wood-based industries. Total expenditureon forestry research in 1995 was approximatelyECU 2.0 million. ECU 1.25 million of this wasprovided by the Department of the Marine andNatural Resources with EU support.

A EU STRIDE initiative was adopted in 1989to co-ordinate R&D projects on a national ba-sis and to develop a strategic planning process.The STRIDE Forestry Sub-programme cameinto operation in 1992 and the Council for For-est Research and Development (COFORD) wasestablished in 1993, on a non-statutory basis, toreflect the broad vocational base of industrialneed and research competence. A variety of in-terests in the forestry sector are represented onCOFORD, including Teagasc, Forbairt, Coillte,forestry representative organisations, the IrishTimber Council, the Irish Farmers’ Association,universities and the Forest Service.

A programme of forestry R&D was producedby COFORD in 1994 (Anonymous. 1994). Theprogramme identified research needs in the ar-

eas of reproductive material, silviculture andforest management, harvesting and transport,wood processing, and the socio-economic area.One of its recommendations was a phased in-crease in expenditure on forestry research to 3%of the gross value of forest output.

5 Main Current Conflicts andChallenges

Recognising the importance and potential of theforestry sector, the Government, in September1993, directed the Minister to bring forward astrategic plan for forestry-related development tothe year 2015. As a result, in July 1996 the IrishGovernment published ‘Growing for the Future’,a Strategic Plan for the Development of the For-estry Sector in Ireland. The overall aim of theStrategic Plan is: To develop forestry to a scaleand in a manner which maximises its contribu-tion to national economic and social well-beingon a sustainable basis and which is compatiblewith the protection of the environment.

There is an interdependence between forestry,agriculture, rural development, tourism, indus-trial policy and the environment. This means thatforestry development cannot be considered froma narrow or sectorial point of view or on a strictlyeconomic basis. Its typically long time scalesalso mean that the benefits of investment in for-estry are themselves long-term. The case forforestry is made on the basis of its economic,social and environmental benefit. The optimumscale and rate of development of the sector mustbe balanced with issues such as the availabilityof land, the production potential of the speciesand sites planted, and the effect of acceleratedand concentrated forestry development on ruralareas.

5.1 Critical Mass

While a plan could be developed which wouldmaximise the economic, social and environmen-tal benefits which are possible within the limitsof the present forest estate and which would re-quire no further afforestation, such an approach

Ireland

would fall far short of delivering the range ofbenefits which forestry can generate if devel-oped to a larger scale. There is a point of devel-opment at which positive economic, social andenvironmental impacts are optimised. Of fun-damental importance in determining this pointis an assessment of the ideal or target scale ofthe forest estate which will be of greatest na-tional benefit.

The development of an indigenous sustainableforestry resource is also important in the con-text of the international timber trade, particu-larly in relation to tropical timber, which ac-counted for ECU 46.25 million out of a total ofECU 180 million of timber imports in 1994.Increasing concerns about sustainable manage-ment of tropical forests point to the wisdom ofdeveloping indigenous timber resources, par-ticularly of hardwoods (broadleaves).

The ideal scale of the forest estate must be re-lated to its principal function, which in Irelandis timber production. Ireland’s annual timberproduction is currently about 2.2 million m3. Ifthere were to be no further afforestation beyond1995, this would rise to nearly 4 million m3 ofsustainable fellings by 2015 and 5 million m3

by the year 2035 as the existing forest matures.This is below the required production level orcritical mass recommended, i.e. approximately10 million m3 an-1 and preferably in the range12-15 million m3 an-1.

Such a scale of timber production is required tomake true competition and the operation ofmarket forces possible and to support a rangeof processing industries. This will permit spe-cialisation so that every element of forest out-put is capable of being processed on an interna-tionally competitive scale, giving maximumadded-value to the national economy.

The level of production needed to produceefficiencies of scale to permit competition andthe operation of market forces is in excess ofdomestic market demand and success on exportmarkets is therefore a necessity for the devel-opment of the Irish forestry sector.

5.2 Change of Land Use

An increase in timber production will require alarger forest area, and the Strategic Plan pro-poses a sustained programme of afforestationto increase the forest estate to almost 1.2 mil-lion hectares (or 17% of the land area of thecountry). An increase in the forest area means achange in some land use, particularly agricul-tural land which is suitable for growing a vari-ety of forest tree species. There are almost 1million hectares of wet mineral soils in Ireland.These soils are particularly suitable for forestryas they are of limited use for agriculture but arecapable of producing high yield spruce crops.There is also potential on the drier soils for otherconifers and broadleaves.

The actual availability of land suitable for for-estry is limited by environmental restrictions,such as listed NHA’s, Areas of OutstandingLandscapes or High Scenic Amenity Areas andthe existence of archaeological sites. These re-strictions may affect up to 10% of land whichmight otherwise be available for forestry. Theactual impact over the period of the StrategicPlan on ultimate timber output is difficult todetermine, given the offsetting effect of affor-estation, most notably broadleaves, on betterquality lands.

Afforestation on cutaway bogs is a particularcase necessitating a new approach to the 50,000hectares identified as being suitable for affores-tation. Pilot trials will be needed to determinesuitable species related to peat depth, type, cul-tivation and location. The replacement of Sitkaspruce with frost tolerant species such as Nor-way spruce and pine will have to be evaluated.A large co-operative research project, in whichUCD, Coillte, Bord na Mona (the Irish PeatBoard) and the Forest Service are participating,dealing with all aspects of cutaway peatland af-forestation, has just commenced.

5.3 Forestry versus Agriculture

Studies on forestry in Ireland have generallytended to assume that no agricultural activity is

Ireland

displaced by forestry, i.e. that afforestation onlytakes place on land which is unsuitable for agri-cultural enterprises and that the opportunity costof displaced agriculture is therefore zero. Whilethis may have been true when only a small pro-portion of the country was afforested, it is likelythat a sustained afforestation programme woulddisplace some agricultural activity. There is littleevidence on the types of enterprises and value ofagricultural activity most likely to be displaced.

5.4 Environment, Recreation and Amenity

Afforestation can give rise to environmentalproblems. Forests are highly visible in the coun-tryside and are such an obvious change of landuse that they frequently attract public attentionand in some instances provoke a degree of pub-lic reaction. This reaction may be rooted in asimple dislike of any changes in a familiar land-scape or may in some instances be founded on afear of isolation of homes and farms. It may bebased on concern as to the possible effects offorestry on wildlife, watercourses, local cultural,historical or archaeological areas. There is alsoan understandable desire to ensure that forestsare accessible to local people for recreation andleisure. Public confidence in, and support for,forestry development is particularly importantwhere a programme contemplates sustained andsignificant levels of afforestation over a numberof decades. An additional means of addressingthe question of public confidence will be to in-crease the degree of public involvement in for-estry planning and practice. The Urban Wood-land Scheme, introduced in 1996, is open to alllocal authorities, and provides grant aid forwoodland improvement and/or the establish-ment of new woodland on land owned or man-aged by local authorities, and for the provisionof public recreational and amenity facilities inthese woodlands. Inter-disciplinary managementand community involvement are two of the prin-cipal objectives of this scheme.

Environmental controls on forestry developmentmust be effective and compliance must be en-forced. If they are to act as a deterrent, sanc-tions must be applied to breaches of the general

or specific environmental protection conditionsattaching to grant assistance for any forestryproject. Ireland has committed itself internation-ally to the development of a sustainable forestpolicy and national criteria and indicators bywhich it can be measured. This is also relevantin the context of the international certificationof timber and the possible advantages for Irishtimber in international trade.

5.5 Forest Planning

The continued absence of a national forest in-ventory and planning system is an impedimentto securing optimum economic and social ben-efit from the development of the sector as awhole. As part of the Strategic Plan, a compre-hensive inventory and planning system to pro-vide forest resource, geographical and environ-mental data for management, control and plan-ning purposes will be developed.

5.6 Species Selection

The policy on species adopted in the StrategicPlan is to increase (with due regard to site suit-ability and the attainment of the identified criti-cal mass) the diversity of species in Irish for-ests. The objectives are to produce better tim-ber quality, to extend the range of potential end-uses, to reduce risks associated withmonocultures, and for environmental and land-scape purposes. A recent study on birdpopulations in different forest types has pro-duced remarkable high values for avian bio-di-versity in commercial coniferous forest planta-tions (O’Halloran et al., 1998).

The recent increase in broadleaf planting hasmade it necessary to expand silvicultural andmanagement expertise in this area. The publi-cation of ‘Growing Broadleaves - SilviculturalGuidelines for Ash, Sycamore, Wild Cherry,Beech and Oak in Ireland (Joyce, 1998) is a firststep in redressing the virtual absence of an in-digenous broadleaved culture in the country.

Ireland

Organisations Related to Forestry

COFORD - The National Council for Forest Research and Development. Agriculture Building,University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4. Tel: 01-7067700, Fax: 01-7061180, Email:coford@agriculture.ucd.ie, Web site: http://www.coford.ie/

Coillte Teoranta, The Irish Forestry Board. Leeson Lane, Dublin 2. Tel: 01-6615666, Fax: 01-6789527 / 6768598.

Crann, Crann House, Banagher, County Offaly. Tel: 0509-51718, Fax: 0509-51718.Forestry Section, Department of Crop Science, Horticulture and Forestry, University College Dub-

lin. Agriculture Building, Belfield, Dublin 4. Tel: 01-7067756, Fax: 01-7061104, Email:valerie.guilfoyle@ucd.ie. Web site: http://www.ucd.ie

Forest Service, Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. Leeson Lane, Dublin 2. Tel: 01-6072000, Fax: 01-6611326 / 6768980.

Forbairt. Glasnevin, Dublin 9. Tel: 01-8082000, Fax: 01-8082500.Irish Christmas Tree Growers Association. Knockranny, Kilmacanogue, Co. Wicklow. Tel: 01-

2863681, Fax: 01-2861499.Irish Forest Industry Chain. Confederation House, 84/86 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin 2. Tel: 01-

6601011, Fax: 01-6601717.Irish Forestry Contractors Association. Clonroad Business Park, Ennis, Co. Clare. Tel: 065-22313

/ 086-2416574, Fax: 065-22744.Irish Timber Council. 7 Mount Street Crescent, Dublin 2. Tel: 01-6785733, Fax: 01-6785976.Irish Timber Growers Association. Plankett House, 84 Merrion Square, Dublin 2. Tel: 01-6764783,

Fax: 01-6624502.Society of Irish Foresters. 2 Lower Kilmacud Road, Stillorgan, Co. Dublin. Tel: 01-2781874, Fax:

01-2835890.Teagasc Headquarters. 19 Sandymount Avenue, Ballsbridge, Dublin 4. Tel: 01-6688188, Fax: 01-

6688023.The Tree Council of Ireland. 2nd Floor, Royal Hospital Kilmainham, Dublin 8. Tel: 01-6790699.

References

Used ReferencesAnonymous. 1994. Pathway to Progress – A Programme for Forest Research & Development.

National Council for Forest Research & Development, Dublin.Anonymous. 1996. Growing for the Future: A Strategic Plan for the Development of the Forestry

Sector in Ireland. The Stationary Office, Dublin.Anonymous. 1997a. Annual Report and Accounts, Coillte Teoranta. Leeson Lane, Dublin.Anonymous. 1997b. Sustainable Development: A Strategy for Ireland. Department of the Environ-

ment, Dublin.Anonymous. 1998. A Framework for Sustainable Forest Management – Consultation Document.

Coillte Teoranta, Dublin.Joyce P.M. 1998. Growing Broadleaves - Silvicultural Guidelines for Ash, Sycamore, Wild Cherry,

Beech and Oak in Ireland. Council for Forest Research and Development, National Universityof Ireland, Belfield, Dublin.

Ni Dhubhain A. and Gardiner J.J. (eds.). 1994. The Socio-Economic Impact of Afforestation onRural Development. Department of Forestry, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin.

O’Halloran J., Walsh P., Giller P., Kelly T. and Duffy B. 1998. An Assessment of Avian Bio-diversity and Opportunities for Enhancement in Ireland’s Forests: Preliminary Results. In: IrishForestry, Vol. 55, No. 2 (in press).

Ireland

Further ReferencesAnonymous. 1998. Irish Timber Growers Association 1998 Forestry Yearbook. The Irish Timber

Growers Association, Dublin.Collins K.(ed.). 1996. Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Urban Forestry. The

Tree Council of Ireland, Dublin.Gardiner M. and Ryan P. 1964. Soils of County Wexford. Soil Survey Bulletin No. 1. National Soil

Survey of Ireland, An Foras Taluntais (the Agricultural Institute), Dublin.Mitchell, A. 1986. A Field Guide to the Trees of Britain and Northern Europe. Collins, London.Neeson, E. 1991. A History of Irish Forestry. The Lilliput Press Ltd. Dublin.O’Carroll, N. (ed.). 1984. The Forests of Ireland. History, Distribution and Silviculture. The Soci-

ety of Irish Foresters. Dublin.Pilcher J and Mac an tSaoir S. (Eds.). 1995. Wood, Trees and Forests in Ireland. Royal Irish

Academy, Dublin.

Italy

1 The Country

1.1 Nature

GeologyThe collision between Europe and Africa in theCenozooic era has generated two main rangesystems: the Alps and the Apennines, the old-est areas of Italy. The rest of the country is muchyounger and formed mainly by sedimentationmaterial.

Main geological groups are: Holocene alluvialdeposits, Pleistocene mixed deposits, Plioceneclays, Cenozooic Flysch, limestone and dolo-mite, Quaternary lava and tuffs, Apenninesophiolites, metamorphic and igneous rocks.

TopographyItaly is located in the Mediterranean Sea be-tween 36° and 47° N of latitude and 8-18° E oflongitude. It is formed by a boot-shaped penin-sula, two large islands (Sardinia and Sicily) andseveral groups of small islands, for a total of8000 km of coastal line. The land area is301.000 km2 35.2% of which are mountain,41.6 % hills (up to 600-700 m a.s.l.) and only23.2 % are plain land. Two important moun-tain ranges dominate Italian territory: the Alps(direction E-W) with steep slopes and high al-titudes (M. Bianco: 4810 m) and the Apennines(NW-SE) (M. Gran Sasso: 2912 m). The mainplain is formed around the Po, the longest andlargest Italian river (652 km) flowing from Westto East, whose watershed covers over 25% ofthe national land area. Important natural lakesof different origin (i.e. glacial, volcanic) are

present in northern (Maggiore, Garda, Como,Iseo) and central (Trasimeno, Bolsena) Italy.

ClimateClassical literature, throughout the centuries,has always celebrated Italy for its mild, Medi-terranean climate. However the peculiar geo-graphic position and the extreme variability ofphysical features determine conditions for di-verse climatic regimes. Mean annual tempera-tures, measured between 2500 and 0 m of alti-tude, can range between 0 (in the Alps) and17°C (Sicily). Annual precipitation vary be-tween 200-300 mm (in the south and the mainislands) and 3200-3300 mm (north eastern Alpsand northern Apennines). According to Köppenclimate classification the following main tem-perature and precipitation regimes can be foundin Italy:- Temperature: continental (cold winter and

warm summer); maritime (mild winter andwarm summer); montane-Alpine (cold win-ter and cool summer); montane-Apennine(cold winter and mild/warm summer).

- Precipitation: continental (summer precipita-tion); mediterranean (winter precipitation); in-termediate (equinoctial precipitation); transi-tion.

SoilsLand units are extremely fragmented due to theyoung geological age of the country. Soils arevery diverse but never very acid. According tothe FAO/UNESCO classification system themost widespread groups of soil types are:- Eutric and Dystric regosols, Dystric and

Eutric cambisols, Haplic phaeozems, in the

Italy

Authors: Cristiana Colpi, Davide Pettenella, Carlo Urbinati, R. CavalliDipartimento Territorio e Sistemi Agro-forestali,Università di Padova,Agripolis, I-35020 Legnaro PD - ItalyE-mails: ccolpi@agripolis.unipd.it, dpettene@agripolis.unipd.it, urbinati@agripolis.unipd.it,cavalli@agripolis.unipd.ithttp://www.tesaf.unipd.it/

Italy

external alpine region;- Eutric and Dystric Regosol, Haplic

phaeozems, Rendzinas, Podzols, Orthicluvisols in the internal part.

- Eutric, Dystric and Calcic cambisols, Eutricfluvisols in the Padanian and main alluvialplains

- Eutric and Calcic cambisols, Eutric regosols,Rendzinas in the northern Apennines

- Calcaric Regosols, Calcic and Eutriccambisol in central and southern Apennines.

VegetationZonal vegetation in Italy can be attributed totwo main large regions: the Eurosiberian andthe Mediterranean both belonging to theHoloartic realm. The limit between the regionsis at around 44° N of latitude. In each regionaltitude zoning can be envisaged.

The Eurosiberian include the following zones:- hilly, with deciduous mixed meso-xeric for-

ests (Quercus spp. Acer spp., Fraxinus spp.,Ostrya carpinifolia, Carpinus betulus, etc.);

- montane, with mixed mesic deciduous andconiferous forests (Fagus sylvatica, Abiesalba, Picea abies, Pinus sylvestris);

- subalpine, with coniferous forests (Piceaabies, Larix decidua, Pinus cembra, Pinusuncinata, Pinus mugo);

- alpine, with natural prairies.

The Mediterranean is subdivided in the follow-ing zones:- thermo- and meso-mediterranean, with

maquis, evergreen sclerophyllous forests, co-niferous forests (Quercus ilex, Quercus suber,Pinus pinaster);

- supra-mediterranean, with deciduous mixedxeric-mesic forests (Quercus spp., Acer spp.,Fraxinus spp., Ostrya carpinifolia, Carpinusbetulus);

- oro-mediterranean, mixed mesic deciduousand coniferous forests (Fagus sylvatica, Abiesalba, Pinus laricio, Pinus leucodermis);

- crio-oro-mediterranean, with natural prairies.

Azonal vegetation includes non-climatic veg-etation and can be subdivided in the followingmain types: riparian forests, marsh forests, peatbogs, marshes, lake vegetation, brackish lagoon

vegetation, coastal (dunes and cliffs) vegeta-tion, man induced (synanthropic) vegetation.

Italian flora includes over 5800 species (5300herbaceous and 500 woody species). There are930 endemic species (16% of the total). 307species (5%) are non-native but became spon-taneous; 463 are endangered species at differ-ent risk of extinction.

1.2 Society

Political structure and institutional organisa-tion of the forestry sectorItaly is a parliamentary republic and is com-posed of 20 regions (4 with administrative au-tonomy). The chief of the government is thePrime Minister nominated by the President ofthe Republic, who is elected by the Parliament(composed by the House of Deputies and theHouse of Senate).

The administrative power in the agro-forestrysector has been transferred to the Regional andLocal authorities (see section 4). Some otherimportant constitutional changes should takeplace in the coming years to complete the de-centralisation process (Pettenella, 1994).

Population distribution and densityWith population of 57.5 M and population den-sity of 191 inhabitant’s km-2 Italy is among themost densely populated countries in Europe.In recent years Italy has experienced succes-sive in-migration waves especially from NorthAfrica (Morocco and Tunisia), Eastern Europe(Albania, Bosnia, Poland, Romania), Central-West Africa (Senegal, Nigeria), Asia (Philip-pines, China), South America (Peru).

Over 70% of the entire population live in met-ropolitan and urban areas located in the plainand coastal areas. In the 1950 rural populationwas almost 50% of the total. There are severalhigh-density areas spread throughout the coun-try: in northeast (Venice, Padua, Verona), north-west (Turin, Milan), eastern Tuscany (Florence,Pisa, Livorno), gulf of Naples and northeasternSicily.

Italy

EconomyAs in many other western countries Italianeconomy has strongly shifted from primary andsecondary to tertiary activities. Only 7% of thelabour force is employed in agriculture, 32%in industry and over 61% in other activities,contributing respectively to GDP for 3.5%,29.2%, 67.3% (table 1). On the basis of theItalian national accounting system, GNP fromforest related activities (wood and non-woodforest products) represents only 1.3% of theprimary sector GNP and 0.05 % of total GNP,while the GNP of the wood working sector isabout 4.5% of total GDP1.

Tourism is a very important industry for theItalian economy. In 1995 almost 28 millionsinternational visitors came to Italy and spentabout 20 billions EUR.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

Forest vegetation has been present in Italy sincegeological eras. In the Mesozoic it was mainly atropical flora and besides the ongoing develop-ment of Angiosperms, this feature was main-tained for most of the Tertiary period. The for-

est structure and composition was comparablewith the one present today in tropical, monsoonwoodlands. The climate warming, which af-fected the whole Mediterranean basin about sixmillions of years ago, induced a desert-type veg-etation and bounded forests (where taxa suchas Pinus, Taxus and Ilex were prevalent) to themountain areas. The shifting back to a moistclimate allowed the spreading of sub-tropicalvegetation again, with evergreen forests andsavannahs. In the closing phase of the Tertiaryperiod, the Pliocene (about 2-3 millions yearsago), vegetation in Italy was very similar, insome respects (evergreen scrub, deciduous for-est) to the present one. Later, the climate cool-ing due to the succeeding ice ages bounded thecold intolerant flora to shelter areas (i.e., Ibe-rian Peninsula or the Balkans), from which itcould expand again during the interglacialphases, until today.

Since pre-roman times Italian forests have beena timber reservoir for different populations.First the Phoenicians and then the ancientGreeks cleared the rich forests of Sicily trans-formed into a cropland. First the Etruscans andlater the Romans issued the first forest lawsand regulations throughout the country. How-ever, in order to provide adequate timber fornaval and building construction and to create

Sectors % GDPAgriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 3.5%Mining and quarrying 2.2%Electricity, gas and water 4.5%Manufacturing 22.0%Constructions 5.1%Wholesale and retail, restaurants and hotels 18.2%Transports and communications 6.5%Financial, real estate and business activities 24.3%Public administration (health, education, etc.) 11.5%Other services 2.5%

Table 1. Contribution to GDP by industrial sectors

1 As normal in the national accounting systems, Italian GDP does not take into account any non-marketpublic service provided by the forest sector, like erosion control, water conservation, landscape andbiodiversity protection, etc.

Italy

agricultural land, they have cleared largeforested areas, like in the Padanian plain andthe central Apennines (river Tiber valley).

After the Roman Empire fall, the barbaric in-vasions and natural catastrophes created theconditions of for land abandonment and mas-sive forest recolonization occurred up to year1000. The socio-economic standards improvedduring Renaissance and forests were clearedagain for crops, pastures and urban settlements.A stronger impulse to timber use came fromthe expansion of overseas commercial activi-ties. A great example is the Republic of Venicethat controlled forest and economic resourcesof a large part of northeastern Italy from theXIV to the XVIII century.

Nonetheless the numerous invasions experi-enced throughout the centuries and the frag-mentation of the peninsula in many differentstates, often governed by foreign families, en-hanced the exploitation of forest resources.Only sixty years after the Italian unity (1861)the central government was finally able to con-ceive a forest policy and the publication of im-portant laws, still in force today.

2.2 Forest types and their distribution

Among the several factors that account for thegreat diversity and abundance of vegetation inItaly, two can be considered of primary impor-tance: the climatic changes occurred along geo-logical eras and the actual climate heterogene-ity of the country. The latter is due i) to thebroad latitudinal extension of the peninsula, ii)to the great sea influence and iii) the highmountain ranges (the Alps, primarily and theApennines).

Italian forests, according the syntaxonomicalclassification system, can be grouped within thefollowing main types:- Mediterranean evergreen forest (Quercetea

ilicis);- Mixed Oak woods and other mesic forests

(Querco-Fagetea, Alnetea glutinosae,Salicetea purpureae);

- Montane Beech woods (Querco-Fagetea);- Alps and Apennines Pine woods (Erico-

Pinetea, Junipero-Pinetea);- Boreal coniferous forests (Vaccinio-Piceetea).

Potential vegetation of Italy envisages forestdistribution from coastal and plain zones up tothe higher elevations. However, the actual typesprevalent in the Mediterranean region are scrubforests subjected, along the history, to variouskinds of disturbances and degradations (i.e. in-tensive grazing and fire). Moreover, plain mesicdeciduous forests, once abundant in the north-ern river valleys (i.e. the Po Valley, from Turinto Venice), have been cleared a long time agoand replaced by agriculture, industry and heavyurban settlements. Most of the wooded areasare therefore left on hills and mountain slopes.

In the Alps (especially in the inner, continen-tal regions) subalpine pure or mixed forestscomposed by Norway spruce (Picea abiesKarst), European larch (Larix decidua Mill)and Stone pine (Pinus cembra L) form alsotimberlines reaching 2100-2300 m of altitude.In the Apennines open beech woods (Fagussylvatica L) are the last stands (1800-2000 m)before transition to high altitude prairies.

2.3 Forest resources: extension, ownershipand main species

Two main sources of information on the forestcover structure and distribution are availablein Italy:- the National Forest Inventory carried out in

1985-86 that adopted a broad definition of for-est land including land covered by shrubs andscattered trees (total forest land extension is8.6 M ha);

- the National Institute of Statistics publishingannual data on forest land extension (the mostrecent data is of 6.7 M ha) including only theforestland within non-abandoned public andprivate farms.

However, natural forest conversion in aban-doned agricultural and range land is by largethe most relevant change in land use in Italy,

Italy

as confirmed by other sources of information(i.e. CORINE2 where total Forest Land Coveris 7.2 M ha, 9.4 M ha considering also shrubsand scattered trees).

Making reference to more detailed source ofinformation (the National Forest Inventory) for-ests in Italy extend over 8,675,100 ha, corre-sponding to 29% of the total land area. Highforests make about 25% of this surface, cop-pices more than 40%. The remaining 35% areboth “specialised production forests” (i.e., plan-tations for timber or wood paste production,tree farming, or non timber products woods:cork, chestnuts, etc.) and “other forests” suchas scrubs, maquis, rocky or riparian woods, allrarely managed (table 2).

Most of the species present are native or spon-taneous; the few exotic ones are generally usedfor industrial forestry (“special forest crops”category).

In high forests conifers are dominant, both forextension (56.3%) and timber volume (63.1%).The most important species is Norway spruce(Picea abies Karst); also mountain pines (Pinussylvestris L., Pinus nigra Arnold, P. laricioPoiret) and European larch (Larix decidua

Mill .) are well widespread. Most coniferousforests are located in the Alps (montane andsubalpine spruce, fir, larch forests), but someimportant ones can be found also in the South-ern Apennines (Pinus laricio Poiret).Broadleaved high forests are mostly beechwoods (Fagus sylvatica L.), but also oak woods(especially Quercus cerris L.) (table 3).

Among coppice woods, the most widespreadspecies in hilly zone are chestnut (Castaneasativa Miller), hornbeam and hophornbeam(Carpinus betulus L. and Ostrya carpinifoliaScopoli) and oaks (Quercus spp.), often inmixed composition. In montane zone, beech(Fagus sylvatica L.) is the most important spe-cies, both on the Alps and on the Apennines(table 4).

2.4 Total growing stock, growth and yield

Growing stocks for high forests and for cop-pices are reported respectively in tables 3 and4 for the main species.

The national growing stock of high forests isabout 405 millions of m3 (about 211 m3 ha-1),with a total annual increment of 15.127.900

2 CORINE is an European Commission project to collect environmental data in all EU member countries.

Category Surface (ha) % Type Surface (ha) %High forest 2178900 25.1 - even-aged 1176300 54.0

- uneven-aged 554400 25.4- irregular 377100 17.3- transitory 71100 3.3(in conversion)

Coppice forests 3673800 42.3 - simple 2751300 74.9- with standards 922500 25.1

Specialised production 288900 3.3 - timber 134100 46.4forests - non-timber products 154800 53.6Other forests - rocky 575100 26.6

2160900 24.9 - riparian 110700 5.1- shrubs 1475100 68.3

Non-wooded inclusions 372600 4.3Total 8675100 100.0

Table 2. Forestland categories and their extension

Source: ISAFA, 1985.

Italy

m3 (on average, 7.9 m3 ha-1 yr-1). Including onlythe trees with d.b.h. >17.5 cm, the total grow-ing stock lowers to 341 millions of m3 and thecurrent annual increment is 5.1 m3. Amongspontaneous species, Spruce and Beech havethe greater averaged increments (9.4 m3 ha-1 yr-

1 and 8.5 m3 ha-1 yr-1 respectively).

Currently, the annual yield in high forests rarelyexceeds 50% of the annual growth and har-vesting, on average, is 35% of the current in-crement. This led to a general increase of thegrowing stocks in the last decades.

2.5 Silviculture

In the part of Italy (mainly in northern regions)where forestry practices have a high standardthe silvicultural systems in use nowadays arebased on the principles of a sustainable, “near-to-nature” forestry. Forest operations are care-

fully controlled and restricted, aiming both totimber production and to forest natural regen-eration.

Clearcutting is forbidden by law in about 95%of the high-forests, which are subjected to re-stricted use, in order to enforce soil and waterconservation.

Currently the most common silvicultural sys-tems applied in alpine high forests (especiallyin coniferous forests) are selection system andshelterwood system (mainly group, stripe oredge systems). This kind of treatments has de-termined the shifting of many even-aged for-ests (developed from past clearcutting or affor-estation) to uneven-aged or irregular forests.In Beech high forests the most common prac-tice is the uniform system. The opening of gapsor stripes by clearcutting is allowed only instands composed by light-demanding species(larch and pines), in order to meet the ecologi-

Species Total area % Total volume m3 % m3 ha-1 Increment (ha) (m3 ha-1yr -1)

Norway spruce 380493 19.8 117543379 29.0 309 9.4Silver fir 63606 3.3 23245024 5.7 365 9.2European larch 241402 12.5 49017886 12.1 203 5.7Mountain pines 267832 13.9 49974017 12.3 187 8.0Mediterranean pines 108627 5.6 13365769 3.3 123 7.1Other conifers 23431 1.2 3021422 0.7 129 13.6European beech 287992 15.0 70243581 17.3 244 8.5Turkey oak 96452 5.0 16443298 4.1 170 6.7Other oaks 176465 9.2 20587540 5.1 117 4.6Other hardwoods 277779 14.4 42278552 10.4 152 8.8

Table 3. High-forests: main species, surface, volume and growth

Source: ISAFA, 1985.

Species Total surface ha % Total volume m3 % m 3 ha-1

Beech 402800 14.8 60939254 19.5 151Chestnut 493535 18.1 74612238 23.9 151Hornbeam 324701 11.9 28940076 9.3 89Turkey oak 346285 12.7 36594099 11.7 106Other deciduous oaks 390037 14.3 33857781 10.9 87Evergreen oaks 152948 5.6 16446998 5.3 108Other broadleaves 612859 22.5 60591673 19.4 99

Table 4. Coppices: main species, extensions and volumes

Source: ISAFA, 1985.

Italy

cal requirements of these species and guaran-tee the stand natural regeneration.

Coppice is largely widespread, especially withprivate owners. The most common system isclearcut, but for many species the law prescribesto leave some standards to favour seed produc-tion and sprouts regeneration in old stumps. Theselection system is applied in many beech cop-pices, a lot of which are of public property (of-ten mountain municipalities).

Coppice with standards is a practice used some-times only in some areas of central Italy forpure or mixed oak stands.

Although still common in Italy, coppice is cur-rently considered an outdated silvicultural sys-tem. The reasons are that its products arelargely surrogated by other manufactured itemsand especially it doesn’t guarantee, as well ashigh forests, the multiple functions that publicopinion expect from forests (soil-erosion con-trol, landscape amenity and recreation).

More and more old coppiced stands in Italy aresubjected to conversion operations leading tohigh forest. Generally conversion begins withthinnings in coppices that are by large olderthan their usual rotation age. When stems arerelatively old, soil has improved and seed pro-duction is abundant the shelterwood system canthen be adopted.

Another important aim of Italian forestry is tofoster natural diversity and evolution in for-ests; therefore mixed forests are promoted andthe spontaneous recolonization of broadleavedspecies in coniferous plantations is todaystrongly encouraged.

2.6 Forest functions

The National Forest Survey of 1985 divides Ital-ian forests on the basis of the prevailing func-tion as shown in table 5.

Indeed, soil-erosion control is a very impor-tant goal in Italian forest management due tothe very irregular morphological features of thecountry and it is desirable the protective func-tion would be extended to most of the forestedland. It is also important to keep in mind thatpeople’s demand for recreational use, as wellas its consciousness of the ecological role offorests, are very strong today.

It is true, however, that these functions can beplayed also by many of the woods classified asproductive (i.e., where production is prevail-ing) in table 5. In Alpine forests, for example,where tourism is an important economic activ-ity, both in summer and winter, the silvicul-ture practices, following the sustainability prin-ciples, permit together timber production, soilconservation and recreational uses.

2.7 Forest production: harvesting systems,accessibility

Some important features of harvesting in theforest are summarised in the following table 6.Motor-manual felling is the most common fell-ing method both in the coniferous and thebroadleaved forests. Logging is based on agri-cultural 4WD tractors equipped with winch andon cable crane where the land slope does notallow the use of wheeled vehicles. Cable cranelogging is more common in the eastern regionsof the Alps. Winch sledge is used as well as

Category Prevailing functionproduction protection ecological recreational

high forests 72.7 18.6 8.5 0.3coppices 82.2 14.3 3.5 0.1plantations 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0other forests 4.8 89.3 5.7 0.2

Table 5. Woodland categories and prevailing functions

Source: ISAFA, 1985.

Italy

mobile cable yarder. In some case animal log-ging (mules and horses) are still performed insteep slopes, especially for fuelwood.

The accessibility varies depending on the yieldof forests. In the most productive forests theaccessibility ranges from 25 to 35 m/ha.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forestry industries in nationaleconomy

In Italy the two components of the forestry sec-tor (forest activities and wood working indus-tries) are separate entities acting rather inde-pendently. The lack of integration between thetwo sectors is due to different policies and pat-terns of development. Forest activities seemmore oriented towards the production of non-market public services than to an increase inthe internal supply of wood products. Whilethe wood industry is strictly oriented towardsproduction and competition in the internationalmarket by giving as much added value as pos-sible to the raw material imported.

In the following pages we try to explain thedifferent economic role of the two componentsof the forestry sector by describing the mainelements characterising forest activities and theorganisation of the wood industry.

3.2 Organisation of forest activities

Italian forests cover 6.4 million ha3, which isequivalent to 21.3% of the land surface of 30.1million ha. The distribution of forest types bycategories of ownership and management re-gime is presented in table 7. Only 23.2% of theItalian territory is flat land, where intensive ag-ricultural production systems and urban landuses are predominant. About 60% of the for-ests are situated in mountain areas, 35% in thehills and only 5% in the plains. Soil and waterconservation is the main goal and constraintof forest management. Strict regulations (i.e.only light selective felling and silvicultural sys-tems based on natural regeneration, prohibi-tion of clearcutting, limitations in forest roadconstruction) are imposed on 92.4% of the for-est land (ISAFA, 1985).

According to the 1990 Agricultural Census,State and regional forests have an average sizeof about 850 ha, communal forests of 150 haand private farm forests only 3.2 ha. No pri-vate industrial forest exists. Hence, woodlandsare highly scattered and therefore wood harvest-ing is more difficult and costly. Timber quality,moreover, is not always meeting the demand re-quirements. High management costs and reducedwood production per surface unit are limitingprivate, and even public, financial interests inactive forest management (Gios and Pollini,1986).

Average annual harvest (1990-1997) 8917125 m3

share of standing sales 70%share of roadside or transported to mill sales 30%share of motor-manual felling 99%*share of mechanised felling 1%*share of log-length harvesting system 95%*share of tree-length harvesting system 5%*share of road as a long-distance transport mode 98%*share of rail as a long-distance transport mode 2%*

Table 6. Distribution of wood harvest methods in forest

* estimated

3 Reminder: there are two sources of information on forest statistics (see section 2.3.).

Italy

3.3 Organisation of wood industry

In Italy all wood-related economic sectors op-erate in a highly disconnected forestry-woodsystem, whose main features seem to be: - a fragmented and limited internal supply (ta-

ble 8), due to the above-mentioned economicand environmental constraints; moreover theinternal supply is not homogeneously distrib-uted (table 9). Most of the productive highforests (mainly coniferous) are in the north-eastern regions4 while coppices predominatein the centre of the country. The only relevantexamples of forest plantations are the poplarstands in the northern plain areas of the riverPo valley. On the other hand with the overallsituation of wood productivity in Italy, poplarplantations probably represent financially themost productive investment in the forest sec-tor in Europe5;

- a consequent low self-sufficiency rate (i.e.around 36% for semi-finished products, asshown in the last column of table 8). Part ofthe reason for this, beside the economic andenvironmental constraints, is the fact that Ita-ly’s geographical position and internationallocation is such that importing from neigh-bour markets (mainly Austria, France, Swit-zerland, Slovenia and Croatia) is easier andfaster than purchasing on local markets. Forexample, in the softwood market the commer-

cial flow between Austria and Italy is, quan-tity-wise, exceeded only by that betweenCanada and the USA. Furthermore, due to thesize of production, the wood, furniture andpulp and paper industries need continuous,homogeneous and reliable timber provisions,which can only be guaranteed by foreignsupply.

The lack of integration between domestic for-est activities and the wood working industry istherefore one of the basic problem and at thesame time one of the main challenge of the Ital-ian forestry sector. The bulk of industrial ac-tivities is based on import of rough and semi-finished products (table 10), while internal sup-ply is able only to cover small niches of themarket (poplar logs used for plywood and me-chanical pulp production, coniferous timberused in building activities in some mountain-ous areas, etc.).

In this context logging enterprises and the saw-mills play a strategic role for the future devel-opment of forest activities. Italian sawmillshave structural lacks (working yards, plants andequipment), very well reflected, in turn, on lowlabour productivity rates. Small size sawmillsare undoubtedly the most widespread (on theaverage about 3,100 m3 worked/year), togetherwith a predominant family-management; this

State and Regions Communes Other public Private Totalhigh forest 198 1019 193 1379 2789- coniferous 111 636 103 588 1438- broad-leaved 87 383 90 791 1351(of which poplar) 4 4 5 105 118coppice 148 600 167 1932 2847coppice with standards 30 157 32 548 767Total 376 1776 392 3859 6403

Table 7. Italian forests by categories of ownership and management regime (1000 ha)

4 The North-east of the country is made up of three Regions (Veneto, Trentino Alto-Adige and Friuli-Venezia Giulia) on the total of 20 Italian Regions.5 With a net annual increment of 20-25 m3/ha, rotation periods of 8-10 years and with the predominant useof the final harvest for high-quality plywood production, poplars plantation investments can reach an Inter-nal Rate of Return of 7-10%, being competitive with corn production (in the irrigated areas of the Po valleynormally corn production is over 10 tons/ha, one of the highest productivity rates in the world).

Italy

limits, or at least affects, investments on tech-nical and managerial innovations. Occupyingspecific market niches, which allow limited pro-ductions designed for specific clients, is theother key factor for the survival of small-me-dium size sawmills (Cesaro and Merlo, 1990;Gios et al. 1991). The possibility for theseniches to endure is linked to technical con-straints preventing large-size specialised enter-prises entering some specific markets.

3.4 The role of non-wood forest products

As in other Mediterranean countries, the so-cial and economic role of the non-wood forestproducts (NWFP) is traditionally of high im-portance in many local communities. Marketdemand for chestnuts, hazelnuts, mushrooms,truffles, berries is so high that almost all theRegional Administrations have introducedproperty right regulations to control the col-lection of NWFP. These products are no morea public, free-access good, but products that can

From forest land From other Total % of total % of industrialland* removals roundwood

removalsTotal removals 8379 1350 9729 100.0 -* fuelwood 4928 587 5515 57.9 -* industrial roundwood 3451 763 4214 42.1 100.0- Coniferous 1341 81 1422 14.6 33.7 (of which in north-east) 997 5 1002 10.3 23.8- Broadleaved 2110 682 2792 28.7 66.3(of which poplar) 958 651 1609 16.5 38.1

Table 9. Wood domestic removals (1000 m3 - 1997)

Sources: ECE/FAO, Timber Bulletin; ISTAT, Bollettino Mensile di Statistica and estimates.

*: mainly single trees, windbreaks, small wood plots in agricultural areas.

Table 8. Italian forest products market in 1985, 1990 and 1996 (1000 cubic metres in equivalentvolume of rough wood)6

a. rough wood

b. semi-finished wood products*

Years Domestic Import (1)+(2) Export Apparent (4)-(2) (1)/(5)production consumption %

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)1985 9448 5496 14944 12 14932 -5484 63.31990 8038 7150 15188 19 15169 -7131 53.01996 8876 7118 15994 308 15686 -6810 56.6

1985 10222 18081 28303 888 27415 -17193 37.31990 11931 21769 33699 1120 32579 -20684 36.61996 12608 24388 36996 2225 34771 -22163 36.3

*: sawnwood, particle- and fibre-boards, woodpulp, plywood, veneer sheets, sleepers.Sources: 1985 and 1990: FAO, Yearbook of Forest Products, Rome; 1996: ECE/FAO, Timber Bulletin andestimates.

6 For more recent data look at the WEB site: http://www.unece.org/trade/timber/tim-fact/ita.htm.

Italy

offer remarkable source of income to the forestowners and their association.

For example, in the Alba area (Piedmont re-gion) every year some 12 tons of truffles areofficially collected (though a similar amount iscollected “on the side” and sold unofficially),at an average price of 3,000,000 lire/kg (1,500EUR). Thanks to collection and processing ofthe truffles (along with other typical agricul-tural products, particularly wine), Alba appearsto be one of the boroughs in Italy with the high-est percentage of agricultural workers, and atthe same time, with one of the highest averageincome rates. However, what counts is not somuch picking the truffles as the economy thatrevolves around this activity (food processingindustries, restaurants and on-farm tourism,etc.) which is growing very quickly. Accord-ing to a number of estimates, the value of thefood production connected to truffles in theAlba area alone is around 25 Millions EUR,half of this deriving from exports (Japan andNorthern Europe).

Both the Alba truffle and the mushrooms (Bo-letus edulis) from Borgo Val di Taro in theEmilia Romagna region have been recognisedby the Italian Ministry of Agriculture and For-estry with a official trade mark.

The high profits deriving from NWFP collec-tion might bring about a modification in thecriteria adopted in woodland management (cop-pices are generally more productive than highforests as far as mushrooms are concerned)which have traditionally been oriented towardstimber production.

4 Forest policies and main currentconflicts and challenges

Italy is a country of contrasts and contradic-tions, also in the forestry sector: it has plentyof coppices and overstocked plantations whichneed to be thinned, but it is the one of the larg-est world importer of wood residues andfuelwood. Italian forests are an essential partof the countryside and tourism represents oneof the most important sources of national in-come, but one-two million ha of forest land istotally abandoned and each year fires destroythousands of hectares of Mediterranean forests.The technological level of Italian forest enter-prises is extremely low and, as a logical conse-quence, harvesting costs are not competitivewith neighbouring countries, but Italian wood-working machinery and equipment industry hasa leading position world-wide7.

Firms Employ. Turnover Import Export Balanceno. no. 1 M 1 M 1000 1 M 1000 1 M

EURO EURO ton EURO ton EUROa. Wood in the rough, 10830 37034 7070 7019 5041 2939 71 -4080chips and residualsb. Semi-finished products 44873 149469 155552 20224 5105 7571 654 -12653- sawnwood 4081 17943 24392 12917 3812 785 72 -12132- panels 369 12999 48785 5196 1020 4622 438 -573- building material 38520 103672 69928 1653 124 1684 51 31- packaging 1903 14855 12447 460 150 480 93 21c. Wood furniture 31807 162107 116719 4586 155 68926 1572 64340Total (a+b+c) 87510 348610 279341 31829 10300 79436 2297 47607

Table 10. Main indicators of the wood-based industry structure (1997)

Sources: ISTAT

7 Italy is world leader in terms of production and export of some wood-working machines like those forpanel sizing, sanding, boring, and plywood, chairs, windows manufacturing.

Italy

Marketing capabilities of forest owners are be-hind the average European standards, but thefirst case of ecocertification of a forest prop-erty in the Alps is that one of an Italian com-munity forests (Pettenella, 1998). Italy is thecountry with the richest and more diversifiedsemi-natural forests in Europe, but the capa-bility of representing the problems and inter-ests of the forest actors in the decision makingprocesses at European level is extremely low8.

Few sectors in Italian economy have such a highdevelopment rate as the wood working indus-try, but in the last 30 years self-sufficiency forindustrial roundwood has constantly decreased.The Italian furniture industry is growing at afast rate, consolidating its leadership in the in-ternational market, thanks also to his strongterritorial specialisation (Merlo and Fodde,1996), but internally Italy still maintains weakdistribution channels. A contrasting situationis also characterising the activities in the fieldof forest education and professional training.While there are only few professional schoolsproviding a practical training for the forestersto be employed in the field, five-years univer-sity courses are organised by 9 Faculties ofAgriculture (Schmidt et al., 1998): 2 in theNorth (Torino and Padova), 2 in the Centre(Florence and Viterbo) and 5 in the Islands andSouthern part of the country (Bari, Potenza,Reggio Calabria, Palermo and Nuoro). Ofcourse for each of these apparent contrasts thereare economic and institutional explanations,even if sometimes they do not seem so evident.

As mentioned in section 1.2, in the forestry sec-tor a strong decentralisation process of Statecompetencies to the 16 not autonomous Regionshas been carried out in the last years. Whilesome Regional Authorities (mainly in theNorth) have taken advantage of the new au-tonomy granted them by the State and have

organised regional forest services, other (mainlyin the South) are still making use of the CorpoForestale dello Stato9 for the implementationof their forest policies. A third alternative or-ganisational model (quite common in CentralItaly) is based on a remarkable decentralisa-tion of the competencies in the forestry sectorfrom the Regional to the local authorities (Prov-inces or Comunità Montane, associations ofMunicipalities in mountain areas).

As a result of this differentiated and still chang-ing situation it is extremely difficult to findcommon patterns in forest related policies im-plemented by public authorities. While someRegions seem more concerned about the prob-lems of expanding the forest area (see the ap-plication of EC Reg. 2080/92), protecting theforest environment from external disturbances(fires, illegal grazing, etc.), other Regions arepaying more attention to the economic role ofthe forest sector through programmes of assist-ance to forest owners and forest enterprises orthrough direct investments based on publicworks for mitigating unemployment problemsin marginal areas. Also as a consequence ofthe reduced public spending in the sector, re-gional forest policies tend to favour one or fewsingle objectives. What appears to be lackingin the decision making process in Italy is iden-tification of a clear long-term objective func-tion which would steer short term choices ac-cording to a coherent integrated approach.

To understand these problems it is importantto remind that, not only Italian public institu-tions are under a process of radical change,but also market demands are rapidly chang-ing. The most evident market change in therecent past has been the increase in demandfor public forest services: recreational areasand hunting, landscape amelioration,biodiversity conservation, global climate

8 The only forest owners association without any representative in the Confederation of European ForestOwners is the Italian one.9 The Corpo Forestale dello Stato (State Forest Service) is a police force directly depending from theMinistry of Agricultural Policies, the former Ministry of Agriculture and Forests.

Italy

stabilisation, etc. The growth in such demandshas often lead to the imposition, on the part ofpublic authorities, of further limits to forestryactivities undertaken by private owners.

The present problem in Italian forestry maythus be summarised as one of decreasing fi-nancial productivity as opposed to increasingsocial demands for public goods:- many services having social purposes are com-

bined products deriving from an active man-agement of forests and have traditionally beensupplied with or without limited restrictionsto public access (recreation and hunting, forexample);

- markets for many of the social services pro-vided by the forest are non-competitive (i.e.the services are public goods),

- external (and generally positive) impacts of for-est activities are not evaluated by private own-ers and adequate mechanisms of internalisa-tion have not been set up.

One of the fundamental reasons for this kindof market failure is the system of property rightswhich is not suited to present-day demands.The tenure system “was designed to serve ob-jectives which are increasingly out of tune withchanging public attitudes towards resource use.In particular, while it depends heavily on pub-lic resources, it fails to provide the private ten-ants with the security they need to invest infuture production” (Pearse, 1993, p.77). Thedecreasing interest on the part of private forestowners in the management of forestry resourcesas such could be dealt with by two policy in-struments, excluding the possibility of encour-aging a change in the ownership structure withpublic bodies buying the land itself.

i) Private forest owners could be encouraged tointernalise some services of public interest(perhaps through a revision of the legislationon property rights) which in Mediterraneanareas are generally supplied at no cost: rightsof access to natural parks, to forest paths androads, permits to collect mushrooms and otherwoodland by-products, hunting and fishingrights, renting of sites and infrastructures forsports purposes, farm tourism, etc. Such pay-

ments should obviously correspond to thesupply of specific services and systems shouldbe devised whereby the costs of fees collec-tion would not be higher than the income. It istherefore necessary to create ‘markets’ wheretransactions would be made between thosewho enjoy the benefits and those who bearthe costs of managing the forests. Specific pay-ments for each individual service, apart fromtimber production, would help to make themodels of forest management more transpar-ent, thus avoiding ‘free rider’ behaviour withregard to the resources.

ii) The supply of many services of social inter-est, as well as industrial roundwood, calls forthe establishment of large-scale managementunits. In a situation affected by rigid land own-ership structures, active management of smallprivate holdings could be encouraged bymeans of voluntary agreements between theforest landowner and a contractor. Thanks tosuch agreements, when necessary forest own-ership could be separated from the responsi-bility of management, leaving such responsi-bility to ad hoc contractor firms. Direct com-pensation could be provided for positive ex-ternalities supplied after negotiations betweenthe small forest owners, contractors and pub-lic authorities interested in forest investment.

In all these cases the full-time farmer wouldno longer be the prevailing subject of a policyof forest development, but public decision mak-ers have to take account of other economic op-erators as well. In particular, the problem ofabsentee landlords should be considered, pay-ing more attention to contractor firms for for-est management and marketing of forestryproducts and services and to local administra-tive structures. To attain these objectives it is apriority to promote the reform of administra-tive structures, simplifying the procedures,stressing the functions of technical assistance,rather than policing, and creating the meansto control the efficiency of public spending inthe sector.

Italy

Acknowledgements

Section 1 was written by C. Urbinati, section 2 by C. Colpi. D. Pettenella wrote sections 3 and 4and edited the text. The authors are most grateful to P. Piussi who reviewed the text and providedsome essential information. Thanks are also due to R. Cavalli who wrote section 2.7.

References

Bernetti G. 1995. Selvicoltura speciale. UTET, Torino.Cappelli M. 1991. Elementi di selvicoltura generale. Edagricole, Bologna.Casini L. and Marinelli, A. (eds). 1996. Un modello economico-ambientale per la gestione delle

risorse forestali. RAISA, Franco Angeli, Milano.Cesaro L. and Merlo, M. 1990. Il sistema delle utilizzazioni forestale e delle prime trasformazioni

del legno in Italia. La Questione Agraria (40) pp. 65-92.Cesaro L., Gatto, P. and Pettenella, D. 1994. Marketing strategies for the survival of small saw-

mills in the Italian Alps. Proc. IUFRO Symposium of the Working Party S4.04-02 Manage-rial Economics in Forestry. Krakow, Poland.

Florio M. (ed.) 1987. Il controllo a lungo termine delle risorse naturali. Franco Angeli, Milano.Florio M., Politi, M. and Sckokai, P. 1998. Un modello econometrico dell’industria del mobile in

legno. Franco Angeli, Milano.Gios G. and Pollini, C. 1986. Le foreste dell’arco alpino. Costi di utilizzazione del legname.

Cellulosa e Carta (4) pp. 23-28.Gios G., Leonelli, G. and Pollini, C. 1991. Qualità e mercato: evoluzione e prospettive per il

legname alpino. Cellulosa e Carta (6).ISAFA. 1985. Inventario Forestale Nazionale. Ministero dell’Agricoltura e delle Foreste Corpo

Forestale dello Stato Roma.Merlo M. and Fodde, F. 1996. Some annotations on the role of forest based production chain in

Italian regional economies. In: Hyttinen, P. Mononen, A. and Pelli, P. (eds.) Regional devel-opment based on forest resources. Theory and practices. EFI Proceding (9).

Ministero dell’Ambiente. 1992. Relazione sullo stato dell’ambiente. Istituto Poligrafico e Zeccadello Stato Roma.

Perlin J. 1988. A forest journey: the role of wood in the development of civilization. HarvardUniversity Press Cambridge MA 446 pp.

Persicani D. 1989. Elementi di scienza del suolo. Ambrosiana, Milano.Pearce P.H. 1993. Forest tenure, management incentives and the search for sustainable develop-

ment policies. In: Adamowicz, W.L., White, W. and Phillips, W.E. (eds.), Forestry and theenvironment: economic perspectives. CAB International, Wallingford.

Pettenella D. 1994. Institutional changes in forest administrative structures: the Italian experi-ence. Unasylva, 45 (178).

Pettenella D. 1997. Demand and supply analyses of roundwood and forest products markets inEurope. Italy. Solberg, B. and Moiseyev, A. (eds). Proc. Workshop Consequences of struc-tural changes in roundwood and forest products markets. Helsinki, November 3-5, 1995. EFIProc. (17).

Pettenella D. 1998. Écocertifier les forêt de montagne? interrogations et enjeux à partir de l’exempledu val di Fiemme (Trentin, Italie). Revue Forestière Française, Numéro spécial “Gestionmultifunctionelle des forêt de montagne”.

Pignatti S. 1998. I boschi d’Italia. Sinecologia e biodiversità. UTET, Torino.Piussi P. 1994. Selvicoltura generale. UTET, Torino.Schmidt P., Huss, J., Lewark , S., Pettenella, D., and Saastamoinen, O. 1998. New Requirements

for University Education in Forestry. Proc. Workshop held in Wageningen; 30 July-2 August1997. Demeter Series (1).

Italy

Touring Club Italiano. 1991. Guida d’Italia: natura ambiente e paesaggio. Grafica Editoriale,Bologna.

Web-sites

Italian State Institutions; http://www.senato.it/altro/fr_orgit.htm Ministry of Agricultural Policies; http://www.politicheagricole.it/Ministry of Environment; http://www.scn.minambiente.itCorpo Forestale dello Stato (State Forest Service); http://www.corpoforestale.it/ISTAT (Italian Statistical Office); http://www.istat.it/SISEF (Italian Society for Selviculture and Forest Ecology); http://www.dsa.unipr.it/~sisefIstituto Sperimentale Assestamento Forestale e Alpicoltura (Experimental Institute for Forestand Meadow Management); http://www.tqs.it/isafa/Istituto Nazionale di Economia Agraria (National Institute of Agricultural Economics);http://www.inea.itFederlegno-Arredo (Wood Working Industries Organisation): http://www.federlegno.it/Federparchi (Federation of Park Authorities); http://193.207.140.245/federparchi/index.htmlCentro Sperimentale Valanghe e Difesa Idrogeologica (Experimental Centre for Avalanches andErosion Control); http://www.sunrise.it/csvdi/csvdi_it.htmlEnvironmental organisations; http://www.naturalstep.orgWWF Italia; http://www.wwf.it

Italy

Latvia

1 The Country

The Republic of Latvia lies on the Eastern coastof the Baltic Sea. Latvia is not big: it covers64,589 square kilometers, the distance betweenthe farthermost points from East to West is 442km, from North to South - 210 km. The popula-tion of Latvia totals 2.5 million; the capital Riga(with a population 800,000) is an old cityfounded in 1201. Latvia is bordered by Estonia(on the North), Lithuania (on the South), Rus-sia (on the East) and Belorussia (on the South-East). Since ancient times, with its coastlineexceeding 480 km and easily accessible ports,Latvia has been a significant link between thestates surrounding the Baltic Sea and Russia.The Baltic Sea has always been of great impor-tance in political, economic and cultural life ofthe country.

1.1 Nature

1.1.1 Topography

Much of Latvia is a flat coastal plain. Nearly45% of its surface area is covered with forest,interspersed with small rivers and lakes. 3.7%of the country is covered by inland waters: thereare 145,400 rivers in Latvia although only 777rivers are over 10 km in length, 140 lakes arelarger than 1 km2. The average elevation of theland surface is 87 m above the sea level, and thehighest point Gaizinkalns rises to 312 m. Latviais not rich in useful minerals. Of combustibleminerals only peat has certain industrial signifi-cance. The most important for the economy areraw building materials such as limestone, gyp-sum, dolomite, clay, sand and gravel.

1.1.2 Climate

Average annual rainfall is about 680 mm andsufficient. The wettest months are April throughSeptember, coinciding with the highest demandfor moisture. Severe droughts, like the one in1992 are rare. Mean annual temperatures (5.4degrees Celsius) are relatively mild for the coun-try’s latitude, due to the moderating influenceof the Baltic Sea. The annual mean air tempera-ture in Riga, the capital, is +6.0oC; in January -4.9oC and in July +16.9oC.

1.1.3 Soil

While Latvia’s overall climatic conditions andtopography are both sufficient and are enoughto ensure good production and variety withinthe agricultural and forestry sectors, the soilquality is less than ideal. Podzolized soils - rela-tively infertile soils typically found in forests -constitute 54.5% and deep, fertile organic loamsoils account for about 7% of total agriculturalland with the rest belonging to less fertile cat-egories. Average soil quality is 4 on a scale of10 points, with 7% falling in the highest qual-ity. Thus overall soil quality is relatively low,and so is soil humus content, averaging no morethan about 1.7%. Widespread soil compactionand deteriorating drainage systems are ampli-fying the impact of relatively low soil qualityon soil productivity.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 History

Until the middle of the 16th century Latvia wasdominated by the German Empire, later its sepa-rated parts were directly ruled by other states:

The Republic of Latvia

Authors:Professor Henn TUHERMForest Faculty, Latvia University of Agriculture

Latvia

Vidzeme - by Poland and Sweden, Latgale - byPoland, but Kurzeme and Zemgale were in theDuchy of Kurzeme (Courland), which were notso dependent on other countries. In the 18thcentury the above-mentioned parts of Latviawere incorporated into the Russian Empire. In1918 Latvia obtained independence and a newstate - the Republic of Latvia was established.It took several years before the war ended witha Peace Treaty between Latvia and Russia in1920 and the formation process of the LatviaState could start. It was interrupted by thedevelopments in 1940 - Latvia’s incorporationinto the USSR, the establishment of the Sovietpower and the ensuing “socialist transforma-tions”, and World War II, immediately after. The50 years under the socialist system left a deepimprint in the fate of both: the nation and manyof its people. On May 4, 1990, the SupremeCouncil of the Republic adopted the Declarationon Renewal of the Independence of the Republicof Latvia. In September 1991 the Republic ofLatvia was granted full membership in the UN;on February 1995 Latvia was grantedmembership in the Council of Europe becomingthe 34th member of the body. In 1998 Latviawas the first of the Baltic States to enter theWorld Trade Organisation (WTO).

1.2.2 Population

As comparable to other European nations (ex-cept for Estonia), the increase in populationduring the post World War II years had beendominated by an increase in the rate of immi-gration. Until 1989, due to migration, Latvia had

the highest population growth in Europe.Throughout the years, the main flow ofmigration has been from the nearest regions ofthe Russian SFSR, the Byelorussian SSR andthe Ukrainian SSR (figure 1); the majority ofthe immigrants concentrated in the cities. Thegrowth of cities was especially intensive in 60-70´s, when there was a drive for industrial de-velopment. From 1940 to 1959 the rural popu-lation diminished 1.3 times. This was a directconsequence of the war and deportations. Therural population continued to shrink at a rate of3.5% per year till 1979, after which it stabilized(table 1).

Basic facts about the Latvian population (year1996):- estimated population 2.5 million, population

growth -0.9%;- population density 36.8 persons per km2;- rural population 31%, urban population 69%;- average life expectancy 69.2 years (men 63.9,

women 75.6).

1.2.3 Economy

The development of Latvia’s national economyhas been greatly influenced both by its geographi-cal position and political, social and economicsituation. The advantageous geographical loca-tion of Latvia on the eastern shores of the BalticSea and the crossing of ancient trade routes fromRussia to Western Europe has determined thedevelopment of a significant transport network.Limited natural resources on the one hand andconsiderably well-developed infrastructure on

Year Total population Urban population, % Rural population, %1914 2,493,0001920 1,596,0001935 1,905,000 37.2 68.21940 1,886,0001959 2,093,000 53.2 46.81979 2,521,000 68.5 31.51989 2,680,000 71.1 28.91996 2,500,000 69.0 31.0

Table 1. Dynamics of population in Latvia

Latvia

the other hand facilitated the creation and speedyprogress of processing industries. After the col-lapse of the former USSR, the situation in theBaltic region has changed dramatically. Duringthe transition period from a socialist to freemarket economy the Gross Domestic Product(GDP) decreased sharply. In the autumn of 1991,when Latvia regained independence, the Gov-ernment started transforming the centrallyplanned economy into a market economy. Theprocess of economic reforms took place in a verydifficult environment. The Latvian economy wasclosely linked to the republics of the formerSoviet Union through the specific system ofspecialization and division in labour.

The main weaknesses of the economy are:- ineffectiveness of the industry regarding la-

bour productivity;- raw material consumption, technologies and

quality of products;- high interest rates for credits;- lack of business culture and tradition of entre-

preneurship;

- political risks related with vulnerable relationswith Russia. A political conflict based on the eth-nic issue can very easily lead to a blockade;

- organized criminality is also a serious prob-lem. Many levels of society may be involvedin this.

The main means for Latvia to achieve a growthrate in GDP are the monetary, fiscal, taxation andlegislative measures, which will be targeted to:- increase of domestic and foreign investments;- considerably lower credit rates;- structural reforms;- further liberation of prices;- accelerated privatization;- lower inflation;- equilibrium of the state budget;- stability of the national currency.

All reforms in Latvia, to a great extent, have thesame motivation - a wish to join the EuropeanUnion and NATO. Latvia’s joining to theseorganizations will depend on whether it can meetall the criteria, to achieve the necessary level.

Figure 1. Ethnic distribution of Latvian population.

Figure 2. Age distribution of Latvian population.

Latvians55%

Russians33%

Byelorussians4%

Ukrainias3% Poles

2%Others

2%

Lithuanians1%

Over active age22 %

Under 1520 %

Active age(15...59)

Latvia

2 Forest resources and their uses

Forests are of great importance for the Latvianeconomy, environment, landscape, flora andfauna; for many Latvians the forest also meansa place for leisure activities, recreation and hunt-ing. After the regaining independence theLatvian economy is highly dependent on renew-able forest resources as well as on forest indus-try; in 1997 the foreign exchange of forest-basedexport made up 35.7% of the national total.

2.1 Forest history

In the territory of present Latvia the forest has,already for more than ten millennia, been theprevailing ecosystem which follows its ownrules. The distribution of forest lands as it ex-ists now takes its origins in the history of thecountry and has especially been affected by twofactors, the diversity of natural conditions andman’s economic activities, farming in particu-lar. At first man’s impact on the forest was in-significant, but it increased with time. The for-est was used as a source of timber and firewood,tar, resin, wood charcoal, bast, game, mush-rooms, berries, honey and a number of otherproducts. In ancient times it was a common prac-tice to burn out forest lands to revert them tofields and pasture lands instead. After repeatedburning, a part of the areas under similar man-agement practices paludified, while on anotherpart the substrate lost its fertility and could nolonger be used for farming. This situationevolved mans‘ thinking on how to manage theforest.

The earliest attempts to introduce some kind offorest administration and management date backto the early 17th century. The first laws con-cerning forest management were passed at thattime. In Latvia the first ever published papersand books on forest management, predominantlycodes of directions and pieces of advice to for-esters, appeared already at the end of the 18thand the beginning of the 19th centuries. Theactivities of the German-origin foresters A.Leviss and A. Bode in the early 19th centuryare to be considered an important landmark in

the history of Latvia’s forestry; they providedinformation on forest tree species, seed produc-tion, reforestation, basics of forest managementplanning, and modern methods for stock vol-ume evaluation by using sample stems.

2.2 Forest ownership

In Latvia there is a process going on towards amore market-oriented situation. TheGovernment policy is to privatize land and otherproduction units; this process is in its final stage.Forest ownership has been largely influencedby historical conditions and, as a result, theforms of forest ownership, in Latvia, have beenchanging repeatedly and radically during thiscentury. In 1935 total area of the cadastral for-ests was 1.747 million ha; 79.6% of the forestsbelonged to the state, 17.5% belonged to thefarmsteads and 2.9% were owned by the towns,industrial enterprises etc. (table 2). Actually,however, the area of the farmsteads’ land whereforest was growing, was considerably larger assuch areas as haylandforests, pastureforests,brushwoods etc. were not all included in thecadastral forests category.

After the incorporation of Latvia into the So-viet Union in 1940, the state became the soleowner of forests and during the next 50 yearsabout 2/3 of the forests were managed by thestate forest enterprises and almost all the remain-ing forests were managed by the collective farmsand the state farms. For example, in 1988 63.3%of the forests were managed by the state forestenterprises and 33.2% by the collective and thestate farms, 3.5% belonged to the army, townsetc. (figure 3).

Since the time when Latvia regained its inde-pendence and after the land reform process wasstarted, Latvia’s forest ownership model is fac-ing essential changes. The forest may be ownedby the state, local governments and natural orlegal persons. Legally, the ownership is regu-lated by the Law of the Republic of Latvia, as-suring to all owners equal rights and equalobligations, non-violation of ownership rightsand independence in carrying out their manage-

Latvia

ment activities. After the land reform and therestitution of land (and also forest) ownershiprights an essential part of Latvia‘s forests willbe privately owned forests:

- According to the Law on Land reform, landwhich was in private ownership up until21.06.1940 will be returned to previous own-ers or their inheritors.

- Considering the forest ownership structure be-fore 21.06.1940 and essential increase of for-est covered area since that time it is forecastthat 51-52 % or 1.5 million ha of the forestwill be under state ownership.

- The rest or about 45% is and will be dispersedamong many small private owners.

- Municipalities are playing a minor role as for-est owners in Latvia, except in the capital ofRiga.

- Up until now more than 50.000 private forestmanagement plans have already been issued.

At present 44.2% of Latvian forests are privatelyowned - up to 120.000 estates, average area 10-12 ha. To date the average area of holdings istoo small, and the shape and location of some isunsuitable for effective forest management, uti-

lization and protection. Further, the fragmenta-tion of forest estates, including splitting the es-tate between heirs, is unavoidable. The prob-lem is also, that a big share of private forestowners do not live near their own forests, andthey do not have enough knowledge, financialresources and equipment to manage their ownforests. Private forest owners’ organizations,supervision service and the forest extension andconsultancy structures are developing, but manyfarmers are not active and this system is in theinitial stage of establishment.

In conformity with the Forest Policy of Latvia,“...the public forest property is the official capi-tal, a guarantor of realizing the nation’s ecologi-cal and social interests, while the forest prop-erty in its totality guarantees the economic in-terests of its owners. Irrespective of the owner-ship category, the forest is a national asset, withfree access to it for the general public, whilerestrictions in the interests of forest owners areplaced on the forest products utilization.” TheLaw gives the owner long-term and safe guar-antees of management and economic independ-ence within his estate.

Year 1935 1988 1994 1995 1996 1997OwnerState 1390.3 1744.9 1606.3 1626.2 1626.2 1493.0Private 306.4 - 440.3 642.9 1137.8 1275.5Agriculture enterprises - 916.4 215.2 46.1 20.0 18.0Others 50.5 96.2 557.8 566.5 97.7 97.5Total 2757.5 2819.6 2881.7 2881.7 2884.0

Table 2. Forest ownership structure in Latvia, 1000 ha

Figure 3. Dynamics of the forest ownership structure in Latvia, years 1923-1997 (1000 ha)

State forest ownership Private forests Agriculture enterprice forests Other forests

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

01923 1929 1935 1949 1961 1973 1978 1983 1988 1994 1995 1996 1997

Latvia

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

The forest covers 2.88 million ha or 44.6% ofthe total land area (table 3). 2.5 million ha or38.8% of the territory of country is under agri-cultural production, 1.7 million hectares is ar-able, and the remainder is in pasture and mead-ows. In the land reform process in Latvia largeareas of agricultural lands were abandoned andthe process of afforestation of these lands is pro-moted. It is foreseen that approximately 350 000ha could be overgrown during a 10-year periodincreasing the total forest coverage up to 49%.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

Since the early 1920’s the forest area of Latviahas increased from 24.7% in the year 1923 to44.7% in 1997 presently constituting 2.884 mil-lion ha of productive forest lands. The territo-rial distribution of woodlands in Latvia is noteven. Areas with higher forest coverage are theCentral part (Riga region), the South-East area(Cesis and Madona regions) as well as the West-ern (Ventspils, Liepaja, Talsi regions) part ofthe republic. The highest forest coverage is inthe Ventspils region - 60%, the lowest in theDobele region - 26%. The age structure ofLatvian forests is shown in table 4.

There are various forest growing conditions andforest ecosystems in Latvia. The adoption ofLatvia’s forest management practices to the de-mands of particular forest ecosystem-a forest site

type classification was elaborated. This classi-fication comprises groups of forest-site types.They are subdivided into five sectors: woodlandwith dry mineral (54.5%), wet mineral (10.4%),wet peat (12.0%), drained mineral (9.6%) anddrained peat (13.5%) soils.

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

Around 60% of the forest are dominated bysoftwoods, where 2/3 are represented by pineforests and about 1/3 by spruce forests. The mainhardwood species is birch representing about72% of the hardwood forests or 28% of all for-ests. Other important species are white alder, as-pen and black alder. Oak and ash are representedon small areas of about 0.5% each (table 5).

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

In the Latvian forests the entire standing volumeis 502 million m3 (figure 4). Mean volume of thestands is 174 m3/ha. Trend of the average vol-ume of all stands as well as the average volumeof mature stands (mean volume - 258 m3/ha) isascending. Latvia’s forests total current annualincrement is 16.5 million m3 (6.2 m3 per ha an-nually (figure5).

Changes in the mean volume during this centurydisplay also changes in forest management.Latvia’s forest resources are greater now than inthe first half of the century. The higher standingvolumes are in state-owned forests as a result of

Area, 1000 ha %1. Actual forest land 2881.7 44.62. Agricultural land 2502.7 38.83. Bogs, swamps 315.9 4.94. Roads, building site 263.3 4.15. Inland waters 237.2 3.76. Scrubland 111.7 1.77. Bogs for peat production 47.9 0.78. Waste land 10.7 0.29. Other 84.8 1.3Total area 6458.9 100.0

Table 3. Land use in Latvia (January 1, 1997)

Latvia

Age Coniferous Soft deciduous Hard deciduous Totalgroup 1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha % 1000 ha %Unstocked 98 5.7 29 2.6 3 9.8 130 4.6Young stands 340 20.0 52 4.8 9 29.0 401 14.2Middle aged 732 43.1 624 57.3 9 29.0 1365 48.4Premature 285 16.8 151 13.9 5 16.1 441 15.7Mature + overaged 245 14.4 233 21.4 5 16.1 483 17.1Total 1700 100 1089 100,0 31 100,0 2820 100,0

Table 4. Age structure of Latvian forests

Species Area % Volume %Pine 39.7 40.5Spruce 20.6 19.8Birch 28.4 24.5Black Alder 2.4 3.5Aspen 2.5 6.1White Alder 5.3 4.6Oak 0.3 0.4Ash 0.8 0.6Total 100.0 100.0

Table 5. Species composition in Latvian forests

Figure 4. Total growing stock in Latvian forests.

600

400

200

01935 1984 1995 1998

176

384489 502

mill

ion

cub.

l

Figure 5. Current annual increment of dominant species.

cub.

m. p

er h

a, y

ear

10

8

6

4

2

0

5.26.1

7.8

6.2 6.2

8.9

4.35.2

7.7

Pine Spruce Birch BlackAlcer

Aspen WhiteAlcer

Oak Ash Mean

Latvia

better silvicultural treatment. Natural die-off isestimated to be 2.4 million m3 per year including1.4 million m3 in conifer stands. The accumula-tion of dead and fallen stems in stands providehabitats for number of dead timber related spe-cies and serves as a forest ecosystem componentmaintaining forest biodiversity. Previous foresthealth regulations enforced the removal of alldead trees from the stand. New regulations pre-scribe sanitary cuttings only after the onset offorest pests; it helps to maintain a balance be-tween both the productivity and ecological goals.

Basic information to estimate allowable cut istaken from the Latvian forest inventory system.The volumes for final and intermediate cuttingsare specified in the forest management plansboth nationally and at operational level. Theyare based on the protection status of the respec-tive stands, the age structure and the dominanttree species. Current planning methods ensuresustainable management of forest resources. InLatvia the volume of present cut in final fellingis estimated to be 5.675 million m3, plus 2,674million m3 in intermediate cut, thus totaling8.349 million m3.

2.3.5 Damages and risks

Nowadays. as a product, the forest is Latvia’smost important natural resource, constituting thehighest input into the nations economy. The for-ests are managed and utilized primarily for tim-ber. However, timber is not the only wealth theforest offers. Latvia contains a unique series offorest habitats, including internationally impor-tant swamp forests with a rich and endangered

wildlife population. Shaped by the German andRussian school of forestry and further developedby local scholars, the Latvian system of forestmanagement appears to be more nature-orientedthan that of the majority of European countries.Low-intensity management and the intricate sys-tem of forest protection typical of the Soviet pe-riod are yet another reason for the preservationof woodland values in Latvia. Changes in thecountry after regaining independence, as wellas in forestry and land ownership all put extrapressure on the natural resources. Forestry inLatvia is becoming more intensive. Today thegoal is how to combine management efficiencywith preservation of the distinguishedbiodiversity level. Further development is im-possible without the balanced utilization of for-ests’ wealth following the principles ofsustainability.

To understand the damages and risks in the for-estry sector, a SWOT analysis of the sector wascarried out. The main results of forestry sectorSWOT analysis are the following:

I Strengths:- persistent macroeconomic and political back-

ground: integration process into the EU – pro-gressive development and participation; fin-ished property reforms – forest land is returnedto previous owners or their inheritors, all log-ging and wood processing enterprises are pri-vate or share companies; ratification of themost significant international conventions onenvironment protection and signing the reso-lutions of the Ministerial Conference on theProtection of Forests in Europe; participationof Latvia in the World Trade Organisation;

Figure 6. Forest harvesting volumes.

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0

Final cutting

Allowable cut

Other

Year 1995 Year 1996 Year 1997

Tho

usan

d cu

b.m

Intermediate cutting

Latvia

expected development of macroeconomicrates;

- long term traditions and experience within thesector;

- the basic legal documents regulating forestmanagement and utilization have been revisedor renewed. To comply with the principles ofsustainability, provisions for biodiversity con-servation, mandatory for all stakeholders inforest management, are worked into these le-gal documents;

- well developed raw material accessibility: in-creasing trend of forest growth andforecastability; the common roundwood mar-ket for all forest owners is functioning; expe-rience in the raw material Eastern market, ad-vantages in communication and mutual under-standing with partners from Russia,Byelorussia and other CIS countries;

- favourable geographical location and trans-port network: strategic position – easy accessto markets in Eastern and Western Europe, ef-fective bridge between the CIS and Europe;well developed transport network, good trans-ports links with Russia, Byelorussia and theBaltic states; three strategic all-year-roundports (Liepaja, Ventspils, Riga) and sevensmall ports equipped for timber and woodproducts handling;

- relatively well-qualified and cost effective la-bour: professional forestry and wood process-ing education is available at different levelsand in corresponding fields, integration proc-ess of academic education - with Scandinavianand Western Europe universities is continuing;average labour cost is lower compared to EU;

- development of an associative and consultingframework within the forestry sector.

II Weaknesses:- undeveloped private forest management: lack

of experience in private forest management,including lack of knowledge in sustainableforest management; weak communication witha huge number of very small private forest es-tates; suspicious attitudes of forest owners to-wards any co-operative action, only few for-est owners are the members of Forest OwnersAssociation;

- economy imperfections: income from the pri-vately owned forests is the only income for a

lot of farmers in the country-side; lack of li-quidity, credit facilities with reasonable con-ditions are not available; uneven competitionwith companies from other countries with bet-ter lending conditions; faults in the State taxa-tion system leads to unfair competition due tonon-payment of tax;

- money flow in the frames of forestry sector isnot regulated: there are problems in the fi-nancing of maintenance and development ofa forest infrastructure;

- roundwood market imperfections: insufficientinformation flow from roundwood market toprivate forest owners; resources are frag-mented, insufficient logistical channels for con-centration of huge volume of uniform rawmaterial; fluctuation in roundwood market sup-ply within 10-15 years after land reform;

- problems of forest estate and enterprise man-agement on the part of companies: lack of ex-perience in personal and business manage-ment; unsatisfactory level of Western businessculture and traditions of entrepreneurship;

- company problems in forest industry: out-of-date technology in majority of companies; lowlabour productivity in some companies, whichleads to low competitiveness of the industry;production capacities are away from resources,location and concentration of production ca-pacities does not always meet optimal rawmaterial procurement and logistical demands;

- low value production: share of the ‘deeplyprocessed’ wood to overall exports of woodfrom Latvia is still very small; during thetransition period the furniture industry sufferedfrom a lack of customer oriented strategies anda change in the market situation.

III Opportunities:- raw material sustainable availability: guar-

anteed sustainable forest management; affor-estation possibilities of abandoned agriculturallands; privatisation in Russia all increases rawmaterial availability;

- economic in general: expansion of local mar-ket, domestic demand for wood products isgrowing slowly but steadily; special economiczones in Latvia, are attracting investment;

- optimal utilisation of raw material: concen-tration of production capacities; complex uti-lisation of wood – wood residues for energy

Latvia

(heating, sawn timber drying, electrical powercogeneration etc., agricultural applications; uti-lisation of low quality timber and sawmillingresidues in board industry (OSB, MDF) andpulp mill;

- promotion of more value added processing:modernisation of technology and machinery;product development and diversification, witha possibility to reach more market segments;promotion of furniture production – chance ofapplication of available high quality raw ma-terial at competitive price and trained labourwith know-how in the furniture business tofacilitate the improvement in furniture designand architecture.

IV Threats:- decrease of forest value: value of private for-

ests in future can decrease due to incorrectmanagement and insufficient long termsustainability; low investment level in forestinfrastructure will cause difficulties in raw ma-terial procurement and decrease in forest value;

- political and economic crisis in Russia: rawmaterial supply from the East is unpredictableand connected with political risks; delayed pri-vatisation in Russia can cause shifting of large,high developed and interrelated EU timbercompanies from the Russian roundwood mar-ket to the Baltic Sea region.

2.4 Silviculture

Silvicultural activities create the most potentialto increase forest productivity. Silviculturaltreatment on a commercial basis is carried outin both exploitable and restricted managementforests, except for some especially protectedareas. The treatments practiced are thinning,conversion and sanitary felling, aimed at im-proving the tree species composition in thestand, obtaining higher yields, better quality andhealth of the remaining stand. This also includesthe tending of newly established young standsand reforested areas. Research based on thin-ning models will help to achieve best results instand productivity while simultaneously takingcare of ecological values.

Woodland drainage is seen as a potential sourcefor increasing forest productivity. Nevertheless,the best balance between forestry interests andenvironmental conservation still is a challengefor foresters and specialists in forest ecology.Besides, the bigger the area already drained, thegreater the demand for the maintenance and re-construction of the existing drainage systems;up to 50.000 ha of forest land once drained isnow in need of maintenance. Proper manage-ment and exploitation of forest resources is im-possible without a system of forest roads satis-fying the defined requirements. At present theoverall length of forest roads amounts to 13.100km or 7,5 m/ha of forest, which does not com-ply with an optimum of 10 m/ha for forests(A.Ozols, 1995).

Reforestation after harvesting is mandatory inLatvia. About 70% of the cutting areas are re-forested artificially and 30%, usually on drysand, wet mineral and wet peat soils is regener-ated naturally with pine, spruce, hard and softdeciduous species according to particular siteconditions. To provide for artificial reforesta-tion by using genetically enhanced seed andplanting stock, forest seed orchards have beenplanted over a total area of 1077 ha. The mainforest tree species are represented as follows(year 1997): pine - 826 ha (first generation -672 ha, second generation - 154 ha), spruce -160 ha, aspen - 11 ha, birch - 5 ha, others - 75ha. In 1997, the total area for artifical reforesta-tion was 28,170 ha: pine - 42.2%, spruce -57.1%, and other species - 0.7%. Share in spe-cies of the naturally reforestated area: pine -8.4%, spruce - 8.7%, birch - 53.1%, ash - 7.8%,aspen - 10.5%, other species - 11.5%.

Our society as well as the EU-markets has beeninterested in the impact of forest management onnature. In Latvia the preparatory process to carryout forest certification in the country’s socio-eco-nomic and ecological conditions started someyears ago. The aim of forest management is thatthe utilization of forest resources today does notreduce future possibilities for forest utilizationand does not destroy the ecological values of for-est, thus preserving them for future generations.The main principle of Latvian National Forest

Latvia

Policy - state-owned and private forests- are thevaluable national resources, which should bemanaged sustainably, including environmentally,economically and socially sound principles andtechniques, to increase the welfare level of theinhabitants. Forests are of great importance forthe Latvian economy, environment, landscape,flora and fauna; for many Latvians the forest alsomeans a place for leisure activities, recreation andhunting.

Sustainable forest management and sustainableuse of forest resources is one of the priority for-est issues at national and international levels. TheUN conference on Environment and Develop-ment, held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, proposed alarge number of activities and new projects forthe promotion of sustainable forestry, eitherthrough national, intergovernmental or market-driven certification processes. In the preparationprocess for EU membership the Latvian Society,legislators and Government, new forest ownersand producers must better understand the envi-ronmental, economic and social concerns in for-estry and forest industries. The Latvian forestryand wood-processing industries are export-ori-ented and have faced pressure in the certificationof sustainable forest management. Our societyas well as the EU-markets has been interested inthe impact of forest management on nature. For-est certification has emerged as a potential toolto promote forest management and Latvian ex-ports in the major markets.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

The aim of forest management is that the utiliza-tion of the forest resources today does not re-duce future possibilities for forest utilization anddoes not destroy the ecological values of forestthus preserving them for future generations:- Latvia’s forest resources serve as a basis for

fast developing forest industries and are pro-viding opportunities for even more ambitiousgrowth in the future.

- all State-owned forestry companies were pri-vatized up to 1996 and large numbers of newprivate companies created.

- about 300 private companies are working in stateforests according to long term agreements.

- most of the forestry companies are small, butonly about 25 can be considered as middle size,with harvesting volumes of more than 30 000 m3

per year.

Forest management is planned for all forestedareas. Normally, the following 5 managementregimes are applied:- following the accepted management practices;- without clearfelling;- without final felling;- without final and intermediate felling;- without any management intervention.

All major harvesting operations are performedby smaller or bigger logging companies or pri-vate farmers. Some 300 companies are regis-tered and have long term cutting contracts inthe state forest. These contracts or cutting rightshave normally a duration of 10-20 years. Thelong-term contracted volume for the 10 largestcompanies amounts close to 1 million m3 annu-ally. New cutting licences are issued with dueconsideration to the Latvian Government’s in-tention to promote the development of the for-est industry. About 55% of the total annual cuton state forest land is covered by long-term con-tracts and about 25% is sold by auctions. Socalled social cuttings and sanitary cuttings makeup the remaining quantity.

The State Forest Service, the logging industryand environmental organisations are in favourof a system with long-term management con-tracts (up to a duration of 100 years). Such con-tracts would cover all forestry activities, har-vesting and silviculture as well as infrastructuralinvestments and maintenance.

Logging costs, as reported by the logging in-dustry for 1996, are as follows:- felling, delimbing and crosscutting; EUR 3.50-

7.00 per m3

- forwarding (300-400 m); EUR 3.75-6.00 per m3

- road transport (100 km); EUR 1.50-3.05 per m3.

The total cost will be in the range of EUR 9-16per m3. The variation in cost is largely due tofactors such as operations in young forests (thin-

Latvia

ning), old forests (clear felling), differentground/soil conditions, and variations in dimen-sions and different species.

2.5.2 Timber uses

Implementation of the privatization programsincreased the amount of roundwood and proc-essed timber for sale, especially for export. An-nually accepted amounts of logging fully en-sured a supply of domestic raw materials for thewood processing enterprises. In Latvia the pos-sible allowable cut would be increased up to 10-12 million m3 in the near future (Figure 7).

The Latvian forestry and wood-processing in-dustries are export-oriented; in 1997 the foreignexchange of forest based export made up 35.7%of the national total. Forestry and the woodprocessing industries play an important role inrural areas by supplying employment opportu-nities and by facilitating development of basicservices, hence promoting regional develop-ment. This is why forestry-related activities areso important to Latvia, as in the Nordic countries(Finland, Sweden), and relatively more impor-tant than in the rest of the European countries.

At present, the forestry sector is limited by lowutilization of forest resources, low quality pro-duction in certain areas, a lack of investment,and inappropriate institutional arrangements. Inorder to achieve its economic and social objec-tives, Latvia needs to encourage and promote amodern, market-led industry. It requires theGovernment to develop an integrated and long-term strategy. joining policy and institutionalframeworks in such areas as environmentalmanagement, natural resources (forest) manage-ment, economic and industrial policy, as wellas the social and political sphere with the tech-nical potential of the forest industry. The cur-rent forest industry is dependent on long-term,stable linkages with a natural resource base (for-ests). On the other hand, sustained and environ-mentally sound forest management and utiliza-tion depends on a viable forest industry able tosell wood-based products and profitably pay forthe market-value for wood.

Latvia of course is in a great need of findingways to exploit its natural resources, and to earnforeign currency desperately needed for the de-velopment of all sectors of the countrieseconomy. It may be tempting to export saw logsand pulpwood as this is seen as a “short-cut” toforeign currency earnings. This may, however,be a dangerous way eventually making Latvia acountry which only exports raw materials, in-stead of the highly industrialized country it is.The export of logs should only be done if thereis no practical possibilities to process the logsin Latvia and thus add more value to the rawmaterial before it is exported. Thus it may bewise to export pulp logs, as there is no practicalmeans of processing this part of the raw mate-rial in Latvia. If the export of sawlogs and ply-wood logs (blocks for peeling) are consideredit is obviously quite another situation.

The main forest industries in Latvia aresawmilling, wood panel production and furni-ture industry. The pulp and paper industry isoutdated and isn’t covering local consumptionneeds. There are also a number of companies spe-cializing in some particular wood products andservices. Output from sawmills has reached nearlythe limits of Latvian sawlog resources while thereis still opportunity to improve quality and addedvalue of sawmilling products and production effi-ciency of sawmills. Main problems to be addressedin sawmilling development are: debarking; sort-ing of logs, sawn timber and quality control; dry-ing; and a market for sawmilling residues. Conse-quently this will influence size and technologypatterns in the sawmilling industry. There are threegroups of panel products produced in Latvia -particleboard, fibreboard and plywood.Particleboard and fibreboard production needs anadditional value to be competitive in the future;investments here are welcome. The furnitureindustry was and still is an important branchwithin the Latvian woodworking industries. Maindevelopment problems during the transition pe-riod after regaining independence were lack ofcustomer-oriented strategies and a completechange in the market situation. Privatization ismostly completed and is considered as an impor-tant precondition to attract investment. A numberof privatized and newly established private com-panies have successfully found their new market

Latvia

niches and reoriented their production towardsWestern markets, local consumers or the newEastern market situation. Currently there areslightly more than 300 companies in Latvia pro-ducing furniture or furniture components. Amongthem are 10 companies that can be considered asbeing medium sized. Now furniture or furniturecomponents exports to Western markets havereached about 35 million EUR (year 1997) andthere is definite potential for growth. Latvianfurniture producers are familiar with traditionsand demands in potentially huge Eastern(namely CIS) markets but risks there are stillhigh. Investments in customer-oriented furnituredesign, technology and marketing are needed.The furniture industry has all the possibilitiesfor successful development due to:- availability of high quality raw material at com-

petitive prices;- good furniture making traditions in Latvia;- trained labour and good wood processing edu-

cation traditions;- existing capacities with development potential.

Main opportunities for development and invest-ment in the Latvian forest industry are:

- investment in technology and technologytraining;

- introduction of international quality control andcertification systems;

- improvement of customer oriented furnituredesign;

- green-field chemical kraft pulp mill in Latvia(recommended capacity level - 600 000 tonsannually). The new pulp mill offers new op-portunities for the utilization of Latvian for-ests (about 3.0 million m3 of wood annually);the wood is available in Latvia, but neighbour-ing countries also supply it. There is a poten-tial to increase the utilization of sawmillresidues as raw material for the pulp mill, butthis potential is hampered by the present saw-mill structure with general lack of debarkingfacilities. The project will directly and indi-rectly involve 13 000 to 18 000 people. Low-est possible environmental impact would beachieved through modern technology and ef-ficient control systems. Latvian Governmentis fully supporting project implementation andready to provide various incentives and assist-ance to facilitate its further development.

Figure 7. Possible model of wood utilization in Latvia (possible annual cut - 10 Mm3).

Annual cut 10%10 Mm3

Pulpwood 42%4.2 Mm3

Sawlogs and blocks for peeling 38%3,8 Mm3

Fuelwood 20%2.0 Mm3

Raw materialsfor prosessing

0,8 Mm3

3.0 Mm3

?Sawn products, plywood

and boards 3,2 Mm3Residues2,6 Mm3

Wood for energeticuses 1.2 Mm3

Sawdust 0,6 Mm3

Cutting residues,slabs, centres 2,0 Mm3

+Bark 0,7 Mm3

Processing

Energetic uses

Small sizetimber 12%

1,2 Mm3

Raw materials for saw-milling, plywood and board

industry 5.8 Mm3

Latvia

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

Economically important forest by-products inLatvia are resin, sap, branches, Christmas treesand boughs for decoration. Also of interest areherbs, buds, bast, birch-boughs etc. Forests pro-vide also possibilities for hay-making, cattlegrazing, placing of apiaries, collection of ber-ries, fruits, nuts, mushrooms, and other rawmaterials found in the wild. Latvia’s forests arerich in game animals (table 6). Populations ofanimals particularly important in the Europeancontext for wildlife protection, such as wolves,lynx, otters and beavers show a permanent in-crease in numbers while wolves and beavers arenearly reaching the limits of biological capac-ity in our forest area.

2.5.4 Forest functions

The overall targets of Latvian forest policy areto balance possibilities in fulfilling society´s in-terests in maintaining ecological values ofLatvia’s forests and securing the implementa-tion of social functions of forest. The forest is

an important component of Latvia’s environ-ment. Therefore the aim of forestry is also topreserve the diversity of nature. Latvian forestshave high environmental value. The rich floraand fauna of forests need to be conserved forfuture generations. There are long traditions fornature conservation in Latvia. A certain part ofLatvian land area is subject to some form ofnature protection. To monitor the condition ofLatvia’s forests a system of forest health moni-toring was established and is in service. Anumber of sub groups of forests with differentenvironmental values is defined and differentprotection and management systems appliedwithin each of the forest protection categories.All forests are divided into three forest catego-ries, according to their function and importancein terms of ecological, economic or other spe-cial functions (table 7).

Sections of the forest with restricted manage-ment and commercial forests (in total 248.200ha or 8,6% of all forests) are classified as espe-cially protected forest areas with special regu-lations of management. The most important onesare the following:

Animals and Number (x1000), March 1 Hunted (x1000)birds 1995 1996 in 1995/1996 in 1996/1997AnimalsElks 7.2 6.6 1.16 0.89Stags 24.9 21.8 4.26 2.78Roes 69.6 55.3 12.19 1.77Wild boars 19.7 17.6 7.42 3.96Wolfs 0.93 0.93 0.32 0.39Lynx 0.70 0.70 0.10 0.07Foxes 18.5 18.5 4.05 4.38Otters 4.8 4.8 0.003 . . .Beavers 26.3 26.3 1.16 2.01Bears 0.010 0.010 - -BirdsWood-grouses 3.3 3.3 0.05 0.04Black-grouses 17.5 17.5 0.14 0.13Hazel-grouses 28.5 28.5 0.04 0.09Partridge 16.7 16.7 - -Eagles 0.24 0.24 - -Wild ducks . . . . . . 37.73 33.3Wild geese . . . . . .. 0.94 1.5Crows . . . . . .. 1.66 2.1

Table 6. Hunting animals and birds

Latvia

- forests along rivers and lakes; 138.700 ha- forests along roads and railways; 44.400 ha- forests around rutting sites for cock-

capercaillie; 20.500 ha- reserved forest compartments; 11.800 ha- forests as cultural monuments; 5.400 ha- protected landscape forests; 4.300 ha- sites for scientific research ; 3.800 ha- forests around protected water reservoirs;

3.800 ha- parks and dendrological plantations; 3.600 ha- protected margin and edge stands;3.400 ha.

To follow the condition of Latvia’s forests, asystem of forest health monitoring was estab-lished and is in service. The Latvia Forest In-ventory Institute carries out the monitoring offorest health in Latvia. Starting in 1990 the as-sessment of tree crown defoliation anddechromation was carried out on 398 perma-nent observation plots, as well as chemical com-position of foliage and vegetation. The forestmonitoring is performed according to the Euro-pean forest monitoring methodology. At thesame time observations are done on the sampleplots to monitor sources of air pollution (indus-trial plants, factories, etc.). Starting in 1994,introduction of the American monitoring sys-tem is continuing.

During the last few years special attention waspaid in ensuring the stability and developmentof the ecological functions in forests. Two ba-sic approaches were used:- all Latvia’s natural biotopes must be preserved.

This means that we must also update our systemof protected forest areas to match that principle;

- in Latvia, with its long-standing forestry tradi-tions and where nearly all the forests have ex-perienced some impact by man, it is impossi-ble to distinguish between forest managementand forest conservation. We are looking to-wards integrated forest functioning and goal-oriented forest management systems, where thegoal determines forest management meansensuring a balance between all forest functions

- economical, ecological and social.

The goals of the national Forest Policy, relatedto social issues, are reached by implementingthe following principles:- general public enjoys the right of free access

to the forest, irrespective of the form of own-ership, with the exception of restrictions stipu-lated by the Law and legitimate acts;

- accounting for management practices for theforest’s cultural and historical values and land-scape protection;

- hunting is regulated by the Law with due re-gard for the owner’s interests.

3 Forest economics

The economic goal of Latvia’s Forest Policy isto guarantee, with ecological and social concernsin mind, sustainable development and efficiencyof the country’s forest sector, while providingfor the maximum possible increase in additionalvalue created via resource utilization. In viewof its specific public functions, the state-ownedforest should be treated as an official capital.The state as the owner of this capital has twobasic interests here:

Forest category Area, 1000 ha %Class I - Protected forests. The aim of these forests is to preserve the diversity 330 11.4of nature: strict nature reserves, National parks, nature parks, nature reserves,suburban parks, anti-erosion forests etc. Some restricted management activitiesare carried out in these forests in conformity with special regulations.Class II - Restricted Management forests. These forests are significant to 525 18.2environmental protection: protected landscape forests, suburban forests, forestsfor environmental protection.Class III - Commercial forests - all other forests. 2029 70.4Total 2884 100.0

Table 7. Forest categories in Latvia

Latvia

- the value of this capital (forest) must not de-crease, it should increase;

- the owner (the State) is interested to draw in-come from its capital (forest).

The economic goals set by the forest sector arereached by implementing the following principles:- introducing the market economy and free

competition in the forest sector by creatingthe related legal framework, comprising a sys-tem of legitimate acts and laws on economicactivities, targeted at the state deregulation ineconomy;

- state regulation in respect to the principles inforest utilization is intended to ensure the long-term availabilityof wood resources on a sus-tained basis, resulting in a predictable envi-ronment for the sector of forest productsprocessing;

- providing for the forest sector’s economic ef-ficiency following the laws in force on entre-preneurship and legitimate acts, applicable ir-respective of the form of ownership;

- the cash flow to sustain forest management isto be created by the market;

-direct state budget subsidies provide for real-izing the state’s public functions: regulatory,supervisory and, partly, also support;

- Management of the state-owned forest impliesexercising the state’s private rights in respectto its property, in so far it does not infringe onthe state’s public functions - environment andsocial concerns; the state-owned forest is cov-ered by management activities with a requiredlevel of efficiency.

The direct contribution of forestry and forestindustries to the Gross Domestic Product is cal-culated as 10-15%. These figures do not reflectthe true economic importance of the forestrysector in Latvia. The indirect effects of the de-velopment of forestry and forest transportation,power generation, services and other sectorswould be greater than the primary effects. It isestimated that about 60,000 employees areworking in the forestry sector or 4.8% of theeconomically active population.

In developing forest industry sectors the Gov-ernment is faced with several critical strategicchoices concerning the overall structure of the

sectors and the choice of institutional and man-agement frameworks for the required transitionenabling and promoting sustainable and envi-ronmentally sound growth. Sources, mecha-nisms and incentives for financing the imple-mentation of this strategy are a major concern.In Latvia there is a long and widespread tradi-tion in wood processing, including sawmilling.This tradition should be nurtured and exploited.Additionally, relatively small investments arerequired to convert a sawlog into sawn timber.Furthermore there is a large process capacityalready in Latvia. This existing capacity maybe utilized at a relatively low cost in the shortrun as the production capital is already there.As there are a large number of people who havebeen employed by the sawmill and woodprocessing industry, it is of great importance toutilize as many as possible of these people inthe industry also in the future.

Latvia’s forest products are going mainly forexport - about 70% of the production, and thevalue of exported wood and wood products isgrowing continuously (figure 8). One of the rea-sons is the still limited local market. The foreignmarket of timber was characterized by furtherliberalization of the requirements to export. In1997 the value of exported forest industryproducts amounted to 495 million EUR in FOBprices (figure 12). Total value of the foreign ex-change of forest based export reached 532.5 mil-lion EUR, including export of woodpulp, paperand paperboard (37.5 million EUR). Main exportcommodities are sawn timber, plywood, pulp-wood, particleboard and fibreboard. A particularincrease can be seen in sawn timber exports(figure 10), where the UK is the main recipient.

Forest products trade:- Weak domestic market for forest and wood

processing products - main reason is low av-erage income and low level of private long-term investments such as construction.

- Exports accounting for about 70% of all sales.- Completely changed sales direction - from East

to West, mainly EU (figure 13).- Relatively high amount of exported unprocessed

wood (year 1995 - 3.452 million m3 ofroundwood, year 1997 - 2.12 million m3 ofroundwood and 1.031 million tons of fuelwood).

Latvia

- High and rising environmental awareness ofconsumers of Latvian forest products in mainimporting countries as UK, Germany.

It is more effective to export timber which hasbeen subject to a higher degree of processing.Unfortunately, during 1992 - 1997, the main

product of export was roundwood (Figure 9) andin 1995, 3.24 million m3 (47% of the forest har-vesting volume), was exported. 1996 and 1997saw a rapid growth of exported sawn wood (Fig-ure 10). In 1997 roundwood and fuel wood ex-port value was 17.4% of the total wood andwood products export value; sawn wood export

Figure 8. Growth of the value of exported wood and wood products from Latvia (relative valuefor the year 1992 - 100).

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997year

rela

tive

val

ue

of

exp

ort

ed w

oo

d a

nd

wo

od

pro

du

cts

Figure 9. Dynamics of the roundwood export from Latvia.

4

3

2

1

01930 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

mill

ion

cub

0.55 0.511.02

1.95

3.24

1.52.12

Figure 10. Dynamics of the sawn wood export from Latvia.

1930 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 19970

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

0.631

0.051

0.298

0.8240.995

1.45

2.146

Mill

ion

cu

b.m

Latvia

value - 51.8% of the total, plywood export value- 10.7%, and furniture export value - 10.4% ofthe total value.

The average FOB price of wood and wood prod-ucts exported from Latvia in 1997 was EUR86.5/m3. Changes in the average price of woodand wood products exported from Latvia (year1995 - EUR 58.2/ m3, year 1996 - approximatelyEUR 87.5/ m3) are dependent on the amount ofroundwood exported; once more, average pricedynamics show that it is very effective to exporttimber subject to a higher degree of processing.

Latvian forestry is very dependent on the ex-port markets. Sawn timber, particle and

fibreboards are exported mainly to the UnitedKingdom and Germany, which are environmen-tally sensitive market areas (figure 13). The re-sults of a representative survey, carried out bythe Institute of Forest Sector Policy and Eco-nomics, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien(E.Rametsteiner), show, that the respondents inUK and Germany are quite satisfied with thesustainability of forest management inScandinavian countries and in Central Europe,but they are a little or not at all satisfied with thesustainability in the Eastern European countriesand that evaluation is only a little higher thanshown for the tropical countries.

Figure 11. Structure of the wood and wood products export from Latvia (year 1997).

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,52.12

1.2

2.146

0.115 0.111 0.029 0.022 0.005

Rou

ndw

ood

Fue

lwoo

d

Saw

n w

ood

Par

ticle

boaa

rd

Ply

woo

d

Sle

eper

s

Fib

rebo

ard

Ven

eer

Mill

ion

cu

b.m

Figure 12. Structure of the value of wood and wood products exported from Latvia (year 1997).

Mill

ion

EU

R

0

50

100

150

200

300

250256.2

57.7 53.1 51.3

28.614.1

4.6 4.5 2.822.1

Sawn

woo

d

Roun

dwoo

d

Plyw

ood

Furn

iture

Fuelw

ood

Parti

clebo

ard

Fibr

eboa

rds

Slee

pers

Mat

ches

Othe

r woo

dpr

oduc

ts

Latvia

4 Forest and forest related policies

It is quite evident that the process of ForestPolicy development and legislation formationis going along with other processes in Latvia’ssociety and is far from completed. At the sametime Latvia is following the developments inforest policy in Europe trying to harmonize ourprogress with an overall trend towards sustain-able forest management. Major steps have beentaken to adjust forestry legislation and state andpublic organizations to meet the present de-mands in forest sector.

- During the summer of 1996, new Forest Policydiscussions were initiated. The main reason forthis was that the existing regulatory frameworkdid not match with the current stage of socie-ties development, ownership structure and re-lations of interest groups in Latvia’s forest sec-tor, particularly private forest owners and pri-vate forestry companies.

- The main targets for Latvia’s new forest Policydevelopment was to define general goals forforest sector’s development and the means andactivities to achieve these goals.

- The Forest Policy of Latvia was approved bythe Government (April 29, 1998).

4.1 Legislation

- Forestry related legislation has been revised orrenewed in the 90’s and it provides means forpractising sustainable forestry in the country.

- Forestry Act defines the general principles offorest protection and management, as well asthe responsible organizations, parties and mainprocedures of forest protection, utilization andreforestation.

- There are many legal acts issued by the Gov-ernment. Most of them regulate the forest pro-tection system, utilization, procedures used, re-forestation, and forest health maintenance.

- Regulations for all forest owners including theState are equal. There are insufficient regula-tions to implement forest legislation princi-ples in private forest estates. The forest act istoo much instructive as opposed to restrictive.

The basic legal documents regulating forestmanagement and utilization are as follows:- Law on Forest Management and Utilization;- Regulations for Final Felling;- Guidelines for Final Felling;- Regulations for Intermediate Felling;- Guidelines for Intermediate Felling.

The prime intention of these documents, whileensuring the functioning of the forest as an eco-system, is to meet the international commitmentsof Latvia in sustainable forest management, in-crease the yield of timber on a per-unit of woodedarea and achieve a unified procedure in forestmanagement and utilization. The objective is toensure the conservation of forests’ ecologicalvalues and, by promoting their regeneration bytarget or admissible composition stands, achievesustainability-focused management.

Figure 13. Wood and wood products export from Latvia (year 1997).D

enm

ark

% o

f to

tal v

alu

e -

495

mill

ion

EU

R 46

20.6

13.2

2.5 2.41.9 1.9 1.4

UK

Sw

eden

Ger

man

y

Net

herla

nds

Fra

nce

Pol

and

Fin

land

5

0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10.1

Oth

ers

Latvia

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

There are a number of interest organizationsrepresenting actors in the forest sector and par-ties interested in the environmental protectionand development strategies of the sector.

- Forest owners are represented by several smallinitiative groups. These are still developing andcurrently few forest owners are represented.Latvian Forest Owners Association is the in-terest organization for private forest ownersbut its operations are still in an initial phase.This is due to the ongoing land reform andquite suspicious attitudes towards any form ofco-operative action after 50 years of enforcedcollectivization. However, these groups maybecome more important in future.

- Forest industry is represented by Union of For-est Logging Companies, which looks after theinterests of the private logging companies thatcarry out most of the harvesting, and WWF For-est Club. The goal of Club members (5 Latvianlogging companies, who are covering 5% ofthe state annual harvesting volume) is to pro-mote the development of environmentally ap-propriate, economically viable and sociallybeneficial forestry, to improve companies’ per-formance through development and implemen-tation policies. There are two wood process-ing company associations in Latvia - LatvijasKoks (Latvian Timber) as a representative oflarge and medium-size enterprises in the tim-ber industry and Latvian Association of WoodProcessing Entrepreneurs and Exporters,which promotes the interests of small scalemechanical wood industry, with special em-phasis in quality matters and marketing.

- Environmental NGO’s are represented byLatvian Fund for Nature, WWF and LatvianEnvironment Club and a number of smallerorganizations.

4.3 Forest education and research

In the second half of the 19th century Latviaexperienced a rapid growth of economy. Fol-lowing expansion of the timber trade, greaterattention was paid to forestry and timber

processing. Therefore, a need for qualified spe-cialists was created. The earliest opportunitiesfor obtaining professional education in forestryin present-day Latvia date back to 1835, whena forestry class was opened at the Jelgava Clas-sical School, where A.Bode worked as a teacher.The first ever Baltic School for forest rangerswas started in 1898 in Vijciems, in the North ofLatvia, and continued until 1929. Between 1929and 1957 there were a number of Forest Schoolsin Latvia (Raiskums, Cirava, Vilaka, Lubana)training forest rangers, senior rangers, timberinspectors, assistants of tractor operators, andpartly also forest technicians to work in the ca-pacity of heads of forest districts. Right nowthere is only one specialized school (Ranka)training the specialists of the elementary levelof qualification in forestry. There is an urgentneed for well-qualified forest workers well-versed in the basics of both forest biology andtechnologies, including the skills to operate for-est machinery. An annual demand for forestworkers of high professional standards is esti-mated to amount to 150-200 persons at least. Atthe moment, there are possibilities to take somecourses in forestry in the regional agriculturalschools; enrolment conditions in these schoolsrequire a compulsory 9-year education. Thetraining of workers in furniture joinery and car-pentry is quite adequate - there are some 15vocational secondary schools in this field, dis-tributed all over the country. At present, the mid-career training of forest workers and workers ofthe wood processing industry (1 to 12 week-long courses) takes place at the Ogre ForestTraining and Education Centre, catering for theneeds of forestry sector.

Medium-level educational establishments (sec-ondary technical schools - colleges of forestry)were started in the post War period. Until 1958,there were two technical colleges of forestry inLatvia, one in Ogre (oriented to wood process-ing), the other in Aizupe (forestry oriented). Atpresent there is only one technical college offorestry in Ogre. The College is training me-dium-level specialists in forestry and forest op-eration. The medium-level process techniciansin wood processing are trained at the Riga StateTechnical College (Technicum). The qualifica-tion level of graduates in the above fields is be-

Latvia

lieved to be adequate. The improvements neededrefer mainly to practical training, process engi-neering and economic subjects.

Specialists with a university level of qualifica-tion in forestry are trained at the Forest Facultyof the Latvia University of Agriculture (LUA).In Latvia higher agricultural and forestry edu-cation started to develop in the middle of theprevious century in the Riga PolytechnicalSchool founded in 1863. During the years ofthe first independent Latvian State there was aFaculty of Agriculture and Forestry at LatviaUniversity (1919-1939). In 1939, on the basisof that Faculty, the Jelgava Agricultural Acad-emy was founded, consisting of two independ-ent faculties - that of Agriculture and Forestry.In 1944 the academy was renamed as the LatviaAcademy of Agriculture. Its present status, asthe Latvia University of Agriculture (LUA) hasbeen since 1991.

The training of university-level specialists in for-estry can be traced back to 1920, when the For-estry Department of the Faculty of Agricultureand Forestry of the Latvia Higher School (a uni-versity since 1921) was established. The pro-grams of forest engineering and wood process-ing have existed at the Forest Faculty since 1949.Presently, there are three study programs at theForest faculty at undergraduate level - Forestry(annual enrollment for full-time studies 25-30students and for part time studies 50-75 students,too), Forest Engineering or Logging (25 full-timestudents) and Wood Processing (50-60 full timestudents and 50-75 part-time students). At gradu-ate level (M.Sc. studies) the program in ForestEconomics and Policy is offered, also. The Ph.D.studies in forestry and wood processing are or-ganised at the LUA, also.

Forest science in Latvia was drawn from boththe German and Russian traditions, as in the fieldof forestry until the post World War I period,there were no higher educational establishmentsin the Baltics. The Handbook of Forestry inVidzeme by A.Leviss published in 1814 maybe regarded as the first manual in silviculture.Regular research work in the field of forestrymay be said to have started in 1867 when theBaltic Foresters’ Society was founded. Eizens

Ostvalds could be mentioned as one of the mosteminent foresters and forest scientists of Latvia,who was the first to publish research data sup-porting forest land drainage as well as workedout the theory of ground rent as applied to for-estry. The first research organization, the LatvianForest Research Station, was set up in 1928,headed by the prominent Latvian scholar KrissMelderis (1889-1942). The leading researcherswere dealing with the most topical problems ofpractical forestry of that period: reforestationof sandy and low-fertility sites, promotion ofnatural forest regeneration, thinning, as well asintroduction of exotic tree species and rationalmethods of timber harvesting.

A new period in the development of forestry andforest science in Latvia started after the incor-poration of Latvia into the Soviet Union in 1940.The establishment of the Latvian Academy ofSciences in 1946 was set up alongside the or-ganization of the Institute of Forestry Problems.Since 1953, with the Forest Research Station“Kalsnava” set up at Jaunkalsnava (the Madonaregion in the central upland part of Latvia), theInstitute, namely its silvicultural divisions, hasa permanent research base. In 1963, as a resultof the restructuring of the Academy of Science,a number of institutes, mainly those oriented toapplied research, were transferred under theadministration of the respective branch ofeconomy. On the basis of wood chemistry labo-ratories the Institute of Wood Chemistry wasfounded; in 1966 it was turned into a centre forcoordinating research activities all over the So-viet Union in the field of wood chemistry andrelated branches. The forestry-orientated divi-sions as well as the Forest Research Station“Kalsnava” were merged to form the LatvianResearch Institute of Forestry Problems“Silava”.

After the regaining of independence by Latviain 1991, along with the fundamental changes inthe political and economic life of the country, aturn to privatization and market economy brokedown the organizational framework of sciencecreated by socialism. At present the LatvianForestry Research Institute “Silava” and theForest Faculty of the LUA still remains at thehub of research and development work in the

Latvia

forestry sector, regardless of the difficult situa-tion, of a limited material and technical base.Unfortunately, Latvia, a country rich in forestresources, experienced the collapse of a numberof institutions within the organizational set-upof the forestry sector, with the scope of researchreduced accordingly. However, forest sciencewas successful enough to win legal recognition.The brainpower within this branch of scienceamounts to 110 Dr. of science and 15 personsconferred to the title of Dr. Habilitus.

In the course of time Latvia’s forest science has,in all the principal spheres of research, shapedstanding traditions of its own:

4.3.1 forest environment and silviculture

The forest typology, in line with local; naturaland climatic conditions, is the cornerstone ofsilviculture in Latvia. The conclusions inferredin the studies on forest typology and hydrologyenable us to evaluate forest ecosystems as be-ing self-regulatory. In the domain of forest en-vironment and silviculture, the problems iden-tified and dealt with are as follows: structuralmodel for the prospective forests of Latvia,hydrotechnical amelioration of forest lands andtheir appropriate management, ecologicallysound and economically feasible fertilization offorest stands, forest vitality and the ground veg-etation as bioindicator, game management as apart and parcel of forest management;

4.3.2 forest plants and forest protection

Latvia’s forests are made up predominantly ofindigenous tree species. In the sphere of foresttree species and forest protection, the problemsidentified and studied are as follows: explora-tion and protection of the indigenous forest treegene pool, seed production of pine and spruce,selection of larch species for perspective culti-vation in Latvia, cultivating forest tree varie-ties, a model for natural forest regeneration, treenursery technologies, soil microflora andagrochemical characteristics of non-forest landin connection with prospective afforestation ofabandoned farmlands, vegetative and

microclonal propagation of trees, phytopatho-logical and entomological inspection of forestsand phermone application in pest control, dy-namics of forest pests and forecasts of outbursts,the problems of forest monitoring;

4.3.3 forest operations and techniques

In spite of tough command policies concerningthe mechanization of forest operations in theformer Soviet Union, the Latvian scientists deal-ing with these issues, nevertheless, managed todevelop and implement technologies and ma-chinery suitable for Latvian conditions, includ-ing the methods of rational evaluation of timberfelled by applying either tree-length or assort-ment technology. In the sphere of forest opera-tions and machinery, the following problems areunder investigation: diverse modern methods intimber harvesting, their evaluation and testing;operational availability and feasibility of diversetype of forest machinery, evaluation of the testresults in terms of silvicultural constraints, im-pact of the machine and the related technologyon stand performance in the future; mechaniza-tion of operations for stimulating the naturalregeneration under conditions prevailing inLatvia; operating efficiency of different groupsof forest workers and the methods for protect-ing and improving their status of health;

4.3.4 forest inventory, growth, yield,quantitative and management sciences

Forest management in Latvia was completedalready before World War II. Now it is repeatedon a regular basis by specialists of the LatvianForest Inventory Institute. The inventory workresulted in the construction of a forest manage-ment plan, making provisions for thinnings, fi-nal felling and regeneration. The planning ofgame management is done along with the in-ventory work by a separate group of experts. Inforest inventory and growth and yield studiesthe following problems are dealt with: shapingthe forest stands and a follow-up of their courseof growth, forest inventory and forest manage-ment, evaluation of feed resources;

Latvia

4.3.5 forest products

Wood processing and conversion in a variety ofways has so far been investigated by a numberof organizations (the LUA, the Riga TechnicalUniversity, the one-time Research and Produc-tion Association “Gauja” as well as by the Insti-tute “Silava” and the Institute of Wood chemis-try). Developments of the post war period gaverebirth to wood chemistry in Latvia, with themain achievements as follows: the Riga methodin wood hydrolysis, preservation of wood,delignification of wood, utilization ofpentosanes, structure and utilization of lignin,etc. In the sphere of forest products utilizationthe following problems are identified and dealtwith: evaluation of wood and timber quality,seasoning of wood, chemical composition of treefoliage and bark, utilization opportunities ofplant protection agents (fungicides and insecti-cides) derived from tree biomass components,multicomponent antioxidant protective paintsand the related technologies to prevent decayof wood; delignification, cellulose chemistry,wood chemistry;

4.3.6 social, economic information andpolicy science

The first studies of forest economics and policyproblems were carried out by Prof.E.Ostwald(Theory of Forest Land Rent) and Doc.K.Teikmanis (late 20s). Unfortunately, afterLatvia was occupied by the Soviet Union, anyresearch in forest economics and policy ceased,and it was only in 1967 when the Laboratory ofForest Economics was set up in the frameworkof the Institute “Silava”. The research of thatperiod had a completely different orientation,mainly in line with the demands of a centrallyplanned economy: working out norms, economicvalidation of new projects, forecasts of the for-estry complex etc. After 1990 a reorientation ineconomic studies had to be undertaken with a50-year long gap between the situation as of nowand the forest economics as existed in the 30s.The content and main directions of the researchprojects in forest economics and policy nowmaking headway are as follows: place and role

of the forestry complex in the country’s macr-oeconomics, developing a flexible forest policyin Latvia and forestry legislation; forest andenvironment; updating the problems of foresteconomics typical for Latvia and developing therelated system of economic studies for the for-est sector; land use and forestry, socio-economicand management studies of private forestry; tim-ber processing and conversion, marketing offorest products, etc.

The given problems, in compliance with the in-ternational commitments Latvia has undertaken,require both fundamental and applied research.In dealing with the research problems identi-fied, the Latvian forestry scientific communityis looking forward to a mutually advantageouscooperation on an international scale.

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges in the country

5.1 Role of the State in the coming decades

Distribution of the State functions among dif-ferent institutions where appropriate from a pro-fessional and economic point of view:- Separation of the main functions - policy de-

velopment, law enforcement and owner func-tion in different institutions (the institutionalframework is in development).

- Improving the awareness and skills of the pri-vate forest owners to manage their forests in asustainable way, etc.

The State’s role in ensuring Sustainable Forestmanagement is to create, by the instruments atits disposal, favourable conditions for achiev-ing the common goals of the Forest Policy, i.e.the integrated development of the ecological,economic and social functions of the forest. Inthe forest sector, the State performs four basicfunctions:

I Policy and normative function:- Formulation of the Forest Policy and its coor-

dination with other policies.- Development of legal (normative) means to

implement the Forest Policy.

Latvia

- Involvement of interest groups in the develop-ment of the Forest Policy and legal means.

II Law enforcement and supervision:Developing an institutional system to ensure anequal environment for all forest owners and ac-tors in the forest sector while implementing theForest Policy and its legal means, including thecontrol of Law observance in all the forest es-tates irrespective of their ownership status.

III Management of the state owned forests:Implementation of the state forest managementsystem to ensure:- the development and stability of ecological and

social values of state forest and to provide in-come (if possible) to the owner - the state;

- create a stable business climate in state forestswhere business is possible in compliance withthe principles of Sustainable Forest Management.

IV Support functions:- Academic and professional education, forest

research.- National forest inventory and management

planning- Extension- Forest fire control- Control of forest reproductive material

Latvia

Addresses of organizations related to forestry in Latvia

Ministry of Agriculture, Forest Department, 13.Janvara iela 14, Riga, LV-1932, Latvia; tel.: +3717228873; fax.: +371 7211176

State Forest Service, 13.Janvara iela 14, Riga, LV-1932, Latvia; tel.: +371 7226600; fax.: +3717211176

Latvian Foresters Society, Kristapa iela 30, Riga, LV-1046, Latvia; tel.: +371 7611874Latvian Trade Union of Forest Workers, Bruninieku iela 29/31, Riga, LV-1113, Latvia; tel.: +371

7272818; fax.: +371 2276720Latvian Forest Owners Association, Upes prospekts 16, Ogre, LV-5001, Latvia; tel.: +371 5044388;

fax.: +371 5047270Latvian Union of Forest Logging Companies, Meistaru iela 10, Riga, LV-1050, Latvia; tel.: +371

7216799; fax.: +371 7220238Latvian Association of Wood Processing Enterprises “Latvijas Koks”, Skaistkalnes iela 1, Riga,

LV-1004, Latvia; tel.: +371 7228374; fax.: +371 7860268Latvian Association of Wood Processing Enterpreneurs and Exporters, Brivibas iela 91, Riga, LV-

1001, Latvia; tel.: +371 2372876; fax.: +371 7311075Association of Latvia Wood Products Quality Inspectors, Dzerbenes iela 27, Riga, LV-1006, Latvia;

tel.: +371 2558024Latvian Fund for Nature, Kronvalda bulv.4, Riga, LV-1842, Latvia; tel.+371 7322852; fax.: +371

7830291WWF Latvia, Kr.Barona iela 64, Riga, LV-1011, Latvia; tel.: +371 7311488; fax.: +371 7311939Latvian Ornithological Society, P.O.Box 1010, Riga, LV-1050, Latvia; tel.and fax.: +371 7221580Forest Faculty, Latvia University of Agriculture, Akademijas iela 11, Jelgava, LV-3001, Latvia;

tel.and fax.: +371 3021619Latvian State Forestry Research Institute “Silava”, Rigas iela 111, Salaspils, LV-2169, Latvia; tel.:

+371 2942555; fax.: +371 7901359Latvia Forest Inventory Institute, Rigas iela 113, Salaspils, LV-2169, Latvia; tel.: +371 2942200;

fax.: +371 2942388Latvian State Institute of Wood Chemistry, Dzerbenes iela 27, Riga, LV-1006, Latvia; tel.: +371

7553063; fax.: +371 7310135

Used references

Baumanis I., and Lipins L. 1995. Forest science in Latvia. Baltic Forestry, Vol.1,No.1, pp.22-29.Forest The Policy of Latvia. State Forest Service, Riga, 1998. (translation into English).Forest Statistics of Latvia, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998. State Forest Service, Riga.Jansons J. 1997. The dynamics of forest ground cover vegetation following drainage. Baltic

Forestry, Vol.3,No.2, pp.26-34.Konstantinova I. 1998. The role of forest rangers in the Latvian state forest sector. The Finnish

Forest Research Institute, Research papers 704, pp.137-144. Helsinki.Laivins M. 1997. Environmental changes related dynamics of the number of sites of rare

indigenous and exotic plant species in Latvia. Baltic Forestry, Vol.3, No.2, pp.9-17.Martikainen P., Bumane A., Bumanis K., and Gaizutis A. 1996. Competitive strategies of the Baltic

sawmill industry. Baltic Forestry, Vol.2, No.2, pp.16-22.Ozols A. 1995. The forest and forestry in Latvia. Baltic Forestry, Vol.1, No.1, pp.17-21.Ozols A., and Tuherm H. 1998. Latvian Forest Policy in the transitional stage of economy: role of

the State // EFI Proceedings No.21, pp.121-126. Joensuu.Silamikele I. 1997. State regulations of non-timber forest management in Latvia // EFI Proceedings

Latvia

No.13, pp.143-147. Joensuu.Silamikele I. 1998. Private forestry as an employment guarantee in countryside of Latvia //The

Finnish Forest Research Institute, Research papers 704, pp.131-136. Helsinki.Tuherm H. 1995. Higher education system in forest economics in Latvia // Report of FAO/WAU workshop. Rome: FAO, pp.127-133.Tuherm H. 1996. Forest Policy in Latvia. Integrating environmental values into forest planning -

Baltic and Nordic perspectives// EFI Proceedings No.13, pp.35-42. Joensuu.Tuherm H. 1997. Forest Policy, policy research and studies in Latvia // Scandinavian Forest

Economics No.36, pp.242-253. Joensuu.Tuherm H., Hrols J., Daugavietis M., Lipins L., and Zalitis P. 1997. Forest reproduction and

complex utilization of wood in Latvia // International Scientific Conference “Forest - Wood- Environment ‘ 97”: Proceedings. - Zvolen: TU print, pp.27-31.

Tuherm H., and Narkevica S. 1997. Marketing studies of wood based panels in a transitional stageof Latvian economy: strategies, structures and functions // International Scientific Conference“Business and Economic Development in Central and Eastern Europe and its Implication forthe Economic Integration of the CEEC in a Wider Europe”: Proceedings. Brno: PC-DIR, Ltd.,Publish House, pp.391-396.

Tuherm H. 1998. Development process of forest management certification in Latvia // 3rd IUFROSymposium “Wood Structure and Properties’98”: Proceedings. – Zvolen: Arbora Publishers,pp.101-104.

Vilkriste L. 1997. Socio-economic aspects of the development of private forest sector in Latvia //EFI Proceedings No.13, pp.149-152.

Vilkriste L. 1998. Sustainability and private forestry in Latvia // The Finnish Forest ResearchInstitute, Research papers 704, pp.123-130. Helsinki.

Zalitis P. 1996. Amelioration and ecological diversity of forests in Latvia. Baltic Forestry, Vol.2,No.1, pp.21-26.

Zalitis P. 1996. Forest hydrological parameters as a function of stand structure meteorologicalconditions. Baltic Forestry, Vol.2, No.2, pp.2-8.

Zhurinsh A. 1997. A feasibility to utilise wood of low-value deciduous species in charcoal production.Baltic Forestry, Vol.3, No.2, pp.53-57.

The Netherlands

1 The Country

1.1 Natural Conditions

The Netherlands are situated in the Northwestcorner of the European main land, between50.45o and 53.32o Northern latitude and 3.19o

and 7.11o Eastern longitude. Its area is about36.000 km2, or 41.000 km2 if the IJsselmeer andWaddensea, both under water, are included. Itsheight ranges from 322 m above to -6 m belowsea level. About 40 % of the Netherlands wouldbe under water if the Dutch had not taken pro-tective measurements, i.e. had not built dikes.

1.1.1 Geology

The land surface consists mainly of quaternarydeposits on a tertiary basis. The latter lies around600 m deep in the Northwest, and comes to thesurface in the East and South of the Netherlands.The older quaternary deposits (Pleistocene) arepartly marine; by rivers Rhine and Meuse in theEastern part, by the sea in the coastal region.During the middle and late Pleistocene glacialsthese first sediments were pushed into ridges,which still are a striking feature of this land-scape. Afterwards during the cold period in thelate Pleistocene aeolic sediments covered largeareas with cover sand and, only in the South,with loess.

In the Western and Northern part of the Nether-lands the Pleistocene deposits are covered byHolocenic material, mainly clay. Due to a sink-ing basin and rising of the sea level, the sea re-peatedly encroached behind the dunes wherepeat was formed afterwards. Of course alongthe rivers in the areas where Pleistocene

sediments are still on the surface, Holocene clayhas been deposited.

1.1.2 Climate

The climate of the Netherlands is a Cf climateaccording to Köppen; a humid temperate andmild climate, owing to the proximity of the NorthSea and the warm Gulf Stream. The mean an-nual temperature varies from 9.5o C to 11.2o C,depending on the place. Severe cold and severeheat are rare, but night frost may occur as lateas May/June and can cause severe damage. Onaverage about 805 mm of rain falls each year,with a relatively dry period in February - Mayand a wet period in July - November. A precipi-tation deficit in summer and a residue in winterresults, however, in an annual precipitation resi-due. The prevailing winds are Southwest andWest. Gales occur once per decade.

Regional differences in climate, although slight,are important to plant growth. In a flat countrydifferences in altitude have only minor influ-ences, although the effect of the coastal dunesand the inland hills is notable. The proximity ofthe sea is of more importance and differencesbetween a more maritime and a more continen-tal climate are felt within the narrow strip ofland the Netherlands is (150 km between thebeach and the border with Germany).

1.1.3 Soils

Depending on its geological origin, the higherPleistocene areas have sandy soils, with a lownutrient and water availability. Due to a precipi-tation excess, these soils are mainly brownpodzolic soils, quite often impoverished by man

The Netherlands

Authors:Pieter Schmidt, Esther Kuiler, Freerk Wiersum & Bram FiliusSub-department of ForestryWageningen Agricultural UniversityP.O.Box 342, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands

The Netherlands

(heather!). Most older (i.e. established beforethe second half of this century) forests in theNetherlands are growing on this kind of soils.Good river clay soils occur along the rivers andare mainly used for animal husbandry. Marineclay soils along the coast and peat soils in thesame regions are used for agriculture and ani-mal husbandry.

1.1.4 Natural vegetation

According to Noirfalise (1987), the Netherlandsare covered by the following vegetation types/ecological zones:- Coastal dunes in a small band along the North

Sea;- Maritime polders in a broader band east of

these coastal dunes;- Fresh-water marshes in a smaller and shorter

band, east of the middle and northern part ofmaritime polders;

- Fluvial plains along the big rivers;- A mixture of Oak-Birch forest of the North

Sea Plane and Subatlantic Oak-Beech forestsouth of these big rivers;

- A mixture of Oak-Birch forest of the NorthSea Plane and Subatlantic Oak-Beech forestin the middle part of the Netherlands

- A mixture of humid Oak-Beech forest of theNorth Sea Plane (humid sand) and SubatlanticOak-Beech forest in the eastern part;

- Raised bogs in the small peaty areas on thePleistocene deposits.

1.1.5 Man-made landscape

A special characteristic of the Netherlands is thatmost of its landscape is man made. It was alreadymentioned that about half of the Netherlands isbelow sea level and would be inundated withoutprotective dikes. Polders were recovered fromthe sea already during the Middle Ages, andduring the 17th century large lakes behind thedunes were reclaimed and turned into agriculturalland. The same was done before and after theWorld War II in the IJsselmeer. In the 19th and20th century peat was used as fuel at a large scale:peat was dug and removed and the remaining landused for agriculture. Large areas of drifting sands

(due to overexploitation) and heath lands havebeen put into use through afforestation by privatelandowners and by the state. An undisturbed soilprofile is rare in the Netherlands.

1.1.6 Land use types

The Netherlands is a densely populated country(Chapter 1.2.1) and the lack of space makes thatthe countryside is almost permanently underpressure. People wish to live, work and recreatethere. Also economic production and transpor-tation have to take place. In addition, valuablenature and landscape has to be guarded for futuregenerations. Not surprisingly, one of the mostimportant issue in the Netherlands is to find afitting balance between the different functionsof the countryside (Ministerie LNV, 1998).

Agriculture has traditionally been the major typeof land use in the Netherlands. During the 20thcentury its land cover increased from 64% in1900 to 73 % around 1980 (Table 1). However,since 1980 its importance declined somewhat.During the same period the forest cover in-creased, as did - but more rapidly - the area cov-ered by houses, towns, industrial plants etc.Other types of land uses, connected to thesocietal developments (infrastructure, air ports,rubbish dumps, etc.), increased as quickly. Thesedevelopments were at the expenses of more natu-ral areas like, heather and peat moors, water (newpolders !), which declined in this period fromnearly 25 % to a paltry 6 %. At present thisdecline has stopped and new efforts areundertaken to enlarge forest and nature areas.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Population

With an area of 4.15 mln ha the Netherlandsbelong to the smaller West European countries,such as Denmark and Belgium. With 15.65 mlninhabitants and a population density of 460 per-sons per km2 it is one of the most densely popu-lated countries in the world. The population isstill growing with 6.8%, amongst others due toimmigration. The highest concentration of in-

The Netherlands

habitants is in the ‘Randstad’ in the western partof the country bordered by the cities of Amster-dam, Haarlem, The Hague, Rotterdam andUtrecht. The Netherlands is traditionally openfor foreigners and the international populationcontains ethnic groups from different parts ofthe world, with main groups from North Afri-can, Indonesian, Surinam and Antillan origin.

1.2.2 Political structure

The Kingdom of the Netherlands is a constitu-tional monarchy. The head of the kingdom is HerMajesty Queen Beatrix. For a governmental struc-ture the Netherlands use the parliamental democ-racy. The parliament has two ‘Chambers’: the‘Tweede Kamer’ (150 members) is directlyelected by the people and the ‘Eerste Kamer’ isindirectly elected by the Provincial Councils.There are three governmental levels: the State,the 12 Provinces and around 600 Municipalities.

The citizens of the Netherlands are politicallyactive. They are not only active on the level ofthe municipality, but also on the state level thereare many small parties in the Netherlands. Atthis moment (1999) the land is governed by a‘purple’ coalition of three parties with a social-democratic, liberal, and conservative back-ground. Another characteristic of the politicalinvolvement of many Dutch citizens is the highdegree of organisation: almost every opinion orpolicy issue is supported by a finely detailednetwork of associations and societies acting ei-ther as lobby groups or being involved with theimplementation of specific policies.

1.2.3 Economy

The Gross National Product of 304 milliardECU or 1,960 ECU per head of the population(1996) makes the Netherlands one of the pros-perous countries in the world. The economy isvery internationally oriented, with Rotterdam asthe largest harbour in the world and a centraldistribution point for the mainland and Schipholas a large international airport. The services sec-tor is the most important, income and job gen-erating economic sector before industry andagriculture. The agricultural sector employs lessthan 5% of the population, but makes up for 10%of the international trade of the EU in agricul-ture products and nutrition (Ministerie LNV,1998). The contribution of forestry to the GNPis only minor (Chapter 3).

1.2.4 Societal changes

After the second World War the main social pre-occupation in the Netherlands was with the re-building of the productive economic structure.Since the early 1950s this emphasis has gradu-ally been augmented by several other socialconcerns. Several major societal changes havetaken place, i.e- Population growth and urbanization;- Growing amount of leisure time and increased

mobility resulting in growing importance ofrecreation and tourism;

- Development of increased environmental con-sciousness coupled with increased apprecia-tion of nature;

Land use 1900 1950 1980 1990Forest 8.2 7.6 9.0 9.7Heather/peat moor 13.1 3.4 1.4 1.3Moor, beachI, land outside dikes 5.0 3.7 2.9 2.6Water 6.6 3.4 2.2 2.4Agricultural land 63.7 73.1 72.9 70.8Built-on area’s 1.6 2.9 5.9 7.5OtherII 1.8 5.9 5.7 5.7

Table 1. Distribution of different forms of land use in the Netherlands in the 20th century

I) including dunes, moving sand etc.II) including open water, infrastructure, recreation areas, airports, rubbish dumps, etc.Source: Dijkstra, 1997

The Netherlands

- Increased democratic decision making anddecentralisation of governmental action.

The consequences of these changes for forestrywill be discussed in Chapter 5.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Definitions

According to the fourth Forest Statistics (CBS,1985) forest (bos) is a land area covered withtrees or bushes with an area of at least 0.5 haand a minimum width of 30 m (Anonymous1995). Two classes are distinguished: closedforest (> 60 % canopy cover) and open forest(< 60 % canopy cover). Besides forests, roadsite plantations (mainly a single line of trees,sometimes two or more) play an important role.Although forests are officially defined as hav-ing a minimum area of 0.5 ha, for practical policypurposes their minimum size is considered as 5ha. For instance, all forest above 5 ha must beregistered with the Forestry board. Forest(plot)sbetween 0.5 and 5 ha comprise about 17% ofthe Dutch forest area and they fulfil importantlandscape functions, but they are hardly con-sidered in the official forestry policies.

Forestry (bosbouw) is defined as all resolutehuman activities aimed at sustainable fulfilmentof all forest functions for (different groups in)the society.

Forest management is defined as the prepara-tion, taking and execution and implementationof decisions including the evaluation of the re-sults, regarding use and preservation of foreststo achieve the objectives of the owner.

Silviculture can be defined as the resolute ma-nipulating of forests based on a coherent set of- on ecological knowledge based - measures aim-ing at a fulfilment of given functions in a sus-tainable way.

2.2 Forest resources and their uses

2.2.1 Forest history

Around 2000 years ago, the Netherlands werenearly completely covered by forests, only toowet (lakes, marshes) and too dry sites (dune tops)were not covered by forests. Around that timethe local population started shifting cultivation,diminishing the forested area. Since then, withchanging intensity forests were destroyed by(over)exploitation until at the start of the 19thcentury only about 2 % (70 000 ha) of the landarea was still covered by forests. These weremainly situated on the poorer soils in the east-ern part of the country, and - in fewer cases - onbetter soils around country houses for the nobleand or rich people. Since then first private land-owners (first half of the 19th century), later alsothe state (second half of the century) afforestedlarger areas of land. Mostly the so-called waste-lands situated on the poorer soils were used forthis afforestation. During the 20th century af-forestation continued, first to procure employ-ment, later as part of the landscaping of the newpolders. The growing importance attributed toforests is well-illustrated by the afforestationpolicy in the new IJsselmeer-polders (table 2).In the oldest of these polders (Wieringermeer,Noordoostpolder) only an small percentage ofthe area was allotted to forestry, this concernedsoils not suitable for agriculture. This policychanged around 1975, and in the more recentlyestablished Flevoland polders a larger area ofland was afforested, also on the better soils. Thischange reflects the gradual decline of the im-portance of agriculture which occurred in the1970s. As a result since that time also agricul-tural lands became available for afforestationunder the set-aside arrangements. Moreover,increased attention is also given to establish newforests in the densely populated western part ofthe Netherlands as a means to provide recrea-tion opportunities for the urban people. As aresult of all these developments the forest coverincreased from 270 000 ha in 1900 to 340 000ha in 1993. At the same time nature areas de-creased rapidly from 620 000 ha in 1900 to 220000 ha in 1950 and more slowly to 140 000 hain 1993 (figure 1).

The Netherlands

2.2.2 Present forest cover

According to the most up to date, i.e. fourth,Forest Statistics, published in 1985 (CBS, 1985),The Netherlands has 334 026 ha of forests; thismeans that forests cover 9.8% of the land area.The average area of forest per caput is only 235m2. The distribution over the Netherlands isunequal (figure 2), in the more densely popu-lated provinces in the Western part of the coun-try (Holland1) and the agricultural provinces inthe North and Southwest forest cover is about 1to 4 % with less than 100 m2 of forest per in-habitant, in the other provinces forest coverranges between 10 and 20 % and between 200and 1300 (Flevoland) m2 per inhabitant.

The government aims to expand the area of for-est still further to 400,000 ha in 2020. This ex-

pansion policy focuses on establishing new for-ests on low-value agricultural lands which aretaken out of production (which are situatedmostly in the northern part of the country) andon creating forest near areas with a high popu-lation density, like the ‘Randstad’, where therecreational function will be most eminent. Inaddition, these forests act as landscape buffersagainst unplanned extension of urban areas(Ministerie LNV, 1993).

2.2.3 Forest ownership

In the Netherlands forest ownership is ratherdiverse. Forests are owned either by privateowners (41 %), the state (31%), local authori-ties and other public bodies (16%) and natureconservation organisations (11%).

Polder Establishment Forest & nature Agriculture Towns & infra-structureWieringermeer 1930-1940 3 87 10Noordoostpolder 1942-1962 5 87 8Oost Flevoland 1957-1980 11 75 14Zuid Flevoland 1968-1995 35 48 17

Table 2. Year of establishment and land use of IJsselmeerpolders.

Source: Reyer Knol, pers. comm

Figure 1. The development of the area forest and nature in the Netherlands between 1900 and 2000.Source: van Duuren and Lengkeek, 1997.

1 Holland is derived from Holtland, meaning wooded land.

0

200

400

600

800

ha

x 10

00

1910 1930 1950 1970 1989 1993 19971920 1940 1960 19801900

Bos

Natuurlijk terrein

Bos en Natuurlijk terrein

The Netherlands

At present almost 50% of all Dutch forests arepublicly owned. Most of these public forests(62%) are owned by the state, about 30% bymunicipalities, and the remainder by provincesand public organisations such as water supplycompanies. Around 1940 the areas of forestsowned by municipalities and the state were moreor less equal, but since that time the state forestarea has increased considerably (table 3). Thisreflects the opinion which prevailed during mostof the 20th century, that due to the long produc-tion cycles as well as the multiple functions offorests of which many cannot be financially re-warded through market mechanisms, the stateholds a major responsibility to maintain forests.Thus, during much of the 20th century, the statehas taken over many of the private forests beingsold by their owners. The State Forest Serviceis in charge of managing these forests.

The area of non-public forests is owned eitherprivately or by nature conservation organisa-tions. In contrast to the relatively large tracts of

state owned forest, the forest plots owned byprivate persons are characterized by their smallsize. About 45% of the private forests are be-tween 0.5 - 5 ha in size; only 18 private ownershave a forest area of over 500 ha. For most pri-vate owners forestry is not their main means oflivelihood, rather forests are kept as part of es-tates, as ancestral lands, or outdoor recreationarea for the family. Especially for small privatelandowners the motives to maintain forests aremostly amenity and conservation reasons ratherthan productive and financial reasons. Conse-quently, forest owners tend to be rather individu-alistic and many are not professionally orientedat forestry.

The financial results of private forest enterpriseswere mostly negative during the last decades.Notwithstanding the fact that for many forestowners financial gains from forestry are not themajor motive for maintaining forests, the con-tinuous financial losses in maintaining forestsand the relatively high inheritance tax to be paid

Figure 2. Forest in the Netherlands.Source: Anonymous 1995

The Netherlands

after the death of an owner have forced severalprivate forest owners to sell their forests. Con-sequently, during the last fifty years the area ofprivate forest ownership has decreased by 25%.Up till the 1970s these forests were mainlybought by the state. But since that time forestshave increasingly also been bought by natureconservation organizations, in many cases withfinancial support of the government. Recentlyprivate forestry is again increasing somewhat,especially due to the afforestation of farm lands.

Traditionally, forest managers exercised a rela-tively strong influence on forestry policy, espe-cially due to the fact that the State Forest Serv-ice originally had a triple role: managing stateforests, giving extension to private forest own-ers, and forest policy development and imple-mentation. In 1988 this service became a semi-autonomous forest management agency withoutresponsibility for forestry extension and policydevelopment. With respect to the owners of non-public forests the nature conservation organisa-tions have a much stronger political profile thanthe private forest owners.

2.2.4 Forest functions

In the beginning of this century forests served alimited number of functions: wood production,stabilisation of sand dunes and soil improve-ment, and (for a small group of wealthy estateowners) prestige and hunting. Since the 1950sforest functions have gradually diversified andat present the forests have a multiplicity of func-tions for Dutch society (Van Vliet, 1993;

Oosterveld, 1997). The 1984 Long-term For-estry Plan officially recognizes the followingfunctions: outdoor recreation, timber produc-tion, natural values and landscape quality; in the1993 Forest Policy Plan environmental functionswere added.

Obviously, wood production is one of the func-tions of the Dutch forests. Annually around 1.3million m3 of wood is harvested. About 50 thou-sand people are employed in forestry and woodproduction and processing (including that ofimported wood); the annual value of wood tradeand processing is approximately Dfl 14 billion(Schouten, 1995). However, this wood produc-tion function is not considered as being the mostimportant function. This is caused by the factthat the local wood production supplies only 7%of the domestic wood consumption, with theremainder being imported from other European(mostly Scandinavian) and tropical countries.Moreover, with the Netherlands being urban-ised about 85% (Wiersum and van Vliet, 1998ex OECD) the recreational and nature functionsof the forest are highly valued. Annually about200 million visits to forests are made; the aver-age number of visits is 600 persons/ha/year, butthis number may increase to 10,000 /ha/year forthe most intensively visited forests. And over 1million persons are a member of the Dutch na-ture conservation organisations; these ownaround 11% of the forests. The inhabitants havea profound impact on the nature conservationand forestry policy through these NGO’s.

Also the environmental functions of forests areincreasingly acknowledged and sometimes also

Table 3. Forest ownership in 1983 and 1997Owner 1980-1983(I) 1997(II )

ha ha numberState 104 323 101 818 133Provinces 2 472 1 742 12Municipalities 50 258 43 812 326Other public owners 2 345 5 717 53Nature conservation agencies 37 486 55 489 164Private owners 136 385 51 314 1311Total 334 026 260 092 1999I) Inclusive area’s < 5 ha. Source CBS, 1985, Anonymous, 1995.II) Exclusive area’s < 5 ha. Source Bosschap 1998, exclusive area’s < 5 ha.

The Netherlands

financially rewarded. For instance, recently elec-tricity companies are occasionally funding af-forestation as a means to sequester carbon-di-oxide. Similarly, a water supply company hasstarted a trial to compensate forest owners forswitching from coniferous to deciduous speciesin order to decrease evaporation and thus to re-duce parching (Filius & Roosenschoon, 1998).Another function of increasing importance is theimprovement of the living environment of hous-ing areas. In some areas, the vicinity of forestsadds up to 10% to the value of real estate prop-erty, amounting to billions of guilders in total.

The multiple functions of forests are usuallyreflected in forest management. Nonetheless,due to the diversity in forest owners, each hav-ing its own specific objectives for maintainingforests (Chapter 2.2.3), there exist quite somevariation in the degree to which specific forestareas fulfil specific forest functions. Table 4 il-lustrates this with regards to the main manage-ment function as reported by various categoriesof forest owners.

2.3 Forest resources

2.3.1 Forest types

The most widely used classification of Dutchforests is the one developed by van der Werf(1991). Based on the potential natural vegeta-tion, he described 33 forest types divided over5 classes and 10 orders. An overview of the mostimportant alliances and associations is given intable 5.

2.3.2 Main trees species

In view of the history and prevailing location ofthe Dutch forests, it is easy to understand thatPinus sylvestris is the main species in Dutchforestry (Table 6). Until 1970 even more thanhalf of the Dutch forests consisted of Scots pine,but their dominance has declined to 35%. Thisdecline has a number of reasons:- The ripening (ageing) of the forest ecosystems

(soils), making them suitable for other species(Betula, Quercus);

- The fading away of the timber market for pinewood (till 1965 pitprops, till 1975 pulp andpaper wood);

- The afforestation with broad-leaved specieson better soils such as in the new polders;

- Changes in forest management objectives(Chapter 2.4).

It is still disputed whether P. sylvestris is an auto-chthonous species, surviving along the bordersof peat moors. Already in the 14th century im-ports from seeds were recorded. However, treeswhich are considered as Dutch provenance’s arebetter suited to the local growing conditions (cli-mate, resistance against Lophodermiumseditiosum) than trees from foreign provenances.The other main coniferous species (Pseudotsugamenziesii, Larix spp., Picea spp. and Pinus spp.)predominate in about 25 % of the forests; thesespecies were planted in the past mainly for tim-ber production. In response to the changing ob-jectives in forest management, there is a ten-dency to converse spruce plantations. Douglasfir will be maintained as a timber tree, but as an

Timber Nature Land- Tourism Hunting Others Totalscape

State 56.4 24.2 7.8 6.0 7.4 101.8Provinces 1.9 0.5 2.4Municipalities 12.1 10.2 7.6 15.4 3.8 49.1Other public owned 0.8 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.2 2.3Nature conservation agency 0.8 30.1 4.7 0.1 0.0 1.1 37.0Private 53.6 31.9 21.4 10.1 2.4 11.1 130.5Total ha 123.7 98.5 42.5 32.3 2.4 23.6 323.1Total % 38.0 30.0 13.0 10.0 1.0 7.0 100.0Source: Anonymous, 1995

Table 4. Main forest management objectives by owners in K ha in 1985

The Netherlands

exotic species with a high regeneration poten-tial only in forests where nature conservation isnot emphasised.

The second most important tree species in Dutchforests is the inland oak (Quercus robur and Q.petraea). This species is especially appreciatedfor its high quality timber production and its rolein respect to nature conservation. In many olderScots pine plantations natural regeneration ofoak is stimulated. Another importantbroadleaved species is Fagus sylvatica. The areaof this species, which is probably the climaxspecies in large parts of the Netherlands, is in-creasing. The afforestation in the new poldersand in the western part of the Netherlands isreflected in the increasing areas of Populus andSalix spp. and of other broad-leaved trees. Re-cently also growing attention is given to auto-chthonous species like Malus, Pyrus,Crateagus, etc.

At present much attention is given to changethe conventional mono-species forest planta-tions to mixed forest stands. Consequently, thestatistical differentiation in main tree species isloosing its conventional meaning.

2.3.3 Standing stock, annual growth andannual cuts

The Dutch forest can be described as being rela-tively young. Only 4 % of the area of clear cutforests is older than 105 year and at least 40 %is younger than 45 year (Table 7). The main treespecies Scots pine reflects this age distributionmore or less, the mean age of other coniferousspecies is lower. Oak, with 25 % of the areayounger than 45 and only 13 % older than 105has a declining age distribution. Only beech, asoak valued for their longevity, has a half waynormal age distribution. These data illustrate thatthe Dutch forest is relatively young. Moreover,still a large area of forest is first generation for-est.

The standing stock in the Netherlands amountsto more than 50 M m3 of wood (Table 8), or 185m3 per hectare (Seubring 1997). In 1988 thesefigures were 45.7 M m3 and 161 185 m3 per hec-tare (Anonymous 1995). The annual incrementper ha diminished from 8.4 m3 ha-1 a-1 in 1988 to7.8 m3 ha-1 a-1 in 1992/3 and increased to 8.1 m3

ha-1 a-1 in 1995. The total annual increment be-tween 1992 and 1996 was about 2.2 M m3.

Class Soil characteristics Area (ha)Order

Vaccinio-Piceetea very poorDicrano-Pinion dry sandy soils < 4000Betulion pubescentis wet sandy & peat <600

Quercetea robori-petraeae moderately poorQuercion robori-petreaea low land < 165 000Luzulo-Fagion sub montan < 1000

Querco-Fagetea moderately rich, richEu-Fagion dry, loam < 4000Tilio-Acerion sub montan < 10Carpinion betuli loam, old clay < 4000Alno-Padion young, rich soils

Ulmenion carpinif. dry - wet < 5000Circaeo-Alnenion very wet < 2000

Alnetea glutinosae wet, (nearly) stagnantAlnion glutinosae moderately. poor - rich < 4000

Salicetea purpureae wet, periodically inundatedSalicion albae riverine < 1000

Table 5. Forest types according to van der Werf (1991), with some ecological characteristics andarea in ha.

The Netherlands

The increase in standing volume is likely to con-tinue in the coming years as a result of the in-creased emphasis on nature conservation objec-tives in most Dutch forests. The wish to havelarge, thick trees in the forest will result in longerrotations and increased mean age. Moreover, the‘production’ of standing and lying dead wood,also of larger dimensions, will change thebiomass characteristics in different ways. Theexact outcome of these and other influences asthe changing site conditions due to forest soildevelopment and pollution, is unclear.

The annual cut increased from 1992 to 1996from 1.1 to 1.3 M m3, resulting in an harvestingpercentage, which increased from 54 to 60 %.Private owners harvest up till 74 % of their an-nual increment, without negative consequences

for the standing stock (190 m3 ha-1). Other forestowners, notably nature conservation organisa-tions, harvest much less.

In the past, most cuttings were derived fromclearfellings. However, as a result of the in-creased attention being given to combined tim-ber production and nature management, recentlya change is taking place towards small-scale andselective harvesting methods and more empha-sis on thinning than on final cut.

2.3.4 Forest stability

The fact that the Netherlands is highly urban-ized does not only mean that forest are highlyvalued for recreation and nature purposes, butalso that they are threatened by a variety of ex-

Tree species 1952-63(I) 1964-68(I) 1980-83(I) 1992(II ) 1996(II )Pinus sylvestris 55.2 50.6 41.9 34.7 34.4Pinus spp. 6.4 8.1 7.9 6.6 6.3Pseudotsuga menziesii 6.5 7.4 6.7 6.1 6.6Larix spp. 9.7 9.4 7.7 6.6 5.9Picea spp. 5.5 8.6 6.7 4.7 4.6Other coniferous 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7Quercus robur & petraea 7.3 7.5 11.5 14.3 14.8Fagus silvatica 2.2 2.2 3.0 3.6 3.7Populus & Salix spp. 3.2 4.1 6.5 6.6 6,1Other deciduous 3.1 3.5 7.5 15.0 15.0felling area n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.4 1.9Total percentage 100 100 100 100 100Total ha 183329 196323 234624 281196 279567

Table 6. Distribution of main trees species between 1950 and 1996 in % of the area.

I) source: CBS, 1985.II) source: Seubring, 1997

16 -45 45 -65 65 -85 85 - 105 105 -125 125 -145 >145year totalPinus sylvestris 25.6 28.6 27.1 12.3 3.3 0.8 0.3 98.2other coniferous 38.4 25.2 4.3 0.7 0,0 0.0 0.0 69.1Quercus robur & petraea 7.3 6.0 5.8 4.3 2.0 0.8 0.7 27.0Fagus sylvatica 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 7.1other deciduous 23.0 6.8 2.1 0.5 0.01 0.0 0.0 33.0Total 95.6 67.9 40.5 18.8 6.4 2.8 1.6 234.5

Table 7. Age distribution of clear-cut forest older than 16 years in K ha

Source: Anonymous, 1995

The Netherlands

ternal effects of human activities (Hilgen, 1997).Due to industrialisation and intensive animalhusbandry the vitality of the forests is stronglythreatened by pollution (acidification andeutrophication) and desiccation (Van Tol et al.,1998). In addition forest fragmentation is caus-ing ecological concern. Traditional foreststhreats as pests and diseases have lost their sig-nificance, partly due to the declining emphasison wood production. Unnatural high levels ofgame animals threaten the natural regenerationof forests. Due to the humid climate forest firesare no major hazard.

Emission by industry and traffic causeimmission of SO

2 in Dutch forests and nature

areas, while intensive animal husbandry causesimmission of NO

x and NH

4 ; deposition up to

150 Kg ha-1 yr-1 has been measured locally.These immissions cause acifidication andeutrophication of the forest soils and decliningtree vitality. In 1997 less than 50 % of the areaof the exotic tree species Pseudotsuga menziesii(< 20 %). Pinus nigra var. Maritima (< 40 %)and Picea abies (< 50 %) was classified as hav-ing at least satisfactory health (Reuver, 1997).For Pinus sylvestris and Larix spp. this is be-tween 80 and 90 % respectively, and for Quercusrobur, Q. petraea and Fagus silvatica around80 %. There are some indications that treegrowth may be enhanced due to eutrophication,nitrogen being the limiting growth factor. How-ever, analysis of leaves or needles indicates thatquite often Phosphorus and other nutrients aredeficient, causing decreased growth rates. As aresult of the immissions the biodiversity valuesof many Dutch forests are decreasing. The com-position of herbs, grasses and mosses below the

canopy is changing towards more general, ni-trogen liking species, while mycorrizhal fungiare declining.

Between 30 and 50 % (depending on the crite-ria) of the Dutch forests can be classified asbeing desiccated. Three causes can be indicated:- The artificial draining of agricultural lands to

prevent water-logging and the lowering of thegroundwater table to allow farmers to culti-vate their soils early in spring;

- The use of ground water for industrial, agri-cultural and human consumption;

- The lowering of the groundwater level to im-prove conditions for afforestation or forestgrowth.

To counter the negative effects of eutrophicationand desiccation the government launched in1990 a programme called Survival Plan Forestsand Nature 2000. Owners of forests and natureareas are provided with financial assistance toapply measures such as crown thinning, fertilis-ing, conversion, impoverishment by sod cutting(heather, but also pine forests on very poor, drysandy soils), mowing etc., to improve the vital-ity of the forests and the conditions for theirsurvival.

Another ecological hazard causing increasingconcern is fragmentation and its negative con-sequences for biodiversity. Two main aspectshave to be considered when discussing fragmen-tation. First the dispersion of forests in the land-scape. Quite often smaller forests are isolatedfrom other forests by other land uses, prevent-ing the migration of organisms for one forest tothe other. Second the same effect can be caused

Year Standing stock Annual increment Harvest per year Harvest as % of theannual increment

1992 48.309 2 198 1 178 541993 49 311 2 211 1 214 551994 49 895 2 209 1 292 581995 50 849 2 258 1 324 591996 51 657 2 245 1 339 60

Table 8. Development of standing stock, annual increment, and harvest in K m3 timber inclusivebark (> 7 cm diameter).

Source: Seubring, 1997.

The Netherlands

by the isolation of autochthonous forestpatches by exotic species. To counter theseproblems a so-called National EcologicalNetwork (NEN) is being developed; this networkconnects the dispersed forest and nature areas(Ministerie LV, 1989). Buying up of (agricultural)land by large organisations like the State ForestService and Nature Conservation Organisationssubsidised by the government is largelyrestricted to areas inside this network.

The main traditional hazards threatening forestsare weather events and fires. Along the coastwind reduces forest growth, while damage-in-flicting gales occur about once every decade asdoes icing. Late night frost is locally a factor toconsider. Opinions on whether forest vitality isalso threatened by climatic change or whetherthe recent decline was related to some years ofrelatively bad weather conditions vary; at policylevel climatic change is a matter of concern forthe future. Forest fire, mainly human induced,were a very serious threat up to 20 years ago,combatted in the high risk forests areas (Veluwewith mainly Pinus sylvestris) by very intensivewatching, earlier from towers, later from smallplanes.

Due to less emphasis on timber production dam-age by fungi (such as Lophodermium seditiosum,Gremmeniella abietina, Melampsora spp.,Marssonina spp.) and insects (Ips typographicus,Tomicus spp.) are less important than before.Nevertheless regulations preventing the presenceof dead stems with bark in the forest during cer-tain periods still exists. On the other hand,eutrophication and acidification may allow or-ganisms, which were earlier not dangerous or notpresent (Sphaeropsis sapinea, Agrilus biguttatus)to become threats. Dutch elm disease is still im-portant, but more for town and road side planta-tions than for forests.

Game (red deer, roe deer, wild boar) continuesto play an important role in forestry. Game causesdamage in young plantations and can preventnatural regeneration effectively. As the lattersilvicultural method becomes more prominent(see below), the need to restrict game to levelscausing acceptable damage grows. On the otherhand large grazing animals such as tarpans and

semi-wild cattle are used as a management meas-ure to keep large nature areas open and to stimu-late micro-differentiation in vegetation compo-sition and structure. This management practiceis supported by the theory that in Western Eu-rope the original vegetation consisted partly of apark-like landscape, in which large herbivoresplayed an important role (Vera, 1997).

2.4 Silviculture

In 1983 90 % of the Dutch forests were closedforest, of which 75 % can be considered as highforest (Table 9). Most of these forests are only oneor two generations old. Up to this time twosilvicultural systems prevailed: (i) the clear-cut andreplanting system, and (ii) the coppice system.

Due to the relatively harsh environmental con-ditions, most of the original forests were estab-lished as even-aged monocultural plantations.During this century the focus of afforestationhas changed (see Chapter 2.2.1). Up till about1940, afforestation focused on then-consideredwastelands on poorer sandy soils, which wereoften covered with heather. Scots pine and otherconiferous species were the main tree species.Between 1950 and 1980 large areas in the newpolders were afforestated. These consistedmostly of better soils, and on the newly re-claimed lands mostly poplar and willow wereused. Nowadays afforestation is mainly takingplace on former agricultural land, which haverelatively good soils and which were heavilyfertilised; on these lands mostly deciduous treesare planted.

Forest management type Area KhaClosed forest 310.1High forest 236.8special management 49.0road site plantings 2.8coppice 22.3Open forest 20.0spontaneous 13.1other 6.9not forested forest area 3.2Total forest area 334.0

Table 9. Forest management types in 1983.

Source: Anonymous, 1995

The Netherlands

For a number of tree species certified seeds fromselected stands and or seed orchards are avail-able. Growing attention for natural regenerationas a silvicultural tool diminishes the economicimportance of these seed stands.

Most of the plantations were managed accord-ing to the clear-cut principle. The clear-cut ar-eas were relatively small, mostly less than 4 ha.

Coppice was historically an important silviculturalsystem in the Netherlands. Major species managedas coppice were oak (used for tannin and fuelwood)and ash in long rotations, and willow (coppiceshoots used for dike building) in shorter rotationsup to 4 years. This silvicultural practice has gradu-ally declined in importance, in 1983 its use wasrestricted to only 7 % of the Dutch forests. Sincethen it diminished even more, but coppice systemsattracts growing attention of nature conservationagencies.

Traditionally, silvicultural systems using natu-ral regeneration did not get much attention. Oneof the reasons for this neglect was the reforesta-tion subsidy granted by the government. How-ever, in the 1980s important changes insilvicultural practice took place. These werepartly caused by the results of some severestorms in the 1970s. The area of wind-blownstands was so extensive that it was not possibleto immediately clear and reforest all of them. Inmany of these areas a good natural regenerationtook place. This proved that natural regenerationwas silviculturally possible as the ecological con-ditions had gradually evolved since the first plan-tations. Moreover, in the 1990s the reforestationsubsidy was abolished (Chapter 3.4), and manyforest managers subsequently changed from ar-tificial to natural regeneration techniques.

Due to the growing emphasis on nature conser-vation objectives in forestry (Al, 1995) alsosome specific silvicultural methods to enhancenature in forest have been developed. Some ofthese so-called nature technical forest manage-ment practices (Londo, 1991) consists of thekilling of trees by removing of a strip of bark orby pulling them over, or the use of large grazinganimals (Chapter 2.3.4). The so-called mosaic-method (Koop & Siebel, 1993) is used to accel-

erate the conversion of mono-species, even-agedforests into uneven-aged, mixed forests.

Changing political (more attention to natureconservation and recreation) and economical(lower timber prices, less subsidies) conditionspaved the way for more attention towards closeto nature forestry. As a result a new silviculturalapproach, called Integrated Forest Management(IFM, geïntegreerd bosbeheer), was developedin the first half of the 90s (Schulting, 1998). InIFM all functions (timber production, nature andrecreation) are pursued, and the use of naturalprocesses is stimulated. Keywords are naturalregeneration, native timber species, mixed, un-even-aged stands, small-scale or selectivecuttings, presence of dead wood, thick stems,no biocides. In a couple of provinces with anactive political attitude towards forests and for-estry, the introduction of this kind of forest man-agement is stimulated, with good results: i.e. agrowing percentage of mixed forests (Table 10).

2.5 Harvesting

Forestry in the Netherlands has a small-scalecharacter, which is reflected in the harvestingsystems too. For the small forest owners, thecooperative ‘Forest groups’ play an importantmediating role in selling timber; the large own-ers are able to deal with contractors and tradersthemselves. There is an increasing tendency tosell timber on stump, which will then be har-vested by either a contractor or the timber trader.Standard contracts for harvesting aim at qualityand comprise clauses stipulating fines if quality(minimal damage to remaining stand an soil) isnot achieved. Nevertheless, quite often sensi-tive felling operations (in regeneration, highquality timber) are still carried out by own staff.More and more forest owners offer quality tim-ber to timber auctions in Germany, recently aquality auction was also successfully organisedin the Netherlands.

The actual felling, delimbing and cross-cuttingis mainly done by chain saw, but a small numberof harvesters and processors operates in theNetherlands too. Whole stems are skidded some-times with horses (back from being not used),

The Netherlands

otherwise with tractor and tongs. After cross-cutting in the forest, sortiments are hauled witha tractor and wagon and crane or with a for-warder. Transport to the mill is done by truck.

The accessibility of the Dutch forests is good.The network of mainly sandy roads is very denseand nowadays more used for recreation purposes(hiking, biking) than for forest operations. Inconsideration of nature conservation purposes,increasingly selected forest roads are closed for(motorised) traffic.

2.6 Forest products

The forests in the Netherlands supply only 7%of the domestic wood consumption amountingto 1.3 milliom m3 of wood. Most Dutch wood isused for bulk production (first pitprops, atpresent industrial wood) rather than high-valuespecial products (wooden shoes being an excep-tion). Both timber trade and timber manufac-turing are characterized by a multitude of rela-tively small companies; this situation limits anintegrated forest - wood chain. Some largemanufacturers of paper and pulpwood productsdepend to a large extend on wood imports.

Recently renewed interest has developed in en-ergy wood; some electricity companies are plan-ning to partly use wood in their major electric-ity generation plants. Interest is also growing inusing wood for small-scale decentralized powergeneration.

Non-timber forest products only play a minorrole; only Christmas tree production and horti-cultural greenery are of commercial interest. Thecollection of most non-timber forest productssuch as fruits or mushrooms are mainly recrea-tional activities. Hunting provides on averageonly 7% of the income of forest owners; mostDutch people are not in favour of hunting.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in the national economy

The total output of Dutch forestry has been es-timated at Dfl 161 million (EU 73 million) in1993. The inputs of forestry amount to Dfl 81million (EU 37 million), which gives an esti-mate of GDP of Dfl 80 million (EU 36 million)in that year. GDP of forestry is only a very smallportion of total Dutch GDP, because the forestarea is only a small portion of the total land areaand because the Dutch economy is mostly in-dustry and services-based. An amount of Dfl 115million (EU 52 million) of the total output con-sists of government consumption (as a final de-mand category), mainly expenditures of theNational Forest Service.

3.2 Employment in the forest sector

Employment in forestry and wood processingindustry is about 50,000 persons (Schouten,

Owner Regeneration Harvest forest Regenerated Changemethod towards

clear small mono mixed mono mixed mono >cut scale spp. spp. mixed

State 270 183 374 78 171 282 203Other governmental 242 73 331 34 274 92 58Nature conservation agencies. 52 104 112 45 25 131 86Private 420 134 404 150 332 222 72Total 1034 494 1221 307 802 726 419

Table 10. Regeneration method and change from mono species towards mixed stands in ha as annual mean for 1986-1991

Source: Anonymous, 1995

The Netherlands

1995). This relatively high amount, when con-sidering the small forest area, is caused by theprocessing of a large amount of imported wood(Oosterveld, 1997). Statistical data (table 11)suggest that the employment in forestry did notdecrease in recent decades. However, this trendhas to be ascribed to the definition of the units.In the early years of registering forest labouronly labourers involved in typical forestry ac-tivities such as timber felling were recorded. Inlater years also employees engaged in differentkinds of nature conservation activities are takeninto account. A considerable amount of the ac-tivities in forestry is carried out by relativelysmall contractor companies, as many forest en-terprises are too small to invest in profitablemechanisation. A large part of the timber is soldat stump.

The nursery sector is well developed in the Neth-erlands. This sector produces not only seedlingsfor forestry, but also for residential areas and alarge part of its produce is exported.

3.3 Discount rate

Since 1974 the Dutch government has pre-scribed a discount rate of 10% to be used in theappraisal of public financed projects. In 1986 itwas decided to decrease this rate to 5%. Since1995, a real discount rate of 4% is prescribed.Benefit-Cost Analyses of public financed for-estry projects are, however, seldom or not con-ducted in recent decades in the Netherlands. TheNational Forest Service and the Nature Conser-vation Organisations do not use a discount ratein their appraisal of management activities.Some private forest firms use a discount rate,e.g. to determine the optimum rotation.

3.4 Profitability

Since 1975, the Agricultural-Economic Institutecollects data about the profitability of privateforest firms larger than 50 hectare in the Neth-erlands. Since 1992 also data of firms of 5 – 50

hectare are collected (Berger et al., 1997). Thetrends concerning costs, revenues and profitabil-ity of firms larger than 50 hectare are summa-rized in table 12. In the course of time labourcosts per hectare have considerably dropped, butmost other costs increased. The revenues of tim-ber sales decreased, while the other revenuesincreased. Total revenues and total costs havechanged in such a way that profit per hectarehas increased in recent decades, in spite of de-clining timber prices. The profit of forest firmsin the southern part of the Netherlands and oflarger firms is on average higher than that offirms in other regions and of small firms. Manyprivate forest firms still have a negative finan-cial result. In order to try to improve their prof-itability, the government has for several yearsstimulated the formation of cooperative forestgroups by providing a subsidy to the membersof such cooperatives. The cooperatives aremostly engaged in the coordination ofsilvicultural activities and timber sales.

Subsidies are a substantial part of the revenues(table 12). The total amount of the subsidies didnot change much during the last decades, buttheir composition changed considerably. In thepast, a substantial subsidy was given to coverthe costs of reforestation and stand improve-ment. These subsidies have been abolished inthe framework of the policy aiming at basingsubsidies on outputs rather than inputs. Sincethe early 1990s the main subsidies consist of afixed amount per hectare which is granted if theforest is accessible (on roads) for visitors2; thissubsidy is considered as a public payment forthe recreation function. Additional payments aremade for explicitly identified old-growth for-ests with high ecological value. Notwithstand-ing the policy of basing subsidies mainly onoutputs, recently a new subsidy is being givenfor activities aiming at restoring or preventingdamage caused by pollution and desiccation(Chapter 2.3.4).

In addition to subsidies, tax reduction or exemp-tion – income tax, property tax and in some situ-ations inheritance tax – is used as an incentive

2 In the Netherlands a forest owner is not obliged by law to open his forest to visitors

The Netherlands

for forest firms in the Netherlands. The waterboard tax is felt as a considerable burden to for-estry in some parts of the Netherlands, especiallybecause forestry does often not benefit but ratherhas disadvantages from water management bythe water boards.

In the framework of decentralisation, policy de-velopment and implementation is shifting towardsprovinces. Some provinces provide a subsidy tostimulate Integrated Forest Management (Chap-ter 2.4), e.g. by paying for a certain amount of largetrees or dead wood being present in the forest.

Recently, increased attention is also given tosearch for new options for paying of those for-est functions, for which no traditional marketsexist. As indicated in Chapter 2.2.4 some utilitycompanies have started occasional funding ofthe environmental functions of forest regardingcarbon sequestration or hydrological regulation.Efforts are also underway to make financial ar-rangements for special recreational servicesbetween forest owners and the tourist and rec-reation sector.

4 Forest policy

4.1 Legislation

When in the midst of the 19th century attentionbecame focused on the need to increase the for-est area in the Netherlands, at first the affores-tation activities were left to the private sector.The government’s involvement with forestrydates from the end of the 19th century, when thesocial and economic benefits of forests wereclearly acknowledged. In 1899 the State ForestService was established, and through this serv-ice public funding was started for the purchaseof forests and nature reserves and for the affor-estation of unproductive lands. Subsequently, in1922 the first Forest Law was enacted. This lawhas been influential in conservation of the ex-isting forest area; it ensures that no forest areais lost by stipulating the obligation to reforestcut forest areas. Subsequently, also fiscal meas-ures were taken to alleviate the financial bur-den for private forest owners. The Nature Pro-tection Act (Natuurbeschermingswet) aims at

Category Number of employees in 1977: Number of employees in:Total Based on 1984 1992

Dutch woodContractors 600Forest groups and land agents 216Roundwood trade and transport 860 860 430Nurseries (forest and ornamental trees) 763 763 1490Forestry 1650 1650 2185Timber and furniture ind.Particle and fibreboard ind. 800Veneer and plywood ind.Sawmills 200¹ 1700Woodenshoes ind. 207Woodconservation ind. 39800 8000 500 á 600Posts and polesPackaging and pallet ind. 9900 9366Wooden furniture ind. 2600 2078Other timber products industries 11400 10796Paper and paperboard ind. 31600 1900Paper products ind. 9500 7400 7500Printing industry 39300 9800Publishers 17100 1700Binding ind. 5000 300Lodging (in wooded area’s) ±25000 ±25000

¹ in firms with more than 10 employeesSource: Ministerie van Landbouw en Visserij (1977, 1984), Schouten (1995) and Stolp (1996)

Table 11. Number of employees in the forest sector in 1975, 1984 and 1992 in the Netherlands

The Netherlands

stimulating nature and landscape conservationthrough acquisition and management obliga-tions. This law also protects certain flora andfauna species (LNV, 1993).

Another influential law is the Landscape Act(Natuurschoonwet), which stimulates forest man-agement and afforestation on estates to ensureaesthetic and recreational values. The HuntingLaw (Jachtwet) obliges the hunter to prevent dam-age by wildlife to forest and agriculture and tosustain a reasonable level of wildlife. This lawalso stipulates regulations concerning huntingpractices and the management of wildlife. Fur-thermore the Land Use Planning Act(Landinrichtingswet) stipulates regulations con-cerning land-use planning, including measures forland-use zoning for forestry, nature, outdoor rec-reation and cultural history. The implementationof these laws and the policy used to be the re-sponsibility of the state but is evolving towards aprovincial and municipal task (LNV, 1993).

Since the mid 1970s forestry has received in-creasingly political attention (Wiersum & VanVliet, 1998). Within the framework of the na-tional rural planning debate, in 1977 a sectorstudy on forests and forestry was issued. Thisdocument was followed by two major nationalforestry policy statements, i.e. the Long-termForestry Plan of 1984 (Ministerie LV, 1984) and

the Forest Policy Plan of 1993 (Ministerie LNV,1993). In the last plan the following policy pri-orities have been formulated for the period upto the year 2020:- Sustained conservation of the present forest

area and its further development on the basisof ecosystem zonation;

- Promotion of optimal fulfilment of the forest’smultiple functions with respect to outdoor rec-reation, nature values, timber production, land-scape quality and environmental quality;

- Expansion of the forest area by at least 65,000ha in 2020 by government, other authoritiesand private landowners, 10,000 ha should belocated near cities and in peri-urban areas;

- Achieving this conservation and performanceat a socially acceptable level of costs, focus-ing on market approach and budget efficiency;

- Promotion of the involvement of other thanstate authorities as well as non-governmentalorganizations and private parties in forestry de-velopment.

- Contribute to sustainable forestry world wide;

In 1989 also a Nature Policy Plan (MinisterieLV, 1989) was formulated, that aims to sustain,revitalize and develop natural and landscapevalues of forests and other nature areas such aswetlands, etc. The aims are to be reached bydeveloping a National Ecological Network withcentral natural areas, nature development areas

Table 12. Costs, revenues and profit (/ha) of private forest firms (?50ha) in the Netherlands in 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1994-1996 (in current prices)

Year1975 1980 1985 1990 1994 1995 1996

Cost itemsLabour 136 201 133 78 70 61 52Contractors 58 44 184 46 92 65 92Management + supervision 79 121 127 145 157 150 154Other costs 64 86 95 90 112 109 108Total costsRevenue items 337 452 539 359 431 385 406Timber 102 137 174 198 132 166 135Other revenues 32 47 54 57 61 70 75Subsidies 116 184 296 134 193 166 195Total revenues 260 380 530 390 387 404 409Profit -77 -72 -9 31 -44 19 3

Source: Berger et al., 1997

The Netherlands

and connection zones. The political prominenceof nature is also reflected in the fact, that in 1997a monitoring and evaluation report concerningthe state of nature was published (Anonymous,1997); it is intended that such an evaluation isrepeated each 5 years. The state of forests andresults of forestry policies receive ample atten-tion in these evaluations (Hilgen, 1997;Paasman, 1997).

4.2 Actors

The multifunctional nature of the forest in theNetherlands is reflected by the fact, that thereare several groups of stakeholders who are in-terested in one of more specific functions offorests. Three major categories of stakeholdersmay be distinguished who play a role in policyformulation and implementation (Oosterveld,1997), i.e.:

Forest owners and forest managers;Forest users;Policy makers.

4.2.1 Forest owners and forest managers

As discussed in Chapter 2.2.3 forest ownershipin the Netherlands is divers, with forests beingowned either by private owners (41%), the state(31%), local authorities and other public bod-ies (16%), or nature conservation organisations(11%). The State forests are managed by a StateForest Service (SFS). Originally this service wasalso very influential in policy making, since ithad a triple function of management, extensionand policy development and implementation.The extension function brought about a largeand uniform forest management in the Nether-lands. After 1988 the SFS has become a semi-autonomous management organisation. Itspolicy function was shifted to the Ministry ofAgriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries,and its extension function to the provinces. As aconsequence, recently a more divers forest man-agement situation and more open process ofpolicy formulation has developed (Wiersum &van Vliet, 1998).The forest owners and forestry labour organi-

zations are officially represented in the Indus-trial Board of Forestry (Bosschap); this non-governmental organisation officially representsthe forestry sector in policy debates and has aregulatory power within the sector.

4.2.2 Forest users

Forest users have gained more and more influ-ence the last decades, setting the policy agendaon how to develop forest management. One candistinguish four main groups of forest users ac-cording to the forest function:

The timber trade and wood industry;The recreation sector;The nature conservation and environmental

groups;Various utility companies such as water and

electricity supplying companies.

Traditionally, the timber trade and wood indus-try is characterized by a multitude of relativelysmall companies, many of whom are not depend-ant on the Dutch forest (as these provide lessthan 10% of total wood consumption). Conse-quently, no strong and integrated forest - woodchain was developed. The organisations are notso large, neither influential on the nationalpolicy. International policy, however, is devel-oped in close dialogue with the timber trade andwood industry.

The recreational sector ir organized in severalinfluential organisations, but most of them do nothave formal links with the forest owners. This ispartly caused by the fact, that the recreation func-tion of forests is basically funded by governmentsubsidies (Chapter 3.4). The main organisationrepresenting recreationist is the ANWB (whichstarted as a bicyclists organisation); this organi-sation often acts as a spokesman representingrecreation interests to the government.

The nature conservation and environmental sec-tor is well organized in a multitude of non- gov-ernmental organisations. Over one million ofDutch people are a member of the Dutch natureconservation organisations. Some of these or-ganisations are predominantly engaged in man-

The Netherlands

aging nature reserves (including important for-est areas), but other act as lobby groups advo-cating environmental protection and nature val-ues. They have been influential in setting theforestry policy agenda.

Recently, various utility companies have becomeinterested in the environmental function of for-est (Chapter 2.2.4). This has resulted in thembecoming a new actor in forest policy develop-ment (Wiersum & van Vliet, 1998).

4.2.3 Policy makers

The Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Manage-ment and Fisheries holds the major responsibil-ity for forest policy in the Netherlands. Since1988 the task for forest policy development andimplementation falls under the responsibility ofthe ministerial department of Nature Manage-ment (Directie Natuurbeheer). In addition, for-estry policy is influenced by the Ministry ofEconomic Affairs and the Ministry of Housing,Regional planning and Environment. The firstMinistry is responsible for issues concerning thetimber industry, and the last holds responsibil-ity for country planning and environmentalpolicy matters.

4.3 Policy tools

The tools for the implementation of the forestpolicies fall within three major categories, i.e.legal, financial and communicative instruments.

The legal framework for forestry was alreadydiscussed in Chapter 4.1. The financial instru-ments vary according to the category of forestowners that is affected. The State Forest Serv-ice is financed directly from the governmentbudget (investments and management costs). Allother forest owners can apply for subsidies un-der the Forestry Grant Scheme (Chapter 3.4).Nature conservation organisations can get ad-ditional management grants and financial sup-port for extension of their territory. For privateforest owners also some tax reductions (e.g. inrelation to inheritance tax) exist.Additional subsidies are available for affores-

tation on former agricultural lands. The regula-tion for stimulating forest expansion on agricul-tural lands is an elaboration of the Mac Sharryregulation of the EU. The subsidy consists ofan afforestation premium and an income bonusto compensate the income losses for a 20 yearsmaximum. After 15 years one can decide to goback to farming if an exemption of the replant-ing duty (Forest law) was obtained (LNV, 1993).Another financial instrument exist for stimulat-ing public and private co-operation in establish-ing forest expansion projects outside the‘Randstad’. The state will take part in the fi-nancing of the afforestation costs and give asubsidy for the value loss of the land (LNV,1993). Another recent development is the plan-ning of a certification system for CO2

sequestriation, which could be used to stimu-late afforestation as a means to sequester CO2.

Communicative instruments include education,research and advice, assisting forest owners andthe forestry sector at large. A special politicalinstrument in the Long-term Forestry Plan wasthe encouragement towards provincial authori-ties to develop regional forest policy plans onan experimental basis.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

Within the 1993 National Forest Policy Plan itis explicitly formulated, that forest policy islinked to several related policy fields, includ-ing those concerning land-use and landscapeplanning, agriculture, environment, nature, wa-ter, and recreation (Ministerie LNV, 1993). Incomparison to the 1984 Long-term forestry planthe 1993 Plan indicates a change from a sectoralto a more integrated approach (Wiersum & VanVliet, 1998). As reflected by the objectives ofthe 1993 Plan (Chapter 4.1) environmental andnature concerns form major concerns as do con-cerns related to recreation and agriculture. Ofspecial relevance are the regulations on regionalplanning, which are based on a system of local(community) decision-making with respect tolegally-binding local land-use plans.

The Netherlands

4.5 EU forest and forest related policies

The Netherlands are a member of the EuropeanUnion and participates in the Permanent Com-mittee for Forestry of the EU. Although the EUis more and more involved in forestry, there isnot yet a coherent EU forest policy. The Dutchgovernment supports the realisation of a forestpolicy that focuses on forest expansion and vi-tality and makes it possible to act collectivelyin European and world forestry. This policy willhave to be in harmony with the Nature policythat’s also being developed. On European levelthe Netherlands also co-operates in the Timbercommittee of the Economic Commission forEurope and the European Forestry Commissionof the FAO.

Since 1986 action is taken within the EU to pro-tect forests against fire and air pollution, and topromote reforestation on agricultural lands andeconomic unattractive areas. The Mac Sharryset-aside scheme provides subsidies to farmersto fallow or reforest their lands. These subsi-dies play an important role in the implementa-tion of the planned expansion of the Dutch for-est area.

4.6 Education & research

In the Netherlands most academic research inforestry is performed at the Wageningen Agri-cultural University (WAU) and the AgriculturalResearch Service (DLO), which are beingamalgated into the Wageningen University andResearch Centre in the near future. At otherDutch universities also forestry subjects are re-searched, mainly by biology and sociology de-partments. Also some private consultancy bu-reaux (e.g. ETC) contribute to forestry research.The Information and Reference Center for Na-ture Management of the Ministry of Agriculture,Nature Management and Fisheries acts as aclearing-house between research and practice.

The Wageningen Agricultural University offersa MSc. Programme in forestry and nature man-agement (5 years) and also an international MSc.study Tropical Forestry (17 months) (van Baren

et al., 1998). The International AgriculturalCollege Larenstein offers a BSc. in forestry andnature management (4 years). Furthermore thereare several schools for technical secondary edu-cation in forestry (MBCS) in the Netherlandsand a school for practical education inSchaarsbergen.

5 Main currents and challenges

5.1 Introduction

As indicated in Chapter 1.2.4, since the 1950sseveral major societal changes have taken place.These social trends have had a major impact onforestry. Of special importance were the in-creased importance of recreation and tourism,the increased appreciation for nature, and thegrowing environmental consciousness. Thesetrends resulted in an increased appreciation forthe recreational and nature functions of forests.Moreover, the increased attention to democraticdecision making and decentralisation of govern-mental action resulted in an increase ofstakeholder involvement in forestry develop-ment. Thus, social attitudes rather than marketforces have been most influential in steeringforestry development in the Netherlands(Oosterveld, 1997; Wiersum & Van Vliet, 1998).This is reflected in both forest policy and forestmanagement.

5.2 Changes in forest policy

As a result of the recent social trends, threemajor current issues in forest policy may be dis-tinguished: a changing role of forestry inlanduse, a diversification in the required func-tion fulfilment, and the development of interac-tive policy making.

5.2.1 Changing role of forestry in land-use

The rural area of the Netherlands has to dealwith a growing number of different demandsfrom society. The growing number of people,increased leisure time and increased mobility

The Netherlands

cause that rural areas are becomingmultifunctional. The country side is no longerconsidered only as an area destined for agricul-tural and other rural production processes, butalso as an area for recreation and enjoyment of‘natural’ landscapes. Such multifunctional userequires an integration of forestry and natureconservation, agriculture, and tourism. One ofthe major consequences is, that forestry is in-creasingly incorporated within the broader con-text of the social appreciation for nature con-servation. This is demonstrated by the fact, thatthe 1997 evaluation of the status of nature inthe Netherlands (Anonymous, 1997) includedseveral assessments about the forestry situationHilgen, 1997; Paasman, 1997).

Although mobility in general has increased, thereare still many people in the expanding urban ar-eas who are less mobile, e.g. the growing numberof elderly people. In order to provide recreationalspace for these people, there is a demand for newurban forests where people can experience restand enjoy nature (Konijnendijk, 1997). The crea-tion of such forests may also decrease the needto travel to forests which are located farther away,and thus limit environmental problems related totransport. Through their environmental functions(buffering noise, temperature, air pollution, etc.)the new urban forests will also provide a pleas-ant living environment. Moreover, as a result ofthe high social appreciation of forests coupledwith the legal protection of forests, these urbanforest are excellent buffers against unregulatedurban expansion.

5.2.2 Diversification in fulfilment of forestfunctions

The forest functions have diversified over time.The functions for society (for landscape, amen-ity, and recreation) and for the environment (fornature conservation, sequestration of carbondioxide, water management) have become moreimportant than wood production. Under the con-ditions of high and divers public demands theeffectiveness and efficiency of forest functionsare increasingly being measured in social ap-preciation. Consequently, in planning forest

policies not only the perceptions and demandsof forest owners are taken into account, but theperceptions and demands of all relevantstakeholders.

One of the results of the increased appreciationof forests and their divers functions is a diversi-fication in forest ownership (Chapter 2.2.3) aswell as management styles. This has as conse-quence that the instruments for forest policy aregradually changing. In the past, specific policymeasures existed for forestry, but the recentlyformulated Programme Management of theMinistry of Agriculture, Nature Managementand Fisheries facilitates the management of bothnature, forest and landscape. This governmentprogramme also changes the former incentivesystem with different policy instruments forstimulating forest management by different for-est owners (i.e. the government, private own-ers, nature conservation organisations) to a sys-tem with equal instruments for all forest own-ers. This illustrates the tendency that forestry isno longer considered a primary governmentaltask, but an activity involving variousstakeholders.

5.2.3 Interactive policy making

In response to the process of further democrati-zation the process of policy decision-making ischanging from a process based on professionalexpertise to a more participatory process involv-ing a multitude of stakeholders. Moreover, achange is taking place from state supremacy indealing with forest policy and management is-sues to a more decentralized approach. Thus,the policy process is increasingly characterizedby a process of interaction between policy mak-ers at various administrative levels, forest own-ers and managers, and different groups of for-est users. In comparison with the past, also aclearer distinction is made between the differ-ent forest managers, and the interaction betweenforest user groups and policy makers is increas-ing (Wiersum & Van Vliet, 1998). The chal-lenges of this new approach are to stimulate andfacilitate a wide range of localised managementpractises that are focused on local needs and

The Netherlands

possibilities on the one hand, and to keep a deli-cate balance between the requirements for sus-tainable forestry and leaving sufficient room tofree market forces on the other hand.

National policies are not only increasingly deal-ing with incorporating stakeholder interests andfacilitating forest management by different own-ership categories, but they also increasingly in-teracting with international conventions (e.g. theRio declaration on forestry, the convention onbiodiversity) and global movements such forestcertification. A major task of forest policy istherefore to ensure that global and national for-estry development are consistently related andlogically linked to diverse and localised man-agement practices.

5.3 Changes in forest management

As discussed above, the diversification in for-est functions requires different managementstyles that are flexible to adapt to the local needsfor different functions and offer a choice to thedifferent owner groups. In order to respond ad-equately to increasingly diversified demandsfrom numerous organised user groups, forestmanagers have to adapt their management prac-tices and to adjust their technical and well associal skills.

5.3.1 Diversification of management systems

In order to respond to the changing demandsfor function fulfilment it will be necessary todevelop new silvicultural systems. These sys-tems needs to be highly flexible in order to al-low continuous adaptation to the wishes of thecommunity. In this context two managementsystems are promoted in the Netherlands, i.e.Integrated Forest Management (Chapter 2.4)and the ‘Pro Silva’ system. Both aremultifunctional management systems based onmixed stands and selective harvesting; they al-low more ecological features to develop thanthe traditional ‘monoculture with clear-cut’ sys-tems (Paasman, 1997; Schulting, 1998).

5.3.2 Communication and negotiation withforest users

During the last decade, the increased social ap-preciation of forest coupled with increased po-litical emancipation has resulted in several for-estry conflicts in the Netherlands. This devel-opment indicated the need for forest managersto improve their communication skills. In orderto find out what needs are present in a locality,forest management needs to stimulate the par-ticipation of user groups. This requires that for-est managers do not only have knowledge onforest ecology, silviculture and forest economy,but also skills for conflict resolution and socialnegotiation.

Improved communication between forest man-agers and forest users does not only concernconflict resolution, but also the negotiation offunction endowment for semi-public goods withrelevant consumer groups (Hekhuis & De Baaij,1997). Increasingly forest managers are negoti-ating financial contract for the delivery of spe-cific services to specific consumer groups. Thismay involve contractual arrangements with wa-ter companies for optimisation of hydrologicalconditions, with electricity companies for fixa-tion of CO2, or with groups such asmountainbikers for the maintenance of specificrecreational facilities. An example of the gradu-ally increasing interest of private market forcesto fund forestry activities is the establishmentof the foundation FACE (Forestry for Absorb-ing Carbon Emissions) by the combined Dutchelectricity generating companies. This founda-tion gives financial contributions to plantationsestablishment both in the Netherlands andabroad.

5.3.3 Quality production

The environmental consciousness and demandfor nature in the Netherlands has grown overthe past 5 years. In response to the request formore nature values, meaning older forests andmixed stands, at present increased attention isgiven to stimulate the production of quality tim-ber instead of bulk production for pulp and wood

The Netherlands

chips. For instance, since two years a specialquality timber auction is organized as a meansto develop a high quality niche market.

Forest managers also find it increasingly worth-while to communicate their concerns regardingsustainable forest management and quality woodproduction to the consumers. Consequently, theidea of forest certification by an independentauditing organisation is well received by vari-ous forest management organisations. After aninitial certification of two municipality forests,recently also several districts of the Dutch StateForest Service (SFS) have been certified accord-ing to the Forest Stewardship Counsel) (FSC)standards. At present already 60,000 ha of stateowned forest has been certified as being man-aged in accordance to the standards forsustainability and multifunctionality. During thisinitial phase of certification, sustainable pro-duced wood fetches 10-15% higher prices than‘normal’ wood. It is expected that such pricedifferences will decrease when more certifiedtimber enters the market. But this developmentshould not limit the public relation effect of cer-tification. However, for the private forest own-ers with small forest areas who are structurallyless integrated in the forest - timber chain, thePR function of certification is considered of onlyminor importance.

5.4 Ecological and technical challenges

5.4.1 Improving forest vitality

The vitality of the Dutch forests is a cause of con-cern (Chapter 2.3.4). As long as the possiblecauses such as air pollution and desiccation arenot controlled, it will be necessary to apply man-agement practices (e.g. fertilising, sod cutting,removing of litter) that address their effects. Alsothe conversion of forests to improve their stabil-ity to withstand windthrow is a current issue.Many monocultures are gradually converted touneven-aged, mixed forests with the aim that theybecome better adjusted to yearly variation in pre-cipitation, heavy storms as well as pests and dis-eases. This means a gradual increase in the areaof deciduous forest.

5.4.2 Maintaining biodiversity

The great social consciousness about nature andenvironment results in much attention to the needto conserve biodiversity. The challenge is to cre-ate improved conditions for maintaining andeven improving the diversity in flora and fauna.In this respect attention is given to the ecologi-cal role of exotic tree species, the need to stimu-late autochthonous species, and the need tostimulate a more divers forest structure in whichall ecological phases including old growth treesand dead wood are represented.

Another option to increase biodiversity is thereintroduction of semi-domesticated large graz-ers in forest and nature areas (Chapter 2.3.4).The introduction of (a low density of) grazersin forest may not only result in micro-niche dif-ferentiation and thus greater biodiversity, butalso increases the recreational value of forests.However, care must be taken that no frictionarise between these grazers and horses (horse-back riding) or dogs (accompanying walkers).The question how to manage forest grazing istherefore not only a question of ecology, but alsoof recreation. An interesting question is how toprevent too high grazing densities, once graz-ers have been introduced in all relevant forestand nature areas. In theory, culling the grazingherds might provide high-quality meet produc-tion to be sold on the speciality market, and thusprovide new income. However, the prevailingnotions on nature might limit this option. MostDutch people have an aversion against hunting,which they consider merely as a pleasure hobbyof hunters. There exist a strong lobby againsthunting, and it is increasingly restricted to a lim-ited number of species. It therefore remains tobe seen whether culling of the newly introducedgrazers will be accepted.

The Netherlands

Literature

Al. E.J. (ed.). 1995. Natuur in bossen. Ecosysteemvisie bos (Nature in forests; an ecosystem viewof forest). Reference Centre for Nature, Wageningen, the Netherlands, Rapport IKC-Natuurbeheer nr. 14 (in Dutch)

Anonymous. 1995. Nederlands bos in beeld (Netherlands forest in the picture). Foundation Probos,Zeist, the Netherlands, 33 p. (in Dutch).

Anonymous. 1997. Natuurverkenning 97 (Evaluation of nature 97). Samson H.D. Tjeenk Willink,Alphen aan de Rijn, the Netherlands, 165 p. (in Dutch)

Baren, B. van, Bartelink, H.H., and Hek, S. de. 1998. Curriculum forest & nature management atthe Wageningen Agricultural University. In: P. Schmidt, J. Huss, S. Lewark, P. Pettenella & O.Saastamoinen (eds), New requirements for university education in forestry. Demeter Series 1:313-326.

Berger, E.P., Schrijver, R.A.M. and J. Luijt. 1997. Bedrijfsuitkomsten in de Nederlandse particulierebosbouw over 1996 (Financial results of Dutch private forestry in 1996). Landbouw-EconomischInstituut, The Hague, the Netherlands, Periodieke Rapportage 29-96. 69pp (in Dutch).

CBS. 1985. De Nederlandse Bosstatistiek. Deel 1: de oppervlaktebos 1980-1983 (The Nether-lands forest statistics. Part 1: forest area 1980-1983). Staatsuitgeverij, den Haag, the Nether-lands (in Dutch).

Dijkstra, H. 1997. Signalering veranderingen cultuurlandschap (Changes in the landscape). In Hilgen,P.R. (ed.) Toestand van natuur, bos en landschap. Achtergronddocument 1 bij projectnatuurverkenning ‘97. Reference Centre for Nature, Wageningen, the Netherlands, p. 99-132(in Dutch).

Duuren, L. & Lengkeek, W. 1997. Trends oppervlakte bos- en natuurgebieden (Trends in areas offorests and nature areas). In Hilgen, P.R. (ed.) Toestand van natuur, bos en landschap.Achtergronddocument 1 bij project natuurverkenning ‘97. Reference Centre for Nature,Wageningen, the Netherlands, p. 11-14 (in Dutch).

Filius, B.M. & Roosenschoon, O.R. 1998. Tree species conversion to diminish forest’s water use -financial consequences of a controversial forest management practice in the Netherlands. Jour-nal of Forest Economics 4: 85-101.

Hekhuis, H.J. & Baaij, G. de. 1997. Toepassing van het profijtbeginsel voor de financiering vanbos- en natuurbeheer (Application of the concept of profit-sharing for financing of forest andnature management). DLO - Institute for Forestry and Nature Research, Wageningen, the Neth-erlands, IBN Rapport No. 254, 146 p. (in Dutch).

Hilgen, P.R. (ed.). 1997. Toestand van natuur, bos en landschap. Achtergronddocument 1 projectNatuurverkenning ‘97 (The situation concerning nature, forest and landscape. Background docu-ment 1 project Evaluation of Nature ’97). Reference Centre for Nature, Wageningen, the Neth-erlands (in Dutch).

Konijnendijk, C.C. 1997. Urban forestry policy-making in the Netherlands: a matter of sharedresponsibility. In: I. Tikkanen, P. Glück & B. Solberg (eds), Review of forest policy issues andpolicy processes. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland, EFI Proceedings 12: 51-58.

Koop, H. & Siebel, H.N. 1993. Conversion management towards more natural forests; evaluationand recommendations. In: M.E.A. Broekmeyer, W. Vos & H. Koop, H. (eds), European ForestReserves. Pudoc, Wageningen, p 199-204.

Londo, G.. 1991. Natuurtechnisch Bosbeheer (Nature technical forest management). Pudoc,Wageningen, the Netherlands, Natuurbeheer in Nederland Vol. 4 (in Dutch).

Ministerie LNV. 1993. Bosbeleidsplan, Regeringsbeslissing (Forest Policy Plan, government de-cision). Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij , Den Haag, 103 p. (in Dutch).

Ministerie LNV. 1998. Feiten en Cijfers 1997/98, kerngegevens over landbouw, natuurbeheer envisserij (Facts and figures 1997/98, data on agriculture, nature management and fisheries).Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij , Den Haag (in Dutch).

The Netherlands

Ministerie LV. 1984. Meerjarenplan Bosbouw (Long-term forestry plan). Ministerie van Landbouwen Visserij, Den Haag, 246 pp. (in Dutch)

Ministerie LV. 1989. Natuurbeleidsplan (Nature Policy Plan). Den Haag, Ministeriue Landbouwen Visserij (in Dutch).

Oosterveld, H.R. 1997. Forests in densely populated areas: forest management in a complex soci-ety, the Dutch case. Paper XI World Forestry Congress, Antalya, Turkey.

Paasman, J.M. (ed.). 1997. Evaluatie bos. Achtergronddocument 7 project natuurverkenning ‘97(Evaluation of forest. Background document 7 project Evaluation of Nature ’97). ReferenceCentre for Nature, Wageningen, the Netherlands (in Dutch).

Reuver, P.J.H.M. 1997. De vitaliteit van bossen in Nederland in 1997. Verslag meetnet Bosvitaliteitnr.3. Reference Centre for Nature, Wageningen, the Netherlands, Rapport IKC-Natuurbeheernr. 28 (in Dutch)

Schouten, H.D. 1995. De betekenis van de bedrijfskolom bos en hout voor de Nederlandse economie(The significance of the forest/wood chain for the Netherlands economy). Nederlands BosbouwTijdschrift 67(3):112-118 (in Dutch)

Schulting, R. 1998. Integrated Forest Management: a Netherlands approach to small-scale for-estry. Proceedings International Symposium on Integrating environmental issues into small-scale forestry. Vancouver, Canada, August 1998 (in press).

Seubring, A.M. 1997. Hout in het Nederlandse bos (Wood in the Dutch forest). Bosdata, Wageningen(in Dutch).

Stolp, J. 1996. Sectorplan ter verbetering van de verwerking en afzet van bosbouwproducten (Sec-tor plan for improving the manufacturing and sale of forest products). Stichting BVos en Hout,Wageningen, the Netherlands (in Dutch).

Tol, G. van, Dobben, H.F. van, Schmidt, P. & Klap, J.M. 1998. Biodiversitty of Dutch forest eco-systems as affected by receding groundwater levels and atmospheric deposition. Biodiversityand Conservation 7: 221-228.

Vera, F.W.M. 1997. Metaforen voor de wildernis; eik, hazelaar, rund, paard. (Metaphors for wil-derness; oak, cow, horse). PhD-Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, the Netherlands(in Dutch).

Vliet, C.J.M. van. 1993. Country reports: Netherlands. In: G. Beaufoy (ed), Using EC measures topromote multipurpose forestry. A report to the Countryside Commission from IEEP. Institutefor European Environmental Policy, London, UK, Vol. 2: 25-36.

Werf, S. van der. 1991. Bosgemeenschappen (Forest types). Pudoc, Wageningen, Natuur beheer inNederland, Vol. 5 (in Dutch).

Wiersum, K.F. and van Vliet, C.J.M. 1998. Context and content of national forestry programmes inthe Netherlands, paper prepared for International Seminar Formulation and implementation ofnational forest programmes, Freiburg, Germany.

Useful Internet pages

Institute for Forest and Forest Products > http://www.sbh.nl/kerngegevens(statistical data on forestry in the Netherlands, in english).

Sub-department of Forestry, Wageningen University > http://www.dow.wau.nl/forestry/(includes links to other Internet pages of Dutch forestry organisations)Research Institute for Nature (& Forestry), Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management andFisheries > http://www.ibn.dlo.nl

The Netherlands

Norway

1 The country

1.1 Natural conditions

Norway (excluding Svalbard, which has been apart of Norway since 1925) stretches from 57°57’ 33”N to 71° 11’ 8”N, and from 4° 30” 12”Eto 31° 10’10”E. The shortest distance from thesouthernmost to the northernmost point is 1752km. The length of the coastal line including thefjords is 21 300 km. The land frontier againstSweden, Finland, and Russia is 2 542 km. Thewidest part of the country is 430 km, the nar-rowest 6,3 km. The total land area is 324 thou-sand square kilometres. The «economic zone»in the ocean South, West and North of the main-land is about 800 thousand square kilometres.

It is a mountainous country. The highest moun-tains are found in the massif of Jotunheimen inthe central parts of Southern Norway, where thepeak Galdhøpiggen reaches a height of 2469 mabove the sea level. Forty per cent of the landarea has an altitude of more than 600 m abovesea level. Several glaciers are found, amongthem Jostedalsbreen covering 486 km2. A char-acteristic feature of the landscape is the longand deep fjords, the longest of which isSognefjorden with a length of 204 km and witha depth of 1300 m.

1.1.1 Geology

There are great variations in bedrock within thecountry. In Southern Norway large areas of Pre-Cambrian formations are found, such as gran-ites, gneisses, and quartzites. A similar area isfound in the far North-East. West and North of

the Oslofjord is a downfaulted area of Cambro-Silurian sediments, partly with limestone, andvolcanics of Caboniferous and Permian Ages.An area streching from the South-West end, andup to the North end of the country, is dominatedby remnants of the Caledonian Fold-belt, with acomplex mixture of metamorphic rocks. Dur-ing the Cretaceous and Tertiary Periods the in-land plateaux and present valleys were formed,and during the last 2,5 million years the glaciersdeepened the valleys, created the lakes, andcarved out the fjords.

1.1.2 Soils

Most of the surficial deposits in Norway weredeposited during the deglaciation period after thelast ice age, 13 000 to 8 500 years ago. Bare rockand a thin cover of loose deposits dominate largeareas of the country. In the inland the surficialmaterial consists mainly of tills. Marine clay andsandy shore deposits are found below the Ma-rine Limit, mainly in the South- Eastern part ofthe country, in the Oslo area below an altitude of220 m, and in the Trondheim area.

The most common natural soil is different kindsof podzols. Peat and swamp soils are also com-mon, whereas occurrance of brown soils is lim-ited to a few favourable places.

1.1.3 Climate

Considering the northern latitude, Norway en-joys a relatively favourable climate. This is dueto the Gulf Stream, which carries water fromthe Caribbean up along the coast, giving tem-

Norway

Author:Asbjörn SvensrudAgricultural University of NorwayDepartment of Forest SciencesP.O.Box 5044, 1432 ÅsEmail. asbjorn.svensrud@ nlh10.nlh.no

Norway

peratures that make the land habitable furthernorth than anywhere else on the Earth. Thereare, however, great climatic variations within thecountry. The warmest region is along the South-Western coast. The meteorological station atBergen has the highest normal yearly air tem-perature with 7,7° C. The station with lowestnormal air temperature is in the county ofFinmark with -3,3° C. In the coastal areas thedifferences between summer and winter tem-peratures are relatively small. In Bergen thenormal temperature in July is 14,5° C and inJanuary 1,5° C. The corresponding figures forFlisa in the South-Eastern inland are 15,1° Cand -8,6° C. Annual, normal precipitation at astation on the West coast is 3575 mm. The cor-responding figure for a station in the interiorvalleys in Southern Norway is 278 mm.

The growth season with normal daily tempera-tures above 5° C exceeds 225 days in the South-Western coastal districts. In the South-Easternlowland it is around 165 days, at an altitude of1200 m around 75 days. In Finnmark the growthseason is around 125 days. The great variationin geological and climatic conditions also cre-ates a basis for great variation in vegetation,from demanding and exclusive species along theSouthern coast, to modest forms of vegetationin the far North and in the mountains.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Political structure

Norway is a constitutional monarchy with a par-liamentary system. The constitution was approvedin 1814, and apart from occasional amendmentsis still valid, making it the oldest written consti-tution in Europe. Executive power is formallyvested in the King, but is exercised through theCabinet, which can only operate with the back-ing of a majority in the Storting, the national Par-liament. The King, who is also Commander inChief of the armed forces and Head of the Church,has sole power to appoint the government, but ineffect this is always done with the advice of theleader of the winning party or coalition in theStorting. Norway has not joined the EuropeanUnion, but is a member of NATO.

All legislative and taxation powers are vestedin the Storting, to which general election takesplace every 4 years. Additionally the Sami popu-lation elects members to the Sami Council,which deals with issues of particular interest tothis ethnic group. The Storting has 165 mem-bers. It cannot be dissolved until it has run fullterm. The largest political party has for a longtime been the Labour Party. The ranking of theother parties such as the Conservative, Party ofProgress, Christian Democrat, Liberal, Centre,and Socialist Left has changed over time. Theright to vote was extended to all men in 1898and to women in 1913. The voting age is 18.There is a general service conscription for men,while women can volunteer to serve.

Norway is divided into 19 counties and 435municipalities. Elections to the political assem-blies of the counties and municipalities take placeevery 4 years. The counties deal with matters asregional planning, hospitals and the high schoolsystem, while the municipalities are responsiblefor a wide array of affairs, from the kindergar-tens, basic schools and social welfare to land useplanning. There is a complex system for allocationof financial resources to the municipalities inorder to harmonise the living conditions in thedifferent parts of the country. In each county thecentral government is represented by a Gover-nor, whose task is to control the implementationof the national policies in various fields.

1.2.2 Population distribution and density

The population of Norway is 4,4 mill., whichmeans a population density of 13 per squarekilometre. The larger part of population is foundin cities and urban settlements along the coast.Ten per cent of the population live north of theArctic Circle. The capital city Oslo has a popu-lation of 500 000. The population of other se-lected cities: Bergen 225 000, Trondheim 146000, Stavanger 107 000, and Tromsø 58 000.Three quarters of the population live in denselypopulated areas. Over many decades a concen-tration and urbanization of the population hastaken place. Two patterns of movements are ob-served. First, people move from Northern andinland regions to urban regions, such as the Oslo

Norway

area, and second, within the regions peoplemove from remote districts to regional centres.

1.2.3 Basic education

The public educational system consists of basicschools (primary and lower secondary schools),high schools (upper secondary schools), andcolleges and universities. The children start inthe obligatory 10-year basic school at the age of6. Then everybody has a right to enter a 3-yearhigh school, which gives competence for collegeor university studies, or/and a vocational certifi-cate. The college and university system consistsa number regional colleges, scientific schoolscovering special fields, and 4 universities.

1.2.4 Natural resources and economy

Norway is well endowed with natural resourcesfor economic activity. The supply of fish fromthe ocean, and the forest resources, created thebasis for export centuries ago. Numerous wa-terfalls were utilised as direct source of energyfor sawmilling and mining, etc. Production ofhydro-electric power started by the end of the19th century and formed the basis for industri-alisation, with the development of fertiliser,pulp, and metal industry. Hydro-electric powercounts for about 50 % of calculated energy con-sumption of the country. Around 1970 exploi-tation of the petroleum resources on the conti-nental shelf started.

In 1997 the gross national product (GNP) ofNorway amounted to EURO 130 milliards (1000mill.), or EURO 30 000 per capita. The share of

GNP and employment (persons) in some se-lected sectors is disclosed in table 1. Total em-ployment 2,221 mill. persons.

It is observed that the contribution of the tradi-tional rural industries is relatively little, and ithas been declining over a long time. However,even though their share of GNP is modest, theyare still important industries as suppliers of rawmaterials etc. During the last couple of decadesfish farming, especially of salmon, has grownrapidly, and is together with the traditional fish-eries, the basis of a large exporting segment.Extraction of oil and gas on the continental shelfhas become a major sector of the economy dur-ing the last 25 years, counting for 14 % of theGNP (1997) and one half of the export of com-modities, with strong impact on the Norwegianeconomy as well as on other fields of the soci-ety. The service sectors have also enjoyed astrong growth during the last decades.

2 Forest Resources and their use

2.1 Global overview of the land use

The distribution of the area on main land cat-egories is shown in table 2. The small share ofagricultural land is noticeable. The area of cul-tivated land is 1 mill. ha, or less than 0,25 haper inhabitant. ‘Other land` comprises landabove the forest line and some other barren land.It is noteworthy that around 50 % of the landarea is located above the forest line.

In table 2 the term ‘forest’ is given a wide defi-nition with modest claims as to attainable heightand density of the trees. A rough classification

Sector GNP (%) Employment (%)Agriculture, forestry and fisheries 2,3 4,6Extraction of oil and gas 14,0 1,0Manufacturing industry and mining 11,7 14,3Supply of electricity 2,1 0,9Wholesale and retail trade 9,7 14,7Communication 6,5 6,8Financial services 3,4 2,2Public services 15,4 30,7

Table 1. GNP and employment in some selected sectors of the economy

Norway

of the forest area is presented in table 3. Theconiferous forest line is found at an altitude ofabout 1000 m in the central inland of SouthernNorway. It declines when approaching the coast,and further to the North, where it reaches thesea level. In many places areas of birch forestsare found above the coniferous forest line. Theterm ‘productive forest land’ refers to land with acapacity to yield at least 1m3/ha/year of wood overa rotation. The proportion of forest land that iseconomically usable depends on the price of woodand the cost of harvesting. In a governmental re-port (1998) it is estimated that 80 per cent of theproductive forest land is economically usable.

2.2 Forest history

When the last glacial epoch ended around 10 000years ago the forest gradually reoccupied the land.It is supposed that mountain races of Betula, Alnusand Prunus could be found in some places duringthe ice age, but now the climate became so fa-vourable that new species occurred. White birch(Betula pubescens) and aspen (Populus tremula)were first. Later, when the climate became warmer,pine (Pinus silvestris), silver birch (Betulapendula) and hazel (Corylus avellana) arrived.During a warm period, starting around 7 500 yearsago, more demanding species as e.g. elm (Ulmusglabra), linden (Tilia cordata), oak ( Quercus),and ash (Fraxinus exelsior) came in. These spe-cies were for some time found over a larger part ofthe land than today. The elevation of the tree line

against the mountains was higher than now. Inmany places trunks and stumps from ancient for-ests are still found in bogs and lakes 300 metersabove the prevalent tree line for birch forest.

Around 2 500 years ago the climate became lessfavourable, with higher precipitation, coolersummers, and longer winters. The more demand-ing species retreated in the lowlands and disap-peared at the higher elevations. The tree line sank,and along the coast the forests were replaced byheath and bushy birchwood. At about the sametime the spruce (Picea abies) started to invadethe land. The beech (Fagus silvatica) also enteredby that time. The moist and cool climate wasfavourable for the spruce, which soon becamethe dominant species in large parts of the country.

As the population grew the forests were increas-ingly affected by human activity. Land wascleared for cultivation, and the forest providedwood for house-building and fuel. Extraction ofiron from bog ore was also an activity demand-ing great volumes of wood, and exports of woodto countries beyond the North Sea took placealready 1000 years ago.

During the first half of the 16th century waterdriven saws were introduced. Production andexports of sawnwood increased, and saw-mill-ing became a major industry. The exports ofsawnwood reached a peak around 1875. By thattime the first pulp mills were started. This in-dustry could utilise smaller trees than the saw

Used for buildings, roads, industry, etc. 1,1 %Agricultural land 3,6 %Freshwater 5,4 %Bogs and wetland 6,3 %Forest 36,8 %Other land 46,8 %

Table 2. Land area distributed on main land categories

Total forested area 120 000 km2

Below the coniferous forest line 90 000 km2

Productive forest land 72 000 km2

Economically usable forest (58 000 km2)

Table 3. Classification of the forested area

Norway

mills, with consequences for the exploitation ofthe forests.

In the 17th century a rather extensive mining foriron, copper and silver was started. This activityrequired large quantities of wood and had a strongimpact on the forests in many regions. In the highaltitude Røros area the forests were so heavilyexploited that they have not yet recovered.

The first public restrictions on trade in forestproducts were introduced by the end of the 16th.century with the aim of securing supply of oaktimber for the navy. Later several public regula-tions of forestry were in force for shorter orlonger periods. However, around 1850 most ofthe regulations were abandoned. Growing popu-lation and large exports of sawnwood were fac-tors that made heavy toll on the forests duringthe last half of the 19th century. Cuttings withlittle regard to regeneration of the forest werepractised until the early 20th century.

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Forest ownership

The structure of ownership of productive forestland is disclosed in tables 4 and 5 (CBS 1991).Main features of the structure are:

- There is a large number of forest owners inNorway. The size of the holdings is very un-evenly distributed. Sixty percent of the small-est holdings have only 10 percent of the forestarea, whereas 10 per cent of the largest hold-ings have 60 percent of the area. For manyforest owners the incomes from forestry aremarginal.

- Most of the forest land is in private, personalownership. A large proportion of the forest landis farm forests, and managed in combinationwith agriculture. About 75 % of the private for-est owners actually live on the farm. There is agreat variation as to the economic role of for-estry relative to agriculture on the farms.

- Very little of the forest land is in integratedownership with the forest industry.

- Public ownership to forest land is less than inmost countries. The term ‘Public forests’ in ta-ble 4 covers land with different legal status:Common forests, in local ownership, or wherelocal people have extensive rights of use (6%),municipal forest (3%), forests belonging to thechurch (3%), and regular state forests. The regu-lar state and the church forests are managed bythe stately owned company STATSKOG SF, whichalso is the managerial authority for large areasabove the forest line, and national parks.

The market for forest land is strictly regulatedthrough a number of laws. Important is a law aim-

Size class (ha) Number Area (1000 ha) Area, percent1 - 24,9 92 528 783 11,125 - 99,9 40 004 1 946 27,7100 – 499,9 11 817 2 149 30,5500 – 1999,9 992 857 12,22000 - 224 1 301 18,5Total 145 565 *7 036 100

Table 5. Ownership by size class of holdings

* A minor difference in this table compared with table 6 is due to different statistical basis

Ownership category Number Area (1000 ha) Area, percentIndividual owners 122 256 5 503 78,5Stock companies, private institutions etc 2 038 484 6,9Public forests 1 228 1 026 14,6Total 125 522 7 012 100

Table 4. Ownership categories (holdings larger than 2,5 ha of forest land)

Norway

ing at securing the ownership to land being keptwithin the family. Another law makes acquisitionof land conditional of public concession, com-bined with a regulation of price. The ownershipstructure has been stable over a long time.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forest

A national forest inventory was started in 1919.The first round was completed in 1930.The ac-tivity has continued up to present time, record-ing several parameters related to forests. Theinventory has covered all counties, except thenorthernmost county of Finnmark.

Table 6 gives a survey of the forest land belowthe coniferous forest line according to the na-tional forest inventory. The country has beendivided in three regions: (1) South-Mid-East,

(2) West, and (3) North. The regional divisionis shown on the map, figure 1.It appears that thearea of productive forest land is 7,2 mill. ha.Region (1) is richest in forest. It has 74 % of theproductive forest land and is consequently ofgreatest importance from a forestry point ofview. Of the bogs some 0,6 mill. ha are coveredby trees. The productive forest land of Finnmarkis estimated to 83 thousand ha. The northern-most pine forest (Pinus silvestris) in the worldis found in Finnmark on latitude 70° N.

Tables 7 and 8 show the distribution of forestland on altitude zones and site quality classesrespectively. Around one half of the forest is lo-cated below 300 m above the sea level.

The definition of site classes is as follows (yieldcapacity including bark over a rotation):

Region Productive Other Bogs Totalforest Woodedland land

South-Mid-East 5 355 1 036 972 15 245West 916 272 191 5 850North 1 002 413 273 6 428Total 7 273 1 721 1 434 27 523

Table 6. The forest area below the coniferous forest line (exclusive Finnmark). 1000 ha. (NIJOS 1996)

Region Site classLow Medium High Very high

South-Mid-East 1 933 (36) 2 507 (47) 841 (16) 71 (1)West 260 (28) 438 (48) 183 (20) 35 (4)North 662 (66) 323 (32) 17 (2) -Total 2 855 (39) 3 268 (45) 1 042 (14) 106 (2)

Table 8. Productive forest land by site quality classes, in 1000 ha. (Per cent distribution in paren-theses). (NIJOS 1996)

Region Altitude zones, m above sea level< 300 300 - 600 > 600 Total

South-Mid-East 2 149 2 003 1 204 5 355West 665 233 18 916North 831 169 2 1 002Total 3 645 2 405 1 224 7 273

Table 7. Productive forest land by altitude zones (1000 ha) (NIJOS 1996)

Norway

Figure1. Map of Norway showing the regional division used in this presentation

Finnmark$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T$T

$T$T

$T$T$T$T

$T

$T

Oslo

Hamar

Tromsø

Berg

Trondheim

Stava

West

South-Mid-East

North

en

nger

Low 1,0 - 2,7 m3/ha/year (Rotation 130 years)Medium 2,8 - 6,5 m3/ha/year (105 years)High 6,6 - 10,7 m3/ha/year (85 years)Very high > 10,7 m3/ha/year (years)

It appears from table 8 that a relatively largepart of the forest is found in the low and me-dium site classes.

The area of productive forest land is accordingto the national forest inventory increasing, es-

pecially in the coastal districts. It is also assumedthat the forest line in the mountains is rising. Areason for the increase in forest area may beovergrowth of former agricultural land and re-duced grazing in the forest.

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

The overall dominating part of the growing stockin the forest consist of native tree species and

Norway

provenances. In the coastal districts in Westand North Norway some exotic conifers havebeen introduced as part of an afforestationprogram. The activity was specially intenseduring a 25 year period from around 1950. Theprogram involved conversion of especially birchforest and heath land to spruce forest. The largerpart of the new forest consists of Norway spruce,but to some extent Sitka spruce and other NorthAmerican conifers have been planted.

Especially during the 1960’s Central Europeanprovenances of Norway spruce were introducedon a practical scale in ordinary forestry, partlyto overcome a shortage of native seed, and partlyas an effort to increase future forest production.The resulting stands do not turn out to be verypromising.

The distribution of the growing stock volumeon different tree species is shown in table 9. Inthe central forest districts spruce is the domi-nating species. In the West and North pine andbirch cover the larger part of the forest land.

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth andfellings

Table 10 shows the volume of the growing stockon productive forest land around 1990. The to-tal growing stock is estimated to 742 mill. m3.In addition comes a volume 44 mill. m3 on otherforested land below the coniferous forest limit.Again the dominating place of spruce is ob-served. Of the deciduous tree species birch isdominant with 68 % of the volume, whilst as-pen and grey alder each has 8 %, and other spe-cies cover the remaining. The percentages aresomewhat different in various regions.

The annual growth on productive forest land is21,2 mill. m3 (table 11). Both growing stock andannual growth have been increasing for severaldecades. Since the first national inventory wascompleted in 1930 a doubling has taken place.This development is illustrated in figure 2.

Felling for sale and industrial utilisation variesconsiderably over shorter and longer periods,due to variations in markets and prices. Itreached a peak in 1990 with 11 mill. m3 whenthere had been a rising trend since the mid-sev-enties. During the nineties the trend has on thewhole been negative. In 1996 the volume offellings was 8 mill. m3, distributed on 75 %spruce, 22 % pine and 3 % deciduous trees (pri-marily birch).

The volume of roundwood used on the farms asbuilding material or fuel, or not recorded in or-dinary statistics, has declined over a long pe-riod of time and is now estimated to roughly 1mill. m3 (included in table 12).

Table 12 shows the estimated annual drain fromthe forest in 1995.

The annual fellings of roundwood for sale andindustrial utilisation are recorded by the Cen-tral Bureau of Statistics. Regarding theroundwood used on the farms etc. the statisticaldata are less reliable. The same holds true forlosses of wood due to natural causes.

The figures indicate that the annual drain isslightly more than 50 % of the annual growth.This is reflected in figure 2 showing the increasein volume of the growing stock. In absoluteterms the annual drain is of the same magnitudeas it was around 1930, when the first balance

Region Dominating tree speciesSpruce Pine Deciduous Total

South-Mid-East 2 537 (50) 1 763 (34) 819 (16) 5 120West 155 (19) 326 (40) 327 (41) 808North 185 (19) 85 (9) 691 (72) 962Total 2 878 (42) 2 175 (32) 1 837 (27) 6 890

Table 9. Productive forest land by dominating tree species, excluding landunder regeneration, in 1000 ha. (Per cent distribution in parentheses). (NIJOS 1996)

Norway

Figure 2. Growing stock volume (upper diagram) and annual increment (under bark) on forestland below the coniferous forest line (NIJOS 1996)

Region Growing stock , mill. m3, including barkSpruce Pine Deciduous Total

South-Mid-East 305 192 97 595West 20 39 32 92North 11 7 38 56Total 337 238 167 742

Table 10. Growing stock on productive forest land (NIJOS 1996)

Region Dominating tree speciesSpruce Pine Deciduous Total

South-Mid-East 9,4 4,4 3,0 16,8West 1,3 0,8 0,8 2,9North 0,4 0,1 0,9 1,5Total 11,1 5,4 4,7 21,2

Table 11. Annual growth on productive forest land, mill. m3 (NIJOS 1996)

Spruce

Pine

Deciduous

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1925 1950 1958 1970 1984 1990 1995

Year

Mill

ion

m3

Spruce

Pine

Deciduous

0

510

1520

25

1925 1950 1958 1970 1984 1990 1995

Year

Mill

ion

m3

Removals Waste wood and natural losses TotalSpruce Pine Deciduous Spruce Pine Deciduous

7,1 2,0 1,0 1,1 0,5 0,6 12,3

Table 12. Estimated total annual drain from the forest in 1995. Mill. m3 (NIJOS 1996)

Norway

based on measurements were made, and whenthe volume of the growing stock was only a halfof what it is today. The annual drain from theforest being less than the annual increment, in-tensified silviculture and regeneration measures,and afforestation in the coastal districts, are rea-sons behind this development.

2.3.5 Forest threats

The threat against the forest that has attractedmost attention during the recent few decades islong-distance air pollution. Extensive researchand surveillance programs have been intro-duced. The conclusion so far is that the foresthealth situation seems to be relatively stable. Asmall decrease in average crown density has,however, been recorded. This developmentmight be regarded due to several factors includ-ing, but not restricted to, air pollution. Specialmeasures, as fertilization or liming, are not rec-ommended. A higher percentage of deciduoustrees in conifer forest is desirable. And there isstill regarded to be risk of a long run negativeeffect of air pollution, especially through theinfluence on the forest soil.

Fungi, insects and animals are inherent compo-nents of the natural forest ecosystem. Occasion-ally and locally some species may be so numer-ous that they make more or less damage to thetrees. From the several examples that could bementioned, a few are selected.

Relatively serious attacks from the bark beetle(Ips typographus) on spruce took place duringthe late 1970’s in the South-Eastern part of thecountry. The attacks were considered to be aconsequence of large storm fellings and dry sum-mers in previous years, and they had clear eco-nomic consequences. The beetle Hylobiusabietis also harms conifer plantations and is thusof economic importance too.

The birch forest in the Northern part of the coun-try and in the mountainous regions are frequentlyattacked by the larva of Oporinia autumnata andother species with very visible consequences inthe landscape, as huge areas usually are attacked.Of the great number of fungies found in the for-

est the Heterobasidion annosum is the one thathas the greatest negative effect on wood pro-duction. It is found especially on the most fer-tile forest land, where in many places a largepart of the mature trees is attacked, with seriouseffect on wood quality and price. Another fun-gus harming wood production is Phacidiuminfestans which attacks regenerations of pine athigh altitudes. During the last years great atten-tion has been paid to the elm disease, which killsthe elm trees both in the forest and in publicparks etc. It is currently found in the Oslofjordarea.

In many places damage on regenerations andyoung stands is caused by dense populations ofmoose (Alces alces) and red deer (Cervuselaphus). The population of these animals hasrisen sharply since the 1960’s.

Local storm fellings occur normally every year.More extensive fellings have taken place withirregular intervals of several years. In 1992 astorm caused severe destruction of forest on theNorth-West coast of Southern Norway. In the latesixties, and especially in 1969, there were exten-sive storm fellings in the South-East regions.

In earlier times rather extensive forest fires oc-curred frequently. Due to a better access to theforests through a dense road system and effec-tive fire departments, large forest fires seldomtake place, even though the fires are numerous.Normally the burnt area is a few hundred hec-tares per year. It is claimed that from an eco-logical viewpoint more burning would be ad-vantageous.

2.4 Silviculture

During the last five decades clear-cutting andplanting has been a dominant feature of thesilvicultural methods. This is particularily truefor spruce forest. In pine forest use of seed treeshas been applied to a greater extent. The foreststand is regarded as the unit for managementand silvicultural treatment. Because of topog-raphy and ownership structure the area of theindividual stands or clear-cuttings are often rela-tively small, averaging 1,4 ha.

Norway

In earlier times more or less selective cuttingswith reliance on natural regeneration were domi-nant. It was, however, an extensive opinionamong professionals that this type of silvicul-ture led to gradual depletion of the forest, be-cause of poor regeneration and consequent re-moval of the best trees. But it should also benoted that the rapid development of the clear-cutting system took place concurrently with themechanisation of the forestry operations.

The clear-cutting system originally also pre-sumed that a large part, at least 25 %, of theproduce should be harvested in thinnings. Dueto the technical and economic development thecosts of thinnings have increased, and in practi-cal forestry thinnings make up a relatively smallamount of the wood harvest. This is especiallytrue for spruce forest. In pine forest more atten-tion is paid to the quality of the wood, and therisk of damaging remaining trees is less. Pineforest is, therefore, more intensively thinned thanspruce forest. On the whole 70 % of the regen-eration area is clear-cut, and 50 % is planted.Relatively little attention has been paid to themanagement of deciduous forest.

Tending of regenerations and young stands isregarded as a central element in silviculture. Theaim may be to reduce competition from sproutsof undesired tree species, or grass, or to regu-late the number of trees in order to reduce theneed for future thinnings, etc. Most of this ac-tivity is performed by mechanical methods, to aless degree chemicals are applied.

During the last 10 - 20 years new trends insilvicultural practices are observed in order tomeet the increasing demand for non-wood prod-ucts and services from the forest, involving moreattention being paid to the total ecosystem ofthe forest, not only usable trees. This tendencyhas several practical implications. Natural re-generation of the forest is more emphasized,assuming changes in cutting practices, for ex-ample smaller clearcuttings, use of shelterwoodsystems etc. As an illustration is mentioned thatin 1995 it was planted 47 mill. plants, comparedto an annual planting of 59 mill. during the pre-ceding 10-year period.

Uniform, single-species stands do not form theideal silvicultural picture to the same degree asbefore. On the contrary the aim is that futurespruce stands should contain at least 10 % de-ciduous trees. There is a greater tolerance for«undesired vegetation». Forest close to lakes,rivers and streams is subjected to particularlycautious management. Draining of bogs for treeplanting has roughly speaking come to an end.Efforts are made to maintain scattered trees be-yond normal cutting age. More attention is alsopaid to the management of deciduous forest.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

During the last decades harvesting systems havechanged from being based on heavy manualwork, using handsaws and axes for cutting andhorses and floating for transportation, to a har-vesting system heavily based on mechanisation.

Mechanisation started with the introduction ofpower saws for felling, delimbing and cross-cutting, and the use of agricultural tractors forextraction. Later more specialised machinery asskidders, forewarders, felling and delimbingmachines were introduced. Presently multi-func-tion machines performing, felling, delimbing,and cross-cutting based on automatically re-corded tree stem parameters, are widely used.

In contemporary practical forestry two differ-ent harvesting systems are mainly applied:(1) Motor-manual system, which means that

power saws are used for felling, delimbing andcrosscutting. Tractors, often agricultural trac-tors with some extra equipment, are used fortransport of the wood to roadside.

(2) Mechanised system, involving the use ofmulti-function machines for felling etc., andtransport to the roadside with forwarders.

An important feature and condition of this tran-sition is the construction of forest roads. Dur-ing the last 40-50 years a rather dense net of roadshas been developed in the forests. The construc-tion activity has declined in recent years. In 1996300 km new truck roads were built, and about

Norway

the same length of old roads were reconstructed.In addition comes the building of 800 km roadsfor tractors. The distance of transportation of thewood to the place of delivery is of great eco-nomic importance. Table 13 shows thedistribution of productive forest land on classesof distance from roads. There is some regionalvariation, in that the densest road net is found inthe more central forest districts.

industries. These two industry groups receiveabout 50% and 40% of the annual cut respec-tively. The remaining wood is used for a greatnumber of purposes, as poles, veneer, particle-and fibreboard, fuelwood, etc. Around one thirdof the sawtimber volume is chipped and used asraw material in the pulp- and board industry.

The sawmill industry consumes annually about4,5 mill. m3, of which 0,7 mill. m3 is imported.The output of 2,5 mill. m3 sawnwood corre-sponds roughly to the domestic consumption,but nevertheless an annual export (and import)of about 0,7 mill. m3 takes place.

In 1997 the consumption of pulpwood (includ-ing chips) of the Norwegian pulp- and paperindustry was 7,1 mill. m3, of which 35 % wasimported. This industry produces mainly for theworld market, as 90 % of the output is exported.

2.5.3 Forest functions

In a commercial context the production of woodas industrial raw material or fuelwood has adominating position. The forest yields, however,a large number of other products and services.The forest owner has an exclusive right to thewood production and hunting (within the pre-vailing laws), but apart from that the generalpublic has free access to the forests for a greatvariety of activities.

The most important game for hunting is themoose (Alces alces). The annual felling is around40 000 animals. Other species for hunting in theforests are red deer (Cervus elaphus) and roedeer (Capteolus capreolus), just to mention twoof the more important species, and a numbersmall game species. The total number of hunt-ers is around 170 000 (the number of issuedhunting tax cards).

Picking of berries (blue berries, cranberries, andcloudberries, etc.) and of mushrooms is anotherextensive activity in which many people takepart, mostly for leisure. It is, however difficult toestimate the quantity or value of these products.

Steepness Productive forest land (%)< 20 % 5220 - 49 % 39> 50 % 9

Table 14. Distribution of productive forest landon classes of steepness (NIJOS 1996)

Distance Productive forest land (%)< 500 m 52500- 1000 m 24> 1000 m 24

Table 13. Distribution of productive forest landon distances from existing road (NIJOS 1996)

Steepness is another factor determining eco-nomic accessibility. Table 14 shows the distri-bution of productive forest land on classes ofsteepness. Relatively much of the steepest for-est land is found in Western Norway.

The definition of productive forest land is solelybased on biological yield capacity. When woodprices and harvesting costs are considered, partsof this land are not economically exploitable.Poor site quality, topography and location aredecisive factors in this connection. Traditionallythere have been great fluctuations in the pricesof wood over time. Thus, the share of forest landin use may also vary, and it is therefore difficultto be specific as to the forest area that on thelong run really is economically exploitable.

2.5.2 Timber uses

The dominant users of roundwood for sale and/or industrial use are the sawmill and the pulp

Norway

Outdoor life is an important feature of Norwe-gian everyday life, and a great number of peo-ple use the forests for different kinds of outdoorrecreational activities such as hiking, skiing etc.Especially intensly used for recreation are for-ests close to the population centres. Great at-tention has been paid to the forests surroundingOslo, where special regulations have been in-troduced in order to protect the recreational (andother non-wood) functions.

In addition to the role the forest plays throughactive utilisation it constitutes a central environ-mental factor. It is an important part of the land-scape, it has climatic and hydrological influences,and is the natural, ecological environment fornumerous species of plants and animals. Duringthe last years the role of forest for the protectionof biological diversity has been emphasised.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy

Forestry and forest industries have traditionallyplayed an important part in the Norwegianeconomy. This holds still true although the rela-tive importance of the sector has declined as aconsequence of more rapid growth in other sec-tors of the economy. The sector can not in thesame degree as before rely on the relatively fa-vourable natural conditions that caused the earlygrowth of the industry: abundant supply of woodof good quality, favourable transport facilitieson the rivers, ice-free harbours, cheap energy,etc. This is due to the technological and eco-nomic development that have opened for indus-trial use of other tree species, revolutionisedinternational transport and trade, etc.

Table 15 gives an illustration of the economicrole of the forest sector. The contribution to thenational product is 2 %. Its share of the manu-facturing industrial sector is around 10 %.In the pulp and paper industry there are cleareconomies of scale. This has led to a concentra-tion of the production to fewer mills and com-panies. The same development has to some ex-

tent taken place in the sawmill industry. The in-dustries are purchasing wood and and sellingtheir products on the international market. Im-portant sources of wood are the Baltics andRussia. The most important product markets arefound within the area of the European Union.

3.2 Employment

Table 15 shows that the employment in the for-est sector is 34 000 man-years. During the lastdecades there has been a steady decline in allparts of the sector, although the output has in-creased, at least in the industrial sector.

In forestry the total employment is around 5000 man-years. Several more individuals areemployed, as many forest owners and others dosome part time work in the forest. It is estimatedthat the forest owners and their families performabout 25 % of the work, the remainder beingperformed by hired labour. A substantial part ofthe forestry operations are carried out by entre-preneurs using technically advanced loggingequipment with a production capacity far ex-ceeding the need of the the individual forestproperty.

Although the employment in forestry on thewhole is relatively modest, it plays an impor-tant role in many rural districts, and for manyindividuals. Concentration of the industry andmechanisation of the forestry has had a strongnegative influence on the employment in manyrural districts, and hence on rural development.Great efforts are, however, being made to main-tain rural employment and population. Strength-ening of the forest sector is part of this policy.One feature is support of small scale industryfor local markets and products, making use ofspecial wood qualities.

3.3 Profitability

The measure of profitability most frequentlyused in forestry is the stumpage value of theharvest. The stumpage value depends on thegross sales price and the harvesting costs. Theprices of wood have traditionally fluctuated over

Norway

time with frequent ups and downs. However,during the last decades the overall tendency hasbeen falling real prices. The development of theharvesting costs are more stable. During the lastdecades the harvesting costs have decreased inreal terms, even with increasing wages and in-comes in the society. The stumpage value hasalso had a negative trend, especially until thelate nineteen-eighties. The fluctuations instumpage value are even greater than in grossprices. Figure 3 illustrates the development inprices, costs and stumpage value during the lastdecades.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

Modern legislation for regulation of forestry datesback to 1891 when a law on forest protection waspassed. The law turned out to be inefficient, anda new law was passed in 1932. In 1965 this lawwas replaced by a new one, which is still in force,with several significant amendments, especiallyrelated to environmental issues.

The aim of the Law on Forest and Forestry is topromote forestry and forest protection. Rationaluse of the forests should aim at yielding a satis-factory return to those who are engaged in for-estry, and ensure a stable supply of wood forindustrial purposes. Concurrently the role of theforests as a source of recreation, as an impor-tant part of the landscape, as natural environ-ment for plants and animals, and as areas forhunting and fishing, should be emphasized. Thelaw covers all forest land, but its regulationsshould not infringe the traditional land use rightsof the Sami people. In the following some mainpoints are mentioned.

To supervise the practising of the law a three-level forest authority has been established. Thehighest level is the Ministry of Agriculture, Divi-sion of Forestry. On the county level there is aCounty land board with a professional staff, andon the local level the responsibility rests with themunicipality. A decision made by a subordinateauthority is subject to control by a superior one.

Central parts of the law deal with regulations ofharvesting, reforestation, and construction ofroads etc. Younger satisfactory forest must betreated with the aim of furthering the develop-ment of the forest with regard to wood quantityor quality. In other forests thinning or regenera-tion felling must be done in such a way that fu-ture growth or regeneration is favoured. Remain-ing trees or adjoining forest must not be unnec-essarily damaged. The term ‘younger’ refers toforest of an age lower than 75 % of the rotationage giving maximum annual increment, and ‘sat-isfactory’ refers to stands supposed to yield atleast two thirds of normal increment during theremaining part of the rotation.

Harvesting shall be planned and carried out withdue regard to the natural environment and out-door recreation. Continued use of public paths,ski trails and other rights of way shall not berendered unnecessarily difficult when the op-erations are finished. For areas of particular in-terest for outdoor recreation or conservation ofnature special regulations can be introduced.There is a general obligation to establish regen-eration on forest land within a reasonable time.If an owner of forest land does not comply witha written request from the forest authority thatsteps be taken to ensure regeneration, the au-thority can order certain measures to be carriedout to restore forest.

Norway* Industry Agriculture Forest sectorGross production** 183 43 2,8 4,9Gross product** 98 13 1,4 1,7Employment (1000 ) 2 106 277 80 34

Table 15. The forest sector in the national economy (1995) (Based on CBS 1997)

* Excluding the continental shelf.** Euro 1000 mill.

Norway

For forest roads and other technical construc-tions the Ministry of Agriculture can establishregulations to the effect that such constructionscan not be carried out unless the plans have beenapproved by the forest authority.

If the forest authority finds it necessary for prac-tising the law it can direct forest owners to givewritten notice of planned harvesting etc. In somecases the forest authority can require a formalmanagement plan be produced. A central pointis, however, that the forest owner is entitled tomanage the forest within the framework givenby the law, often referred to as the principle of«freedom under responsibility».

The forest authority can also impose certainduties on the forest owners regarding treatmentof forest damaged by wind, fire, etc., or in or-der to prevent or reduce damages by insect andfungus attacks etc.

Special regulations apply for protection forests,i.e. forests that can serve as protection againstlandslides, harmful floods, erosion, etc., and forother forest, agricultural land or buildings. Mostprotection forests are found close under the for-est line. The limits of such forests should bemarked on maps, or even in the field.

The law introduces a so-called ‘forest trustfund’, which is an instrument to ensure financ-ing of forest regeneration and some other for-estry measures. The arrangement implies that acertain percentage of the incomes from sales of

wood be deposited on a special bank account,from which the forest owner can draw when rel-evant works, controlled by the forest authority,have been carried out. The deposit is usually 10% of the gross sales income, but may vary be-tween 5 and 25 %. The interest on the bank de-posits is disposed of by the forest authority. Aspecial regulation in the tax laws gives the for-est owners a tax deduction when using meansfrom the forest trust fund for financingsilvicultural works or road construction.

A number of other laws do also have special rel-evance to forestry. The Law on Protection ofNature forms the legal basis for establishment ofnational parks and forest reserves, and in the Lawon Outdoor Life some regulations regarding therights and obligations of the general public whenstaying in the forest or on other out-laying land,to which there is a general right of access. Otherrelevant laws in a forestry context are the lawson land use, on planning and building, and onconservation of the cultural heritage.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

On the governmental level the two main actorsin forest policy are the Ministry of Agricultureand the Ministry of Environment. In addition tobeing the proper authority concerning the Lawon forestry and forest protection The Ministryof Agriculture is responsible for the forest sec-tor policy in general, whereas the responsibility

Figure 3. Average price of sawtimber and pulpwood of spruce, logging costs and stumpage valueduring the period 1973-1997, in 1997- NOK and Euro per m3 (at constant rate of exchange)

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

NO

K

EU

RO

1973 75 1977 79 1981 83 1985 87 1989 91 1993 95 1997

Year

Price

Costs

Stp. value

Norway

of the Ministry of Environment covers environ-mental issues in all sectors of society.

The interests of the forest owners are taken careof primarily by two organisations, namely theForest Owners’ Federation of Norway (‘NorgesSkogeierforbund’) and The Norwegian ForestAssociation (‘Norskog’). The former has tradi-tionally had close contacts with the family of ag-ricultural co-operatives, whereas the latter ideo-logically is based on individual, free enterprise.

An idealistic approach to forest and forestry isthe basis of The Norwegian Forest Society(‘Det norske Skogselskap’). Women in Forestry(‘Jenter i Skogbruket’) is an organisation aim-ing at involving women in a profession that tra-ditionally almost exclusively has been domi-nated by men.

The main non-governmental actors regardingenvironmental issues related to the forest are theNorwegian Society for the Conservation of Na-ture (‘Norges Naturvernforbund’) and the Nor-wegian branch of World Wildlife Fund.

4.3 Forest policy tools

The main basis of the forest policy is the Lawon forest and forestry, which defines a frame-work for the forestry practice. It forms, how-ever, also a basis for more active public poli-cies towards forestry. In addition to controllingthe practicing of the law the forest authority hastraditionally been heavily involved in guidanceand planning for the forest owners regardingsilviculture and road construction.

Another element of public forest policy is fi-nancial support to investments in forestry, asdirect subsidies or tax reliefs. Direct subsidiesare granted to a number of forestry measures,e.g. establishing regenerations, road construc-tion and management planning. Silviculturalexpenses and expenses for building and main-tenance of forest roads are deductible in the cal-culation of taxable incomes. Special tax reliefsare also connected with the use of the ‘foresttrust fund’ described above. The regulations re-garding the subsidising and the use of the ‘for-

est trust fund’ are designed with a view to theaims of the forest policy, or e.g. to obtain a ra-tional forest road system across the borders ofthe individual ownerships. These regulationsare, thus, a strong political instrument. Aspectsof regional policy are influencing the allocationof funds, and the decision power regarding thepractising of the regulations has to a large ex-tent been decentralised to the county level.

4.4 Forest policies in relation to othernational policy areas

The forest policy is more or less closely relatedto several other policy areas. Forests constitutea basic element of the natural environment, andthe forest policy is therefore considered in thecontext of the more general environmentalpolicy. The role of forests in a policy for reduc-ing the «greenhouse effect» is one aspect of thisconnection.

Because of the ownership structure there is aclose connection between agriculture and andforestry, and this has also political consequences.In some respects the policy towards forestry isregarded as a part of the agricultural policy. Partsof the subsidies to forestry are allocated fromthe ‘agricultural income agreement’ funds, thatare subject to negotiations between the govern-ment and the farmers’ organisations. The aim isto make forestry contribute to rural develop-ment. Aspects of regional policy have on thewhole had strong influence on the forestrypolicy, as great parts of as well forestry as for-est industry are located in districts with prob-lems of maintaining employment and popula-tion. As wood from the forest also is raw mate-rial for important manufacturing industries, theforest policy has to be viewed in an industrialcontext.

4.5 Forest education and research

Education in forestry has over the recent yearsgradually become an integral part of the gen-eral educational system. The background isfound in the development of the forest sectoritself , and in the general development of the

Norway

society. The sector has declined relatively, em-ployment has decreased, and non-timber aspectshave come to play an ever more important rolein public opinion and policy. Education is morethan ever regarded a crucial factor in the eco-nomic and social development, and the educa-tional system in general has swelled during thelast decades. Changes in the labour market takeplace more rapidly than before, requiring theindividual person to acquire new competence.The forestry education has also to be viewed onthis background. Basic subjects and knowledgeare emphasised.

The vocational training of forest workers, whichused to take place in separate schools, has nowbeen integrated, and are forming one option ofstudy, in the high school system. The three-yeareducational program includes general topics thatin principle will make the student eligible foradmittance to higher education. During the firsttwo years there are courses in natural resourcesand forestry, while the third year offers differ-ent options, including guided training as forestworker or machine operator. A diploma of pro-fessional skill is obtained. The programs havebeen designed to meet the need for training ofprofessional forestry workers and machine op-erators, and also of future forest owners. Theprogram is offered in a number of schools indifferent counties.

The former forestry technical schools have beenintegrated in the regional college system. Three-year study programs in forestry are offered at 3regional colleges. The prerequisite for admit-tance is passed exam from a three-year highschool. Compared to the traditional forestryschools the curriculum includes more of basicsubjects. Independent work is more emphasized,and the study has on the whole become moreflexible. The number of graduates is up to 100per year.

University forest training is offered at the Agricul-tural University of Norway, located 30 km Southof Oslo, where forest science is one of 12 lines ofstudy. The normal study program takes 5 years.An option to follow a 3,5 year program is used toa small extent. For the time being about 45 candi-

dates accomplish the full study program per year.The program has a main core of courses, or sub-jects, accounting for 60 % of the curriculum. Thispart covers the basic general subjects and subjectsrelated to forest and forestry. The rest of theprogram involves specialisation in one of 4directions of study: Silviculture, Resourceeconomics and planning, Forest operations, andWood technology. The students are also giventhe option of following an individual plan of study.There is a liberal practice as to accepting studentswith education from other institutions and offerthem an individual road to a final exam. Theprogram is open for majoring in sawmill industry.

From 1997 the Agricultural University of Nor-way is subordinated the Ministry of Church,Education and Research in stead of the Minis-try of Agriculture, involving that the whole edu-cation system is unified in one ministry.

Research in subjects related to forest and for-estry takes place at several universities and otherresearch institutions. Special forest research in-stitutions are the Norwegian Forest ResearchInstitute and the Department of Forest Sciencesat the Agricultural University of Norway.

The Norwegian Forest Research Institute (NISK)was founded in 1917 with the aim ofstrengthening the scientific basis for the manage-ment of forest resources. The activity is currentlyorganised in three departments, namely Ecology,Management, and Economics, technology andprocessing. The institution has traditionally beenclosely connected with timber production andforest industry. However, during the last 20 yearsever more of the research projects have beenrelated to ecological and environmental problems.Problems related to biodiversity, and the influenceof acid rains on forest soils, are emphasised.Research on improving products, and develop-ing new products based on wood has also beenstrengthened. The institute has a staff of around170. Its main office is located at the universitycampus at Ås, and a small branch office at Bergen.

The main task of the Department of Forest Sci-ences of the Agricultural University of Norwayis to give scientifically based teaching, but thescientific staff is also supposed to allocate half

Norway

of the working hours to research. The researchactivity of the department covers most fieldsrelated to forest and forest utilisation. The staffnumbers about 40.

Other research institutions related to forest andforest resources are:Norwegian Institute of Nature Research,TrondheimThe Norwegian Institute of Land Inventory, ÅsThe Norwegian Institute of Wood Technology,OsloThe Norwegian Pulp and Paper Research Insti-tute, Trondheim

A number of regional research institutions haveprojects related to forest and forestry on theiragenda.

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges

A main issue in forest policy is to combine theintensification of the forest utilisation with theincreasing environmental requirements. The in-creasing growing stock volume means that thereis a potential for larger harvest of wood. It isdesirable to exploit this potential in order thatforestry can contribute to rural development bycreating employment and incomes, and for sup-plying raw material to the forest industry. Con-sidering the prevailing forest situation thereshould as a matter of principle be good possi-bilities for satisfying the many demands on theforests in a reasonable degree, even though thereare obviously many conflicting interests.

Conservation of forest, meaning exclusion fromcutting, has for many years been a central topic.Up to 1995 a total forest area of 1 995 km2 hadbeen reserved for conservation, of which 795km2 was coniferous forest. A large share of thisforest is located at high altitudes and far north.Most attention has, however, been paid to thereservation of productive forest, particularly toproductive coniferous forest. A national plan forestablishing reserves covering various types ofconiferous forest has been worked out. A planto extend the area of this type of forest by 120

km2 has been adopted and is now being imple-mented, bringing the share of reserved produc-tive coniferous forest area up 720 km2 , slightlymore than one percent. Some reserves of de-ciduous forests of oak and other species withless occurrence have also been established.

The judgement is, however, that conservationof the biological diversity in the main has to betaken care of through regulation of forestry prac-tices. In order to achieve this a great number ofmeasures have been put into effect. In publicforest policy the regard for biological diversityhas been underlined, e.g. by adapting the rulesfor financial support of investments in forestry.A special set of regulations for environmentalforestry has been proposed (for the moment sub-ject to hearings). In a governmental report in1998 a new forest law with a more pronouncedenvironmental profile has been announced. Thebackground of this development is found in theprocesses resulting from the international con-ferences in Rio de Janeiro (1992), Montreal andHelsinki (1993), and Lisbon (1998).

Research programs on multiple use and envi-ronmental forestry have been carried out. Inorder to educate the practitioners of forestry TheForest Owners’ Federation of Norway has ac-complished a study program called «RicherForest», the aim of which was to make the par-ticipants consider the total forest ecosystem intheir activity. In 1993 a rather extensive project,called «Living Forest», in which forest landowners, forest industries, and environmentalorganisations took part, was started with the aimof developing a sustainable use of the forest re-sources. The project was terminated in 1998with an agreement on a set of standards for for-estry. However, the problem of certification offorestry, which has arised during the last years,as a consequence of consumers’ demand thatforest industry products are based on sustain-able forestry, has not yet been clarified, whetherregarding criteria, or organisation of the certifi-cation process.

Norway

Addresses of organisations related to forestry

Agricultural University of Norway, Department of Forest Sciences, P.O. Box 5044, N- 1432 ÅsTel: 47 64 94 88 80; Fax: 47 64 94 88 90

Norwegian Institute of Forest Research, Høgskoleveien 12, N-1432 Ås, Tel: 47 64 94 90 00; Fax:47 64 94 29 80

Norwegian Institute of Nature Research, Tungasletta 2, N-7005 Trondheim, Tel: 47 73 80 14 00;Fax: 47 73 80 14 01

Norwegian Institute of Land Inventory (NIJOS), P.O. Box 115, N-1430 Ås. Tel: 47 64 94 97 00;Fax: 47 64 94 97 86

Ministry of Agriculture, Division of Forestry, P.O. Box 8007 Dep. 0030 Oslo. Tel: 47 22 24 93 61;Fax: 47 22 24 27 54

Ministry of Environment, Division for Conservation of Nature and Cultural Heritage, P.O. Box8013 Dep. 0030 Oslo, Tel: 47 22 24 58 51; Fax: 47 22 24 27 56

Forest Owners’ Federation of Norway, Norges Skogeierforbund, P.O. Box 1438 Vika, 0115 Oslo,Tel: 47 22 01 05 50; Fax: 47 22 83 40 47

Norwegian Forest Association, Norskog, P.O. Box 123 Lilleaker, 0216 Oslo, Tel: 47 22 51 89 00;Fax: 47 22 51 89 10

The Norwegian Forest Society, Det norske Skogselskap, Wergelandsveien 23B, 0167 Oslo, Tel: 4722 46 98 57; Fax: 47 22 60 41 89

Women in Forestry, Jenter i Skogbruket, Wergelandsveien 23 B, 0167 Oslo, Tel: 47 22 46 98 57;Fax: 47 22 60 41 89

The Norwegian Society for the Conservation of Nature, Norges Naturvernforbund, P.O. Box 6891,0130 Oslo, Tel: 47 22 99 33 00; Fax: 47 22 99 33 10

World Wildlife Fund, Verdens Naturfond, P.O. Box 6484 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo, Tel: 47 22 0365 00; Fax: 47 22 20 06 66

References

Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). 1991. Census of agriculture and forestry. Volume VII. Oslo-Kongsvinger 1992

Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). 1998. National Accounts 1978-1996. Oslo-Kongsvinger 1998Norwegian Institute of Land Inventory (NIJOS). 1996. Skog 96. Statistics of forest conditions and

resources in Norway. Ås 1996

Additional literatureThe National Atlas of Norway gives a survey of the physical and human geography of the country.

During the period 1981-94 the atlas was published as a series of thematic maps accompaniedby booklets with English summaries. From 1996 the atlas is published as books.The atlas ispublished by Statens kartverk [‘The state map service’], (Address: Kartverksveien 21, N-3500Hønefoss).

Numerous publications from The Central Bureau of Statistics, Oslo, contain an abundance of in-formation regarding nature, population, economics and society. The publications are normallyfurnished with English summaries and captions. The Statistical Yearbook of Norway deservesspecial mention in this connection.

Useful URLThe governmental electronic information service ODIN http://www.dep.no/odin/engelsk/index-b-n-a.html.

Norway

Poland

1 The Country

1.1 Natural conditions

TopographyPoland is a lowland country situated in Cen-tral Europe. The average height above sea levelfor the whole country is only 174 m. Seventyfive per cent of the country does not exceed200 m a.s.l. and 22% is between 200 and 500 m.

The shape of the country could be compared toan irregular circle almost equal in size fromNorth to South and from East to West (650 by690 km).

The surface of the country gradually rises fromthe North ,(Baltic Sea) to the South. As forcountry relief belts running from East-West canbe recognized.

Northern Poland, from the Oder up to theNiemen River, is the land of the lakes. Thequaternary glaciations influenced the landscapeof this region considerably. When the climategot warmer and glaciers melted, there remainednot only lakes (more than one thousand ofthem), but also morainic hills made of sands,gravel and loam, transported by glaciers fromScandinavia. The wide old valley of the VistulaRiver separates the region into the WesternPomeranian and Eastern Mazurian districts.

Moving south, we find an adjacent belt of plains(Great Poland, Mazovia, Podlasie and SilesianPlain). It is part of the big Central EuropeanPlain. There are no mountains and the land ismostly flat, although dotted with hills.

Next belt to the South consists of a highlandarea known as Malopolska and Roztocze. Onthe northern edge the old (hercynian)Swietokrzyskie (Holy Cross) Mountains can berecognized.

The Sudety Mountains and Carpathians, wherethe tallest chain is known as the Tatras, formPoland‘s southern frontier. The Carpathiansyoung mountains (cretaceous and Tertiary indate) constitute an extension of the Alps. Inthis mountain chain, only the Tatras, most ofwhich belongs to Slovakia, have an Alpinecharacter. The Sudety is an old mountain chainbelonging to the old Czech Massif.

The highest peak in the Tatras is Rysy Mt.reaching 2500 m above sea level. Length ofthe Baltic seaboard is about 500 km.

Area of the country is about 312.000 km2.

ClimateTwo different types of climate are found onPolish territory: the oceanic climate (Cfb ac-cording to Köppen classification system) ofWestern Europe and the continental climate

Poland

Authors:Krzysztof Kaczmarek, (M.Sc., For.)Forestry Economics and Policy DepartmentForest Research InstituteBitwy Warszawskiej 1920r. Nr 3, 00-973 Warszawa, PolandPhone: +48 22 822 49 37, Fax: +48 22 822 49 35Email: kaczmark@ibles.waw.pl

Albert Dudek (Ass. Prof.)Warsaw Agricultural UniversityRakowiecka 26/30, 02-528 Warsaw, PolandPhone: +48 22 49 7855, Fax: +48 22 49 1375Email: dudeka@delta.sggw.waw.pl

Poland

(Dfb according to Köppen) of Eastern Europe.This results in highly changeable weather con-ditions and considerable seasonal fluctuationsfrom year to year. Whereas the weather tendsto be more stable during the summer months,winters are more variable: some are damp andcool, while others are frigid and fair.

Poland has 30-70 days of snowfall and 20-50days with below-freezing temperatures. Theground is covered with snow, on average for atotal of one month, however in the coldestNorthEastern area there may be as much asthree months of snow cover.

Annual precipitation is about 600 mm, but highin the mountains it reaches 1800 mm, and theminimal value for Central Poland is only 450 mm.

The average temperature for July is 19 oC and-2 degrees for January. Length of the growthseason varies from 180 to 220 days.

SoilsMore than 60% of the forests (mostly on low-land) grow on rusty soils, podsolic soils and

podsols developed on Quaternary sands andgravels fluvoglacial, glacial, aeolic and allu-vial. Such soils (acid and poor in nutrients) aretypical for conifer and mixed conifer sites.

Brown soils, lessive’s and pseudo gley soils,originating mostly from boulder loams, sands,or silts on loams, are the lowland sites for mixedbroadleaves and fresh deciduous-type trees.

Black earths, gley soils and gley-pod soils,originating from different parent materials toslightly loamy sands, up to loams and clays,can be found in areas of high humidity, such asterrain depressions and river valleys.. Some-times in such conditions organic turf, muck andmud soils were formed.

Acid brown soils originating from older mas-sive magmatic and sedimentary rocks are mosttypical for the highland and montana forests.On limestone rocks of different age therendzinas were created. Near to the timberlineand below the dwarf mountain pinenoncarbonate weakly developed soils can be met.

The bogged high peat soils occur on watersheds.

Figure 1. Mean annual precipitation (according to data from Institute of Meteorology andWater Management).

OPADYPRECIPITATION

550 600 700 800 1000 1300 mm

Poland

VegetationAs a result of glacial activity (Poland wentthrough four ice ages) and present climatic con-ditions vegetation cover is very diverse. Southof the country is characterized by mixed de-ciduous forest and boreal-type forest is seen inthe North. The present forest composition is aresult of both prehistoric and human activity.

Forest coverage has been reduced by 28% to-day. In lowland Poland the richer sites are stilloccupied by mixed deciduous stands. An ex-cellent example could be the Bialowieza For-est where there still exists natural mixed standscomposed of oak (Quercus robur), lime (Tiliacordata) ash (Fraxinus excelsior), hornbeam(Carpinus betulus), spruce (Picea abies) andpine (Pinus sylvestris).

In northern and mid-Poland the most typicalspecies in managed stands is Scots pine,whereas in southern areas these stands mainlyconsist of Norway spruce. Spruce, under theinfluence of economically-oriented Germanforestry, was planted as monocultures in themountains as well. But more typical for the

Carpathian Mts are more natural mixed standscomposed of beech (Fagus sylvatica), silver fir(Abies alba), elm (Ulmus laevis) and ash.

Much of the area on poor sites (sands) is cov-ered by pine stands mostly monocultures, al-though sometimes birch (Betula verrucosa) ispresent. On fresh sites, Scots pine, sometimeswith a proportion of Norway spruce formshighly productive stands of excellent quality.But there are some examples of pine standsplanted on sites too rich with a resultant poorquality.

1.2 Society

PopulationWith a population of 38.6 M (1996) and popu-lation density 124 inhabitants per sq. km, Po-land is Europe’s ninth country in terms of popu-lation number and density. Population growth,quite rapid in the 80’s, has lately become veryslow - only 0.11% in 1996. At present Polandis an ethnically almost homogenous countryand all national minorities constitute not more

Figure 2. Mean annual temperatures (according to data from the Institute of Meteorologyand Water Management).

3 6 7 7,5 8 C

TemperaturaTemperature

Poland

than three percent of the total population. About62% of the population live in urban areas - thelargest concentration being in Silesian indus-trial region. Other densely-populated areas arearound Warsaw, Lodz (central Poland) and theharbour areas of Triple City (Gdansk, Gdynia,and Sopot).

IndustryPolish economy was heavily influenced,through the nation being part of the formerSoviet Union block up until 1989. During thistime industrial development concentrated on“heavy industry” (mining and first stages ofraw material processing). Very little, if any,effort was given to the development of indus-try producing “consumer goods” and to devel-oping the service sector.

Another typical problem of former “peoplesdemocracies” countries is structure of agricul-ture. After WW II, during the time of collec-tivization, big efforts were given to the wind-ing-up of private farming. In some regions ofthe country so-called “state agricultural farms”were created. After 1989, the majority of thesefarms became bankrupt, resulting in unemploy-ment for a large number of people.

2 Forest resources and their uses

Under the Forest Act of 1991, a forest meansland which:1) has a compact area of at least 0,10 ha, cov-

ered with forest vegetation (forest stands) -

trees, bushes and undergrowth - or temporar-ily devoid of it:a) selected for forest production or,b) constituting a nature reserve or part of na-tional a park or,c) registered as a monument of nature;

2) is related to the forest, as used for the needsof forest management: buildings and struc-tures, drainage systems, forest division net-work, forest roads, land under power lines,forest nurseries, lumber yards as well as park-ing areas and recreation objects.

Sustainable forest economy - under this Law,is an activity aimed at developing the foreststructure and to use it in such a way and ratethat ensures the lasting preservation of forestbiological diversity and abundance, high pro-ductivity and regeneration potential, vitalityand ability to perform both at present and inthe future, all important functions: protective,economic and social, on the local, national andglobal level, without harmful impact on otherecosystems.

A sustainable forest economy is based on theforest management plan, or in the case of aprivate forest on a simplified forest manage-ment plan, and focused on the following pur-poses:1) to maintain forests and their beneficial in-

fluence on the climate, air, water, soil, envi-ronment for people’s life and health, and eco-system (ecological balance);

2) to protect forests, in particular such forestsand forest ecosystems that constitute natural

Table 1. Contribution to GDP by industrial sectors (1994)

Agriculture, forestry, hunting & fishing 6.3%Mining & quarrying 4.2%Public administration and defense and 4.5%Construction 5.7%Electricity, gas and water 3.7%Wholesale and retail, restaurants, hotels 14.1%Transport, storage, communications 6.0%Manufacturing 24.3%Financial, real estate and business activities 7.0%Education, health and social work 7.0%Other services 17.2%

Poland

fragments of local nature or forests of particu-lar significance due to their:a) variety of nature,b) preservation of forest genetic resources,c) landscape quality,d) scientific needs;

3) to protect soil and areas that are in particu-lar danger from pollution or damage and ar-eas of considerable social significance;

4) to protect of surface and ground waters, re-tain river basins, in particular on watershedareas and on areas supplying water to under-ground lakes;

5) to produce wood, raw materials and non-timber forest products - based on the princi-ple of rational forest economy.

Furthermore, forest economy is based on thefollowing rules:1) common protection of forests,2) consistent conservation of forests,3) continuity and balanced use of all functions

of the forest,4) expansion of forest resources.

2.1 Forest history

The history of Polish forests is similar to thehistory of forests in neighboring countries.However some processes of societal develop-ment in Poland had a different intensity bothin place and time. There is no doubt that to-day‘s perception of our forests has been influ-enced throughout 146 years when Poland wassub-divided and occupied by three partitioningpowers: Russia, Prussia and Austria-Hungary.

Some idea of the significance of forestry forPolish people in development of human civili-zation , can be found in the meaning of thenames: Polska (Poland) and Polacy (Poles).

The origin of these terms is derived from thename of one of the Slavic tribes “Polanie”. Inthe Polish language it means “people living at/connected to an opening within the forest”.Similar historical word terminology can befound in other European nations, however inPoland they have lasted the course of time.

Intensive colonization of the forest and the startof permanent farming on such areas was inplace from the XIII century. The first law actsconcerning permission in use of forest goodswere prepared in the XIV and beginning of theXV centuries.

Production of ashes was the first stage in forestexploitation, and such production caused muchdamage to the forest. The next stage was tim-ber harvesting. In the XV century, the firstwater sawmills were constructed. At the turnof the XV and XVI centuries a very rapidgrowth in the export of agricultural and forestproducts from Poland to West-European coun-tries was observed. Changes in forestry, typi-cal for capitalism started in the second half ofthe XVIII century. In this time a separate for-est business arose within the framework oflanded properties. Some evidence of this wasthe preparing of forest management plans.

During the time of partitioning some differ-ences existed between forest management indifferent parts under the ruling body. Howeverin all parts heavy exploitation of the forests wasobserved. After this period it was evident thatthe forest percentage declined (before partition-ing this percentage was above 43%). Thisdropped, in conjunction with losses accompa-nied with WW I, to a forest percentage of 23.1%.

The period between wars did not bring improve-ment, and a small percentage drop of 22.2 wasobserved.

The Polish forest suffered further losses in theSecond World War (in area and yield). Forestpercentage after WW II (in the new borders)was only 20.8%.

Strong efforts and concentrated attention givento this problem after the war, resulted in forestland area reaching 28% and an increase in thesum of standing volume within the country ataround 80% (volume in year 1946 taken as100%).

Poland

2.2 Forest ownership

The country’s forests are mainly owned by pub-lic authorities, the majority being the propertyof the State Treasury, and under managementof the State Forest Enterprise (SFE). Privateforests account for 17% of the total forestedarea, although the proportion in central andeastern parts of the country is much higher (30-60%). The number of private forest holdingsowned by individuals amounts to 900,000. Theownership structure is shown in table 2.

2.3 Land use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global overview of land use

Forests cover 28 per cent of the land area, i.e.8.8 million ha. In the period of 1945-1995 thearea under forests increased considerably (byabout 2.3 million ha or 35%), however, the for-est cover of Poland is still less than optimum,(assessed to be 34%). In the period mentionedabove, the human population grew faster thanthe forest acreage, hence about 0.22 ha of for-est and 40 m3 of growing stock was felled perinhabitant. Present composition of land usecategories in Poland is shown in figure 3.

Almost two thirds of the agriculture land areain Poland is composed of light sandy soils, atwhich 3.3 million ha or 17% are assessed to bemarginal for agricultural production. In 1995a National Programme to Increase the Coun-try’s Forest Cover was adopted by the Councilof Ministers. According to ecological and eco-nomic guidelines the basis of the programmewas to increase the share of forests in the coun-try‘s natural space. The programme aims todevelop afforestation of about 1.5 million hec-tares of abandoned agricultural land (700,000hectares until the year 2020, and then 800,000hectares until the year 2050). This will increasethe country’s forest cover to 30% by the year2020 and to 33% by the year 2050.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

The share of forested land in the country de-creased to 38% in 1820 and to 21% in 1945.Thanks to afforestation efforts, especially inyears 1947-70, the ratio of forested area to thetotal area of Poland increased to 27% in 1970.As a result of extensive deforestation in pastcenturies and very widespread post-War refor-estation, Poland’s forests are highly fragmentedand isolated spatially. The holding of the State

Table 2. Ownership structure.Forms of forest ownership Forest area [ha] Forest area [%]Total 8,779,000 100.0

PUBLIC FORESTS 7,282,000 83.01) property owned by the State Treasury 7,205,000 82.1including managed by-the State Forests 6,881,000 78.4-national parks 177,000 2.0-other 147,000 1.72)property owned by communes 77,000 0.9

PRIVATE FORESTS 1,497,000 17.0Including property of:-individuals 1,397,000 15.9-common land 68,000 0.8-collective farms 12,000 0.1-other 20,000 0.2Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry, 1997.

Poland

Figure 4. Species distribution by area. Source: Report on the State of Forests, 1997.

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0Agricultural Forest Other woodland Urban and

industrialWaste and other

Figure 3. Land use categories in Poland. Source: General Statistical Office of Poland, 1998.

Forest Enterprise is comprised of 28,000 com-plexes, of which more than 6,000 cover no morethan 5 hectares (see map of forest complexesin Poland). The average size of a private hold-ing does not even exceed 1 ha, and a holdingof this size may often be made up of severalseparate plots.

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

Forests in Poland have persisted up to thepresent time mainly on less fertile coniferoussites. Thus, the majority, i.e. 63% of the coun-try’s forests area are coniferous sites, 34%broadleaved and 3% alder swamp forest sites.Stand composition is to the extent of 78%mainly coniferous species, of which Scots pine(Pinus sylvestris L.) is dominant, at about 68%

of the forest area. The share of broadleavedspecies in the composition of stands has risenin recent decades from 13% to 22%. Neverthe-less, the situation remains problematic in rela-tion to an excessively simplified biologicalstructure and the large proportion (15-20%) ofstands whose species composition is not in ac-cordance with the habitat. These problems arethe result of a past preference for the regenera-tion of pure stands. Imported species, amongwhich the most frequent are Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii Mirb) and red oak(Quercus rubra L.) are of low significance bothby area and for wood production. The distribu-tion of the main species by area is shown infigure 4.

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

%

Scots pine and Larch Eur. silver fir, Nor. spruce,Douglas fir

Oaks, Beech, Ash, Nor.maple, Syca more, Elms,

Limes

Birches, Hornbeam, Alder,Aspen, Poplarand others

Poland

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfelling

In 1997, the total growing stock volume was1.6 billion cubic meters, 1.37 billion cubic me-ters being in forests managed by the State For-est Enterprise (SFE) and 0.18 billion cubicmeters in the private and communes forests.About 1.25 billion cubic meters is coniferousand 0.35 as broadleaved species. This corre-sponds to a mean of 186 m3 per hectare, with200 m3/ha in public and 118 m3/ha in privateforests. The gross annual increment amountsto 50 million cubic meters or 5.6 m3/ha. Thepresent level of annual timber harvesting ismuch lower than the volume of estimated grossannual increment. Recently only 26 millioncubic meters was harvested, (2.9 m3/ha). Theratio of harvest size to increment size is 0.5,which ensures a continual and stable growthof forest resources in Poland. Changes in thevolume of total growing stock, growth and fell-ing in the period of 1945-97 are shown in table 3.

In 1997, the mean age of forest stands man-aged by the SFE was 56 years, and for privateforests this figure was much lower, at only 37years. Table 4 shows the age class structure offorests in Poland.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Overall state in the health of forests gives causefor concern in spite of some recent improve-ment. Forests are threatened by diseases, pests,games, unfavourable climatic phenomena, firesand air pollution.

The forest area threatened by insect pests in1997, mainly Bupalus piniarius L., Diprion pini

L., Neodiprion sertifer Geoffr. and Lymantriamonacha L. was about 450,000 ha or 5% oftotal forested area in Poland, and preventativemeasures were carried out on 120,000 ha.

Fungal diseases, especially root-rot fungus(Fomes annosus Fr.) and honey mushroom(Armillaria sp.), have a considerable impact onthe health of forests and on an increase in thenumber of dying trees. In 1997, fungal diseaseswere noted in an area of 563,000 ha or 8% offorests managed by the State Forest Enterprise(SFE) and chemically preventative measuresagainst fungal diseases were carried out on anarea of 2,000 ha.

An excessive number of game, especially reddeer (Cervus elaphus L.) and roe deer(Capreolus capreolus L.) cause damage mainlyby tree browsing in young plantations and thedebarking of trees in thickets and tree stands.This type of damage, in 1990, was observed inforests managed by the SFE in an area of about1.3 million ha or 19% of the forested area. In1990 substantial damage (over 20% of the trees)to forest stands caused by game has been notedon an area of 551,000 ha or 7% of forests man-aged by the SFE.

Table 3. Growing stock, felling and increment (wood with bark)

Source: General Statistical Office of Poland.* Unofficial figure

Unit [1000] 1945 1971 1990 1997Total growing stock m3 845,000 1,169,000 1,461,000 1,607,000Felling of growing stock m3 14,500 23,000 22,000 26,000Gross increment m3 20,000 30,000 44,000 50,000*

Table 4. Age class structure in 1997 (by areaof species group)

Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry, 1998.

Age class Conifers [%] Broadleavedspecies [%]

1 – 20 years 14.4 13.521 – 40 years 25.2 24.741 – 60 years 21.6 24.261 – 80 years 18.8 14.8> 81 years 20.0 22.8Area of forestland: [1000 ha] 6,784 1,995

Poland

In 1990, as the result of wind falls, wind andsnow breaks, forest stands were damaged in anarea of 90,000 ha, and total volume of woodharvested from damaged areas reached 5.4million m3, that was about 25% of a calculatedyearly cut.

During the last decade there was an increasein the number of forest fires and area of forestsdamaged by fires. The average area of forestfires in 1991-1995 in forests managed by theSFE was about 8,700 ha, with the enormousarea of 33,334 ha burnt in 1992.

Although a considerable decrease in the amountof industrial air pollution emissions has beenobserved since 1988, it is still considered as adamage factor of great importance for the healthof forests ecosystems in Poland. In 1997, theassessed average values of SO

2 and NO

2 con-

centrations in the air were as follows: SO2 -

11.26 µg/m3, NO2 - 18.19 µg/m3. On the basis

of studies it is estimated, that the current lossin annual increment of wood in forest standsmanaged by the SFE amounts to 10.5 millioncubic meters, and 2.0 million cubic meters inprivate forests. The total size of this loss isnearly 50% of annual wood harvested volume.

The index of damage to stands, as measuredusing the defoliation level, is high with regardsto the complexity of threat agents. However,the share of trees with defoliation above 25%decreased from about 50% in 1993 to 36% in1997. Currently estimated defoliation is shownin table 5.

Locally, in the Sudety Mountains, the complex-ity of threats, with damage primarily causedby industrial air pollution from local sources,

led to a decline in tree cover of an area of 13,000ha and was a so-called ecological disaster.

A disastrous flood occurred in 1997 in 140,000ha of forests, which caused damage to about28,000 ha of forests managed by the SFE, ofwhich 16,000 ha of stands needed to be con-verted.

2.4 Silviculture

Silvicultural measures take into account natu-ral site conditions (climate, soil and topogra-phy), present state of the forest stands, andadopted aims. One of the basic silviculturalprinciples in Polish forestry is the compatibil-ity of tree species composition to site condi-tions. There are 26 types of forest sites distin-guished for the purpose of silvicultural works.

In 1993, the “Program of Conservation ofForest Gene Resources and Selection Breed-ing of Forest Trees in Poland” was elabo-rated. The Program introduced the seedregions in Poland and outlined further tasksin the field of protection of forest geneticdiversity. Program plans, among others,included selection of a new area for 3,450 haof plus seed stands, selection of 4,560 of plustrees, establishment of 44,800 ha of progenyplantations, and the establishment of 630 haof seedling orchards.

The clearcutting system prevails, although itsuse was reduced from 43,000 ha in 1980 to25,000 ha in 1997. The use of natural regen-eration has increased since 1980 from a levelof 2,300 ha to 5,700 ha in 1996. Shelterwoodsystems, in forests managed by the State For-est Enterprise, were in operation on an area of12,600 ha, and 5,300 ha of neglected areas werebrought back into production (1996). Threat-ened tree stands were converted in 1997 in anarea of 10,500 ha. Yearly tending measures incultures and thickets cover approximately300,000 ha. Tending and sanitary cuts in othertree stands are performed in areas of about500,000 ha yearly.

Table 5. Trees defoliation in 1997.Defoliation level [%] Number of

trees [%]0 – 10 10.911 – 25 52.526 – 60 35.1> 60 1.2Dead trees 0.3Source: Report on the state of forests, 1997.

Poland

The framework of forest economy formed in the19th century had a sole goal: production of rawmaterial for the needs of the woodworkingindustry. This was expressed as a preference forconiferous monocultures and for clearcuttings.Applications of these methods in silvicultureand forest use, contributed to a weakening instability of the Polish forest stands, and over-simplification of their composition and struc-ture. The estimated area of pine and spruce purestands, growing on rich broadleaved sites, isabout 400,000 ha. These stands need to be sup-plemented with understorey shrubs as well aswith broadleaved tree species.

Reducing the number of game stock relative tosivicultural efficiency is one of the basic re-quirements to limit damage caused to culturesand thickets in regions with an excessively highdensity of game animals.

2.5 Forest production

With a share of 94% in volume of total woodharvested, SFE is the main supplier of wood inPoland. The impact of private forest owners ismainly local in character.

Total roundwood production is forecast to riseby 43% in 2010, reaching 31.7 million m3. In1996, the share of industrial roundwood to to-tal volume of wood harvested was 93% and isexpected to drop by 3% in 2010. The most im-portant product from industrial roundwood aresawlogs with a share of 43% in 1996 (38% fore-cast in 2010), and pulpwood with a share of35% in 1996, and 31% forecast in 2010. Al-though the share of sawlogs and pulpwood as

a volume of industrial roundwood productionis forecast to decline in 2010, their productionvolume is expected to rise by 12% and 9%, re-spectively. The timber production structure inPoland in the period 1997-1999 is shown intable 6.

2.5.1 Harvesting systems

In wood harvesting, the most common systemis the tree-length method (56% of total woodharvested volume), then whole-stem method(21%), cut-to-length method (18%), full-treemethod (3%) and chip harvesting (2%). Manualand motor-manual work methods dominate inwood harvesting. The mechanisation level foreach operational process is varied and shownfor all wood harvesting methods in table 7.

2.5.2 Timber uses

According to a prospectus made in 1996, totaldemand for wood is roughly foreseen to rise by55% in 2010. In 1996 the share of sawlogs andpulpwood to total volume of wood demand was50% and 35%, respectively. In 2010, the de-mand for sawlogs is expected to fall by 3%,and for pulpwood to rise by 6%. Under the 1996prospectus, the total demand for wood in 2010is roughly forecast to be fully satisfied throughdomestic production. However, in 2010 a defi-ciency in 0.5 million m3 or 5% of sawlogs, anda surplus of 1.8 million m3 or 134% of pulp-wood is expected to appear. In this context, aswell as in the light of a low consumption ofpaper in Poland, new investments in the pulpindustry are presently considered.

Table 6. Timber production in Poland, 1997-1999

ProductionTimber assortment Unit [1000] 1997 1998 1999Sawlogs m3 10,203 10,280 10,340Pulpwood m3 8,173 8,450 8,700Fuelwood m3 2,545 2,600 2,650Other m3 1,721 1,750 1,800Total wood in the rough m3 22,642 23,080 23,490

m3 = cubic meter of roundwood, solid measure, without bark.Source: Forest Products Markets in 1988 and Prospects for 1999.

Poland

Current consumption per capita of roundwoodaccounts for 0.6 m3 and of paper 40kg. Thetimber uses in 1997 are shown in table 8.

2.5.3 Non-wood forest products

Utilisation of non-wood forest products, as inmany other European countries, has a long tra-dition in Poland. Nowadays the main non-woodforest products are berries: bilberry (Vacciniummyrtillus L.), cowberry (Vaccinium vitis-ideaL.), raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.); mushrooms:chanterelle (Cantharellus cibarius Fr.), edibleboletus (Boletus edulis Bull: Fr.), and medici-nal and ornamental plants. All citizens haveopen access to the public forests for picking

fruits of the undergrowth for their own use. Pick-ing fruits for industrial purpose is permitted onlyif an agreement has been made with the directorof a local Forest District of the SFE. Whenpicking fruits from the undergrowth endangersthe forest environment in some cases it couldbe limited or even forbidden. Table 9 shows theestimated level of harvesting of certain non-wood forest products.

2.5.4 Forest functions

Forests serve very diverse functions, either natu-rally or as a result of management activities.The three main groups of forest functions areas follows:

Table 7. Mechanisation level of operations in technological process of wood harvesting

Source: Experts assessment, 1994.

Technological process Means [%]Felling Chain saws 99.6

Harvesters 0.4Limbing and bucking Chain saws 99.0

Harvesters 0.4Others 0.6

Extraction Mechanical extraction 60.0Horse extraction 40.0

Transport Mechanical means 100.0

a) veneer and core plywood; b) including non-wood particle board; m3=cubic meter (solid volume of roundwoodand processed products); m3(r)=cubic meter of roundwood, solid measure, without bark; m3(s)=cubic meterof sawnwood; m.t. = metric ton.Sources: 1/ Forest Products Markets in 1998 and Prospects for 1999; 2/ General Statistical Office of Po-land, 1998.

Table 8. Timber uses in Poland, 1997

Timber uses Unit [1000] Apparent Consumption Production Imports ExportsWood in the rough m3(r) 22,651 22,642 300 291Pulpwood m3(r) 8,223 8,173 200 150Coniferous sawnwood m3(s) 4,333 5,010 106 783Non-coniferous sawnwood m3(s) 787 900 60 173Total sawnwood m3(s) 5,120 5,910 166 956Plywood a) m3 119 132 60 73Particle board b) m3 2,408 2,072 471 135Fibreboard m3 513 727 118 332Woodpulp m.t. 825 707 178 60Paper m.t. 1,459 1,473 415 429Paperboard m.t. 601 87 415 1Waste paper m.t. 68 59 10 1

Poland

- environmental (protective), ensuringstabilisation of the water cycle in nature; thecounteraction of floods, avalanches and land-slides; the protection of soil against erosionand of the landscape against changing intosteppe plant formations; the shaping of theclimate both global and local; stabilisation ofatmospheric composition and purification ofthe atmosphere; the creation of conditions bywhich to preserve the biological potential ofa large number of species, ecosystems and thegenetic resources of organisms; and safe-guarding the diversity and complexity of thelandscape, as well as better conditions forhuman health and life;

- commercial (economic), through ensuringsustainability of the use of timber and non-timber forest resources as well as hunting; thedevelopment of tourism; profits from the saleof the aforementioned goods and services; thecreation of jobs and the provision of incomefor state and local budgets by way of taxes;

- social, serving to shape favourable health andrecreation conditions for society; enrichmentof the labour market; the creation of diverseforms of use by local communities; utilisa-tion of degraded land and marginal soils; de-velopment of the country’s culture, scienceand education.

As a consequence of their functions, other thancommercial, nearly half of state-owned forestsin Poland are classed as protective. These areforests protecting soil from erosion, and watersfrom excessive runoff and pollution; damageby industry; offering refuges to animals underspecial protection; significant to national secu-rity; in the vicinity of large agglomerations andsubject to scientific research or mass tourism.

Forests are fundamental elements in the nationalsystem of protected areas, with forested landaccounting for 63% of the area within NationalParks, 66% in Nature Reserves and 55% inLandscape Parks. SFE land includes 849 NatureReserves covering 66,400 ha, about 1,740protective zones around sites for rare andprotected animal species covering 54,500 ha,and about 3,800 Areas of Environmental Im-portance, covering 14,000 ha.

In 1994, within the forests managed by the SFE,special units, known as Forest PromotionalComplexes (FPCs) were created. These arelarger, preferably heavily-wooded areas, withinone or more Forest Districts, which have beenestablished for promotion of multi-functionalforest use and the sustainable forest manage-ment policy of the State. FPCs include eitherwhole Forest Districts, or, to a lesser extent,separate sub-districts. Thus, they are functionalunits, without a separate administration staff,being administered (under the supervision ofRegional Directorates of the State Forests) bythe personnel of the Forest Districts includedwithin them. Total area of the ten FPCs in 1997was 445,670 ha or 6.5% of forested area man-aged by the State Forests. The process of iden-tifying areas and boundaries of PromotionalComplexes seeks to ensure the representationof different nature-forest regions and the asso-ciated variability in habitat conditions, standspecies compositions, valuable natural features,productive possibilities and leading functions,as well as the diversity of threats. Among theten existing FPCs (of the 18 targeted), thereare both forest areas of high nature value, suchas the primeval forests (e.g. Bialowieska Pri-meval Forest) and areas which have been largelymodified by man, such as Tucholskie Forests.

Table 9. Non-wood forest products harvested in Poland

a) harvesting in forests managed by the State Forests Enterpriseb) products purchased from collectorsSource: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry, 1998.

NWFPs Units 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997Berries b) [1000kg] 8,010 3,006 1,974 1,258 606 252 292 5,683 4566Mushrooms b) [1000kg] 5,151 2,792 841 618 657 87 243 940 761Resin a) [1000kg] 8,403 6,400 2,940 806 34 - - - -Christmas trees a) [1000] 564 336 339 330 303 272 317 339 292

Poland

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy

Despite having a relatively large proportion offorest resources in Poland, forest production isof rather low importance within the nationaleconomy. In 1996, forestry, as a share of thegross domestic product (GDP) amounted to0.6%, and the total share of agriculture, hunt-ing and forestry came to 6.0%.

In foreign trade, forestry products also play aminor role in the balance of trade, accountingfor 0.22% of the nations total exports and0.08% of its imports. The forest industry sec-tor is of considerable importance, however, withexport of its products amounting to 11.4% oftotal exports and imports of 4.4%.

3.2 Employment provided by the forest sector

In 1996, about 70,000 persons were employedin the forestry sector, the majority (about 50,000persons) working in the SFE. During the lastdecade the number of employees in forestry wascontinuously reduced (up to 50%), mainly dueto the transformation of the national economy.The level of employment in 1988 amounted to155,000 persons (125,000 in the SFE).

3.3 Profitability

Profitability is defined as gross or net profit-ability. Gross profitability is the margin betweengross sales revenues in relation to value of out-put, and net profitability between net sales rev-enues in relation to value of output. In 1996,estimated for forestry, an indicator of gross prof-itability was 4.2%, and net profitability 4.0%.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 LegislationThe following legal acts refer to forests in Po-

land:1) The Act on Forests - 28 September 1991 (with

the latest update on 24 April 1997);2) The Act on Protection of Nature - 16 Octo-

ber 1991 (being now revised);3) The Act on Protection of Environment - 31

January 1980 (with the latest update on 29August 1997);

4) The Act on Protection of Arable and ForestLand - 3 February 1995;

5) The Land Development Law - 7 July 1994.

The Act on Forests defines the principles ofpreservation, protection and growth of the for-est resources as well as the basic rules of forestmanagement, linked with other environmentelements and economy of the country. This Actapplies to forests in general, regardless of theform of their ownership. Under the Act on For-ests, public forests are supervised by the Min-ister of Environmental Protection, Natural Re-sources and Forestry (MEPNRF) and privateforests are supervised by a head of the regionalor local government administration’s unit. For-est management in forests constituting naturereserves or a part of national parks is based onregulations within the Act on Protection ofNature.

Protection of nature under the Act on Protec-tion of Nature, is defined as preservation, properuse and renewal of resources and natural ele-ments, in particular wild vegetation and wildanimals as well as nature complexes and eco-systems. Nature reserves situated on territoryowned by the State Treasury shall be supervisedby organisational units of the State Forest En-terprise and in particular by the directors of lo-cal Forest Districts. On the territory of the StateForests located within borders of a landscapepark, tasks for nature protection are performeddirectly by the director of the local Forest Dis-trict, in accordance with the projected protec-tion of the landscape park, included in the for-est management plan.

The Act on Protection of Environment, deter-mines principles of protection and rational con-trol over the environment and preserving itsquality, in order to provide present and futuregenerations with favourable life conditions and

Poland

the right to use the environmental resources.Under the Act on Protection of Environment,organisations and individuals who use the land,are obliged to protect the earth from erosion,mechanical devastation or pollution with toxicsubstances, and if their activity is related toagriculture or forestry they are obliged to useproper cultivation methods.

The protection of forest areas, under the Acton Protection of Arable and Forest Land means:1) restricting their designation for other pur-

poses unrelated to forest activities; prevent-ing the degradation and devastation of forestareas, damage of forest stand and

2) deterioration of forest production - resultingfrom activity unrelated to forest management;

3) restoring the economic value of the land,once deforested as a result of activity unre-lated to forest management;

4) enhancing their economic value and prevent-ing decrease in their productivity.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

Under the National Policy on Forests (NPF),the drawing-up and implementation of a stateforest policy is among the duties of the Minis-ter of Environmental Protection, Natural Re-sources and Forestry. In particular, the Minis-ter is obliged to shape conditions underpinningthe achievement of all the functions of forests;to provide constant supervision over the con-dition of forests and forestry management, overforests within National Parks, and over thepreparation of programs following nationalpolicy. A further statutory duty of the Ministeris to present an annual Report on the State ofForests to the government, which is later di-rected to sessions of parliament.

National policy in regard to forests is imple-mented through:- voivodes (heads of regions), supervise over

the sustainable use of private forests and theirresources, along with the improvement of thecondition of such forests;

- the Director-General of the SFE, aiming to

improve the management practices performedon the state owned forests and also their use,to retain all the functions supplied by forestsand indicated by the state forest policy;

- the Director of the National Board for theNational Parks and Park Directors, this is toa certain extent determined in the Forest Act,in relation to forests under all forms of own-ership and in the scope of protection and man-agement of forests ecosystems according tothe conservation plans of National Parks;

- the Office of Forest Management Plans andSurvey, aimed at introducing to planning pro-cedures the principles of forest managementdirected at achieving the aims of multi-func-tional forest use and monitoring of the stateof forest resources.

Partners in the implementation of national for-est policy are:- national and regional government adminis-

tration units and local administrations;- private owners of forests and their associa-

tions, as well as other forest managers.

Also participating in forest policy are:- trade unions, which are active within forestry

in line with their statutory entitlements;- faculties of Forestry of higher education es-

tablishments, the Forest Research Instituteand other scientific institutions, through thecarrying-out of research on the ecological andsocial functions of forests and their harmoni-sation with technologies and methods of pro-duction, as well as on the implementation ofprograms by which to educate society on natureand forests and to train forestry personnel;

- forestry scientific and technical associations(the Polish Forest Society, the Association ofForestry Timber-Industry Engineers andTechnicians), in relation to the promotion ofknowledge on forests and the provision ofopinions and proposals with respect to na-tional policy in this sphere;

- forestry press and forestry publishing houses,in relation to information on forests, trainingand national policy.

Particular roles in establishing a national policyon forests are acted by:- the Sejm and Senat (lower and upper houses

Poland

of parliament), in relation to the framing of lawconcerning forests, appropriate policy safe-guards in the national budget, checks on theimplementation of provisions of policy on for-ests and the environment, and the introduc-tion of the principles of sustainable develop-ment;

- the government, in relation to implementa-tion of the principles of state forest and envi-ronmental policy in all sectors.

The wider involvement of society in forestpolicy, as stated in National Policy on Forests,is required:- to bring into effect, consultations with the peo-

ple at local, regional and national levels, inrelation to the perfection and implementationof policy that takes account of needs and ex-pectations regarding what is an asset for thewhole nation, and reconciling the conflictinginterests of different interest groups;

- to heed the principle that people be informedconstantly about the state of forests, and inparticular to take joint action for forests andforestry in association with interested organi-sations and local government.

4.3 Forest policy tools

In the Polish forest policy framework there isthe National Policy on Forests (NPF) and sev-eral schemes, among which are:- Program of Conservation of Forest Gene Re-

sources and Selection Breeding of Forest Treesin Poland (1993);

- National Program of Increasing the Country’sForest Cover (1995);

- Program of the Conservation of Nature andCultural Values in Forest Districts (1996).

National Forest Policy aims to safeguard thesustainability of forests, along with their multi-functional management and use, through:- expansion of the country’s forest resources;- improving the state of forest resources and

providing them with comprehensive protection;- transformation of forest management and use

from the previous model dominated by a com-mercial function into an environmentally andeconomically balanced model of sustainable

and multi-functional forest economy, that cor-responds with criteria formulated for Europeby the Helsinki process and takes into accountthe specifics of Polish forestry.

The Program of Conservation of Forest GeneResources and Selection Breeding of ForestTrees in Poland defines a foundation for con-servation of forest gene resources, improvementof seed base, and selection of forest trees, andalso defines the conditions for an efficient per-formance of established goals.

The National Program to Increase the Coun-try’s Forest Cover (adopted by the Council ofMinisters in June 1995), predicts afforestationof about 1.5 million ha of abandoned agriculturalland until the year 2050. This Program willincrease the country’s forest cover to about 33%.

The Program of the Conservation of Nature andCultural Values in Forest Districts, being since1997 an integral part of the forest managementplan, has been constructed with a convictionthat the preservation of biological diversity isa vital task for managed forests.

The 1991 Act on Forests stipulates, that theSFE shall be granted subsidies from the Statebudget for assignments indicated by the admin-istration, and in particular for:- purchase of lands and forests for afforesta-

tion and regeneration, as well as purchase ofother land in order to preserve the quality ofits nature;

- implementation of the national program toexpand the forest areas as well as a project ofconservation and protection of young foreststands established as a result of the programsimplementation;

- development and protection of forests in dan-ger;

- making regular, national inventories of for-ests, updating information about forest re-sources, keeping a database on the forest re-sources and forest condition;

- preparing projects for the protection of forestnature reserves managed by the State Forests;implementation of the project and protectionof flora and fauna species;

- providing funds for educating society forest

Poland

aspects, mainly through the creation and man-agement of Forest Promotional Areas or de-signing paths for nature walks.

Under terms of the Act on Forests, private for-est owners receive financial subsidies from theState budget or the SFE budget for such activi-ties as:- sanitary and preventive treatments of pests

endangering existence of the forest;- forest development, improvement and protec-

tion when the tree stand has to be convertedand when identifying the source of damage,endangering the existence of the forest, causedby gases and industrial dust or in case of fireor other nature disasters caused by biotic orabiotic factors, is impossible;

- afforestation;

In addition, the simplified forest managementplan, for forests that are owned by individualsor land communities, is prepared at the expenseof the State budget. In particularly justifiedcases, the director of local SFE District canmake available - free of charge - tree seedlingsand bushes for restoring the forest stands inaccordance with the simplified forest manage-ment plan.

Projects of the State budget for year 1998 in-cluded expenses for forestry amounting to 40million ECU, in which to implement tasks re-sulting from the Act on Forests, about 16 mil-lion ECU was allotted, with 13 million ECUdesignated for afforestations of abandoned ag-ricultural lands.

All forests are subject to taxation, with excep-tion of the following:1) areas outside of forest management;2) land within holiday complexes, under con-

struction or for recreation;3) excluded by administrative decisions from

forest administration, and selected for non-forest purposes.

The following forests are also excluded fromthe forest tax:1) crops with trees up to 40 years old;2) listed in the monument register.The basis for forest taxation is the number of

hectares - determined according to the area ofthe prevailing tree species in the forest standas well as to stand quality classification for mainspecies of trees - resulting from the forest man-agement plan or the simplified forest manage-ment plan. Forest tax per 1 ha shall be a moneyequivalent of 0.2 cubic meters of wood calcu-lated on the basis of the average sale price ofwood in the first three quarters of the year pre-ceding the fiscal year. For protective forests,forests constituting part of nature reserves, na-tional parks and forests which are uncoveredby any forest management plan or simplifiedforest management plan, the forest tax per 1ha shall be a money equivalent to 30kg ofwheat.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other nationalpolicy areas

The role of forests in the socio-economic de-velopment of the country, the multitude offunctions served and the numerousinterdependencies between the state of forestsand external economic processes all explain theneed for policy on forests to be implementedwithin inter-disciplinary systems. This is es-pecially in association with: - environmentalpolicy, - national planning policy, - agriculturalpolicy, - energy and industrial policy, - socialpolicy, including education and science, - firecontrol policy, - the strategy for national de-velopment, - the strategy for the protection ofbiological diversity, - and the strategy for cli-mate protection.

4.5 Forest education and research

In Poland there are 14 technical and 4 voca-tional forestry schools, as well as 3 forestry fac-ulties in agricultural universities. The voca-tional schools and secondary technical schoolseducate about 4,300 people and 800-900 peo-ple graduate from them every year. Educationin the college takes 3 years, and in the second-ary technical school 5 years. After vocationalschool, graduates are qualified to become for-est workers. Secondary technical schools edu-cate forest technicians specialising in forest

Poland

management. In 1997 the forestry schools in-troduced new forestry teaching programs,which concentrate more on the ecological as-pects of forest management and use. About1,200 students study every year at the three for-estry faculties (Warszawa, Krakow, Poznan),(200 graduate every year), and education theretakes 5 years.

The Forestry Centre for Ecological Education(FCEE), established in 1997, plays a key role inecological education in forestry, by training staffto realise the idea of the sustainable and multi-functional model of forestry, forest resource pro-tection and nature protection in forests.

The Forest Research Institute was establishedin 1930 as a Research Station for the State For-ests Organisation (SFO). In 1934 it was trans-formed into the Research Institute of the SFO,and since 1945 it has been acting as the ForestResearch Institute under the Minister of Envi-ronmental Protection, natural Resources andForestry. The Institute consists of 18 scientificdepartments and 4 separate research laborato-ries. At present there are 270 employees in theInstitute.

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges in each country

5.1 Relations between different actors in thefield of forestry

The multi-directional nature of linkages in thenational policy on forests is reflected by its pres-ence within the programs of various adminis-trative bodies and institutions. Particularly inneed of reorganisation are the links betweenforestry and the wood processing industry andother customers for wood, as well as the eco-nomic bodies which take profit from forests andthe sector providing services for forestry. Be-tween forestry and its customers - particularlythe wood processing and paper-making indus-tries - there should be development of func-tional integration and even capital integrationbringing benefits to both sides.Issues arising from the UN Conference on En-

vironment and Development in Rio de Janeiroin 1992Changing trends in Polish forestry, in concen-trating on national conditions, reflect also thechanges in European and world forest policy,as streamlined by the final documents of theUNCED and of both Pan-European MinisterialConferences on protection of forests in Europe.

To strengthen the efforts focused on mainte-nance of sustainability and biological diversityof forests, procedures are being undertaken atall managerial levels, as well as programmesand complex actions taking into the accountbroad aspects of nature, economy, law, socialwelfare, administration and science. They in-troduce the principles of sustainable and bal-anced development into forestry practice.

In 1994, a document was issued from the Min-istry of Environmental Protection, Natural Re-sources and Forestry (MEPNRF) entitledPolish Policy for the Comprehensive Protec-tion of Forest Resources”. Resulting from thiscame a decision by the MEPNRF to establishspecial rules of silviculture and forest protec-tion of the Bialowieska Primeval Forest and alsoorders from the Director-General of the SFE,i.e. General Director’s of the SFE to act for Es-tablishment and promotion of Forest Complexesand a directive on “Grounding the Forest Man-agement on Ecological Foundations”.

In 1997, the Council of Ministers adopted adocument on National Policy on Forests, pre-pared under the MEPNRF. This new policy forforests creates a comprehensive framework forforestry activities.

Furthermore, updating of the Act on Forestsfrom 1991, that went into force on 5 Septem-ber 1997, balances the environmental, commer-cial and social functions of forests, as well as:defines basic rules of sustainable forest man-agement; specifies obligations of forest ownersin general protection and conservation of for-ests; defines principles and sources of financ-ing works in the field of forest protection andcontrol of damage to forests.At the operational programs level, certain pro-

Poland

posals were elaborated:- Program of Conservation of Forest Gene Re-

sources and Selection Breeding of Forest Treesin Poland (1993),

- National Program of Increasing the Country’sForest Cover (1995),

- Program of the Conservation of Nature andCultural Values in Forest Districts (1996),

- Project of a Strategy for Conservation of Bio-logical Diversity in Forests (1997).

5.2 Changes in the relative importance ofdifferent forest functions

The forests as a property of the State Treasury,for the good of the nation, face a special situa-tion. Expectations of the public toward forestryare changing. Besides wood production, envi-ronmental and recreational functions grow inimportance. At the same time certain criticalattitudes towards foresters appear.

Political and economic transformations thathave been going on since 1989, also have adeep impact on the status of forests in Poland.There are some reforms adapting forestry tothe market economy which are necessary. Si-multaneously the maintenance of forestsustainability is a necessary element for eco-logical security of the State and satisfaction ofthe needs of a democratic society.

Conflicting interests are revealed in previousantagonism between intensive economic or rec-reational use and some environmental functionslike the protection of biological diversity andof soils. Conflicts have also arisen between theuse of forests for tourism, commercial and en-vironmental functions (the littering of forests,destruction of ground cover and young trees,disturbance of animals, etc.).

5.3 Role of the State in the coming decades

As it is stated in the National Policy on For-ests, the role of the State in coming decades is:- resolving conflicts between economic growth

and the need for environmental protection;- creating legislation relative to the protection,

shaping and use of the natural environment,as a prerequisite for the legal and economicbalancing of forest production and the pro-tection of the forest environment;

- introducing the legal protection of forest un-der all forms of ownership,

- ensuring that the State cares for forests underall forms of ownership and to establish moni-toring to provide appropriate methods that arebased on principles for the sustainable devel-opment of multifunctional forest manage-ment;

- developing legal and financial instrumentsto encourage owners and managers of foreststo invest constantly and protect elements inforests which benefit society as a whole;

- creating conditions which favour the propervaluation and utilisation of wood as a renew-able natural resource of varied application,and as a energy source;

- developing correct principles to harmonisethe aims set by different users of forest func-tions with the requirements of the agriculturaland forest economy.

5.4 Changes in silvicultural practices

In 1995, Director General of SFE issued theDirective on Grounding the Forest Manage-ment on the Ecological Foundations. Amongnew forest management guidelines limitationsof clearcuttings and preferences for shelterwoodsystems and natural regeneration are recom-mended.Organisations related to forestry

Poland

Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Resuorces and Forestry, Department of Forestry,Nature and Landscape Protection, 52/54 Wawelska, 00-922 Warszawa, tel/fax: +48 22 825 1906, http://www.mos.gov.plAgriculture University in Krakow, http://www.rol.ar.krakow.plAgriculture University in Poznan, http://www.au.poznan.pl/Warsaw Agricultural University, http://www.sggw.waw.plForest Research Institute, 3 Bitwy Warszawskiej 1920 r., 00-973 Warszawa, tel.: +48 22 822 3201, fax: +48 22 822 49 35, http://www.ibles.waw.pl General Directorate of the State Forests, 52/54 Wawelska, 00-922 Warszawa, tel./fax: +48 22825 85 56, http://www.lasypanstwowe.gov.plPolish Forest Society, 3 Bitwy Warszawskiej 1920 r., 00-973 Warszawa, tel.: +48 22 822 14 70,fax: +48 22 822 49 35Science in Poland – Institutions, http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~zbzw/ph/sci/scinst.htm

References

Donn W.L. 1975. Meteorology. McGrar – Hill Book Company.General Statistical Office of Poland. 1998. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 1998. Warszawa.Kapuscinski, Ryszard. 1998. Promotional Forest Complexes. General Directorate of the State

Forests. Publisher: Zbigniew J. Filipkowski, Warszawa.MEPNRF. 1997. National Policy on Forests. Agencja Reklamowo-Wydawnicza Arkadiusz

Grzegorczyk, Warszawa.Plotkowski, Lech. 1997. Forestry education and transition - towards market economy in Poland.

People, forests and sustainability. Report of the FAO/ECE/ILO Team of Specialists on SocialAspects of Sustainable Forest management. Bern.

Rykowski, Kazimierz. 1994. Sustainable Development of Forests in Poland - State and Perspec-tives. Agencja Reklamowo-Wydawnicza Arkadiusz Grzegorczyk, Warszawa.

State Forest Enterprise State Forests”. 1998. Report on the State of Forests - 1997. ForestResearch Institute, Warszawa.

UN-ECE/FAO. 1998. Forest products markets in 1998 and prospects for 1999. Timber Bulletin.Volume LI (1998), No. 6.

List of abbreviations

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United NationsFPCs Forest Promotional ComplexesFCEE Forestry Centre for Ecological EducationGDP Gross Domestic ProductMEPNRF Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources and ForestryNPF National Policy on ForestsSFE State Forest EnterpriseUNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and DevelopmentUN-ECE United Nations - Economic Commission for Europe

Poland

Portugal

1 The Country

1.1 Geography and population

Portugal is a small rectangular shaped countrylocated between the latitudes of 37º and 42º N,with about 560 km of maximum length and220 km of maximum width, the total land areabeing 8.879.033 ha. On this territory lived, in1997, a population of 9.945.700 inhabitants,most of them in the coastal area between Bragaand Setúbal. In the two metropolitan areas ofLisbon and Oporto are concentrated 30,5% ofthe total population. So in the coastal areas for-ests are under pressure by demographic andurban growth. In the interior regions forestsare threatened by the rural emigration takingaway the people needed to manage them prop-erly.

1.2 Societal changes and political structure

Since 1974 the country has been a democracywith semi-presidential features. This regimecame after a smooth revolution which ended aperiod of almost 50 years of authoritative rule.Under this long period, forests expanded mostlyin the common lands of Northern and CentralPortugal through interventions by the ForestServices, sometimes authoritative and non re-spectful of the customs of local populations.Also in that period there was little public ac-tion to stimulate private forestry. It was onlywith democracy and financial incentives fromthe EU that public support to private forestrywitnessed some development.

The coming of democracy brought with it fullintegration of the country into the EU where it

is now one of the founding members of Euroafter having fulfilled the Maastricht criteria.This good performance of the Portugueseeconomy continues with one of the highestgrowth rates in the EU and one of the lowestunemployment rates due to relatively flexiblelabour markets.

1.3 Nature

1.3.1 Climate and relief

Climate shaped by the relief is the primary fac-tor affecting the structure and functioning ofthe forest ecosystems. Therefore, it is going tobe the starting point for this description of thenatural factors. The first thing to mention isthat, even though Portugal is a very small coun-try, it has several combinations of two types ofclimates, Atlantic and Mediterranean. Thereare, however, also elements of Continental,Alpine and Subtropical climates in some partsof the country. The Atlantic influence isstronger in the North and along the coastal re-gions. It is especially important in winter be-ing responsible for relatively high precipitationand for the attenuation of the effects of dry andcold winds coming from Spain. The Mediter-ranean influence is stronger in the South andduring the Summer which is relatively hot anddry.

The coastal region in Northern and CentralPortugal with altitudes up to 400 m has a domi-nantly Atlantic climate with a Mediterraneaninfluence. The annual precipitation is around1300 mm and the temperature between 13 and17º on average.

Portugal

Author:Américo M. S. Carvalho MendesUniversidade Católica PortuguesaRua Diogo Botelho, 1327 - 4150 Porto - Portugalamerico@porto.ucp.pt

Portugal

Going from the coast to the east in Northernand Central regions the altitudes average be-tween 400 and 700 m, with small mountainranges and depressions usually drained by riv-ers, and a few mountains with a height of 1000m. Annual precipitation can be relatively highin the northernmost mountain ranges (>2500mm), but in the other parts of these regions theprecipitation and the temperature are not muchdifferent from those along the coast.

In the Northeast, in parts of the Central regionclose to Spain and in the Southern province ofAlentejo, there are areas of depressed plateauwhich are relatively extensive in the south,ranging up to 400 m. These are the regionswhere the Mediterranean climate is dominant.Annual precipitation is around 800 mm in theinterior North and Central Regions and between600 and 700 mm in the Alentejo. Summers arevery dry and hot and winter is cold, with somesnowfall every year in the Northern and Cen-tral regions.

The Mediterranean climate is also a dominantfeature of the Algarve in the southernmost partof the country with an average annual precipi-tation of 600 mm.

The coastal areas from the Central Region downto the Algarve have a range of up to 500 m ofaltitude like the ones further north, but differsbecause of a stronger Mediterranean influencewith lower precipitation and higher tempera-tures.

Evapotranspiration calculated by theThornwaite method is the following:- between 730 and 750 mm in the Northwest

and the Centralwestern region;- between 680 and 740 mm in the Northeast;- between 800 and 840 in the South.

1.3.2 Soils

In terms of lithology there are three main re-gions to be distinguished:- the old granites and slates belonging to the

Iberian Meseta which cover the North, mostof the Central region and most of the Alentejo

province in the South;- the post-paleozoic calcareous areas along the

coast in the Central region down to Lisbonand in Algarve;

- the fertile antropozoic plains of the rivers Tejoand Sado.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest history

When Portugal was established as an independ-ent country in the beginning of the twelfth cen-tury, forests existed in valleys wher access wasmore difficult and on the hillsides, but the topof the mountains being more exposed to windand erosion had poor forest coverage. Thesewere mostly the remaining natural forests of(Quercus robur, Quercus pyrenaica, Quercusfaginea, Quercus suber, Quercus ilex and chest-nuts).

The demographic growth of the Middle Agesand the corresponding need for farmland, graz-ing land, wood and coal for domestic and manu-facturing uses, led to deforestation, even thoughin some cases farming and forestry was com-plimentary.

During the first dynasty, which lasted until theend of the fourteenth century, most of the for-est lands were under the crown, or belonged tonoblemen or religious orders. They were usedby the royal family and the aristocracy mostlyfor hunting and these rights were often in con-flict with the uses of the forests by local com-munities for fuelwood and grazing.

The second big movement of deforestation af-ter the Middle Ages came with navigation andthe expansion of the Portuguese empire in theearly fifteenth century. The demand for woodfor shipbuilding became very strong since thiswas the most important industry in the countryat that time. The species most demanded wereoak and pine (Pinus pinaster and Pinus pinea).This demand was already emerging at the be-ginning of the fourteenth century when KingDenis ordered the plantation of pines in theroyal forest of Leiria under a special adminis-

Portugal

tration for that time, the purpose being to pro-duce wood for the shipbuilding industry. Thisis still today one of the best managed pine for-ests in the country.

As the gap between supply and demand waswidening, the imports of wood for shipbuild-ing started to grow in the fifteenth century, themajor supplier being the Hanseatic League. Theinterest groups involved in these import busi-nesses probably contributed to the lack of astronger and more comprehensive policy to stopthe depletion of forest resources and promotereforestation. Therefore, with the exception ofthe 1565 “Law of Trees”, forest resources con-tinued to shrink until the eighteenth centurywithout any major breakthrough in publicpolicy with respect to reforestation. At that timethe forest cover rate might have reached thelowest at about 7% of the country land area.

We had to wait until the beginning of the nine-teenth century to see an active and scientifi-cally based forest policy which reversed thesecular trend towards forest resources deple-tion. This policy was strongly influenced by agroup of foresters trained in Germany. Thisgroup advocated the need for reforestation,improved protection and management of ex-isting forests, reorganisation of the adminis-tration of the royal forests, and scientificallybased silviculture. These recommendations ledto the creation of the Forest Services in 1824to manage the forests in the public domain. Inthe beginning, the Forest Services belonged tothe Ministry of Navy, a legacy from the timewhen wood supply to the shipbuilding indus-try was very important. In 1835 forests in thepublic domain increased substantially with in-corporation of the lands once belonging to thereligious orders, expelled from the country bythe liberal revolution. Four years later a com-mission was charged with preparing a ForestCode to consolidate and reform the forest leg-islation. In 1864 a degree in Forestry was cre-ated for the first time, in the General Instituteof Agriculture, in Lisbon, this being the startof forest higher education in the country. In1886 the Forest Services were integrated intothe Directorate General of Agriculture. Thismodel of putting the Forest Services under the

same umbrella as the Agriculture Services isstill prevailing nowadays in Portugal.

The Forest Services did a great job in the affor-estation of about 25.600 ha of land to protectthe dunes along the coast. From the beginningof the twentieth century their efforts graduallymoved to the afforestation of common lands inthe mountains of Northern and Central Portu-gal. These efforts were intensified in the 30sthrough the “Afforestation Plan of the Com-mons north of the Tagus River”. This was atime when the political regime took a dictato-rial turn, and the intervention of the ForestServices in the afforestation of common landswas also embodied of an authoritative attitudetowards the local communities on many occa-sions. In spite of these conflicts, the Forest Serv-ices carried out their plan resulting in the af-forestation of 318.000 ha from 1935 until 1972.

The intervention of the Forest Services in pri-vate forests was less active. It was only in 1945that a special service was created for this pur-pose, called the Forestry Development Fund,but it had a limited impact until it was restruc-tured in 1966. However, this and all the otherreorganisations that followed to the present daydidn´t succeed with an effective policy to dealwith one of the biggest problems of private for-estry in this country which is the fragmenta-tion of private forest ownership, especially inNorthern and Central Portugal.

The big leap forward in stimulating privateinitiative of forest owners and the forest con-tractors has been with a series of programmesfunded by the EEC/EU, since 1987.

2.2 Forest ownership

85.7 % of forest lands are under private man-agement, the rest being almost entirely com-munal forests managed by the Forest Services.Behind each of the three major species exist-ing in the country (pine, eucalyptus and corkoak) can be found the four major stakeholdersconcerned with forestry in Portugal:- the non-industrial private forest (NIPF) own-

ers of North and Central Portugal, typically

Portugal

with small sized holdings, managing 3/4 ofthe pine forests, the Forest Services manag-ing the other 1/4, mostly in communal lands;

- the pulp industry managing 1/3 of the euca-lyptus forests, the other 2/3 being with non-industrial private forest owners and in com-munal forests;

- the non-industrial private owners of the corkoak forests in the South with much largerholdings than the ones in North and CentralPortugal.

Table 3 shows the contrasting landownershipstructures between North and South:- in the North, almost 50 % of the forest lands

with forest use only belong to holdings hav-ing 5 ha of agricultural land or less, and be-tween 1,5 and 2 ha of forest land;

- in the southern region of Alentejo, 93,3 % ofthe forest lands with agro-forestry use belongto holdings having more than 50 ha of agri-cultural land, and 175,5 ha of forest land onthe average.

The communal forests exist mostly in the Northwhere they represent 44,2 % of the forest lands,while in the other regions the percentage is5,6%, most of which is in the central region.

2.3 Land use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

The forest area has been growing for the last120 years. Until the 50s there was a simultane-ous growth of forest and agricultural land whichwas possible because of the large amount ofuncultivated land existing in the XIX centurydue to the secular process of deforestation men-tioned before. With the intense rural emigra-tion in the 60s and 70s farmland started to fallback while forest land continued to expand.Nowadays agricultural land represents 42,8%of the area of Continental Portugal while for-est land represents 37,8%.

Table 1. Ownership of forest lands in 1995Regions Total Private Forests managed by the Forest Services

area (ha) forest lands State forests Communal forestsha % ha % ha %

Northwest 340 700 254 476 74.7 143 0.0 86 081 25.3Northeast 292 500 98 708 33.8 0 0.0 193 792 66.2North 633 200 353 184 55.8 143 0.0 279 873 44.2Others 2 672 900 2 450 594 91.7 71 748 2.7 150 558 5.6Total 3 306 100 2 803 778 84.8 71 891 2.2 430 431 13.0Sources: INE (1997) and our own estimations.

Table 2. Forest lands by types of management and tree species in 1991/93 (1000 ha)Coniferous Broad-leaved species

Total species Eucalyptus Cork Oak Other TotalArea % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area %

State forests 86 2.6 71 5.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 15 2.2 15 0.8Communal forests 380 11.7 36026.5 20 3.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 20 1.1NIPF 2.497 76.9 899 66.1 319 60.3 621 90.4 658 97.8 1.598 84.6Industrial forests 246 7.6 30 2.2 19035.9 26 3.8 0 0.0 216 11.4Others 40 1.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 40 5.8 0 0.0 40 2.1Total 3.249 100.0 1.360 100.0 529 100.0 687 100.0 673 100.0 1889 100.0

Sources: our own estimations based on data from the Forest Services and the pulp industry

Portugal

This secular growth in the forest resource basehas substantial potential to go on much furtherin two non mutually exclusive ways:- further growth in the forest area up to

5.280.000 hectares (59,5 % of the land area)through afforestation of 1.068.000 ha of mar-ginal agricultural lands non suitable for farm-ing and about 850.000 ha of other lands withforest potential (Banco Português deInvestimento et al. 1996);

- substantial productivity gains (around 20%more in annual increments of Pinus pinasterand Eucalyptus globulus) resulting from im-proved forest management and use of betterplants (Banco Português de Investimento etal., 1996).

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

According to the most recent forest inventory,the total forest area of Continental Portugal

was 3.358.800 ha in 1995, most of which being inthe Northern (658.600 ha) and Central (1.450.700ha) regions.

Table 4 shows trends in forest lands and figure1 illustrates forest cover in continental Portu-gal since 1874.

2.3.3 Trees species origin and distribution

Nowadays the major species in Portuguese for-ests are pines and other conifers (33,8%of the forest area), especially Pinus pinaster(maritime pine), cork oak (21,5%) and euca-lyptus (20,7%), mainly Eucalyptus globulus.

The major pine species existing in the country,Pinus pinaster, might have been introduced byman, but a long time ago, because traces of ithave been found dating from the Neolithic pe-riod. This species expanded its territory by plan-

Table 3. Distribution of private forest lands by size of agricultural holdings in 1993Classes of Forests with agro-forestry use Forests without agro-forestry useagricultural Holdings Forest lands Holdings Forest landsarea (ha) N.º % ha % N.º % ha %CONTINENTAL PORTUGAL0 - < 1 172 1.1 63 0.0 40 516 17.7 54 738 6.31 - < 5 3 615 23.6 3 866 0.4 141 775 61.8 326 340 37.65 - < 20 4 431 29.0 21 148 2.4 38 912 17.0 197 996 22.820 - < 50 2 371 15.5 39 188 4.4 5 763 2.5 70 725 8.2>= 50 4 703 30.8 834 812 92.9 2 520 1.1 217 535 25.1Total 15 292 100.0 899 077 100.0 229 486 100.0 867 334 100.0NORTH0 - < 1 30 0.8 8 0.0 13 638 14.4 14101 5.91- < 5 1 590 44.0 1 147 4.1 57658 60.8 103 336 43.15 - < 20 1 454 40.2 2 643 9.5 20 218 21.3 73 353 30.620 - < 50 379 10.5 2 096 7.5 2 801 3.0 23 145 9.6>= 50 161 4.5 21 891 78.8 516 0.5 26 110 10.9Total 3 614 100.0 27 785 100.0 94 831 100.0 240 045 100.0ALENTEJO0 - < 1 64 0.7 45 0.0 252 7.2 4 432 5.31- < 5 1 325 14.5 1 789 0.2 1 018 29.1 3 598 4.35 - < 20 2 257 24.8 15 919 2.2 948 27.1 10 236 12.220 - < 50 1 546 17.0 31 814 4.3 470 13.4 5 153 6.2>= 50 3 920 43.0 688 010 93.3 811 23.2 60 403 72.1Total 9 112 100.0 737 577 100.0 3 499 100.0 83 822 100.0Source: INE (1995a).

Portugal

tation and by natural diffusion and regenera-tion, since the sixteenth century.

The major eucalyptus species existing in thecountry is Eucalyptus globulus which origi-nated in Tasmania. In the 60s the eucalyptusplantations started by supplying pulpwood forthe paper companies recently established in thecountry. This species has been replacing partof the decaying pine forests, especially in North-ern and Central Portugal.

The region of Alentejo in the South remainsthe land of the most important agro-forestrysystems in the country (“montados”) based onthe cork and holm oak trees. The holm oak lost

most of its economic value in the 60s due toswine fever which decimated the stock of Ibe-rian pigs fed on the acorns from these trees.The cork oak has kept its economic value be-cause of the cork manufacturing industrieswhere Portugal is the leading producer in theworld. More recently EU funds for the affores-tation of farm lands (Reg. 2080/92) have beenused at great profit by the landowners to reno-vate and expand the cork oak forests.

Although nowhere near as important as thenative forests of the past, the other oaks andthe chestnut forests have been growing sincethe 60s, especially in the Northern and Centralregions.

Table 4. Trends in forest lands in continental Portugal since 1874

Sources: DGF (1998a, 1998b) and INE (1947, 1992).

Species 1874 1902 1928 1956 1968/78 1980/85 1995Conifers 210000 1020200 1198600 1309000 1376940 1358800 1136300Maritime pine n.a. 430200 1132000 1128000 1293040 1252300 1029200Cork and holm oak 370000 782700 939600 1264000 1192480 1128700 1196400Cork oak n.a. 366000 560000 590000 656580 664000 720700Other oaks andchestnut 60000 153600 193200 132000 99840 143200 174900Eucalyptus 0 0 0 0 213720 385800 695100Forest lands 640000 1956500 2331400 2763000 2969120 3108200 3358800Agricultural lands 1886000 3111317 3283000 4834000 3879602 3800381Land area 8879033 8879033 8879033 8879033 8879033 8879033 8879033Forest cover rate 7,2% 22.0 % 26.3 % 31,1 % 33.4 % 35.0 % 37.8 %

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

3500000

4000000

1874 1894 1914 1934 1954 1974 1994

years

hec

tare

s

Other oaks and chestnuts

ConifersCork and Holm oak

EucalyptusTotal forest area

Figure 1. Forest area in continental Portugal since 1874

Portugal

2.3.4 Total growing stock, growth and totalfellings

The 11.200.000 m3 o.b. of annual fellings forwood supply are almost as great as the12.900.000 m3 o.b. of net annual increment inforests for the same purpose. This is due to thefact that derived demand by forest industries isclosely knit with wood supply.

Net annual increment per hectare in forests forwood supply (4,6 m3/ha/year for Pinus pinasterand 9,0 m3/ha/year for Eucalyptus globulus) isrelatively small due to the following factors:poor management of the pine forests, old ageand multiple use of the broad-leaved forests.With better forest management these incre-ments could increase by 20%.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Fire is the major threat to Portuguese forests,especially the pine forests in the Northwest andCentral West regions which were reduced re-spectively by 41 and 21% between 1982 and1995. As we look at the data in the long run,this problem definitely emerges in the 60s whenemigration from the rural areas was more in-tense. Therefore, the abandonment of tradi-tional uses of the forests which helped in keep-ing some minimum management standards andthe current status of poor management of manyforests are certainly an amplifying factor of themeteorological conditions which ignite forestfires. The data shows some slight improvementsin recent years in terms of area burnt and aver-age size of fires. However it is too early to know

Table 5. Area, growing stock, increment, fellings and removals in 1995

Source: DGF (1998c)

Area Growing Net Fellings Annual(1000 ha) stock increment (1000 m3 o.b.) removals

(1000 m3 o.b.) (1000 m3 o.b.) (1000 m3 o.b.) (1000 m3 u.b.)Trees in forest, total 3 383 275 760 14 312 11 500 11 300 9 400Conifers 1 179 147 782 8323 6 200 6 100 4 900Broadleaved 2 204 127 978 5 989 5 300 5 200 4 500Trees for woodsupply* 1 897 188 020 12 900 11 200 11 000 9 100Conifers 1 021 140 871 7 890 6 200 6 100 4 900Broadleaved 876 47 149 5 010 5 000 4 900 4 200*The 344000 ha of mixed stands were evenly split between conifers and broadleaved species.

Table 6. Forest fires in Continental Portugal since 1968

Source: DGF

Burnt area (ha)Yearly In for est stands in Totalaverages Annual area Cumulated area shrubs area1968/69 8532 17064 8165 166971970/74 15349 93807 8601 239501975/79 46292 325268 17637 639291980/84 35862 504579 19279 551411985/89 67259 763272 42404 1096631990/94 56413 1045336 44394 1008071995 87554 1132890 82058 1696121996 30542 1163432 58325 888671997 10574 1174006 15494 26068

Portugal

whether this is due to better forest managementor not.

According to the June 1998 Follow up reporton the Ministerial Conferences on the Protec-tion of Forests in Europe “forest areas dam-aged by insects and diseases are monitored inpermanent plots (S1) and do not show signs ofirreparable or permanent damages. They alsoinclude low and medium intensity classes whichare closely related to the occurrence of drought.When drought is reduced, vitality immediatelyrecovers.” (Third Ministerial Conference onthe Protection of Forests in Europe, 1998, p.201).

2.4 Silviculture

Pinus pinaster is the species managed mostlyby the non-industrial private forest owners inNorth and Central Portugal. These owners aremostly of the following types:- small private owners who, in many cases, aresmall part-time or aged farmers still living neartheir forests;- larger private owners usually living in the citywith their lands leased out to tenants or leftunder-utilised.

In the past, forest lands were a necessary com-plement to agriculture because they providedpasture to feed the livestock and brushwoodwhich after being used as bedding for animalswas turned into manure to fertilise the land.The forests were also a free source of fuelwoodand non-wood products indispensable for thesubsistence of the local communities. Thus theforest lands were actively used and were man-aged free of charge for their owners.

Currently things are different. Modern farm-ing uses industrial fertilisers and foodstuffs, andthe rural households no longer use fuelwoodnor the non-timber products from the forests.Therefore, the forest owners don’t have peoplegoing around their forests to collect the com-bustible materials for free. If they want themcut and removed, they have to hire someone,with increasing costs as the rural populationdecreases. These costs are also aggravated by

the difficult topography of many forest landsin the North.

Comparing three alternative options to reducethe accumulation of combustible materials inthe forest - mechanised cutting and removalfrom the forest, mechanised cutting withoutremoval from the forest and prescribed burn-ing - the first two options fall outside the rangeof the willingness to pay of most forest own-ers. The third one is affordable, but it has manyrestrictions in order to be implemented cor-rectly. Also, in spite of having its roots in tra-ditional practices, it is still very much withinthe circles of forest research, lacking qualifiedpersonnel in the field to use it properly.

Because the forest maintenance costs are ris-ing beyond the willingness to pay of privateowners, the benefits are uncertain and do notoccur in the short run, and also because part ofthese benefits are positive externalities forwhich the private owner is not compensated,the result is that the large majority of privateowners do not spend money in the maintenanceof their forests. Also they do not spend moneyin afforestation unless it is highly subsidised.So the growth and decay of the forests is left tonatural regeneration and wildfires.

When the owner decides to cut, it is not be-cause he is following some forest managementplan guided by optimal rotation principles, butbecause he needs cash to make ends meet. Thisleads to the following management practices:- clear cut after a forest fire followed by natural

regeneration;- removal of the best trees, leaving behind the

worse ones which causes negative selectionand a lowering of the productivity of the for-ests.

Some owners in the Northern and Central re-gions after forest fires, replace pine by Euca-lyptus globulus by themselves or by renting outthe land to the pulp paper companies.

These companies own almost all the industrialforests in the country located mostly in theNorthern and Central regions. In these forestsEucalyptus globulus is, by far, the major spe-

Portugal

cies with rotations of about 12 years long. Theseare certainly among the most carefully man-aged in the country, each pulp company hav-ing set up its own forest management firm totake care of these operations. These groups havealso invested regularly in the prevention andfight of forest fires as well as in research anddevelopment to improve the productivity of theplantations. About 25 % of the eucalyptus for-ests are reaching the fourth rotation and haveto be replaced within the next ten years. Theindustry will probably take this opportunity touse the results of the R&D and improve theproductivity of the new plantations. The indus-try is also bound to take these actions becauseit faces legal constraints to the expansion ofeucalyptus plantations.

The cork oak forests in the South areagroforestry systems where farming and graz-ing sometimes puts pressure on the trees. Inyears of bad drought there has been some unu-sual death rates in trees but there is no consen-sus yet among researchers whether it is thefarming system, the drought or some patho-logical reason which is causing that problem.The good economic value of cork and the factthat throughout their estates most of the own-ers can get an almost annual income from thatproduct is an incentive to them in regularlycaring for the trees. So we cannot say that thisis a fossil forest except where the cork has no

economic value. The case of the agroforestrysystems in the South-eastern part of the coun-try based on the holm oak is different becausethey lost their economic value when the swinefever killed the Iberian pigs fed with their acorn.

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems

Since most of the forests are in hilly moun-tainous areas with bad infrastructure, forestoperations are difficult and costly. They aredone by private contractors who usually areorganised as small businesses using mostly fam-ily labour, with low levels of mechanisation andcapitalisation. It is this type of entrepreneurialstructure which makes possible their economicsurvival in the face of the high costs of timberextraction.

2.5.2 Timber uses

Pine wood is used mostly as a sawn product.Woodchips for the panel industry are anotherimportant industrial use for this forest prod-uct. Finally there is also a use for pine wood inthe pulp industry, namely to make kraftlinerpaper. For eucalyptus the major use is for pulp.

Table 7. Net annual increment and fellings of pine wood (1000 m3 over bark)

Source: CESE (1998)

Pine Eucalyptus1979/83 1984/88 1989/93 1979/83 1984/88 1989/93

NET ANNUAL INCREMENT 7 105 6 561 5 913 3 074 5 446 5 023FELLINGS 6 060 6 493 6 247 2 919 4 772 5 094DOMESTIC USES (withoutfuelwood) 5 933 6 473 6 189 2 919 4 338 4 757Sawnwood 4 343 4 964 5 126 278 413 424Pulpwood 844 897 824 2 309 3 922 4 324Other industrial uses 746 612 239 332 3 9EXPORTS 127 20 58 210 560 503IMPORTS 0 0 0 0 126 166BALANCE (net increment-fellings) 1 045 68 -334 155 674 -71

Portugal

2.5.3 Non-timber forest products

Cork is the major non-timber forest product inPortugal, the country being the main producer(more than 50% of the world production) andtransformer of this material in the world.

Portugal also had, in the recent past, a leadingposition in the production and processing ofpine resin. However, the lower labour costs inChina in the extraction of this product led to aquick decline of this activity in this country,annual production falling from 108.000 tonnesin 1986 to 15.000 tonnes in 1995.

The other relevant non-timber forest productsare two fruits: pine nut from Pinus pinea witha total production of 700 tonnes in 1995 andchestnut with a total production of 20.321tonnes in 1996. Almost all the pine seed pro-duction comes from a relatively small area lo-cated in the county of Alcácer do Sal, south ofLisbon. The chestnut production comes mostlyfrom the North-eastern part of the country.

2.5.4 Forest functions

In 1995, the main function of 56.1% of the for-est area was for wood supply. The second main

function corresponding to 41,7% of the forestarea was the production of non-wood forestproducts, mostly cork oak. Conservation andprotection were the main function of 2,2% ofthe forest area. This number, however, shouldbe somehow adjusted by the fact that 585.000ha (17,3% of the forest area) of forests are in-cluded in protected areas.

Also, all the forest area can be used for hunt-ing, the Forest Services having issued in 1996/97 about 306.000 hunting permits. Huntingrights can be used under two different andmutually exclusive regimes: the general regimeand the special regime. Most of the land underspecial regime is managed by associations ofhunters, similar to clubs where hunting is re-stricted to the members and investments aremade to enhance game production. The othermajor form of special regime corresponds tothe touristic hunting zones. These are territo-ries managed for gaming by private firms whichsell housing rights and related services at acertain price. The general regime covers therest of the territory where hunting is allowedto everyone who has a permit issued by theMinistry of Agriculture. In this regime game

Table 8. Cork production (t)

Sources: CESE (1998) and DGF.

Years Total Virgin Amadia “ & secundeira”Average 43/51 170 000 44 000 126 000Average 52/60 188 000 58 000 130 000Average 61/69 221 000 78 000 143 000Average 70/78 197 000 51 000 146 000Average 79/87 161 100 34 900 126 200Average 88/96 157 700 31 300 126 400

Table 9. Domestic production and industrialconsumption of cork (t)

Source: CESE (1996)

1985/89 1980/84 1990/94Production 160 000 156 000 154 000Consumption 126 000 138 000 169 000

Table 10. Forest according to main functions

Source: DGF (1998c)

Functions Area (1000 ha) %Wood supply 1897 56,1predominantly conifers 849 25,1predominantly broadleaved 704 20,8mixed stands 344 10,2Non-wood forest products 1410 41,7Conservation/Protection 76 2,2Total 3383 100,0

Portugal

is “collected” by the hunters but is not man-aged by them. As the special regime expands,the territory for the general regime shrinks,leading to severe conflicts between hunters inthe two regimes.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy

In Portugal, the forest sector is an importantbut heterogeneous sector. In fact, with 2.6 % ofthe GDP, the forest cluster (forestry, forest in-dustries and related industries and services) isone of the top three in the Portuguese economyin terms of value added and employment, to-gether with the textiles and clothing, agricul-

ture and food industries. With 12 % of the ex-ports, it is also the second major exporting clus-ter in the country.

Being important in the economy, the Portugueseforest sector has a heterogeneous structurewhich makes it difficult to co-ordinate for pub-lic policy. As we mentioned before, the sectorhas evolved around three key forest productsvery different from each other in terms of pro-duction and business structure: pine wood andthe woodworking industries (sawmilling, car-pentry, panels and furniture), pulpwood and therelated pulp, paper and board industries, corkproduction and the cork industries. These threecomponents are very different in terms of own-ership structure and forest management as wellas in terms of industrial business structure:small and medium-sized firms in sawmilling,carpentry, furniture, preparation and transfor-mation of cork, manufacturing of paper andboard products and big firms in the pulp, pa-per and panel industries.

An important issue relating to the wood-basedindustries is to know if the growth in forestresources has responded adequately to the de-mand from the forest industries. The currentsituation is that timber supply is not keeping

Table 11. Area under the special hunting re-gime in 1998

Source: DGF (1998c)

Types of zones N.º Area (1000 ha)Associative 1176 1534Touristic 623 851Other 40 122Total 1839 2507

Table 12. Gross value added of the forest cluster in 1993 (thousands of euros)

Sources: CESE (1996, 1998a)1 Euro=200,482 esc.

Activities Value addedForestry 460 730- Roundwood 150 353- Pulpwood 147 275- Cork 93 644- Non wood products 69 458Gaming 65 542Sawmill, carpentry, plywood and particleboard industries 281 342Furniture industry 430 158Woodworking machinery 25 838Cork industries 191 010Pulp, paper and board industries 294 710Resin products 27 913Other wood and cork based industries 7 128TOTAL 1 784 371GDP at market prices 68 210 530

Portugal

up with this demand, leading to a rise instumpage prices. It is fair to say that the mo-mentum for Forest Policy Law came, to a largeextent, from pressure by the forest industriesto increase the public effort on afforestation.In the short term, to loosen the pressure ondomestic resources, the pulp mills are increas-ing their imports.

Data about the supply and domestic demand ofcork presented in table 9 show a decline in pro-duction during the 80s and 90s. This is prob-ably due to the fact that between 1939 and 1974the area of cork oak forests decreased from690.000 ha to 652.540 ha. Also drought andother factors not well understood yet are caus-ing the death of some cork oak trees. However,with afforestation programmes in place since1987 the area of cork oak forests has been grow-ing, so that in 30 years from now the produc-tion will increase again. The fact that since thebeginning of the 80s there is a shortfall in thedomestic production of cork to meet the indus-trial demand has not been necessarily a badthing. The positive effects of this situation arethe following:- the Portuguese cork industry became an in-

dustrial platform transforming not only thedomestic production, but also a important partof the production from neighbouring coun-tries;

- the shortages in cork supply have been anincentive for the industry to invest in newproducts able to make a more complete andvaluable use of the cork.

3.2 Employment

The forest cluster represents 5.3 % of theworkforce, making it one of the major employ-ers in the Portuguese economy.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation

The legal and policy framework for forests andforest-related activities in Portugal is undergo-ing substantial change which is still far fromsettling down. These changes have to do withthe following aspects:- the revision and consolidation of the forest

Table 13. Foreign trade in forest products in 1994

Sources: INE (1995b, 1995c)

Products Exports Imports103 euros % total 103 euros % total

1. Fuelwood 643 0.0 469 0.02. Roundwood 26 526 0.2 128 406 0.63. Sawnwood 69 283 0.5 53 376 0.24. Other wood products 55 387 0.4 30 162 0.15. Wood chips 1 945 0.0 6 110 0.06. Plywood and panels 148 751 1.0 40 901 0.27. Pulp 420 392 2.8 37 116 0.28. Paper, board and paper & board products 384 738 2.6 404 899 1.89. Furniture 160 498 1.1 93 874 0.410. Cork 29 589 0.2 27 728 0.111. Cork products 453 622 3.1 11 582 0.112. Honey 808 0.0 334 0.013. Resin products 28 327 0.2 6 804 0.014. Chestnuts and other forest fruits 14 749 0.1 838 0.015. Mushrooms 1 771 0.0 40 0.016. TOTAL (forest products) 1 797 029 12.1 842 639 3.817. TOTAL (all sectors) 14 841 572 100.0 22 343 607 100.0

Portugal

legislation sometimes outdated and inconsist-ent and scattered through many different de-crees and regulations;

- the reform of the public Forest Services andthe creation of intersectoral co-ordination andconsultation bodies to promote integration offorest related policy instruments and the par-ticipation of the various stakeholders;

- the preparation of new financial instrumentsto develop private forestry.

We will consider each of these aspects startinghere with the first one. The new legal and policyframework for forests and forest related activi-ties was set out by the Forest Policy Law (LawN.º 33/96) voted by unanimity in the Parlia-ment in July 1996 and published in August 17of the same year. This is a frame law whosemain elements are the following:- a statement of the principles and goals of the

forest policy;- the main policy tools to achieve those goals.

The forest policy principles and related goalsadopted in the law are the following:

- forests are a multifunctional renewable re-source which should be managed in a sus-tainable way;

- sustainable forest management should recon-cile expansion of the forest area, productivityimprovement of the existing stands andbiodiversity preservation;

- forest resources are essential for the preser-vation of all forms of life on earth and so theprotection of forests is a responsibility to beshared by the society;

- private forest owners are the majorstakeholders in sustainable forest manage-ment;

- forest owners and other economic and socialgroups concerned with forests should be ableto participate in the preparation and imple-mentation of forest policy measures;

- forest policy should be integrated with theother policy areas and take into account theinternational initiatives which the country iscommitted to.

The major policy tools listed but not fully speci-fied in the law are the following:

Table 14. Workforce in the forest sector in 1993/95Activities WorkforceLogging, cork and resin extraction 16 000Forestry contractors 3 750Wood transportation 2 300Forest nurseries 1 000Game production and management 8 000Import and export of roundwood 770Sawmill, carpentry and panel industries 34 376Furniture industry 76 116Handicrafts of cork and wood 1 000Woodworking machinery 2 349Furniture wholesaling and retailing 35 526Resin industry 2 000Cork industry and corkworking machinery 19 358Pulp, paper and board industries 15 561Forest related services 5 288TOTAL WORKFORCE IN THE FOREST SECTOR: 223 394- Forestry, gaming and related services 21 050- Forest industries and related services 197 056- Other services 5 288TOTAL WORFORCE (all sectors) 4 255 000Sources: CESE (1996, 1998).

Portugal

1. regional forest management plans definingthe appropriate sustainable forest use for eachzone and the corresponding norms to be fol-lowed by the forest owners;

2. compulsory management plans at the forestmanagement unit level for forest units abovea certain threshold to be specified in the re-gional forest management plans;

3. the definition of a National Forest Authorityresponsible for the preparation and implemen-tation of the forest policy and the manage-ment of the state forests;

4. the creation of an Interministerial ForestCommission presided by the Minister of Ag-riculture and including the other ministriesrelevant for forests whose task is to promotethe integration of the policy areas related toforests;

5. the creation of a Forest Consultative Coun-cil composed by the organisations representa-tive of the various stakeholders related to for-ests and directly related to the Minister of Ag-riculture whose task is to propose new forestpolicy measures, analyse the ones the Gov-ernment and the Parliament intend to approveand evaluate the implementation of the onesalready in place;

6. the creation of a national, regional andsubregional structure for the planning and co-ordination of forest fire prevention and fight-ing to improve co-operation between the For-est Services more related to prevention andthe Ministry of Internal Affairs and the fire-men more related to fire fighting;

7. the provision of financial incentives to theforest owners’ associations;

8. the creation of a permanent forest fund andtax incentives to finance the development offorest production, the improvement of the for-est landownership structure, the compensa-tion of biodiversity preservation and forest re-search and training;

9. the creation of an Appeal Commission pre-sided by the National Forest Authority to ana-lyse the complaints from forest owners aboutdecisions of the public administration on theirforest management plans and their applica-tions for public funds.

Since this is a frame law it has to be specifiedin decrees without which it cannot be put in

practice. About the legislation already in place,the regulations to be mentioned are the onesabout the management of cork oak forests andeucalyptus plantations.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

We have already mentioned some of the newinstitutional frameworks following directlyfrom the Forest Policy Law. Besides thesechanges there are other very relevant reformsin the structure of the Forest Services inprogress since the new Government took of-fice in 1995. They consist basically of the fol-lowing changes:- at the subnational level the foresters who once

worked in the regional services of the Direc-torate General of Forestry mostly in the man-agement of public and communal forests, withtotal autonomy with respect to the regionalagricultural services of the Ministry, weremerged into the 8 Regional Directorates ofAgriculture;

- there is a proposal by DGF ready for approvalby the Government to externalise the forestmanagement activities which the DGF car-ried out directly for most of this century inthe public and communal forests, transferringthese activities to a new company with publiccapital and private management rules;

- responsibility for the analysis, approval andfinancing of the forest investment projects ap-plying for public aids was fully committed toIFADAP, the public financial institute depend-ent on the Ministers of Agriculture and Fi-nances which manages all agricultural struc-tural policy funds.

The personnel of DGF and the foresters in theRegional Directorates of Agriculture make atotal of about 2.800 persons, including admin-istrative staff. We estimate that personnel inother public and private forest-related servicesamounts to 1.000 persons.

In terms of planning capacities at the nationallevel, the Directorate General of Forestry is ingreat need of human resources in the fields ofLaw and Economics and capacities in data col-

Portugal

lection and treatment. General economic data iscollected and published by the National Statis-tic Institute but in less quantity, detail andquality than for other economic activities. DGFmanages only the following data collection sys-tems:- the Forest Inventory System;- the data collection on forest fires;- the monitoring of air pollution effects on for-

ests.

The planning capacities at the forest manage-ment unit level are as follows:- small private firms providing services to pri-

vate owners for preparation of forest manage-ment plans and applications for public funds;

- management services in the pulp paper com-panies to supervise their own forests;

- foresters in the young forest owners´ associa-tions which are getting started throughout thecountry (a total of about 50 associations).

Looking now at the actors in the private sector,let’s see first the organisations representing theforest owners. Since 1992, in the North therehas been a growing movement to promote for-est owners’ associations. This started with thecreation of a non profit organisation calledFORESTIS-Associação Florestal do Norte eCentro de Portugal [Forest Association ofNorth and Central Portugal]. The main task ofthis association is to promote the creation oflocal forest owners’ associations and providecommon services to them (diffusion of techni-cal information, publication of a periodicalbulletin, training courses, forest mapping, GPS,negotiations with the Ministry of Agriculture,participation in forest events, representation ofthe members, etc.). So far, this work has re-sulted in the creation of 11 local associationscovering the Northwest and part of the North-east. Recently FORESTIS has changed its stat-utes in order to become more like a federationof its local associations. So far it has remainedindependent from the two agrarian confedera-tions disputing the national representation ofthe agricultural and forest sectors.

In the South the most important forest ownersare the ones who have cork oak forests. Afterthey got back their lands occupied by the farm

workers after the 1974 Revolution, some asso-ciations were born, especially in the good corkoak areas of the Tejo and Sado basins. Theseassociations are the most influential groupwithin FPFP-Federação dos ProdutoresFlorestais de Portugal, a national federationof forest owners’ associations which does notinclude FORESTIS and is related to one of theagrarian confederations existing in the coun-try (CAP-Confederação dos Agricultores dePortugal).

To finance their activities, these associationshave relied mostly on subsidies from nationaland regional programmes financed by the EU,the annual membership fees making up only asmall part of their income. They have not yetclearly stepped into the provision of privateservices to their members from where theycould collect revenues, such as the productionof silvicultural services (plantings, thinnings,etc.) or the sales of forest products. Also thereis no mandatory system where a percentage ofthe gross value of the timber sold by the mem-bers goes to some trust fund which supportsthese type of associations.

In spite of this recent progress in the collectiveorganisation of forest owners their influencein policy making is still weak. Forest indus-tries are more organised and more influential.The pulp and paper industry is dominated bythree groups: PORTUCEL and SOPORCELstill controlled by the state and CELBI belong-ing to the Stora group.

The wood industries are of a much smaller sizeand much more dispersed, except in the panelindustry where the SONAE group stands to-day as one of the leading industrial groups inthe world market. These industries recentlymerged their different professional associationsinto a single one and are now fighting for astronger say in forest policy making than theyhad in the past.

In the cork oak industries there is a big indus-trial group (Amorim) with interests in othereconomic sectors, but the sector as a whole doesnot seem to have reached a good level of col-lective organisation involving all its partners.

Portugal

4.3 The National Forest Programme

4.3.1 Goals

Forest services at the national and regionallevel, universities and forest research stationsall live on the State budget. The forest owners´associations live mostly on public subsidiesfrom the programmes supporting producers’organisations. The private owners invest mostlywith the help of subsidies from the ongoingpublic programmes supporting afforestation.The forest contractors and the forest projectorsare also very dependent on these public pro-grammes. Currently there are two programmesat work - Regulation (EEC) N.º 2080/92 andthe Forest Development Plan (PDF-“Plano deDesenvolvimento Florestal”) - about which wewill talk later. PDF will come to an end nextyear and its follow up has to be designed ontime to fit into the third Common SupportFramework for the period 2000-2006 whosepreparation is now underway. On March 23,1998 the Minister of Agriculture presented forpublic discussion the first draft of a NationalForest Plan called Plan for the SustainableDevelopment of the Portuguese Forest (PDSFP-“Plano de Desenvolvimento Sustentável daFloresta Portuguesa”). This document wasprepared by DGF building on the work of theirown staff and drawing also on the contribu-tions from other sources like the BPI and theCESE reports (BPI et al., 1996; CESE 1996,1998) and the workshops organised for thispurpose by DGF and some associations in theforest sector.

The core of this document is the following:- statement of general objectives and derived

strategic goals;- specification of some medium-run operational

targets derived from those goals;- specification of some policy instruments to

reach the targets.

The general policy goals proposed in this draftof the NFP are picked from the 1996 ForestPolicy Law. The list of derived strategic goalsis very long. We are not going to give here anexhaustive presentation of all of them, but sim-ply pick some of the most relevant or innova-

tive ones, in the light of what has been the for-est policy in Portugal so far.

Improving the productivity of the existingstandsThe Plan sets the following productivity im-provement targets:- improvement of 70.000 ha of pine forests,

20.000 ha of cork oak, 5.000 ha of holm oakand 2.000 ha of other broad-leaved speciesper year;

- raising the annual increment of eucalyptusby 1 m3/ha/year until 2008;

- until the year 2005, conversion of all the de-graded and badly located stands (15.000 ha/year of eucalyptus, 1.000 ha/year of Pinuspinea, 50 ha/year of chestnut trees and 3.000ha/year of maritime pine).

Expanding the forest areaThe Plan sets a target of 2% annual growth inthe forest area for the next 10 years mostly inmaritime pine (15.000 ha/year), cork oak(10.000 ha/year) and other broad-leaved spe-cies (10.000 ha/year).

Improving the protection against forest firesThe plan sets the following fire protection tar-get to be achieved through better forest man-agement and improved co-ordination amongall the services involved in fire prevention andfighting: a 20% reduction in the burnt forestlands in the period 1998-2003, and a 50% re-duction in the period 2003-2008 compared tothe period 1992-97.

Building forest management capacityThe plan sets the following targets to be reachedby the year 2003:- a 200% growth in the number of members of

the forest owners´ associations;- 10% of the timber and cork sales go through

the forest owners´ associations;- 10 teams of firemen in the forest owners´ as-

sociations;- 100 extensionists assisting the forest owners´

associations and the set up of grouped forestmanagement units;

- 10 communal forests with at least one perma-nent forester in charge of forest management;

- 300 forest management plans at the forest

Portugal

management unit level covering an area of250.000 ha;

- 500.000 ha managed by the public forestmanagement company under forest manage-ment plans.

Building capacity in the forest related servicesThe plan sets the following targets to be reachedby the year 2003:- 10% of the forestry contractors have a level

III technician;- 30% of the forestry contractors attend train-

ing courses;- 20% of the forestry contractors are certified;- the forestry contractors follow the 1997 ILO

occupational safety and health code for forestworkers and pay them at the same level asfarm workers;

- only roundwood non suitable for sawmillingis delivered to the pulp paper and panel com-panies;

- 20% decrease in the forest investment costsdue to improved public information on thesecosts and competitive bidding;

- 50% of the forest projectors attended specifictraining courses.

The Plan expects 20% productivity gains in theforestry contractors’ work by the year 2008.

Creating a Sustainable Forest Managementcertification systemBy the end of 1999 the Pan European Indica-tors of Sustainable Forest Management at theForest Management Level are tested andadapted to the Portuguese conditions.

By the year 2000 a national certification sys-tem is in place.

The regional forest management plans incor-porate the monitoring systems needed for cer-tification.

Protecting biodiversityThe plan sets the following targets to be reachedby the year 2003:- 20% of the forest projects include mixed stands;- 100% of the forest projects protect biodiversity;- 10.000 ha/year of private projects protecting

high environmental value habitats;

- all the forest contractors follow a code of en-vironmentally friendly practices.

4.3.2 Policy instruments

Innovative financingFollowing up on the statement of the 1996 For-est Policy Law for the creation of a permanentforest fund to finance forest investment andmanagement and compensate forest owners forpositive externalities, the Plan proposes thefollowing sources of financial resources for thisfund:- a new tax or a share of the corporate income

tax paid by the water and electricity powercompanies;

- a new tax on the carbon emissions by pollut-ing companies;

- 1% of the proceeds from the tax on fuel andgas;

- bonds;- philanthropic contributions.

The Plan also announces tax incentives for for-est owners not yet fully specified.

Consolidating forest legislationThe Plan announces for 1999 a Forest Codeupdating and consolidating all the scatteredforest legislation.

4.3.3 Other goals

The plan also sets an extensive list of goalsand operational targets regarding the enhance-ment of the protective role of forests in termsof soil and water conservation, the contribu-tion of forests to the global carbon cycles, theprotection of forest resources against airbornepollution and biotic agents, the integration offorest planning with the wider land use plan-ning, interdisciplinarity and improved co-or-dination of forest research, development of theforest industries, commercial promotion of for-est products, enhancement of the recreation useof forests and improved management of nontimber forest production, including gaming andfishing.

Portugal

4.3.4 Issues not covered by the NationalForest Programme

This draft of the NFP has no budget and finan-cial feasibility study. The implicit and some-times explicitly stated rationale for this incom-plete approach is to start by building up con-sensus or broad support for the stated goals andtargets and later push for the need public andprivate funds, knowing from the start that itwill not be easy to improve the share of for-estry in the public budget.

Another important point missing in this draftis a strategy to implement the Plan on theground involving something more than the pro-vision of financial incentives, public informa-tion and norm setting. In fact this first draft ofthe Plan does not address the issues of decen-tralisation, public participation and integrateddevelopment at the local level. Forest planningat the subnational level is only addressedthrough the regional forest management plansand the forest management plans at the forestmanagement unit level. Both of these instru-ments are essentially silvicultural planningtools without the socio-economic and collec-tive organisation dimensions needed for a realdevelopment process. This is why we have pro-posed (Mendes 1998b) that participatory for-est planning should be promoted at the regionaland subregional level.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other nationalpolicy areas

Up to now there is no institutionalisation ofco-operation and conflict resolution between thedifferent bodies of Public Administration andthe private sector. What exists is lobbying andinformal talks between DGF and the forest in-terest groups, especially forest owners’ organi-sations and the forest industries’ and forestcontractors’ associations. Contacts betweenDGF and the environmental groups are muchless intense.

The Forest Policy Law contains provisions forinstitutionalisation of co-operation and conflictresolution between the Ministry of Agriculture

and the forest interest groups, including theenvironmentalists. This will be done throughthe following commissions:- the Consultative Forest Council;- the Appeal Commission for Forest Projects.

Intersectoral co-ordination of forest policy ob-jectives with other policy areas is very weak. Itwas the acknowledgement of this fact that ledthe legislators to put in the 1996 Forest PolicyLaw the provision for a new InterministerialForest Commission. The decree regulating thiscommission has already been approved by theGovernment on October 1997. It is presided bythe Minister of Agriculture and includes rep-resentatives of the following ministers: Fi-nances, Internal Affairs, Equipment, Planningand Territorial Administration, Economy andEnvironment.

The Ministry of Finances oversees together withthe Minister of Agriculture the public institutecalled IFADAP in charge of financing the ag-ricultural and forest structural policy.

The connection with the Internal Affairs hasbasically to do with the fact that it is this min-istry which controls most of the fire fightingsystem including forest fires. Fire fighting inPortugal is carried out essentially by generousbut insufficiently trained corporations of vol-unteers existing in most of the villages in thecountry. These corporations of volunteers areco-ordinated and partially funded by this min-istry.

The Ministry of Equipment, Planning and Ter-ritorial Administration has many linkages tothe forest sector. Here we will mention justthree:- the best development planning capacities at

the regional level are in the Regional Co-or-dination Commissions of this ministry;

- these regional commissions prepare and man-age the regional development programmes fi-nanced by the EU structural funds some ofwhich have been supportive of capacity build-ing in the forest sector, especially the crea-tion of forest owners´ associations;

- the Regional Co-ordination Commission pro-vide technical assistance to the local govern-

Portugal

ments and have responsibilities in the widerland use planning.

The Ministry of Economy is important for theforest industries since it is in charge of the in-dustrial policy. This minister has a direct in-tervention in a major portion of those indus-tries because from the three top pulp and papercompanies operating in the country two of themare still controlled by the public sector. TheMinistry of Economy is now in the process ofsetting up a holding to promote some form ofintegration of these two groups.

The Ministry of Environment is relevant notonly for the growing importance of the envi-ronmental agenda in forest policy, but also be-cause it oversees the natural parks and otherprotected areas. Forestry is important in almostall of them. In some cases it is the Forest Serv-ices which are in charge of forest managementin those areas. In other cases that responsibil-ity has been transferred to the park services.

4.5 EU forest and forest related policies

“Programa de Acção Florestal”The major impact of EU forest and forest re-lated policies in the Portuguese forest sector isthe funding for afforestation programmes. Thisstarted with the so called “Programa de AcçãoFlorestal” (PAF). This programme came in1987, at the end of another programme funded

by the World Bank (PFP-”Projecto FlorestalPortuguês”) which lasted from 1981 until1988. The role of the state towards private for-estry turned from one of direct intervention likein the World Bank Project to one of substantialfacilitation through attractive subsidies, leav-ing to the forest owners and private contrac-tors the responsibility for preparing the forestplans and conducting the afforestation works.The components of this programme, theplanned targets and what was actually accom-plished are summarised in table 15.

The first thing to note is that again the imple-mented programme intentions fell below thetargets. The objectives were set too high, giventhe experience of the previous afforestation pro-gramme, and were not supported by enoughfunds from the State Budget to match the EECfinancing. Again, like in the World BankProject, the provision of forest extension serv-ices was not implemented.

This programme introduced some changes rela-tive to the World Bank Project.1. Instead of loans to be repaid with the rev-

enue from the fellings, the financial incen-tives to the forest owners consisted of subsi-dies varying between 30 and 100 % of thetotal cost.

2. The public afforestation programmes startedto support not only afforestation, but also im-provement of the existing stands (restocking,reconstitution of damaged woodland, protec-tion, forest roads, etc.) .

Table 15. Objectives and implementation of PAFPlanned Accomplished

Time horizon 1987/94 1987/94Afforestation (ha) 400 000 108 420Improvement of existing stands (ha) 400 000 200 888Establishment of grazing areas (ha) 100 000 0Forest roads (km) 7 700 6 690Divisional roads (km) 3 400 2 903Dams 400 1 053Forest extension services X nothing was doneTotal cost of the programme in 1000 euros 313 940 162 374- Private projects 110 804- Public projects 51 570

Portugal

3. The favourable treatment received by theeucalyptus plantations in the World Bankproject disappeared: they were restricted bynew regulations which came out in 1988-89,the rate of subsidy was reduced and finallydisappeared in 1991.

4. The public support to afforestation becameless concentrated on eucalyptus and maritimepine, and began favouring other species, es-pecially the cork oak forests.

5. The Forest Services started to withdraw froma direct intervention in the preparation andimplementation of afforestation projects, ap-pealing more than before to the private ini-tiative of forest owners and contractors: 70,2% of the total investment supported by PAFwas for private forestry. From the remaining29,8 %, more than half was for public projectsin the North. These projects, however, repre-sented only 17,4 % of the total investmentsupported by PAF which is much lower thanwhat happened in the World Bank Project.

These situations contributed to a major shift inthe regional incidence of the forest policy: whilein the World Bank Project 54,5 % of the plan-tations were in the North, with PAF this per-centage fell to 21,3 %.

To this shift also contributed the fact that noth-ing was done in the World Bank Project and inthe PAF to establish a Forest Extension Serv-ice and to support the organisation of forestowners’ associations. So without this kind ofcapacity building, the owners with larger for-est holdings, located mostly in the South, were

naturally more effective in getting the biggershare of the public support.

Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 and “Plano deDesenvolvimento Florestal”Regulation (EEC) 2080/92 is a EU policy meas-ure not specific to Portugal supporting the af-forestation of agricultural lands. The PDF, onthe other hand, is a programme specific to Por-tugal, financed by the EU within the CommonSupport Framework for the period 1994/99.This programme supports the following typesof actions:- afforestation- improvement of existing stands and reforesta-

tion, including the case of woodlands dam-aged by fires less than 5 years ago;

- maintenance costs of the plantations for 5years after the first restocking;

- installation and amelioration of forest nurs-eries;

- selection and production of good quality seedsand seedlings;

- construction and amelioration of forest roadsand water reservoirs;

- multiple use of forest lands (grazing lands,apiculture, gaming, aromatic and medicinalplants, etc.).

This programme also has the following spe-cific features:- it favours grouped projects consisting of, at

least, 5 contiguous, forest holdings;- it does not support plantations with fast grow-

ing species.

Table 16. Regional distribution of the plantings and improvements supported by PFP and PAFPFP (1981/88) PAF (1987/95)

Regions Afforestation Stand improvement Totalha % ha % ha % ha %

North 70 670 54.5 40 443 35.6 28 671 13.6 69 114 21.3Centre 37 400 28.8 29 137 25.7 33 395 15.8 62 532 19.3Lisbon & Tejo Valley 9 773 7.5 13 137 11.6 43 823 20.8 56 960 17.6Alentejo 10 455 8.1 13 86112.2 88 395 41.9 102 256 31.5Algarve 1 451 1.1 16 984 15.0 16 720 7.9 33 704 10.4TOTAL 129 749 100.0 113 561 100.0 211 054 100.0 324 615 100.0Source: Instituto Florestal

Portugal

The main new features of these two programmesare the following:- a stronger role for the private initiative of for-

est owners;- more support for the cork oak forests in the

south;- financial support for maintenance costs for 5

years after the first restocking in PDF;- a prime to compensate the loss of agricul-

tural income for 20 years in the Reg. 2080/92;

- more support to the multiple use forest man-agement and broadleaved species.

It is sound economic policy to appeal to theprivate initiative of forest owners instead ofrelying mostly on the Forest Services in regionswhere the forest lands are predominantly pri-vate. The problem is that, before having en-gaged in this policy shift, the Forest Servicesshould have used the resources put forward bythe World Bank Project and PAF to provideextension services and support to the establish-ment of forest owners’ associations, especiallyin North and Central Portugal where owner-ship is more fragmented. We have already seenthat little was done in this matter. So it is un-derstandable that when the afforestation policystarts to appeal to the private initiative of for-est owners, the ones who are quicker to applyfor the grants and get most of the public sup-port, are the bigger landowners in the south.

4.6 Forest education and research

Forest research is concentrated mostly in thetwo universities with undergraduate and gradu-ate programmes in forestry (ISA and UTAD)and in the National Forest Research Stationwhich is part of the public research institute ofthe Ministry of Agriculture. This station sur-vives on transfers from the state budget and onpublic research grants, their researchers com-plaining with some reason on the lack of suffi-cient funding in the last two decades. The link-ages with the industry and the private ownersare relatively weak. Only the pulp paper com-panies were able to set up a research networkcentred on eucalyptus made up of their ownpersonnel in co-operation with some universi-ties. In March 1998 a similar network gotstarted for the pine and the related industries.The same type of efforts are under way for cork.

Like in the Forest Services, the great majorityof the work coming out from the forest researchsystem is purely silvicultural when it relates toforestry or technological when it relates to in-dustry. There is an almost total lack of work inforest policy and forest planning.

Table 17. Regional distribution of the investment supported by PAF, PDF and Reg. 2080/92

Source: Instituto Florestal (in CESE, 1996)1 Euro=200,482 esc.

Regions PAF PDF Reg. 2080/92 PDF+2080/921000 PTE % 1000 PTE % 1000 PTE % 1000 PTE %

Northwest 5 102 294 15.6 1 118 434 12.1 249 515 2.2 1 367 949 6.7Northeast 7 342 143 22.6 1 122 252 12.1 1 860 203 16.7 2 982 455 14.6North 12 444 437 38.2 2 240 686 24.2 2 109 718 18.9 4 350 404 21.3Central West 3 664 463 11.3 1 098 589 11.9 144 307 1.3 1 242 896 6.1Central East 5 102 701 15.7 2 647 562 28.6 1 473 633 13.2 4 121 195 20.2Ribatejo Oeste 3 004 529 9.2 1 377 920 14.9 956 090 8.6 2 334 010 11.4Alentejo 4 349 086 13.4 983 895 10.6 5 229 913 46.9 6 213 808 30.5Algarve 3 987 802 12.3 903 965 9.8 1 233 117 11.1 2 137 082 10.5TOTAL 32 553 020 100.0 9 252 615 100.0 11 146 778 100.0 20 399 393 100.0

Portugal

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

The future role of the Regional Forest Serv-ices and the management of the public andcommunal forestsSince the Forest Services have been responsi-ble for most of the afforestation and manage-ment of the communal lands, the major issueconcerning these forests is to know what isgoing to be the future role of these services inthis regard.

Since the present government came into powerin 1995, a major structural change was under-taken in the Forest Services. Their local andregional services, which before were part of acentralised structure, autonomous from theagricultural services, lost their autonomy, andwere merged with the regional agriculturalservices. Also the purpose of the current policy-makers is to take away from the regional For-est Services the management of the public andcommunal forests, transferring it to a new com-pany to be created for that purpose with publiccapital and private management rules.

The rationale for this institutional change isthat, as a forest management operator, the re-gional forest services, since they are constrainedby public management rules, are thought to beless efficient than a company guided by privatemanagement rules. So the future role for theForest Services should be more one of an ex-tension service provider rather than a forestmanagement operator, in conjunction with theregional agricultural services, in order to pro-mote an integrated approach to agricultural andrural development.

Assuming this new role will not be easy with-out proper training and good motivation for theforesters in the regional Forest Services. Whilethis extension mission is not yet clearly underway, what is actually happening is that most ofthe time of these foresters is being taken by theadministrative tasks of examining the applica-tions of forest owners for public grants.

As far as the project of the new public forestmanagement company is concerned, it is aninitiative promoted mostly by Directorate Gen-eral of Forestry supported by the industry, butlooked on with suspicion by the Regional Di-rectorates of the Ministry of Agriculture, therepresentatives of the communal forests and theenvironmentalist groups. Some people thinkthat this is not a step in the direction of gettingthe local communities more directly involvedin the management of the communal forestsand integrating this management with the othertypes of forests and activities existing in thelocal economies. Also there is a fear that thismight be a step towards the future privatisa-tion of some public and communal forests. Be-cause of this fear there is opposition againsttransferring the ownership of the state foreststo this company.

The idea of this new company is appealing tothe wood industry, especially the sawmills andthe big firms in the panel industry which arelarge consumers of pine wood, the dominantspecies in the state and communal forests.These industries are expecting that the forestcompany will be more efficient in the forestmanagement and logging operations. Also itwill facilitate the procurement of wood in quan-tity and in quality by concentrating supply,without having to pay monopoly prices becausethe company is public and will not behave tothe detriment of industrial competitiveness.

Public policy towards the forest owners’ asso-ciationsSince the existing forest owners´ associationsgot started they have been surviving essentiallyon public subsidies. So the major issue here isto know how they can reduce this heavy de-pendence on public funds, and what role shouldbe kept for this type of financing.

These associations are already making someefforts towards the provision of paid privateservices to their members. These efforts, how-ever, don’t mean that they should be bannedfrom public aid. They should continue to beentitled to public support because of their in-dispensable role in the provision of public goodsnecessary to the development of the forest sec-

Portugal

tor, especially in regions of small scale forestry.In fact, one of the major roles of these associa-tions is to promote forest projects at an effi-cient scale, which in regions of small scale for-estry implies heavy transactions costs requiredfor grouping large numbers of fragmented for-est holdings.

In article 17, the Forest Policy Law claims that“the creation and technical upgrading of theforest owners’ organisations is stimulatedthrough different types of incentives”. The lawdoes not specify which type of incentives shouldbe considered. To our knowledge there is nocareful studies on the roles of these organisa-tions, the type of support they should be givenby the public sector or their financing strate-gies. Thus public support might end up to betailored mostly to the lobbying ability of eachgroup of associations without a clear and na-tional policy in this matter.

An important type of public support for the for-est owners’ associations could come from theregional forest services. If they are going to beeffectively discharged from their responsibili-ties in terms of the management of public andcommunal forests, they will have time and hu-man resources available to be more active thanbefore in providing technical support to theseassociations.

Besides financial and technical support fromthe Public Administration, the forest owners’associations should also be called to partici-pate actively in the policy-making process. Wehave already mentioned that an important fea-ture of the Forest Policy Law is the creation ofa Forest Consultative Council to assist the Min-istry of Agriculture and the Government ingeneral in the matter of forest policy making.The regulation for this council will be approvedby the Government soon, and among its mem-bers there will be representatives of the forestowners’ associations (FPFP, FORESTIS).Mandatory forest management regulationsWith the application of the Forest Policy Law,all forest types will be subject to managementplans. In fact, article 5 defines two types ofplans:

- regional plans to be prepared by the ForestServices which are guidelines to be respectedin the management of the forest holdings inorder to promote sustainable forestry;

- plans at the forest management unit level.

Only the holdings above some threshold to bedefined in the regional plans will have to pre-pare and follow the second type of plans.

The major issue here is to know if these plansare going to be effective management tools con-tributing to forest development, or just somekind of administrative activity. The Forest Serv-ices consider them as one of the major instru-ments of their future actions. However, thereare some cautionary points to be made. First,the regional plans are basically land use andforest management plans of a sectoral naturewhich have to fit into more global land useplans, namely the municipal and regional landuse plans, an area which has been the object ofa new frame law recently submitted to the Par-liament. So either they are prepared first, orafter the more general land use regulatorymechanisms, the regional forest managementplans have to be adjusted with them.

Secondly, these forest plans are essentially landuse and silvicultural plans. So they lack a socio-economic component in order to be effectiveforest development plans.

Finally, there is a risk of the regional plansbeing more like an administrative activity car-ried out in the offices of the Forest Services,without a strong involvement of the forest own-ers’ associations and other stakeholders in theforest sector. So a good idea would be to givepriority to the plans made in territories cov-ered by forest owners’ associations calling upontheir active participation. These associationscan also be an important partner in promotingplans at the forest management unit level.

The National Forest ProgrammeWith a Forest Policy Law in the process of be-ing translated into the decrees necessary for itsimplementation and a draft for a NFP put outfor public discussion after several contributions

Portugal

presented by some major stakeholders in theforest sector the expectations are getting higherthat finally a participated NFP might come upand be assumed by the Government togetherwith an updated and consolidated legislativeframework. The problem might be to get ap-propriate national funding to meet some of theambitious targets set out in the plan. Lack of astrong commitment by the Government failingto show a clear sign of the priority attached toforest development will be demobilising for theforest owners and the forest industries, leadingsome of the major ones to withdraw from in-vestment plans in the country and search forbetter opportunities outside.

Even if this planning and legislative process atthe national level comes to a good end there isstill a long way to go in terms of capacity build-ing in the public administration for forest plan-ning and forest-policy making both at the na-tional and at the subnational level. Also theprivate sector is weak in this regard. The bigforest industry has the means to do its job inthese matters but the rest of the industries andthe forest owners still have to build capacityfor being more able to participate actively andconstructively in forest planing and policymaking. The universities and the research in-stitutions have yet to play their role in this ca-pacity building process.

The public finance of afforestation and the For-est Policy LawCrucial for meeting the planned targets for af-forestation will be the type of financial incen-tives provided to private forestry. From the pre-vious analysis we can draw the following con-clusions about the past experiences:- since 1981 the afforestation in Portugal has

relied essentially in programmes co-financedby foreign sources, the World Bank first, andEEC after, without a permanent fund fed ba-sically by national sources;

- the priorities of the public afforestation pro-grammes have changed substantially since1981: after the World Bank Project, whosealmost exclusive goal was to plant pine andeucalyptus forests to respond to the needs ofthe forest industries, other programmes came

up much more favourable to cork oak andmultifunctional forestry, practically banningeucalyptus from the support of public policy;

- in the same period, substantial changes tookplace in the type of actors privileged by thepublic afforestation programmes: in the WorldBank Project the major players were the pulpindustry and the Forest Services, whereas inthe subsequent programmes the priorityturned to the forest owners and the privatecontractors;

- the types of financial incentives to private for-estry changed substantially in a relativelyshort period of time.

We think that the Portuguese forest sector needsa different type of public finance based on thefollowing principles.1. Afforestation programmes should not be sub-

ject to frequent changes in priorities, incen-tives and sources of funds. Instead they shouldbe supported by a permanent fund orientedby a national forest programme with long-term goals.

2. To contribute to this national commitmentto long-term forest development, a greater roleshould be given to domestic sources of funds,reducing the strong dependence on foreignfunds whose permanence and objectives thecountry cannot control.

3. In the domestic sources of funds there shouldbe some regular transfers from the StateBudget compensating forestry for its positiveexternalities. There is a case for these trans-fers to be based on the consignment of the taxreceipts on gas, fuel and automobiles, the ar-gument being that forests are an importantcarbon sink contributing to reduce the “green-house effect” generated by those products.Without this kind of consignment mechanism,given the heterogeneity and weak lobbyingpower of the Portuguese forest sector, the in-sufficient public awareness for its economicand social importance and the high discountrate of political actors, there is always a riskfor a macrodecoupling (Wolf, Jr., 1993) wherethe majority of the population benefits fromthe public goods and positive externalitiesfrom forestry without paying for that.

4. Also it is not good to continue with the cur-

Portugal

rent misallocation of objectives and policy in-struments and the microdecoupling (Wolf, Jr.,1993) in the public subsidies to private for-estry which only loosely commit the benefici-aries to an active forest management. Subsi-dies and grants should be allocated to the pro-vision of public goods and the internalisationof positive externalities. Commercial planta-tions should be supported with long-termloans (possibly at subsidised rates to compen-sate for some provision of public goods andpositive externalities) with amortisationschemes adapted to the time profile of costsand revenues of the different species andstands. The repayment of these loans wouldcontribute to feed the permanent fund.

5. The system should also appeal to privatesavings, namely through fiscal incentives.

Portugal

Organisations related to forestry

Forest ServicesDirecção Geral das Florestas, Av. João Crisóstomo, 28, 1050 Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-3124800 - Fax

+351-1-3124988, http://www.dgf.min-agricultura.pt/ (This is a site to check for some statistics,legislation and text of the National Forest Programme)

Forest Research StationEstação Florestal Nacional, Tapada das Necessidades, rua do borja, 2, 1350 Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-

3901661 - 3973163

Scientific SocietiesSociedade Portuguesa de Ciências Florestais, Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Tapada da

Ajuda, 1300 Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-3634667 - Fax +351-1-3645000 (Publishes a periodicalcalled “Revista Florestal” as well as the proceedings of the National Forest Congresses).

UniversitiesUniversidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Departamento Florestal, Quinta dos Prados, 5000

Vila Real - Tel./Fax +351-59-320238Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Tapada da Ajuda, 1399

Lisboa Codex - Tel. +351-1-3634667 - Fax +351-1-3645000

Polytechnic SchoolsEscola Superior Agrária de Bragança, Quinta de Santa Apolónia, 5300 Bragança - Tel. +351-73-

331570Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra, Bencanta, 3000 Coimbra - Tel. +351-39-444400Instituto Superior Politécnico de Viseu, Escola Superior de Tecnologia, Repeses, 3500 Viseu -

Tel. +351-32-460204 - Fax +351-32-424651Escola Superior Agrária de Castelo Branco, Quinta da Senhora de Mércules, 6000 Castelo Branco

- Tel. +351-72-344458 - Fax +351-72-328881Escola Superior Agrária de Beja, Praça Rainha D. Leonor, 7800 Beja - Tel. +351-84-323060 -

Fax +351-84-326163

Technological Centers related to the industrial associationsCentro Tecnológico das Indústrias da Madeira e do Mobiliário, Rua dos Salazares, 842, 4100

Porto - Tel. +351-2-6102813 - Fax +351-2-6179595Centro Tecnológico da Cortiça, urbanização do cerrado, rua 13, 416 Santa Maria de Lamas 4535

paços de brandão - Tel. +351-2-7471200 - Fax +351-2-7471209

Federations of Forest Owners’ AssociationsFORESTIS-Associação Florestal de Portugal, Rua do Campo Alegre, 823, 4150 Porto - Tel.

+351-2-6006129 - Fax +351-2-6090156, forestis@mail.telepac.pt, http://www.ccr-n.pt/actreg/forestis/forestis.html

Federação dos Produtores Florestais de Portugal, Av. Colégio Militar, Lote 1786-6.º, 1500 Lisboa- Tel. +351-1-7100000 - Fax +351-1-7100071

Associations of Forest Industries and Forest ContractorsAIMMP-Associação das Indústrias de Madeiras e de Mobiliário de Portugal, Rua Álvares Cabral,

281, 4050 Porto - Tel. +351-2-3394200 - Fax +351-2-3394210, geral@aimmp.pt

Portugal

AIECN-Associação dos Industriais e Exportadores de Cortiças do Norte, Av. Comendador HenriqueAmorim, 580, apartado 100, 4535 Santa Maria de Lamas - Tel. +351-2-7442176 - Fax +351-2-7449768

AIEC-Associação de Industriais e Exportadores de Cortiça, Av. Duque de Ávila, 169, 2.º Esq.,1050 Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-3158506 - Fax +351-1-3570878

CELPA-Associação da Indústria Papeleira, Rua Marquês de Sá da Bandeira, 74, 1.º Esq., 1050Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-7960054 - Fax. +351-1-7939054

ANEFA-Associação Nacional de Empreiteiros Florestais e Agrícolas, Estrada de Benfica, 552 -3.º D.to, 1500 Lisboa - Tel. +351-1-7160166 - Fax +351-1-7162318

References

Used referencesBanco Português de Investimento, Agro-Ges & Jaakko Pöyry. 1996. Proposta para o

Desenvolvimento Sustentável da Floresta Portuguesa. Lisboa. Mimeo. (A strategic plan pre-pared by a group of consulting companies for the major business groups in the panel and pulpand paper industries, as a contribution for the preparation of the National Forest Programme).

CESE. 1996. O Sector Florestal Português. CESE-Conselho Para a Cooperação Ensino Supe-rior-Empresa. Mimeo. (Descriptive report about the portuguese forest sector with a lot of dataavailable up to 1996. Copies can be requested to CESE, Rua do Campo Alegre, 823, 4150Porto).

CESE. 1998. Livro Verde da Cooperação Ensino Superior-Empresa. Sector Florestal. Lisboa:Conselho para a Cooperação Ensino Superior-Empresa. (Abridged published version of the1996 report more focused on the linkages between the research system and the forest sector).

Direcção Geral das Florestas. 1998a. Plano de Desenvolvimento Sustentável da FlorestaPortuguesa. Base para a Discussão Pública. Direcção Geral das Florestas. Lisboa. (NationalForest Programme. The current version is available through INTERNET at the DGF site).

Direcção Geral das Florestas-Divisão de Inventário e Estatísticas Florestais. 1998b. Distribuiçãoda Floresta em Portugal Continental (http://www.dg-florestas.pt/divinven.html).

Direcção Geral das Florestas. 1998c. The Portuguese Forest by Numbers. Direcção Geral dasFLorestas: Lisboa.

Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1947. Estatística Agrícola 1946. Tipografia Portuguesa. Lisboa.Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1992. Recenseamento Geral Agrícola 1989. Resultados

Definitivos. Dados Gerais. INE. Lisbon.Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1995a. Inquérito à Estrutura das Explorações Agrícolas 1993.

INE. Lisbon.Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1995b. Estatísticas do Comércio Internacional 1994. INE. Lis-

bon.Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1995c. Estatísticas Agrícolas 1994. INE. Lisbon.Instituto Nacional de Estatística. 1996. Estatísticas Agrícolas 1995. INE. Lisbon.INE. 1997. Estatísticas Agrícolas 1996. Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Estatística.Third Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe. 1998. Follow-up Reports

on the Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe. Vol. II. SustainableForest Management in Europe. Special Report on the Follow-up on the implementation ofResolutions H1 and H2 of the Helsinki Ministerial Conference. Lisbon: Minstry of Agricul-ture, Rural Development and Fisheries. (Useful reference with information on the implemen-tation of the Helsinki resolutions).

Wolf, Jr., Charles. 1993. Markets or Governments. Choosing between Imperfect Alternatives.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Portugal

Further references1

AGRO-GES. 1997. O Montado de Sobro e a Cortiça. (Estratégia para a sua Defesa eDesenvolvimento). Lisboa: AGROGES.Mimeo. (A strategic plan for cork oak prepared by aconsulting company for the forest owners’ associations of one major cork producing region,with useful information on the economy of this species).

Brouwer, Roland. 1995. Planting Power. The Afforestation of the Commons and State Formationin Portugal. PHD Dissertation presented to the University of Wageningen. (Good referenceabout the history of the afforestation of the commons and the forest policy in Portugal. Con-tains a lot of historical and more recent references about the portuguese forest policy, includ-ing references to legislation and statistical sources).

Devy-Vareta, Nicole. 1993. A Floresta no espaço e no tempo em Portugal. A arborização da Serrada Cabreira (1919-1975). PHD Dissertation in Human Geography presented to Faculdade deLetras-Universidade do Porto. (Good reference about the history of the afforestation of thecommons and the forest policy in Portugal. Contains a lot of historical and more recentreferences about the portuguese forest policy, including references to legislation and statisti-cal sources).

Goes. 1991. A Floresta Portuguesa. Lisboa: PORTUCEL. (A very valuable reference covering allthe relevant species existing in the portuguese forests)

Pereira, Helena (ed.). 1997. Cork Oak and Cork. Sobreiro e Cortiça. European Conference onCork Oak and Cork. 5-7 May 1997. Lisboa: Instituto Superior de Agronomia-Centro de EstudosFlorestais. (A useful reference with recent research on the sylviculture and technology of thecork).

For references on silvicultural research in Portugal there are two ways to get started:- consult the scientific journal “Sylva Lusitana” published by Estação Florestal Nacional;- consult the proceedings of the three National Forest Congresses organised by Portuguese Soci-

ety of Foresters.

1 This list and the previous one are, by no means, comprehensive, but it contains useful references fromwhich much more can be found to get an overview of the silvicultural, technological, historical and socio-economic research on the portuguese forest sector.

Romania

1 The country

1.1 Location, population and relief

Romania is located in Eastern Europe, border-ing to Hungary in the West, Bulgaria and Ser-bia in the South, Ukraine in the North and thenew state of Moldavia and the Black Sea in theEast (see figure 1). The total population is22,607,620 inhabitants1, sharing a total areaof 238,391 km2.

The country has a wide range of natural re-sources. About 60 % of its area is suitable foragriculture, with climatic and relief character-istics favoring both arable and pastoral farm-

ing. Historically, there are three main importantregions: Transilvania, Valachia and the historicalMoldovia. The first one is separated with theother two regions by the Carpathian Mountainswhich are bounded by hilly regions. Thestructure of the actual population is determinedby the historical background: Transilvaniabelonged to Hungary until 1918, when thenational state was created on the basis ofRomanian majority in that region. Hence, inTransilvania, both Hungarian and Germanpeople can be met, along with other minori-ties, such as Ukrainian and Serbian. The popu-lation is more homogeneous in Valachia andhistorical Moldavia.

Figure 1. Romania’s location in Eastern Europe

1 Source: Romanian Statistical Yearbook 1997, Bucharest.

Romania

Author:Professor Dr. Eng. Milescu I,University of Suceava, Faculty of ForestryStradaa Universitatii 1, 5800 Suceava, RomaniaTel.: +40 30 521 664, Fax: +40 30 520 080

BLACKSEA

ROMANIA

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

YOGOSLAVIA

BULGARIA

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

Romania

The plains cover about one third of the wholearea, and they are located in south – theValachian plain, in east – the Moldovian plainand a strip plain can be found in the Westernpart, as an extension of the Hungarian grass-land. These regions are ascribed to agricultureto a large extent, and only a few forest spotscan be found. The hilly regions also cover athird of the total area while orchards, pasturesand vineyards represent the main use of land.

1.2 An overlook on natural conditions

Romania has various natural and artificial eco-systems determined by a wide spectrum of natu-ral conditions shown in figure 2. The WesternPlain is characterized by fertile soils, and morerainfall due to the Mediterranean influences.The Valachian plain is drier, and is actually agrassland section, much of it being covered withintensive wheat, barely, oat and maize cultures.Only a few forest areas (Oaks for natural for-ests and Locust for newly plantations) havebeen maintained in this region. The outboundstrip of the Moldavian plateau preserves somerelicts of the natural forests which are basedon “drought ridden” forest species, such as

Carpinus minor and Quercus pubescens. TheTransilvanian plateau is characterized by brownsoils, the most relevant uses of land being, ag-ricultural crops, especially potato, oily plantsand Sessile oak. Within the Carpathians moun-tains, beech, Norway spruce and fir are widelyrepresented – according to their natural eleva-tion.

In the Southern part of Meridional Carpathians,namely the Banat mountains, there still existssome uneven-aged monumental beech forests,located in habitats where the Mediterraneaninfluence is apparent.

The most important forest species met in themountainous area are Norway spruce, Beechand Fir. On large areas, brown soils provide amedium to high forest productivity, but somefragile ecosystems should be taken into account,and, according to the framework of the Roma-nian forest managerial planning, these areasare carefully preserved, either as natural re-serves, scientific reserves or national parks.Formally, only one National Park was foundedby a special law, issued in 1935 and the Dan-ube Delta has been declared as one of the mostimportant protected areas in Europe.

Figure 2. Main ecological regions

Moldovianplateau

Dobrogeaplateau

MeridionalCarpathians

OrientalCarpathians

Sub-Carpathians

WesternCarpathians

Valachian plain

Western plain

TransilvanianPlateau

Romania

2 Forest resources and their uses

The first condition to be met by a patch of cul-tivated or wild forest vegetation is the area:(according to Romanian standards, a forestshould exceed hectares). Besides official for-ests, the land management system recognizesan additional category, namely woodpastureland, which represents a regularpastureland covered with forest canopy, moreor less continuous.

Table 1 summarizes the trend in use of Roma-nian forest resources. It should be stressed thatdramatic changes are supposed to occur in theforthcoming two years, as the present politicalpower intends to restore the property rights toall people who owned forests before 1948. Upto 50 hectares of forest will probably2 be real-located per family, as many woodlands are cur-rently managed in accordance with high envi-ronmental standards, consisting of: long rota-tions, uneven age structure, close-to-nature

Table 1. Forest areas according to their main productive and protective functionsArea in year

Specifications 1955 1970 1980 1990 1997Woodland total area 5777.3 6218.9 6227.4 6228.1 6314.0I. Forest with special protective functions: 822.3 1139.9 2136.5 2336.0 3316.0

watershed protection 182.9 392.5 776.6 844.1 1240.0soil protection & erosion control 441.8 491.1 728.7 827.8 1048.0protection against climatic stress and 17.2 15.7 27.8 27.7 127.0pollutant hazardsamenity 113.6 141.4 424.4 447.9 672.0biodiversity protection and scientific 669.9 98.3 178.9 188.5 229.0purposes

II Forest with productive and protective 4989.9 5079.0 4090.9 3892.1 3026.0functionsI-st functional group, where annual crop is scheduled on a regular basis =2523 thousand hectaresI-st functional group, where annual crop is not scheduled on a regular basis (only salvage products areyielded) =793 thousand hectares.Source: Romanian yearbooks 1955-1997.

Table 2. Proportions of the main forest species

Source: “Le Forets de Roumanie.” (ed. C. Chirita) Ed . Academiei Republicii Socialiste România, 1981,pp: 557.

Species Area Volume by stem1000 hectares % Million m3 %

total 6245 100 1341 100Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 1916 31 489 36Oaks (Quercus sp.) 1137 18 177 13Hardwood broad-leaved 951 15 99 8Softwood broad-leaved 328 5 50 4Norway spruce (Picea abies) 1430 23 386 29Fir (Abies alba) 312 5 124 9Other resinous species 173 3 16 1

2 The reallocation system is based on two phases: the former consists of recording all valid applications andthe latter consists of effective reallocation, carried out by a special law.

Romania

composition and silvicultural systems and soforth. Now, the state manages about 95 % ofthe total forest fund, while only 5 percent areprivate forest.

Proportions of the main forest species are pre-sented in table 2. As the sustained yield princi-ple is the framework of the Romanian forestmanagement system, the structure accordingto age classes is an important indicator of crop

sustainability, and these figures are presentedin tables 3 and 4, both for commercial forestsand protective forests. It should be highlightedthat, due to the multi-purpose forest manage-ment system referred to above, most forests aresupposed to provide both wood and protectivefunctions, and the traditional classification incommercial and non-commercial forests isimproper.

Table 3. The forest areas on types of management regimes and age classes

Source: The National Forest Administration - Annual report for 1998

Specifications 1000 hectares % %Regular yielded forest of which 5646.0 90 100

1st functional group 1754.02nd functional group 3892.0

1st age class (1-20 years) 1260.0 221st functional group 508.42nd functional group 751.6 20

2nd age class (21-40 years) 1143.31st functional group 305.92nd functional group 808.4

3rd age class (41-60 years) 1023.2 181st functional group 223.82nd functional group 799.4

4th age class (61-80 yr.) 811.9 141st functional group 200.12nd functional group 611.8

5th age class (81-100 years) 559.2 101st functional group 170.12nd functional group 389.1

6th age class (older than 100 years) 877.4 161st functional group 345.72nd functional group 531.7

Forest where the yield is not planned on a regular basis 599.0 10

Table 4. Distribution on age classes for the main species (%)Species

Age class Beech (Fagus Sylvatica) Oaks (Quercus sp.) Norway spruce (Picea abies)I 10 17 28II 12 29 17III 18 25 14IV 17 13 18V 13 8 12VI 30 8 11

Source: The National Forest Administration - Annual report for 1998

Romania

As stated above, private woodlands accountfor less than 5 % of the national forest fund, andthe National Forest Administration is the mainbody responsible for applying the national for-est policy. According to its status, the forestauthority takes advantage of its monopoly but,at the same time, it has to comply with a quiterestrictive rule of operation, forbidding loggingoperations. In other words, by its own code ofoperation, the National Forest Administrationis allowed to sell wood by stem3, not timber assuch, and the main breakthrough in this re-spect was carried out only in 1996, when theNational Forest Administration was allowed toexport some self-processed lumber for creat-ing an investment fund directed to new roadbuilding.

The National Forest Autonomous Administra-tion (NFAA)4 has been reorganized and theinitial number of 41 subsidiaries, one for eachforest county, has been reduced to 25. The For-est Research and Management Institute is alsounder the NFAA and its main responsibilitiesare research and technological developmentalong with forest management planning.

Each subsidiary, more or less co-ordinates for-est ranges according to the forest area of eachcounty. Furthermore, each forest county is com-posed of up to 10 production units, each unitbeing subject to a ten-year management plan.Implementation of this plan means that the al-lowable cut and the cutting budget are statedfor a ten-year period of time, according to thewell known sustained yield principle. Anothercharacteristic of the forest management systemconsists of giving a high value to amenities andthe non-productive functions of forests. Basi-cally, all forests are grouped into two mainclasses: productive forests which are managedaccording to economic criteria, and protectiveforests where ecological considerations prevail.

In both types of forests logging activities areallowed, more or less, according to how im-portant the close-to-nature structure of the for-est is considered. Briefly, Romanian forestry isspecifically oriented towards the multiple useforestry pattern.

Wood is sold by stem, basically two times ayear, by auctions which are organized at eachforest county headquarters. Due to the monopo-listic position of the seller, the average price oftimber used as a floor price within the timberauction was controlled by the Ministry of Fi-nance until the end of 1997. The average floorprice was and still is a full-cost price, assessedaccording to the expenditure needed to man-age the forest fund within a year. From 1994 to1996, the floor average price was not updatedto the inflation rate. Now, the floor price is free,it is the forest counties which are responsiblefor setting it up.

Having adopted a close-to-nature managerialbackground, Romanian foresters apply on largeareas different forms of group forest systems,and, in some places, the selection system is alsocurrently applied. Clear cuttings and regularshelterwood systems are somehow avoided, dueto their negative environmental impact. Table5 presents the structure of the latest allowablecut, at national level, and table 6 shows somefigures referring to the game management out-put.

Regarding game management, it should be saidthat in Romania there are 2227 hunting areas,covering both forests, agricultural lands andinland waters. According to the Hunting Law,Environment Law and Forest Code, game man-agement within forests is the responsibility ofthe National Forest Administration, and in-cludes surveying, selection, feeding, providingveterinary assistance and so on. For other hunt-

4 Referred as “Regia Nationala a Padurilor” in Romanian.

3 Although one could say that harvesting rights are actually sold the whole mechanism of marking up trees,appraising them and supervising the logging works constrict the rights of the seller upon the trees which aresupposed to be logged.

Romania

ing areas, game management is ensured by theRomanian General Association of Hunters andFishermen, which was established in 1940, andis associated with international hunting bod-ies. This organization is responsible for coor-dinating the different hunting party sectors fordeer, wild boar, fox, along with different birdspecies. Table 6 shows some relevant figuresrelated to game management.

In the Carpathians there are a reasonable numberof areas with special ecological niches for Lynxlynx, Felis sylvestris, Martes martes and Canislupus. Foresters have organized some parkswhere Mustela putorius, Lutra lutra andMarmota marmota can be found.

Regarding the forest regeneration process,which is strongly determined by forest policy,reducing the share of the annual reforested area

Table 5. The present allowable cut of Romanian forests, million m3

Source: The National Forest Administration - Annual report for 1998

Species Main yield Thinnings Clearings Salvage TOTAL %(including conservation works)

Resinous 2144 1019 104 701 701 25Beech 5251 1624 119 615 615 42Oaks 959 307 57 400 400 11Hardwood broad-leaved 934 808 156 320 320 14Softwood broad-leaved 807 363 62 110 110 8TOTAL 10095 3387 498 2143 2143 100% 63 21 3 13 100

Table 6. Game crops on species, in 1997

Species Optimal number Actual number Quota CropRed Deer (Cervus elaphus) 35200 35300 1210 852Deer (Capreolus capreolus) 168500 144000 1610 1720Chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra) 7850 7700 121 135Bear (Ursus acrtos) 4410 5366 141 141Wild boar (Sus scrofa) 30700 35400 7520 7513Hare 938000 1040000 750000 75025Source: Romanian yearbook, 1997.

Source: Romanian Yearbooks for the referred period.

Table 7. Regenerating the forests (hectares)

Specifications Year1989 1990 1992 1994 1996 1997

Total area, 54047 33558 19303 23098 25521 22185Natural regeneration 19100 9655 6933 9233 13591 11668reforestation 34947 23903 12370 13865 11930 10517In forest fund5 26186 21840 12243 13563 11541 10373On bad lands 8761 2063 127 302 389 144

5 After clear cuttings

Romania

is normal to some extent, as natural regenera-tion is an important objective to follow, but theeconomic crisis also affected the forest sector.This explains the downward trend of reforesta-tion on badlands, which is very costly. Figuresare presented in table 7, and they reflect thetrend from 1989.

3 Forest economics and forest poli-cies

3.1 Timber logging and timber industry

The actual state of Romanian forestry is de-picted by figures presented in tables 1 to 3.Wood-mass exploited per year has linearly de-creased until 1997: in the 5 years, from 1990to 1994, it decreased by 3.5 million m3; in 1995it increased slowly and following that it de-creased as table 8 shows.

It should be highlighted that in the last fiveyears illegal cuttings have increased. Thereforeit is difficult to assess the annual harvest andto monitor the timber transport. These illegalcuttings are done either by those pretending toown some forests or by timber thieves.

Although in the period 1990-1997 marketeconomy rules were, more or less, supposed torun, the economy, this is only partially true.The export of round wood was allowed but incase of resinous and beech timber it was doneon a license basis; the economic agents whohad been using quantities of wood for industry(pulp and paper, furniture) did not make anadequate and on time reorganization. Table 9presents the main economic results of the Na-tional Forest Administration, during the lastseven years.

A very controversial issue in Romanian foresteconomy was the appropriate pricing system,as the traditional full cost approach, institutedby the command and control economy, was nolonger compatible with a market economy. Asthe Administration of National Forests still hashad a monopolistic position, the floor averageprice was controlled by the Ministry of Finance.This control was regarded by the forest sectoras a serious market distortion, favouring thelogging and processing industries, and was re-moved at the end of 1997. This was an impor-tant step in the transition to a market economybased on competitiveness. Table 10 shows theaverage price trends, both in national currency

Table 8. The situation of wood-mass brought into economic circulation in the period 1985-1997,million m3

Year Total species groupsWood-mass resinous beech oak hard soft

broad-leaved broad-leaved1985 25043 7423 9485 2973 2920 22421986 22584 6695 8504 2575 2621 21891987 23077 7190 8689 2280 1686 22321988 19769 6722 7018 1824 2259 19461989 19043 6452 6587 1820 2214 19701990 16649 5813 4958 2045 2071 17621991 15377 4956 4644 1919 2089 17691992 14419 4418 4629 1739 2109 15241993 13590 4564 4073 1629 1872 14521994 12942 4285 4037 1651 1741 12281995 13813 4973 4215 1551 1774 13001996 14556 5752 4067 1656 1872 12091997 14397 5781 4263 1486 1755 1111Source: Romanian Yearbooks for the referred period.

Romania

Table 9. The production value of the National Forest Administration

Source: National Forest Autonomous Administration Report

Specifications Achievements (Million ECU, average exchange rate for 1997)Total 98.649 90.27 86.892 80.946 111.351 131.486 139.865 140.135from state owned 59.189 57.297 54.865 51.622 77.568 91.757 100.135 100.676logging companiesfrom private owned 36.486 40.405 39.595 29.324 38.243 45.27 46.216 45.27logging companiesfrom village habitants 22.703 16.757 15.27 17.703 22.973 23.649 23.649 20.811other resources 39.459 32.973 32.027 29.324 33.649 34.865 39.73 39.459

Table 10. Trend of the average controlled floor price and the average winning price, achievedbetween 1990 and 1997

Source: “Short and long run impacts on the use of forests at the economy level of the policy to liberalize theexports of sawed timber “ UNEP Preliminary Report.Note: The average exchange rate in the period between 1990 and 1997 had the following trend: 1990-32 lei/$; 1991-102l lei/$; 1992 - 300 lei/$; 1993- 805 lei/$; 1994 - 1535 lei/$; 1995- 2180 lei/$; 1996 - 3260 lei/$; 1997 - 7192 lei/$.

Year Period Lei/m3 $/m3

1990 January-August 72.8September-December 215.0Average winning price 124.0 3.87

1991 January-June 215.0July-November 500December 790.0Average winning price 402.0 3.94

1992 January-May 790.0June-November 1080.0December 1310.0Average winning price 1203.0 4.01

1993 January 1310.0February-May 1800.0June-September 2850.0October-December 3400.0Average winning price 3247.0 4.03

1994 January-March 4185.0April-August 6123.0August-December 8438.0Average winning price 9892.0 6.44

1995 January-December 8438.0Average winning price 15667.0 7.19

1996 January-December 8438.0Average winning price 24399.0 7.48

1997 January-February 8438.0March-May 28850June-July 30840.0August-December 32903.0Average winning price 8.08

Romania

and USD per m3, at national level, between 1990and 1997.

The logging work is performed by 29 state-owned companies (derived from the prior state-owned companies), supposed to be privatized,and about 400 private companies.

The processing sector is represented by 163state-owned processing companies and morethan 1200 private-owned small companies,many of them having a negligible economicpower. Table 11 exhibits some relevant figuresreferring to the trend of wood-based produc-tion.

The continuous decrease of wood mass volumeentering the economic circuit is due to eco-

nomic agents of wood exploitation and primarywood processing which have not exploited thewood mass to the approved level during theperiod 1990-1997; the quantity of unexploitedwood mass was over 10.0 million m3 (table 12)The logging operation system is based both onstate and private companies, and the privatesector produces 40 to 60% of the total sawntimber output.

The first conclusion concerning the cause thatled to the decreasing of industrial productionin Romanian forestry economy is the lack of acoherent development strategy.

As a contradiction, when comparing forestrywith the agriculture and wood processing in-dustries (furniture and pulp & paper) one can

Table 11. Production for main industrial products (wood-based products and pulp & paper prod-ucts)

Source: Romania Yearbook, 1997.

Specification Unit 1990 1992 1994 1996 1996/1990 %Sawn wood 1000 m3 2932 2094 1852 1924 66Veneer billion m2 73 45 39 37 51Plywood 1000 m3 123 100 84 93 75Wood particle board 1000 tons 473 275 193 208 44Fiberboard 1000 tons 184 109 102 81 44Doors-Windows 1000 m2 3041 1177 1304 1204 40Wood cellulose 100% dry 1000 tons 388 182 163 203 52Paper and Paperboard 1000 tons 540 310 288 327 61

Table 12. The situation of wood mass volume approved and harvested during the period 1990-1997 (1000 m3)

Source: National Forest Autonomous Administration Annual Reports

Year Scheduled Harvested volume Unharvestedvolume Total volume, species groups Volume

harvested resinous beech Oak Hard softbroad-leaved broad-leaved

1990 17000 16649 5813 4958 2045 2071 1762 3511991 19000 15377 4956 4644 1919 1089 1769 36231992 16500 14419 4418 4629 1739 2109 1524 20811993 15000 13590 4564 4073 1629 1872 1452 14101994 14500 12942 4285 4037 1651 1741 1228 15581995 14400 13813 4973 4215 1551 1774 1300 5871996 14600 14556 5752 4067 1656 1872 1209 441997 14800 14397 5781 4263 1486 1755 1111 403TOTAL 125800 115742 40542 34886 13676 15283 11356 10058

Romania

realize the discrepancy between the three sec-tors, in terms of investment policies. Figure 3presents the dynamics of investments in thethree sectors. Nevertheless, even relative fig-ures are quite misleading when looking at thelow investment rate in forestry, where forestroads consume most of the investment funds,along with torrent control.

The third and the fourth graphs provide someadditional information about the productiondecrement: taking into account the high infla-tion rate, and it is apparent that neither invest-ments nor production really has an upwardslope at all. As a matter of fact, both the woodprocessing and pulp & paper industry have beenreduced, along with the whole industrial pro-duction.

3.2 Investments

Some relevant figures related to investmentsin the forestry sector are shown in figure 3. Itprovides some comparisons between invest-ments in forestry and other related sectors. Onecan note that the pulp and paper industry in-vestment rate is the highest, and this fact mightbe regarded as positive, in the long run, as pulpand paper consumption in Romania is still verylow. Comparing these figures with those pre-

sented in figure 4, showing the production in-dices trends, it is obvious that the productionindices for both wood processing and pulp &paper are still lower than the average produc-tion index, and this drawback certainly affectsforestry, which provides raw material for thesetwo industries.

3.3 Research, managerial planning andtraining

Research work has been carried out mainly bythe Forest Research and Management Institute,which has a ruling body in Bucharest and sixregional subsidiaries. Some of these forest man-agement and research stations are also involvedin forest road designing and trout nurseries.As regards managerial planning if should benoticed that many private companies haveemerged recently, and these small companiesare competing on a market basis.

Forestry training and education has been or-ganised since 1883, when the first two forestrangers schools were founded at Branesti (nearBucharest) and Fratauti (near Suceava). Thissystem had been working continuously withmedium and high level schooling until 1949.Since the reform made in 1948 the forest schoolmoved from Bucharest to Campulung

Figure 3. Trend investments in forestry and related sectors, assessed at actual pricesSource: Romanian Yearbook, 1997

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Year

Dynamic of Investment Indices

ForestryAgriculturePulp & Paper IndustryFurnitureTOTAL

Romania

Moldovenesc (52 km west from Suceava) andthe forest faculty from Bucharest to Brasov.Now, there are two forest faculties for high levelforestry teaching: one at Brasov, oriented to-wards forestry, logging and primary timberprocessing, considered as separate fields ofstudy and the latter at Suceava, characterizedby a more integrated curriculum combiningforestry and logging. At Suceava each year, 50new students are admitted to this schoolingsystem.

4 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

Restoring privately owned forestsThe privatization process Romanian forestryis facing is still being debated within the newpolitical coalition who won the latest election.Therefore, it should be noted that there is ahigh economic pressure on forests, as a conse-quence of economic conditions and the lack oflaw and institutional framework.

As the restoration process is quite difficult, dueto multiple causes6, in many places the loggingprocess, scheduled according to managerialplans, has been seriously disturbed.

Forestry reform and economic blockageForestry cannot be isolated from the economicenvironment, and if the environment is affectedby a financial blockage, sooner or later forestryis also affected. This is the case in Romania.Besides that, one can realize the lack of a co-herent coordination of policies and strategiesin forestry, wood logging and wood process-ing. Some other challenges the Romanian for-estry sector is facing are as follows:- A poor accessibility of woodlands.- Low investment level needed to develop the

sector. Privatization is regarded as the bestsolution, but the sector is still not attractiveenough, as it is supposed to be reformed withan important proportion of forest area beingreturned to private owners.

- Serious drawbacks within research and tech-nological development.

- Extremely poor collaboration, technological

Figure 4. Production indices5 of the whole industrial production, wood processing sector andpulp & paper industry. Source: Romanian Yearbook, 1997

6 The main cause is the lack of official papers proving the property rights of owners more than 50 years ago.The second cause is the political initiative to accept witnesses in validating the property rights. Unavoid-able overlaps between hypothetical properties create difficulties in handling the problem.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Year

totalWood processingPulp & Paper Industry

Pro

du

ctio

n In

dic

e 19

90=1

00 %

Romania

blockage with respect to other countries hav-ing an important advantage in forestry, log-ging and wood processing.

- Slow implementation of market-based rela-tionships in the forest sector. This process wascommenced five years ago, but there is roomfor improvement in this area.

- Liberalization of stumpage price. This im-portant step was carried out in 1992, but theaverage floor price was controlled by the Min-istry of Finance for a long period of time.

- Timber trade liberalization. This importantdecision was adopted too late, as the Euro-pean market has already been filled by Ukrain-ian sawn timber, and ecological labeling hasinvoked more and more control over the tim-ber trade . Romania should catch up with thesenew directions in forestry regulations.

- Reorganization of the National Forest Admin-istration. A more important role will be as-signed to the Forestry Department, which willbe deeply involved in following up forestpolicy at the local level. Mainly, a decentrali-zation process has been started, and about 10regional control bodies will share responsi-bility with the headquarters located in Bucha-rest.

The Slovak Republic

According to the global climatological classifi-cation, Slovakia is categorised in the mild cli-mate zone. A regular rotation of four seasonsand variable weather with continental featuresthroughout the year is typical for this country.The average January temperature ranges from -1o C in the Danube lowlands to -12o C on thetop of the Tatra Mountains. Average tempera-tures in July exceed 20o C in the Slovak low-lands, while at the elevations of 1,000 m abovesea level they reach about 14o C. Average an-nual precipitation for the whole territory ofSlovakia is 743 mm of which 65 % is evapo-rated and 35 % runoff. The lowest precipita-tion means (550 mm annually) are observed inthe Danube lowlands, while in the highest el-evations of the Carpathians it usually exceeds1,500 mm (Slovak Hydrometeorological Insti-tute, 1997). Snow cover is not stable and thereis not a permanent snow cover in the lower alti-tudes during the winters.

The typical moderate zone for Slovakia is faunaand flora, which results in a large number ofspecies. At present, More than 11 270 plantspecies and more than 26 700 animal specieshave been described in Slovakia but estimatesare much higher ( Zuskin 1998). Many speciesexist here as endemics, and glacial relicts canalso be found. Increasing numbers of endan-gered species recently became a serious prob-lem in Slovakia. The largest area with Com-mon yew (Taxus baccata L.) in Europe is lo-

1 The Country

1.1 Geography and climate

Slovakia is the geographical centre of Europe.Its borders from West to East lie between 16o50´- 22o34´ longitude and from North to South be-tween 49o37´ - 47o44´ latitude. It borders theCzech Republic in the West (261.3 km), Aus-tria in the Southwest (115.3 km), Hungary inthe South (630.9 km), the Ukraine in the East(95.8 km), and Poland in the North (508.2 km).When considering its area (49,036 sq. km),Slovakia is not among the largest of Europeancountries (about 25th in Europe). Its territorybelongs to the Alpine-Himalayan system, ofwhich the Carpathians (Western and EasternCarpathians) are a part of. The southern partsof Slovakia are formed by lowlands (the West-ern and Eastern Pannonian Basin). About 60 %of the territory lies more than 300 m above sealevel and, according to relief types, about 57 %of the area belongs to the highlands and moun-tains (Table 1).

The highest point is 2,654 m above sea level(the Gerlach peak in the High Tatras) and thelowest point is 94 m above sea level The long-est river is the Danube, which also borders onAustria and Hungary and flows along with itstributaries into the Black Sea. The total lengthof registered water courses (the river network) is49 775 km (average density 1.015 m per sq. km).

The Slovak Republic

Authors:Dr. Lubomír Scheer, Associate Professor (corresponding author)Faculty of Forestry, Technical University in ZvolenT. G. Masaryka 24960 53 Zvolen, SLOVAKIATel.: + (855) 5325277, Fax: + (855) 5332654E-mail: scheer@vsld.tuzvo.sk

Dr. Roman LongauerForest Research InstituteT. G. Masaryka 22960 01 Zvolen, SLOVAKIA

The Slovak Republic

cated in Slovakia (Protected Landscape AreaVelká Fatra - an area of 860 hectares with ap-proximately 160 000 specimens).

1.2 Society

Slovakia (census 1994) has a population of5 356 207 inhabitants (takes about 20th placeamong the 41 contemporary European states).The current average population density is 109inhabitants per sq. km. The largest city isBratislava (450 770 inhabitants), which is alsothe capital of Slovakia and is located in theSouthwest of the country, close to the Austrianand Hungarian borders. The average life ex-pectancy of men (68.3 years) is 5 - 6 years lessand of women (75.5 years) 3 - 4 years less thanthat in developed countries (Lazistan 1997).Additional significant statistics concerning thepopulation are as follows:- Age structure: 22.9 % of the population is be-

tween 0 - 14 years old; 59.6 % is between 15 -59 years old (men) and 15-54 years old(women); 17.46 % is more than 60 years old(men) and more than 54 years old (women).

- Nationalities (1993): Slovaks 85.7 %; Magyars10.6 %; Czechs 1.0 %; Ruthenians and Ukrain-ians 0.6 %.

- Religions: Roman Catholics 60.4 %; Evange-lists 6.2 %; Greek Catholics 3.4 %; Calvinists1.6 %; Orthodox 0.7 %; Agnostics 9.8 %; notdetermined 17.4 %.

The industrial sector is the core of the Slovakianeconomy. Chemical and rubber industries rep-resented 11.5 % of the gross domestic product(GDP) in 1994; mechanical industry 6.4 %; foodproduction 15.0 %; metallurgy 16.5 %; energy12.9 %; and oil-refining 7.7 %. More than 40types of minerals are mined and, from the inter-national point of view, the most important is themining and processing of magnesite.

The number of economically active personsemployed in 1994 was 2 176 900: 677 200 inindustry; 188 300 in construction; 214 500 intrade; and 168 800 in transport. The structureof foreign trade in 1994 was as follows: inter-mediate manufactured products (39.4 %); ma-chinery and transport equipment (19.0 %); andmiscellaneous manufactured articles (13.4 %)were the main export commodities. Machineryand transport equipment (27.7 %); fuels andrelated products (19.3 %); intermediate manu-factured products (16.8 %); and chemicals andrelated products (13.2 %) were a decisive partof the volume of imports.

Slovakia is extremely dependent on importedenergy (85 - 89 % of primary energy). The pro-duction of electricity does not fully cover con-sumption needs. About 5 - 10 % of annual con-sumption is imported from surrounding countries.The Slovak Republic is a parliamentary democ-racy. It became an independent state on Janu-ary 1, 1993 as a result of the division of theformer Czech and Slovak Federal Republic intotwo independent states. The President of the

Table 1. Share of altitude level and relief types in Slovakia (LAZISTAN 1997)

Note: a.s.l. = above sea level.

Altitude levels m km2 % of SlovakiaLowlands 97-300 m a.s.l 20.045 40Low highlands 300-750 m a.s.l 22.089 45Middle highlands 750-1500 m a.s.l 6.350 14Mountains 1500-2655 m a.s.l 552 1Types of relief (altitude difference)Plains 0-30 m 10.984 22.4Hills 31-150 m 9.022 18.4Highlands 151-300 m 18.584 37.9Mountains 301-600 m 9.611 19.6Alpine mountains 601 m and above 834 1.7

The Slovak Republic

Slovak Republic is the Head of State and theparliament is the supreme organ of state powerand the legislative authority. Slovakia has a plu-ral political system. The Slovak Parliament(National Council of the Slovak Republic) wasrepresented by six political parties in 1999. TheGovernment of the Slovak Republic is directedby the Prime Minister. From an administrativepoint of view, Slovakia is subdivided into 8 re-gions, 79 districts and 2,904 communities(1995). The head of the state forest authoritiesin Slovakia is found in the Ministry of Agricul-ture, Forestry section with Departments of StateAdministration Land, Agriculture and Forestryat county and district levels.

After 1989, the economic reform (transitionperiod) was initiated in Slovakia. Such aspectsas ownership structure changes, restitution, lib-eralisation of trade, a free market, taxation re-form, related changes in legislation, etc. are typi-cal for this period.

2 Forest resources and their utilisa-tion

According to the official definition in Slovakia,forest includes forest stands together with theirenvironment and other areas designated for thefulfilment of forest functions. Forest stands in-clude tree and shrub species which, in their en-vironment, fulfil forest functions. There are noarea, age or stocking level limits. If the defini-tion of TBFRA – 2000 (UN-ECE/FAO) is ap-plied, the total forest area of the country wouldapparently be higher. The reason for this is thatonly forest stands situated on forest land (ac-cording to the cadastral records) are consideredas a forest, but there are also large areas of aban-doned land that have been naturally and fullyconverted into forests which are still formallyconsidered as agricultural land.

Forestry is the economical activity aimed at themanagement of forests. It includes silviculture,forest protection, forest infrastructure and con-struction, logging, hauling, pre-processing ofsaw-logs and services.

2.1 Forest history

Forestry in Slovakia, which developed simulta-neously with the mining industry, has a rich pastand tradition. The basic forms of original pro-duction, and thus also the first theoretical knowl-edge in forestry, originated in Slovakia (a sepa-rately defined unit) in the great area of woodsthat was owned by the Hungarian ruler in the11th century. In the period of this primary state,the rulers were interested especially in huntingand fishing. The beginning of forestry datesback to 1426, when the ruler Sigmund issuedan order for using the forests for mining pur-poses. These measures established a system toutilise woods and clearings and to protect woodto ensure a permanent profit.

The Forest Order of Banská Bystrica, issued onMay 15, 1565 by Maximilian II, was revolu-tionary in the development of the utilisation ofthe Slovakian woods. This order comprised allknowledge of forestry regarding the cutting andfloating of wood. Wood cutting, and later onforestry, was an area of human activities thatbecame the basis for successful enterprising inmining and metallurgy. The wood was used in-tensively, and, moreover, the woods were ex-ploited and partially renewed by planting. Theircomposition, regarding species which we canobserve today, is not an original one due to themodified, industrialised territory. The fact thatmining not only meant a source of income butalso scientific and technical development, thatis of progress in general, manifested itself in thedevelopment of forestry and the science in-volved with it.

In the 16th and 17th centuries, after long lastingcivil wars in Europe, the forests in the territoryof Slovakia were exposed to high exploitationfelling, due to the restoration of the economyand the development of industry. The empressMaria Theresa gradually issued forest regula-tions for all countries of the Hapsburg Monar-chy. These regulations determined loggingmethods, forest regeneration and expansionmethods, as well as their management by skilledemployees. The Forest Order for Hungarianlands issued in 1769 prompted the planting of

The Slovak Republic

Figure 1. Forest ownership structure (Scheer, Longauer 1998)

Fig.2.1 Forest ownership structure(Scheer, Longauer 1998)

43,18 %

5,19 %21,80 %

9,38 %

2,87 %

7,91 %

9,54 %

0,15 %

Church 2,87State 43,18 %Private 5,19 %Community 21,80Municipal 9,38

On progress 7,91

Unknown 9,54

Companies 0,15 %

wood species in the free areas near villages andtowns. It also ensured creativity in the foresteconomy and led to the beginning of forestry asan academic subject at the Academy of Miningin Banská Štiavnica in 1770, where the ForestryInstitute was established in 1807. It is quitepossible to consider this as the beginning ofuniversity education in forestry, not only inSlovakia but also in the world. The first profes-sor at the institute, Dr. Henrich David Wilkens(1763 - 1832), gave most of the lectures on natu-ral history and forestry.

Social changes after 1989 influenced the wholenational economy and started a so called ”tran-sition period”. During this period, changes inforestry typically occurred in forest ownershipstructure, forest management, and forest legis-lation, as well as in forest policy as a whole.New legal regulations and ideas have been re-fined, taking world and European trends and theconclusions of the most important negotiationsin the area of forestry into consideration. Allthese new aspects of Slovakian forestry are dis-cussed in detail in the following chapters.

2.2 Forest ownership

99.5 % of the forests were state owned between1960 and 1991. After 1991, the forest owner-ship structure was substantially changed. Res-titution of ownership started in 1991. Between1994 and 1997, major parts of forests were res-tituted to their original owners. The currentownership structure (Figure1) is close to that

which was expected. Approximately 40 %(794 500 ha) of the forest area is owned by non-state bodies and private persons. The remain-ing area to be restituted represents 8 %. Ap-proximately 9 % of non-state forests remainsunclaimed, with unknown owners, or is not re-claimable according to the valid legislation. Theexpected forest ownership structure after com-plete restitution and re-privatisation (GreenReport, 1997) is as follows: state owned 43.2 %;municipal (cities, towns, villages) 10 %;churches 5.3 %; shared ownership (communi-ties) 22 %; private estates 10 %; other cases ornon-reclaimable 9.5 %.

Medium sized estates with an average of 100 -700 hectares are the norm for non-state forests.A considerable portion (approximately 22 %)of the entire forest area is defined as a sharedownership. Small holdings with an average of3 hectares and owned by more than 30 000 peo-ple cover 5.2 % of the forest land.

The approximate fragmentation in 1997 in theprivate sector (because all forests had not yetbeen restituted) according to size classes wasas follows:(0.1 - 10 ha) = 24.1 %(51 - 100 ha) = 6.7 %(11 - 50 ha) = 12.8 %(> 100 ha) = 56.8 %Restitution of ownership has resulted in a largevariety of ownership types and an increasednumber of owners and users. The managementplans are elaborated for units designed with re-spect to ownership and management. Their size

The Slovak Republic

Figure 2. Land use resources (Scheer, Longauer 1998)

47,7

40,8

6,53,2 1,8

Agriculturalland

Forest land Other areas Urban areas Water areas

Slovakia is thus one of the countries with thehighest percentage of forests in Europe (Finland77 %, Sweden 69 %, Austria 46 %). The areaof forest per capita in Slovakia is 0.37 ha (thelargest area is in Finland with 4.68 ha per capita).The distribution of forests has been increasingand will continue to increase in the long term.In the next few years, the category of forestland will be extended even more, due to naturalconversion or re-afforestation of abandonedagricultural lands.

Semi-natural forests originating from naturalregeneration represent 40 - 45 % of the totalforest area and differ only slightly from the natu-ral ones in terms of species composition. Morethan 70 fragments of natural and virgin forestswith a total area of 18 000 - 20 000 ha still existin Slovakia (KORPEL 1993). This is a rather ex-ceptional figure for European countries west ofRussia.

The share of high forests and coppice is dem-onstrated in Table 2 together with estimatedtrends for the past 50 years and the transitionperiod.

Many serious problems in Slovakia’s forestryare associated with the mountainous topogra-phy. Mountain forests in elevations over 700 mrepresent 33 % (641 000 ha) of the total forestarea. These forests are apparently affected bythe trans-boundary air pollution, which is com-

varies between 50 and 8,000 hectares, with anaverage of 1,200 ha. Earlier, the managementplanning was done for areas of 10 000 ha onaverage.

Forest infrastructures (buildings, roads, specialconstructions) were restituted or sold separately.The ownership of forest infrastructures was re-located free of charge or for a minimum price.However, there are still many unsolved(unsolvable) cases and disputable questions,mainly concerning forestry buildings.

2.3 Land use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global view of land use

The global view of land use in Slovakia is shownin Figure 2. A major part of forested land issituated in Central and North Slovakia. Thereare only a few scattered forests in the South ofthe country.

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

The country lies in the western part of theCarpathian Mountain Ridge. About 65 % of theterritory and dominant part of forested land hasa mountainous character. The area of forests inSlovakia is 19 924 km2 which equals 41 % ofthe country’s total territory (49 025 km2).

The Slovak Republic

prised of surprisingly high amounts of heavymetal depositions. 35 % of forests are on slopessteeper than 18o, which makes them unsuitablefor conventional logging technologies. Al-though large sections of these forests have beencategorised as protective forests, even their mini-mum necessary sanitation requires extra man-agement costs. Also, due to the insufficient anddense network of forest roads in the mountain-ous areas, the wedge (strip) system and smallarea clear-cutting (with a maximum width equalto twice the stand height) are more suitable thanthe shelterwood and selection systems.

Eight forest vegetation zones are recognized inSlovakia (table 3) according to thephytocenological classification of Zlatník(1959). General ecological characteristics ofthe vegetation zones are, for example, availablein Paule (1995). According to the managementcriteria and geomorphology, 47 forest regionshave recently been delineated.

2.3.3 Tree species: origin and distribution

Distribution of tree species in forests is con-nected relatively closely to the territory’s macro-relief. In the lowlands and hill territories ofSouth and East Slovakia, broad-leaved speciesare typical; in the mountains of Middle andNorth Slovakia, mixed forests prevail and co-niferous species are dominate.

The percentage of forests with respect to domi-nant species is as follows: coniferous 30.8 %;broad-leaved 47.6 %; mixed forests 21.6 %.

Actual species composition (1996) and hypotheti-cal original composition are given in Table 4.

Of course, the original composition of tree spe-cies has been changed by many years of man-agement. The proportion of spruce (Picea abiesL.,) and pine (Pinus silvestris L.,) increased sub-stantially; the distribution of fir (Abies albaMill.,), beech (Fagus silvatica L.,), and also ofoak (Quercus robur L.,) has been largely re-duced. The trend of development in recent dec-ades has been illustrated very well by a com-parison of the composition of tree species inorigin and in 1920 to present (figure 3). It ischaracterised by an increase in spruce (Piceaabies L.,) and a strong reduction in fir (Abiesalba Mill.,), which had been our most produc-tive tree species until recently.

Much attention has been paid to the determina-tion of a desirable (target) composition of treespecies in Slovakia’s forests. The policy of thetarget composition of tree species is based onthe basic principles of forest management - onthe principle of maximal, permanent, safe andeffective performance of forest functions for thepublic interest and for production decisions. Itfully takes into account the decisions and prin-ciples by which the above principles of forestmanagement are carried out.

From an ecological point of view, the followingprinciples will be applied to the target compo-sition of tree species in Slovakia:- biodiversity protection, i.e. the principle of

cultivating stands with mixed species;- cultivation of tree species suitable to forest

sites;- alleviation of pollution deposition impact and

the impact of other harmful factors by usingmore resistant tree species;

- elimination of one sided utilisation of the sitesby altering the proportion of highly produc-

Category Unit 1996 Estimated trend for the Transition periodpast 50 years 1990 - 1997

Total Area of High forests 1,000 ha 1924.4 Gradual decrease of Unchanged (Lack ofcoppices through money for restoration

Total Area of Coppice and 1,000 ha 63.5 restoration of a high of high forests)Coppice with Standards forest

Table 2. High forests and coppice in Slovakia (TBFRA – 2000, National Questionnaire)

The Slovak Republic

Vegetation zone Area 1996(1,000 ha) (%)

1 Oak woods and riverain forests including subcontinental 167.049 8.39thermophillous oakwoods (sub-Pannonian sector), Pannonianoak woods with hornbeam(Danubian sector), thermphillousand xerophillous oak woods, and edaphic enclavesof Scots pine on sands2 Mixed oak forests with beech on brown soils and loess 306.365 15.393 Submountain mixed beech forests with oak 460.680 23.154 Beech woods 387.050 19.455 Mixed beech woods with fir, acidophillous and mesotrophic 414.314 20.826 Mixed beech-fir forests with spruce 193.227 9.717 Mountain spruce forests 41.381 2.088 Stretches of mountain dwarf pine 20.003 1.01

Table 3. Vegetation zones and their area in Slovakia (TBFRA – 2000, National Questionnaire)

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

50 %

Spruce Fir Pine Larch Beech Oak Hornbeam

Fig.2.3 Development of maincomposition in

(Novotn_ 1997)

Origin Year 1920 Present Target

7,7 %14,1 %

0,9 %0,1 %

45,2 %19,1 %

3,7 %

22,2 %11,8 %

5 %1,2 %31 %

16,7 %6,2 %

27,2 %4,4 %6,3 %2,1 %

30,3 %11,4 %

5,6 %

27 %5 %

6,5 %7 %

31 %17 %1,5 %

SpruceFirPineLarchBeechOakHornbeam

Figure 3. Development of main species composition in Slovakia (Novotny)

tive tree species by adding biological tree spe-cies to preserve permanently feasible devel-opment;

The following principles are applied from thepoint of view of economy:- where the composition of tree species is suit-

able for the site, the proportion of commercialtree species is increased (spruce (Picea abiesL.,), larch (Larix decidua Mill.), oak (Quercusrobur L.,) and valuable broad-leaved species);

- silviculture is aimed at increasing the qualityof tree species and increasing stem dimensions(in the south of Europe, broad-leaved specieshave been devastated and the north of Europeoffers small-dimensioned coniferous species);

- wood production is orientated towards the uti-lisation of wood for its unique properties, i.e.it is oriented towards mechanical (and only toa smaller extent to chemical) wood treatment.

Today, the aim is to preserve fir (Abies albaMill.,) on convenient sites, to increase the shareof larch (Larix decidua Mill.,) and of valuablebroad-leaved species, and to increase resistanceto the impact of pollution.

The Slovak Republic

2.3.4 Growing stock, growth and felling

During the last 40 years, the total growing stockin Slovakia increased almost twofold. Since1994, it has increased by 5.2 % and presently(1997) represents approximately 250 m3 perhectare. Detailed information about the grow-ing stock and growth (increment) is given in ta-ble 5.

This volume of the growing stock concerns theliving trees, the growing stock of dead trees inSlovakia is approximately 638 000 m3 o.b. Thedifference between gross and net annual incre-ment represents natural losses, i.e. natural de-crease of trees and other incidental fellings.

Actual and objective felling possibilities are il-lustrated by an allowable cut. It is set accord-ing to the forest categories, tree species compo-

Genus Species CompositionNative (indigenous) tree species Actual Originalappearing on forest and other wooded landPicea abies (L.) KARST. 27.18 % 7.7 %Abies alba MILL. 4.43 % 14.1 %Pinus P.sylvestris L. 6.26 % 0.9 %

P. mugo TURRA 1.06 % -P.cembra L. 0.02 % 0.08 %

Larix decidua MILL. 2.12 % 0.1 %Quercus Q.robur L. Q.petraea (MATTUSCH.) LIEB. 11.39 % 19.1 %

Q.cerrsis L. 2.49 % 2.5 %Q.pubescens WILLD., Q.pedunculiflora C.KOCH 0.03 % -

Q.virgiliana (TEN.) TEN.Fagus sylvatica L. 30.27 % 45.2 %Carpinus betulus L. 5.65 % 3.7 %Acer A.pseudoplatanus L., A.platanoides L., 1.68 % 1.9 %

A.campestre L.Fraxinus F.excelsior L., F.angustifolia VAHL. 1.20 % 0.3 %Ulmus U.glabra HUDS., U.minor MILL., 0.08 % 1.1 %

U.laevis PALLBetula B.pendula ROTH., B.pubescens EHRH. 1.32 % 0.1 %Alnus A.glutinosa (L.) GAERTN., A.incana (L.) MOENCH 0.65 % 0.3 %

A.viridis (CHAIX) DC.Tilia T.cordata MILL., T.platyphyllos SCOP 0.34 % 0.3 %Indigenous Poplars Populus P.nigra L., P.alba L., P.x. canescens 0.13%

(AIT.) J.E.SM.Populus tremula L. 0.26 %Salix S.caprea L., S.alba L., S.fragilis L. 0.11 % 2.2 %Sorbus S.aucuparia L., S.torminalis (L.) 0.15 %

CRANTZ, S.aria (L.) CRANTZ

Other broad-leaved Wild fruit tree species, other trees and shrubs 0.03 %Introduced tree species on forestand other wooded landRobinia pseudoacacia L. 1.79 % -Populus x euroamericana 0.61 % -Pinus nigra ARNOLD 0.52 % -Other conifers Pseudotruga menziesii (MIRBEL) FRANCO 0.08 % -

Abies grandis (DOUGL.ex D.DON) LINDL.Pinus strobus L.

Other broad-leaved Quercus rubra L., Castanea sativa MILL., 0.15 %Aesculus hippocastum L., Negundo aceroidesMOENCH

Table 4. Tree species structure in Slovakia (TBFRA – 2000, National Questionnaire)

The Slovak Republic

sition, rotation, etc. The annual allowable cutslightly decreased in the period between 1980 -1993 and slightly increased later in the periodbetween 1994 - 1997. Total annual timber fell-ing was higher by more than 10 % compared tothe allowable cut (excluding the years 1991 -1993). When the rates of felling are separatedaccording to the groups of species, we can saythat in coniferous stands actual logging washigher by about 10 - 70 %, excluding the years1991 and 1992. The main reason for this wasover logging, which increase in 1996 and was aresult of incidental felling. Their share in totallogging represented almost 80 % in the last fouryears. On the contrary, the logging of broadleafspecies between 1990 - 1997 was lower thanthe allowable cut and reached only about 70 -90 % of the allowable cut. The amount andstructure of fellings and removals in 1996 aregiven in table 6.

The contribution of individual harmful factorsto the felling of losses (average 1990 - 1996) is,according to the annual Green Reports on For-ests and Forest management 1992 - 1997, asfollows:Insect pests 21.0 %Fungal diseases 5.5 %Windstorms 41.5 %

Snow, rime, others 15.5 %Fire 10.0 % (due to extraordi-narily fire in the Zahorie region in 1996)Air pollution 6.0 %Illegal cutting 0.5-1.0 %

2.3.5 Forest threats

Negative changes in environmental conditionsof forest ecosystems are a result of the long-term impact of anthropogenic factors (mainlyair pollution) and of the synergetic impact ofnatural negative factors. Declining and dyingforests are characterised by symptoms of dis-eases, reduced resistance expressed in insuffi-cient increment, defoliation, susceptibility tounfavourable natural stresses (wind, snow, rime),inclination to damage by insect and fungi, andfinally by die back. A review of serious dam-ages caused by biotic and abiotic agents is givenin table 7.

Interaction of a large spectrum of unfavourablefactors mainly caused the present character offorest decline. The most unfavourable ones areanthropogenic factors and weather anomalies.Emissions and air pollution cause excessive

Data Unit 1997 Estimated trend for Transition periodpast 50 years 1990-1997

Total volume of the growing stock 106 m3 (o.b.) 510.948 Gradually Gradually- conifers 240.798 increasing increasing- broad-leaves 270.150Mean volume of the growing stock m3 ha-1 (o.b.) 253.5 Gradually Graduallyper hectare of forest land increasing increasingGross annual increment 106 m3 (o.b.) 15.929 Gradually StableNet annual increment 13.859 increasing

Table 5. Growing stock and increment in forests of Slovakia (TBFRA – 2000, National Questionnaire)

Category Total Annual Total annual removals Intermediate Felling of lossesfelling felling

(million m3 o.b.) (million m3 o.b.)(million m3 u.b.)(million m3 o.b.) (million m3 o.b.)Forest total 7.387 5.618 5.107 2.013 4.144 *

Coniferous 4.462 3.523 3.023 1.256 3.322 *

Broad-leaved 2.925 2.095 1.904 0.756 0.822 *

* Does not correspond with the removals of the felling of losses!

Table 6. Felling and removals in 1996 (TBFRA – 2000, National Questionnaire)

The Slovak Republic

defoliation and, consequently, a reduction inincrement, deterioration of the overall healthcondition of the forest and eventually their totaldestruction, in some cases.

This phenomenon of forest decline has beenglobally observed and has been monitored inSlovakia according to the rules of the Interna-tional Monitoring System since 1991 (net ofmonitoring plots 16x16 km).

The results of direct measurements of SO2 and

NOx concentrations in relation to the forests,

which could characterise the intensity of airpollution, are not available. In 1995, the emis-sion sources in Slovakia totally emitted 236.4thousand tons of sulphur dioxide, 180.9 thou-sand tons of nitrogen oxides, 403.9 tons of car-bon monoxide and 89 thousand tons of solidparticles including heavy metals. Between 1970and 1985, the total emission of pollutants inSlovakia increased by approximately 25 %

(Green Report 1997). After 1985, the level ofemissions was almost stable. Recently, a de-pression of the Slovakian economy and the highprice of fuel have influenced the unfavourabletrend and contributed to a decrease in emissionsof air pollutants. More than 50 % of SO

2 emis-

sions in Slovakia are transmitted long distancesacross borders. The long-term trend of SO

2

development in Slovakia can be characterisedas decreasing, however, the air pollutants fromsources outside of the Slovakian territory rep-resent up to 70 % (in the case of sulphur), andthey play the most important role in the pollu-tion of the environment in the Slovak Republic.

Poor forest health conditions are also caused byabiotic, primarily climatic, factors (prolongeddrought, wind, snow, ice, frost, etc.). The aver-age percentage of influence these factors haveon the total annual cuts is 20 - 30 % and as muchas 60 % in extreme years.

Category Unit Year Estimated trend Transition1996 for past 50 years period

1990-1997Damage by insects 1,000 ha year-1 20.838 Gradual Increase Increase

1,000 m3 year-1 782.587Burnt forest area 1,000 ha year-1 0.238Volume harvested from burnt areas 1,000 m3 year-1 13.464

Area seriously damaged by storms 1,000 ha year-1 0.381 Fluctuations IncreaseVolume harvested from these areas 1,000 m3 year-1 1,996.617

1,000 ha year-1 1.453 Gradual Increase Increase1,000 m3 year-1 745.347

1,000 ha year-1 12.190 Stable Slight decreaseTotal area of regeneration per year 1,000 ha year-1 1.106Area seriously damaged by game 1,000 ha year-1 0.012Area seriously damaged by grazing 1,000 ha year-1 181.286 Increase Increase(domestic animals)

Area of forests primarily damaged by 1,000 m3 year-1 382.864air pollution

Other anthropogenic damage 1,000 ha year-1 <0.035 No estimates Unchanged- recreation leisure activities 1,000 ha year-1 0.422 Fluctuations Stable- fungal diseases 1,000 m3 year-1 164.241 Gradual Increase Stable

Loss of seedlings in the nurseries 1,000 seedlings 20.500 Fluctuations Fluctuations

Table 7. Damages caused by biotic and abiotic factors in Slovakia (Green Report 1997)

The Slovak Republic

The most notable negative biotic factors areanimals (forest vertebrates and insects), as wellas negative plant factors (fungi and undesirablevegetation). Wildlife causes (mainly by repeatedbrowsing of shoots) an average annual foresta-tion loss of approximately 32 % from artificialregeneration made and, in many cases, is a lim-iting factor of tree species composition. Fir(Abies alba Mill.,), yew (Taxus baccata L.,),maple (Acer pseudoplatanus L.,), and ash(Fraxinus excelsior L.,) are usually damaged themost.

Prevention plays a very important role in respectto forest threats and damages. Environmentally,friendly prevention methods are the most effec-tive protective measures capable of improvingthe health and resistance of forests (e.g. geneti-cally appropriate afforestation material, speciescomposition respecting the site conditions,sound tending improving ecological stability).Successive recovery measures combining me-chanical, chemical, biological and other meth-ods solve only acute problems. However, thereare not sufficient funds in the Slovakian forestrysector for the projects promoting preventive andrecovery measures.

2.4 Silviculture

Due to the long-term positive impact of profes-sional schools and of intensive research, forestsilviculture has a rich tradition in Slovakia.Nevertheless, its long history was not able toprevent many remarkable changes in the char-acter and extent of various policies applied to it(Novotny 1997).

The volume and quality of wood mass produced,as well as the degree to which it performs vari-ous functions of public interest, depends on theforest’s structure. It mainly depends on the shareof tree species and space distribution of the treesin the stand that is projected for ”commercialor functional types of forest”. According to theagreed policy of target structure, silviculturalmethods and procedures are defined as tools forforest formation and its deliberate aims. Thepolicy takes into account the different environ-mental conditions and the different functional

orientations of forests in Slovakia for decidingon stand structure, differing silviculturalphytotechnology, the application of methods ofstand regeneration and tending.

The convenience of silvicultural methods ap-plied (primarily of regeneration methods) isconfirmed by the observation that the real shareof tree species of commercial and environmen-tal importance does not differ remarkably fromthe desirable share.

The 50s and 60s were a period of biologisationof all forest management in Slovakia. Most no-table was the remarkable intensification ofsilvicultural activities in connection with thenatural forest as an integrated ecosystem. To-day, the ecologisation of silvicultural activitiesis preferred: stricter application of more naturalsilvicultural methods, with an emphasis onmixed stands suited to the site, an increasedportion of natural regeneration, more extensiveapplication of a selected commercial methodparticularly in protected forests and in special-purpose forests.

Concerning silvicultural systems, theshelterwood system is a dominant one for com-mercial forests and is applied according to natu-ral conditions. The clear-felling system can onlybe applied under the conditions given in legis-lative regulations. In the future, the shelterwoodsystem will be applied, based on the naturalconditions, on an area of about 68 % of the to-tal forest area in Slovakia; the selection systemon 12 %; and the clear-cutting system on 20 %.However, the small size clear-cutting system isstill the standard at present. In addition, acci-dental felling represents 65 % of the total an-nual cut. Consequently, the annual share of natu-ral regeneration of the annually regenerated for-est area has been 15 - 25 % in the last two dec-ades (the proportion of natural regeneration atthe end of the 19th century was approximately50 % of the regenerated area).

The Slovak Republic

2.5 Forest production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems and timber uses

The harvesting system includes used machin-ery and technology. Cutting and delimbing ofthe trees is carried out by using powersaws.Trees are delimbed mainly where felled, timberis dragged to the roadside by whole-stem log-ging. As much as 93 % of the timber is hauledby tractors (special forest haulers), 3 % of thecut wood is hauled by cableways and about 4 %by horses (NOVOTNY 1997). Assortments areproduced from stems mainly using powersawsin forest depots. About 24 % of the assortmentsare produced in central conversion landingsequipped by mechanisation, or directly in cus-tomers mechanised depots - approximately 3 %of the volume of wood cut. In recent years, woodchipping technology with movable chippers hasbeen introduced, with the production of chipsfrom crown parts of the trees in the yards. Inaddition, tools for timber transport are adjustedto the method and place of assortment produc-tion. Assortments are transported by haulingrigs with a carrying capacity of 12 metric tons,which are equipped with hydraulic booms. Lor-ries with a carrying capacity of 27 metric tonsare used for stem transportation. High capacityextensions and containers with a volume of25 m3 are used to transport chips.

The intensity of forest accessibility results fromtechnical/operational and public/beneficialneeds. At present, timber logging is carried outduring the whole year and therefore roads withreinforced roadway, enabling timber transportfor the whole year, are required. Today, 10.5 m/ha of hauling roads have been built. 4.7 m/ha ofthese are paved roads which are used the wholeyear round and 5.8 m/ha are seasonal roads,which are good for lorries. The amount of haul-age roads and lines is 30 - 50 m/ha.

The domestic wood processing industry utilisesapproximately 97 % of the wood cut. The restrepresents the export of assortments. The shareof wood consumption for the individualbranches of the wood processing industry is aresult of tree species composition and qualita-

tive (assortment) structure of the wood cut.Approximately 2.5 % of the softwood and ap-proximately 6.5 % of the hardwood cut is usedfor production of veneers, plywood, matches andother special wood products. About 69 % ofthe softwood and approximately 36 % of thehardwood cut is used in the lumber industry.23 % of the softwood and approximately 48 %of the hardwood cut is used for cellulose, chip-board and fibreboard production (Green Report,1997). Approximately 5 % of the softwood andapproximately 9 % of the hardwood cut is usedfor energy purposes. For instance, about400 000 tons of fuel wood and 2,000 tons ofchips and sawdust are currently being utilisedin Slovakia for energy. Annual consumption oftimber for energy production in forestry is12 000 tons. This may increase to 115 000 tonsannually in the future, due to the replacementof fossil fuels and purchased heat.

2.5.2 Non-timber forest products

Wood is by far the most important forest prod-uct, but some other notable products for humanconsumption include food, beverages, medicalplants and extracts (e.g., fruits, berries, nuts,honey, game meat, mushrooms, etc.). Fruits,berries, and mushrooms are of some economi-cal importance for rural populations, mostly atthe local level. At the regional levels, they rep-resent more a traditional part of the recreationand leisure activities than an economic interest.To some extent, hunting and sales of venisonhave a different position. They represent a regu-lar supplementary income for hunter’s associa-tions (total number of registered hunters is ap-proximately 40 000 in Slovakia) and also forstate owned forest companies.

The main non-wood forest products in Slovakiaare given in Table 8. Products which are pro-duced on forest land were taken into considera-tion, including those to be marketed or for pri-vate consumption. The following products offorest fruits are concerned: sloes, mushrooms,rose hips, raspberries, blackberries, blueberries,rowan, elderberries, juniper berries, cranberriesand hazelnuts.

The Slovak Republic

2.5.3 Forest functions

Forests have a large scale of functions withinthe natural environment of Slovakia. Each for-est stand has more than one function, but one oreven several may be emphasised more accord-ing to the needs of society. Forests stands aredivided into three categories according to theirpurpose: protection forests, forests with specialfunctions and commercial forests. The catego-ries are divided into sub-categories accordingto a particular dominant function and they aremanaged differentially in order to fulfil thedominant functions as efficiently as possible.The individual categories in 1996 were as fol-lows: commercial forests 66.4 %; special pur-pose forests 17.5 %; and protection forests14.8 %. The share of individual sub-categoriesin protection forests and forests with specialfunctions is given in Table 9.

Increasing the importance of public beneficialfunctions (ecological and environmental func-tions) of forests will be a result of the concep-tion of sustainable forest management inSlovakia. The main interest is particularly thepreservation of original ecosystems by extend-ing the network of protected territories. Thisnetwork is comprised of 5 biosphere reserveswith an area of 218 000 hectares, representing16.4 % of the total protected territory inSlovakia.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy and employment

In 1996, forestry products represented 1.4 % ofthe gross domestic product (GDP) in the SlovakRepublic. This does not include the public ben-efits of forests which are estimated to be at leastthree times higher than the value of wood pro-duction functions. In addition, the woodprocessing industries (primary wood process-ing, furniture industry and other mechanicalprocessing, pulp industries and other chemicalprocessing of wood) represent 7.4 % of the GDPin Slovakia.

The proportion of investments in forestry andtotal investments in the economy of Slovakia isapparently below the required level. The shareof forestry was 0.42 % in 1995 and only 0.27 %in 1996. An insufficient reproduction of tangi-ble investment property causes a decrease in thetechnical level of the forest management. It hasan unfavourable impact on the economy of for-est enterprises, as well as on the application ofa more ecologically oriented management offorests.

The domestic market for wood has changed sub-stantially in the past years. Demand has de-creased and the quality requirements seem tobe surpassing the surplus in prices. Interest inthe top quality assortments of pine andcottonwood timber has been low. This develop-ment especially influences the liquidity of largerholdings which manage broad-leaved forests.

Commodity Volume Value Notes (tons) M ECUForest fruits, berries and mushrooms 2541.0 2.24 Number of commodities decreases, volume (V+PS) increases, price SKK/kg decreasesVenison (V+PS+D) 834.0 1.42 Demand and price decreaseMedicinal plants (from forest) 178.4 0.19 Number of species has decreased (by 55 %)(V+PS) in the transition period, demand for

cultivated species is stable or increasingHoney (V+PS) 2747.8 3.97 Volume decreases, purchasing prices increase

Table 8. Non-wood forest products in Slovakia (yearly averages) (TBFRA – 2000, National Ques-tionnaire)

Note: V = export, PS = industrially processed in SR, D = domestic consumption.

The Slovak Republic

In order to support domestic wood processing,the wood exports were relatively strictly regu-lated until 1996. Due to a largely fluctuatingbut closed domestic market, the unfavourableeconomical situation in forestry, and an attemptto revive the cash flow, timber exports to theEuropean Union and the European Associationof Free Trade were liberalised in the beginningof 1997. The licences awarded by the Ministryof Economy are only required in a few cases.The share of raw timber exports (pulpwood pre-vails), including re-exports, has ranged between10 % and 15 % of total timber sales. The restof the timber volume was sold on the domesticmarket.

After the tax reform in 1993, the liabilities offorestry increased considerably and were recon-sidered in the subsequent years. Forests man-aged primarily for protective and special func-tions as well as young stands are exempt fromthe real-estate tax. Specific tax procedures havebeen applied for incomes from timber sales,from forest estates in shared ownerships, andlong-term financial reserves for silviculturaloperations.

A decrease in the value added tax (VAT) for allwood assortments in accordance with EU stand-ards has been proposed, as well as exemptingsilvicultural operations from the liability of thenew act on VAT. A reduction in taxes on incomesfrom forest management, especially from smallholdings, and an improvement in the legal basisfor creating long-term financial reserves forforest management is being planned.

3.2 Employment

The proportion of employees in forestry com-pared to the total number of employees in thenational economy of Slovakia was about 1.37 %(27.9 thousand workers) in 1996. About 7.5 %of them worked in the forest industries (GreenReport, 1997). This figure does not include part-time, self-employed forest owners, but theirnumber is estimated to be relatively low. On theother hand, the volume of man-days of smallservice providers has been increasing. The in-come level in forestry is below the national av-erage. In 1996, it was 182 ECU and the differ-ence was -15 %. In spite of the growth in nomi-

Estimated TransitionSub-categories Unit 1996 trend for the period

past 50 years 1990-1997Total area of forests managed primarily forprotective functions, sub-categories: 1000 ha 284.742 Gradual Graduala) Forests in unfavourable sites 1000 ha 137.865* Increase in all Increase in allb) Alpine forests 48.210* sub-categories sub-categoriesc) Stretches of mountain pine 18.807*d) Soil protecting forests 63.775*

Total area of forests managed primarily for otherspecial functions, sub-categories: 1000 ha 336.641 Gradual Graduala) Forests at water resources and reservoirs 1000 ha 22.297* Increase, Increase,b) Forests surrounding springs of mineral water 4.892* especially in especially inc) Park and urban forests 32.259* sub-category f sub-category fd) Game preserves and pheasantries 24.187*e) Nature reserves and national parks 24.389*f) Forests damaged by air pollution 121.623*g) Research and education forests 5.125*h) Forests of special interest 55.520*z) Forest (formerly agricultural) land for 25.191afforestation-

Table 9. Forests managed primarily for protective and special functions (by sub-categories) (GreenReport, 1997)

* Refers to December 31, 1994 (sums of sub-categories are not equal to the actual area of the categories)

The Slovak Republic

nal and real values in 1997, the relationship tothe national average has been approximately thesame.

3.3 Profitability

In the long-term, the total revenues from themanagement of forests in Slovakia have beenlower than expenditures, and forest managementis unprofitable as a whole. The reasons for thementioned deficit are the status of forests, costsof public benefit functions which are not mar-ketable, as well as the deteriorated conditionsof forests in Slovakia. Therefore, forests requiresubsidiary support, as the dependence on exter-nal financial sources has increased. The totalstate financial assistance to forestry was 14 mil.ECU in 1996. In 1997 the difference was -2.6mil. ECU. Due to traditional records, however,40 % of the money listed as subsidies to for-estry represent a financial assistance for resto-ration projects and remediation activities whichdo not match with any definition of regular andpurpose oriented subsidies. The share from to-tal financial support for different areas of for-estry is as follows: primary forest production60.7 %; secondary forest production (roads,transport) 20.4 %; ecological protection andrecreation (includes refunds) 16.6 %; other pur-poses (management plans, chartered foresters,research) 2.3 %. These ratios are for 1996 butthey were almost the same in the previous years.

The situation and development of some profit-ability indicators in the period 1995 - 1997 isgiven in Table 10.

The profit rate of forestry in Slovakia decreasesand the necessary sources for common manage-ment of forests and reproduction of investmentproperty are not being formed.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Forest and forestry legislation

As in many other countries in Central-EasternEurope, the legal system in Slovakia was also

subjected to changes in the 1990s. There aretwo basic parliamentary acts which cover theforests and their management:- Act No. 61/1977 on Forests (Forest Act)

amended by Act No. 229/1991 and Act No.183/1993.

- Act No. 100/1977 on the Management of For-ests and State Forest Authority (later amend-ments promulgated in Act No. 265/1995 andAct No. 15/1994).

As these acts were already being enforced inthe 1970s, the amendments harmonise them withnew ownership and the economic situation.

Partial aspects of forestry and related activitiesare covered by other parliamentary acts:- The act on State Forest Improvement Fund (No.

131/1991, amendments promulgated in ActNo. 16/1994)

- The act on Hunting (No. 23/1962, amendmentspromulgated in the Act No. 23/1992 and ActNo. 99/1993)

- The act on Land Communities (No. 181/1995)- The act on the Slovak Forestry Chamber (No.

259/1993).

Several acts primarily concerning other sectorsalso have a significant impact on forestry. TheAct on Nature and Landscape Conservation (ActNo. 287/1994) particularly expands the scope oftraditionally forestry activities controlled by theenvironment and nature conservation sector.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest relatedpolicies

The amount of actors involved in forest policyincreased considerably in the 1990s. Besidesthe traditional ones such as the state authorities,state forest companies, municipalities, watermanagement, and research and education, thereare also now the newly emerged non-state for-est owners and their associations, associationsof wood processors, entrepreneurs in tourism,and non-governmental nature conservation or-ganisations. Some of the actors have severalroles.

The Slovak Republic

a) Authorities and executive bodies of the For-estry Section of the Ministry of Agriculture in-clude:- Agriculture and Forest Authorities at the re-

gional and district levels- The Institute of Forest Management Planning- The Institute for Education and Training of

Workers in Water and Forest Management- The Forest Research Institute.

b) Associations of forest owners are formallyrepresented by:- The Association of the State Forest Enterprises,

a consultative body with a tendency to be adirectorate general of the state-owned forestestates

- The Council of Associations of Non-State For-ests.

c) Non-forestry state authorities:- The Ministry of Environment represented by

the regional environmental offices (country anddistrict), the Slovak Environmental Agency,and the Directorate of National Parks

- The Slovak Land Fund, which formally main-tains and supervises the non reclaimable land.Such land represents 8.5% of the total forestarea.

d) Non-governmental organisations:- The Slovak Forestry Chamber- The Slovak Academy of Agricultural Sciences- The NGOs active in the area of nature conser-

vation.

e) Education and scientific sectors:- The Faculty of Forestry, Technical University

Zvolen- The Institute of Forest Ecology and other bod-

ies within the Slovak Academy of Sciences.

4.3 Forest policy tools

4.3.1 Forest policy

Endorsed by the Parliament in 1993, the “Strat-egy and Conception of Development of ForestManagement in Slovakia” and “Principles ofState Forestry Policy in Slovakia” provide mostof the general guidelines for the sustainablemanagement of forests. Ten principles of thestate forestry policy have a rather declaratorycharacter, however. Their implementation hasbeen evaluated in the annual Report on Forestrysubmitted to the government and parliament.

From among the policies prepared by other sec-tors, the parliamentary approved Strategy of theState Environmental Policy (Decision 339/1993)and Strategy for Biodiversity Conservation andManagement in Slovakia (Decision 676/1997)have had a relatively large impact on forestmanagement.

Nonetheless, only limited participation of theforestry sector was allowed in the formulationof the Environmental Policy and BiodiversityAction Plan.

In order to prepare new forest policy and har-monise legal regulations with the EU countries,the project “Assistance in Harmonisation ofLegislation and Strategy for Development of

Indicator Year / mill. ECU1995 1996 1997

Revenues 185.9 204.4 220.9Costs 195.2 212.6 228.6Loss (-) 9.3 10.8 7.6Subsidies 11.2 14.1 11.4Profit (+) 2.0 3.3 3.8Share of Loss (-) 5.01 5.35 3.47revenues Subsidies 6.07 6.97 5.17% Profit (+) 1.06 1.62 1.70

Table 10. Profitability indicators (Green Report 1997)

The Slovak Republic

Forestry Sector” was implemented in collabo-ration with the Forestry Department of the FAOin 1998/99.

4.3.2 Forest related programmes

The “Programme for mitigation of anthropo-genic and especially air pollution damage toforests” was approved by the government in1994 and reiterated in 1996. Its implementa-tion has been restricted to only a few projectsdue to limited financial funds. The “Programmeof afforestation of unproductive non-forestlands” (government resolution 550/1994) has setobjectives in afforestation for the period 1995 -2000 and also basic long-term frames. The origi-nal aim to afforest 50 000 ha of abandoned ag-ricultural lands by 2000 will most likely be ful-filled by only about 20%.

The “Forestry Development Programme” (gov-ernment decision 566/1996) set general priori-ties and guidelines for the improvement of in-frastructure and more ecologically oriented for-est management.

The Action Plan for Implementation of NationalBiodiversity Conservation Strategy for 1998 -2010 has also had an impact on forestry. Pres-ently, however, forestry institutions subordinatedto the Ministry of Land Management are noteligible to receive direct financial support pro-vided by the government for implementation ofthis plan.

4.3.3 Legal tools

The basic laws (the Forest Act and the Act onForest Management) provide only generalguidelines, e.g. concerning categorisation andthe management of protection and special pur-pose forests. Partial acts and executive regula-tions issued by the Ministry of Land Manage-ment have thus been designed as direct toolsfor the implementation of the state forest policy.

In 1994, the system of Chartered Foresters waspromoted. Each forest estate or management

unit must have a chartered forester on staff orthe owner must pay for a forester’s part-timeservices. To obtain a chartered forester’s license,applicants are subjected to periodical trainingand examination.

The Guidelines for Forest Management Plan-ning (Regulation No. 5/1995 of the Ministry ofAgriculture) have a broad impact on forest man-agement through the management planning. Thefollowing modifications to previous guidelinesshould be mentioned:- Protective functions dominate the special and

commercial forest functions.- Flexibility and nature conforming management

are supported by the preference forshelterwood systems while clear-cutting is onlyprescribed in specific cases in new manage-ment plans.

- The age of rotation is no longer taxatively pre-scribed. It is set according to the productionand functional values of forest stands. In for-ests with a predominate wood production func-tion, the age of rotation respects the maximumvalue of growing stock.

- Four alternative methods are to be applied toquantify the volume of regeneration fellings.Inductive methods are applied in favour offixed allowable cuts.

- Special management can also be required out-side of nature conservation areas. It allows forthe protection of valuable biotypes and habi-tats of rare forest related species, for example.

Management co-operation and the associationof forest owners has been supported by the Acton Land Communities (No. 181/1995) and alsoby its executive regulation “Providing and Useof Financial Support from the State Fund forForest Improvement” (No. 126/1994). Com-pensations for expenditures for chartered for-esters, consultation, and education and trainingare provided to the management associationsand established according to the above men-tioned act.

Another set of regulations pursuant to the Acton Nature and Landscape Conservation hasbeen applied to the forest reserves and forestsinside national or nature parks.

The Slovak Republic

4.3.4 Financial incentives from the state

There are three main sources of direct financialsupport to the operational level of forest man-agement: the State Forest Improvement Fundand the State Subsidiary Fund for Agricultureand Food Production at the Ministry of LandManagement and the State Environmental Fundat the Ministry of Environment. The State For-est Fund has been the absolute dominate oneamong them, however.

Compared to the late 1980s and consideringinflation, the annual sum of direct financial in-centives to forestry decreased by approximately20% in the mid 1990s. The “subsidies” to for-estry also traditionally include expenditures onprojects for public benefit and restoration for-estry. These expenditures account for approxi-mately 40% of the total and therefore they mayinflate external views on the extent of state sup-port for forest management.

Tax policy: following the tax reform of 1993,the liabilities of forestry increased considerablyand have been reconsidered several times. Fromamong the different tax reliefs, the forests de-lineated for protective and special functions aswell as young stands are exempt from the real-estate tax. Some other indirect financial incen-tives as a result of tax reliefs have been dis-cussed.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to other policyareas

The forest policy has a relatively autonomousposition in relation to the parliamentary ap-proved State Agricultural Policy (1992) and theStrategy of the State Environmental Policy(1993), for example.

In relation to the State Agricultural Policy, com-mon interests and overlaps are found especiallyin regards to land use, which have been summa-rised in the “Programme of afforestation of un-productive non-forest lands” (approved 1993).

Concerning the State Environmental Policy, sev-eral parts cause multiple tensions between for-

estry and nature conservation. Affluence of re-strictions under the absence of a system of com-pensations or incentives to forest managementare considered to be a very hot spot.

4.5 Forest education and research

Forestry education in Slovakia has a long tradi-tion. The origin of forestry studies dates backto the establishment of the Mining Academy inBanská Štiavnica in 1770. This fact providesevidence that the study of forestry originated inSlovakia.

At present, the educational system of forestryhas the following levels:

4.5.1 Professional forestry schools

The aim of these schools is to provide educa-tion and practical training for the forest work-ers. At present, there are five such schools inSlovakia with 18 areas of study. The course ofstudy generally lasts 2 - 3 years and over 300students graduate each year.

4.5.2 Secondary forestry schools

The aim of these schools is to prepare the for-estry graduate, whose main objective is to con-trol and manage the basic organisational unitsof forest practices, for practical professions. Atpresent, there are three such schools in Slovakia,with three areas of study (Forestry, LandscapeEcology and Country Tourism). The course ofstudy lasts 4 years with final examinations. Anexternal form of study also exists. Approxi-mately 200 students graduate each year.

4.5.3 University forestry education

The new tradition of university forestry studiesdates back to 1952 when the University of For-estry and Wood Technology, with an independ-ent Faculty of Forestry, was established inZvolen.

The Slovak Republic

At present, the Forestry Faculty of the Techni-cal University in Zvolen is the foremost forestryeducational institution in Slovakia. Its mainmission is to provide a university education inthe following areas of study:- Forestry- Management and Entrepreneurial Activities in

Forestry- Forest Ecology- Game Management

The aim of the educational process at the Fac-ulty of Forestry is to provide the graduates witha broad knowledge of forestry, emphasising thespecific methods of forest establishment, silvi-culture and forest protection, harvesting, trans-port, economics, and forest management.

The full-time course of study lasts five years(10 semesters) and the part-time (external) lasts6 years. Approximately 120 forestry engineersgraduate each year. During the 45 years of theFaculty in Zvolen, 4,076 graduates wereawarded the MSc. degree in Forestry.

The following organisations of forestry scienceand research are active in Slovakia:The Forest Research Institute (FRI) in Zvolenwas founded in 1890 under the original name”The Central Forestry Research Station”. Atpresent, the institute is directly subordinated tothe Ministry of Agriculture. It is comprised of aheadquarters and 5 research stations. The re-search section of the institute is comprised of 7departments which are engaged in applied for-estry research in the following fields:- Forest Genetics and Tree Breeding- Silviculture- Forest Protection and Game Management- Forest Environment- Forest Management Planning and Monitoring- Forest Economics and Policy- Forest Techniques and Operations.

Permanent sample and monitoring plots, bio-logical stations and research objects of the FRIcan be found throughout the whole territory ofSlovakia. The institute has its own laborato-ries, library, and other necessary facilities.

The Faculty of Forestry, Technical Universityin Zvolen carries out institutional research basedon the support of grants from the GrantingAgency of the Ministry of Education. The fac-ulty research has been modified recently in con-junction with topical problems resulting fromscientific development and the reaction to thecondition and development of forest ecosystems(e.g. change of global climate, natural disasters)or the requirements of forestry practice (re-pri-vatisation, fragmentation of management units,etc.). At present, the main research topics to besolved are as follows:- sustainable forest management- management of forests under changing eco-

logical condition- biodiversity, forest genetics- forest monitoring and modelling of production- biotechnology.

The Institute of Forest Ecology of the SlovakAcademy of Science carries out institutionalresearch aimed at general and special forest ecol-ogy, particularly phytopatology, entomology,dendrobiology, ecology and silviculture.

5 The main current conflicts andchallenges

5.1 Forestry and nature conservation

- Due to low recognition of the Act on Forestsand the Act on Forest Management and StateForest Authority, manifold tensions followedthe implementation of the Act on Nature Con-servation (287/1994). These are also foundbetween the executive branches of the Minis-try of Environment and the Ministry of LandManagement.

- Compensation to forest owners for manage-ment restrictions due to nature conservation,half of the country’s forests are already in-cluded in various nature conservation catego-ries (IUCN categories I-V) declared by theMinistry of Environment. In spite of the tre-mendous increase of their area in the last 10years, there is no system of compensation toforestry for limitations and duties imposed bythe nature conservation regimes.

The Slovak Republic

- From among local conflicts, the one concern-ing forest management in the Protected Land-scape Area (Nature Park) and UNESCO MABBiosphere Reserve Poana received the mostattention in 1998. The protests of the NGO“Forest Protecting Association Wolf” wereagainst intended small sized (up to 1.5 hec-tare) strip fellings in accordance with the man-agement plans from before 1995, when newguidelines for forest management planningwere enforced. Concerning forestry, the flex-ibility and ability to implement nature conform-ing practices appear to be the core aspect ofthe conflict. Publicity of this case influencednegative opinions about the quality of forestmanagement, especially from urbanpopulations.

5.2 Protective and special purpose forests

- Forests delineated for primary fulfilment ofprotective and special functions represent14.8% and 17.5%, respectively. Their propor-tions in the total forest area have further in-creased. Under the lack of direct or indirectincentives, there is only a little or no interestin the loss of forestry operations, especially inthe protective forests. Functional deteriora-tion and even a destruction is undesirable, butis frequently the consequence of the neglectedtending of today’s protective forests whichwere formerly managed for productive pur-poses, with a changed age and tree speciesstructure.

- High air pollution still apparently contributesto the deterioration in the condition of health,especially of mountain forests. Following thegovernment resolution on the Program to Miti-gate Anthropogenic and Especially Air Pollu-tion Damage to Forests (1994, 1996), 50% ofthe fees for air pollution had to be relocatedfrom the State Environmental Fund to the StateFund for Forest Improvement. Due to legaland institutional discrepancies, however,hardly 1% of the total annual budget had beenprovided for forestry from the State Environ-mental Fund. The situation formally improvedin 1998 due to the amendments to the Act onState Environmental Fund.

5.3 Tourism and forests

Lobbying and the influence of commercial tour-ism have been causing multiple conflicts, butmainly in the competence of the Ministry ofEnvironment.

5.4 Hunting and nature conservation

- Persisting conflicts, but of decreasing inten-sity, are due to wildlife damage (by ungulatesand boars) to forest stands. The damage issubjected to regular monitoring providing rela-tively exact records on damage and additionalexpenses attributable to hunting.

- A more recent controversy is a result of thefull protection (referring to the Bonn Conven-tion) of wolf in Slovakia. The conflict is mostlybetween the Ministry of Environment and hunt-ers, but farmers are also involved, partially dueto the currently absent compensation systemfor losses caused to livestock by protectedpredators. Damages and risks associated withoverpopulation of bears in larger recreationareas have also been mentioned in the massmedia.

The Slovak Republic

Organisations related to forestry

The Ministry of Agriculture of the Slovak Republic, Forestry Section, Dobrovicova 12, SK - 812 66Bratislava.The Forest Research Institute, T. G. Masaryka 22, SK - 960 01 Zvolen.The Faculty of Forestry, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, SK - 960 53 Zvolen.Lesoprojekt, Institute of Forest Management Planning, Sokolská 2, SK - 960 52 Zvolen.

References cited in the text

Korpel, S. 1995. Die Urwälder der Westkarpaten. Gustav Fischer Verlag, 310 pp.Lazistan, E. 1997. Slovakia. Neografia Martin, 3rd Edition, 250 pp.Lesoprojekt - Institute of Forest Management Planning. (1994). Summary Forests Management

Plan 1994 for the Slovak Republik. Zvolen, 270 pp. (in Slovak)Ministry of Agriculture of the Slovak Republic, Forestry Section. 1997. Report on Forestry in the

Slovak Republic. [Green Report], Bratislava, 87 pp. + AppendicesNovotny, J. 1997. The forestry of the Slovak Republic. POLY-KONTAKT, 84 pp.Paule, L. 1995. Conservation of Norway spruce genetic resources in Slovakia. In: Turok, J., Koski,

V., Paule, L., Frison, E., (eds): Picea abies Network. Report of the first meeting, 16-18 March1995, Stará Lesná, Slovakia. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute Rome, p. 51-58.

Scheer, L. and Longauer,R. 1998. National report - Slovakia, Preparation of a multi-country for-estry programme, Phare Project 229613, Zvolen, 40 pp.

Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute. 1997. The Second National Communication on ClimateChange. Favart Press, 98 pp.

The Forest Resources of Slovakia 2000. Temperate and Boreal Forest Resource Assessment.TBRA – 2000, National Questionnaire. Forest Research Institure in Zvolen. 1997, 72 p.

Zlatník, A. 1959. Prehled lesu na Slovensku podle skupin lesních typu. [Review of the Forests inSlovakia according to the associations of forest types.] Spisy vedecké laboratore biogeocenologiea typologie lesa Lesnické fakulty VSZ Brno 3 : 1-195 (in Czech).

Zuskin, J. 1998. Nature and Landscape Protection in Slovakia. Enviromagazin, Journal of theMinistry of the environment of the SR and the Slovak Environmental Agency, Vol. III., May1998, 4-7 pp.

Useful Internet addresses

Welcome to Slovakia – Slovakia List, About Slovakia: http://www.sanet.sk/ Technical University in Zvolen, Faculty of Forestry: http://www.tuzvo.sk/ Forestry Research Institute in Zvolen: http://www.fris.sk/

The Slovak Republic

Slovenia

1 Country

1.1 Nature

The basic characteristic of Slovenia is its ex-treme diversity of flora and fauna. On a rela-tively small surface are found the Alps, theMediterranean, the Dinara Mountain massif,and the Pannonian Basin. Consequently, sinceancient times many trade routes have leadthrough Slovenia, from the Alpine countriestowards the Balkans and from Central Europetowards Italy and the Adriatic Sea.

Orographic conditions are also quite diverse.The country’s altitude varies from 2864 mabove sea level (Triglav in the Julian Alps) tozero (at the Adriatic Sea). The average is above570 m as most of Slovenia consists of moun-tain ranges of medium height. High mountainspredominate in the NW parts of Slovenia. Theplains are located in E Slovenia at the edge ofthe Pannonian Basin. They are also found inlarger tectonic basins, e.g. the Ljubljana Ba-sin, the Drava and Savinja Basin. The land-scape, uplifted, folded and thrust by mountainforming processes, has been further shaped byrivers, glaciers, and karst processes (Vidic etal. 1998). Therefore the relief varies consider-ably. The average slope is 21 degrees, and rockscover 15% of the surface forest area.

As a consequence of its diverse orography, cli-mate conditions vary as well. Slovenia can bedivided into at least three climatic regions:mediterranean in the west, temperate humidin the central part, and continental in the east.The macroclimate is strongly modified by

mountain chains. The transition from the(sub)mediterranean climate to the continentalzone is interrupted by Dinara Mountain mas-sif with its typical combination of a maritimeand continental climate type. The major partof Slovenia is characterized by a temperatehumid climate with an average annual tempera-ture of 6-9°C and by well-distributed precipi-tation (1100-1400 mm/year) over the wholeyear with a maximum in the summer and au-tumn. Influences of the semi-arid continentalclimate gradually increase in proximity to thePannonia flat. The maximum precipitation fig-ures are the highest in the Julian Alps(3500 mm/year) and the lowest at the borderwith Hungary (600 mm/year); the range of an-nual temperature extremes reaches 75°C (from-34,5 to +40,7°C). The average annual tempera-ture of Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, is 9,7°C.

Soils types are very diverse. Soil genesis is es-pecially affected by parent soil material com-position. Karstic terrain covers 44% ofSlovenian territory. The rest is covered by clas-tic sedimentary rock, and to a lesser extent(<10%) by felsic, igneous and various meta-morphic rocks. The predominant soils arecambisols and leptosols (Vidic et al. 1998).

From a phytogeographic point of view Sloveniais divided into six highly different regions: thealpine, pre-alpine, dinaric, submediterranean,pre-dinaric, and subpannonian. Zonality ofvegetation is clearly defined due to distinctiveorographic factors, different soil substratum andwell-preserved forest structure. Beech sitescover 71% of the total forest area, so beech(Fagus sylvatica) together with spruce (Picea

Slovenia

Authors:Ass. Prof. Dr. Andrej Boncina & Prof. Dr. Iztok WinklerUniversity of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty,Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources1000 LJUBLJANA, Vecna pot 83, SloveniaTel. +386 61 123 11 61, Fax: +386 61 271 169E-mails: andrej.boncina@uni-lj.si, iztok.winkler@uni-lj.si

Slovenia

abies) is the dominant forest species inSlovenia.

1.2 Society

The Republic Slovenia was established in 1991and was, prior to that time, a republic withinthe Socialist Federative Republic of Yugosla-via. It covers 20.256 km2 and has a populationof 1,9 million. The majority are Slovenes butthere are two autochthonous minorities, the Ital-ian and Hungarian, with a constitutionallygranted special status.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Definition of forest

According to Forest Act, Article 2:A forest is a plot of land, overgrown with for-est trees in the form of stands or other forestgrowths which provide any of the functions ofa forest. Forest, according to this law also in-cludes overgrown plots of land which are de-fined as forest in the spatial element of the for-est management plan. The forest infrastructurewhich is apportioned to individual plots is anintegral part of the forest. The following arenot forest within the meaning of this law: indi-vidual forest trees; groups of forest trees up toan area of 0,05 ha; non-autochthonous riverineand windbelt trees; avenues; pastures over-grown with forest trees if they are used forpasturing, irrespective of how they are describedin the land register.

2.2 Forest history

There are huge differences among the variousregions due to different historic use of the for-est, the origins of organised forest managementand the forest tradition. The Primorje region,at the Adriatic Sea, was deforested at aroundthe year 1000. In the Dinara Mountain massif,which was unsuitable for settling and agricul-tural use, vast virgin forests were preserveduntil the last century. The first regulations forforest-use were applied in the regions wheredemands for timber were the largest, within thevicinity of coal mines and larger towns.

Characteristic milestones in Slovenian forestdevelopment:- in the 15th, 16th and 17th century many for-

est regulations were issued for individualparts, of what is now Slovenia, in an attemptto prevent devastating forestry practices andto direct inhabitants to the rational use of for-ests. The oldest known forest regulation datesback into 1406 and was passed by Frederickof Ortenburg for the Kocevje region;

- 1724, the first forest management plan forforests belonging to the mining industry inIdrija;

- 1771, the Forest Ordinance for Carniola andIstria;

- 1771, the first forest management plan forthe forests of Trnovski gozd;

- 18 th and 19 th century; more intensified for-est use. With the development of industry andrailway construction (1849 Vienna -Ljubljana), timber became an interesting mar-ket product;

Table 1. Representation of the individual forest sites to total forest areaGroups of forest sites % of total forest areaMixed hornbeam-oak forests and common oak forests 8.8Flood plain forests, maple and ash forests 1.1Acidophilous and thermophilous oak forests 2.8Beech forests of hill and sub-montane belts 18.8Beech forests of montane and alti-montane belts 14.5Thermophilous beech forests 6.0Acidophilous beech forests 17.9Silver fir- beech forests 14.1Silver fir and spruce forests 6.3

Slovenia

- 1853, buying off the former servitudes, farm-ers became owners of the forest;

- 1852, the Austrian Forest Law enacted;- 1860, the first successful afforestation of bare

karst land;- 1868, the first Slovenian Forestry School in

Sneznik;- 1869, the first Slovenian forestry manual;- 1875, the first Carniola - Primorje forestry

association founded;- 1892, Leopold Hufnagel introduced an origi-

nal selective forest management method andstrongly influenced the future generations offoresters in Slovenia;

- 1931, the first one-year junior Forestry Schoolin Maribor established;

- 1949, clear-cutting prohibited as a manage-ment method;

- 1948/49, the Forestry Institute, Forestry Uni-versity and the Secondary Forestry School es-tablished;

- the period after 1945 until today, the imple-mentation of sustainable, multipurpose andclose-to-nature concepts of forest manage-ment.

2.3 Forest ownership

In 1997, forests covered an area of1.109.710 ha. In 1990, before Slovenian inde-pendence, 38% of the forests were state-ownedand the rest were privately owned by approxi-mately 250.000 owners. In 1991, the processof returning privately owned forests, seized bythe government in the agricultural reform af-ter WW II, began (“re-privatisation” or “dena-tionalisation”). So far about 75.000 ha of for-

ests have been returned thus causing a drop inthe percentage of state owned forests down to30% of the total forest area. In the case that allthe applied claims for returning forests aresolved positively there would be finally onlyabout 21% of state owned forests.

The social structure of forest owners wasstrongly influenced especially by a rapid de-cline of peasants after WW II. In the begin-ning of this century 73,3% of population werepeasants, in 1948, 48,9%, and in 1991, only7,6%. Especially during the period of intenseindustrialisation, many people moving into newindustrial centres abandoned the countryside.Employment outside the domestic farm spheredoes not necessarily mean permanently leav-ing it. Many of them kept their forest land andform a strong group of non-farmer forest own-ers. Nowadays the so-called mixed farmerhouseholds predominate in the social-economicstructure of agriculture in Slovenia. In 1990,40% of all private owners belonged to thisgroup and they owned 22% of all private for-ests. An important part of their income is de-rived from outside the farm, but they still re-tain most of the agricultural areas and forests.The size of their property seldom exceeds 5 ha.Non-farmer forest owners are not directly eco-nomically dependent on their forest as a long-term resource. They are often interested onlyin short-term benefits. In addition, the major-ity of them are not qualified, willing or techni-cally equipped for forest work.

The state-owned forests are in large complexes.On the other hand, private forests are largelydispersed which is evident through average

Table 2. The structure of privately owned forest properties in 1990

Size classes of Portion of total number Portion of totalforest properties (ha) of private forest owners (%) private forest area (%)up to 1 54.7 10.01 - 3 25.6 20.13 - 5 8.3 13.95 - 10 7.2 22.210 - 20 3.1 18.6over 20 1.1 15.2Total 100.0 100.0

Slovenia

private property size, its spatial fragmentationand in the high rate of non-farmer forest owners:- an average property is comprised of approx.

2,7 ha;- each property is comprised, on average, in

2,4 spatially dispersed allotments;- 45% of farmer owners possess approx. 60%

of whole private forests.

Fragmentation of private forest property haslasted for a century and was strongly influencedby the following factors: inheritance of prop-erties (36%), agricultural reform after the WWII (39%) and forest depletion due to infrastruc-ture building (21%).

In the 1991 process of returning state-ownedforests, which were ex-private forest proper-ties, seized by the government in the agricul-tural reform after WW II, began (“denationali-sation”). Nevertheless property structure of pri-vate-owned forests has not changed signifi-cantly. Only the number of forests owners willincrease whereas small-scale forest propertywill remain the basic characteristic of privateforests. There will be some large-size privateforest properties, but the majority of the re-turned property will be fragmented due to in-heritance factors, since the forest property inmost cases is not returned to the original own-ers but to their heirs. The share of non-farmerforest owners will increase. The average re-turned forest property is comprised of 30 ha andthe right to inherit it is claimed by three heirson average. Half of them are non-farmers and60% of them were forest owners before the proc-ess of “denationalisation”.

2.4 Land use and forest resources

2.4.1 Global overview of land use

Slovenia has the highest percentage of forestcover compared to other countries in CentralEurope. The main reasons for such a highamount of forested surface are complexorographic conditions: the prevailing part ofSlovenia is karst, which is less appropriate forsettling and agricultural use. Due to the samereason, the highest percentage of forest coveris in SW Slovenia, while the highest rate ofagricultural areas is concentrated in EasternSlovenia.

2.4.2 Forest area and distribution of theforests

In 1997, the forests of Slovenia covered 54,8%(1.109.710 ha) of the total surface. The extentof forested area has been increasing for severaldecades mainly due to overgrowth of abandonedagricultural areas and, more recently, due tothe inclusion of forest vegetation at the uppertimber line into the forest surface.

2.4.3 Tree species origin and distribution

In the data base maintained by the SlovenianForest Service (in the text following: SFS) thereare 46 different tree species in evidence. Thehighest proportion of the total growing stockgoes to Picea abies (33%) and Fagus sylvatica(31%).They are followed by: Abies alba (9,9%),Quercus robus and Q. sessiliflora (6,3%),

Table 3. Land use in 1995

Land use categories Area (ha) Percentage of total area (%)Arable land and kitchen gardens 234432 11.6Orchards 31494 1.6Vineyards 22955 1.1Meadows 34509 17.0Rough grazing 149831 7.4Reeds, fishponds and marshes 3299 0.2Forests 1097929 54.2Bare land 140593 6.9Total area 2025627 100.0

Slovenia

Pinus sylvestris (4,8%), Acer pseudoplatanus,Ulmus glabra and Fraxinus excelsior (2,9%),Carpinus betulus (2,7%) and Castanea sativa(1,5%). The proportion of other tree species islower than 1% per species. All mentioned treespecies are a component part of the naturalvegetation in Slovenia. Spruce, in fact, is anatural tree species of mountain forests, but itwas artificially introduced on other sites due toeconomic reasons. Therefore its proportion(33%) is higher than it would be if only con-sidering the indigenous species (8%). The sec-ond reason for a slightly altered natural treecomposition is a decrease in agricultural useresulting in a larger proportion of pioneer treespecies present in forest succession. In forestregeneration the natural process largely pre-vails, therefore the natural tree species compo-sition is relatively well preserved.

2.4.4 Total growing stock, volume incre-ment and total felling

In the period from WW II until today the grow-ing stock of forest has constantly increased.During this time the methods of forest inven-tories have changed which may have influencedvalues of growing stocks (table 5).

Besides the total growing stock, the d.b.h. struc-ture of forest stands is also an indicator of for-

est history and forest management until thepresent time. Trees of more than 30 cm d.b.h.represent 56% of total growing stock. Foreststands are classified into different developmen-tal phases and types. Pole stands cover 42% ofthe total forest area. The amount of timberphase and stand regeneration phase is some-what lower (together 31%). Young stands cover10% of the total area, selection forests are scarce(4%). In addition, 15% of forested area is cov-ered by pioneer forests and coppice forests.

After WW II tree felling quantity has variedgreatly. It was the highest in the first years af-ter WW II, with a 2 - 2.5 annual volume incre-ment felled per year, and it then subsequentlydeclined. After 1986 the rate of felling de-creased again due to unsettled conditions inforestry, especially in the privately-owned for-ests.

The percentage of various tree species felleddoes not change significantly through time.Coniferous trees felled as a proportion of thetotal is approximately 60%.

2.4.5 Forest threats

In the period between 1985 and 1995, sanitaryfelling comprised, on average, 26% of the to-tal. Sanitary felling is in most cases a conse-

Table 4. Change of forest area in the period between 1875 and 1997Year

1875 1947 1961 1970 1980 1990 1994 1997Forest area (in 1000 ha) 737 860 943 1008 1027 1071 1094 1110Forest covered area 36.4 42.4 46.5 49.8 51.0 52.9 54.1 54.8(% of country surface)

Table 5. Growing stock and annual volume increment of forests in the period from 1953 to 1997Growing stock (m3/ha) Annual increment (m3/ha)

Year Total Coniferous Broadleaved Total Coniferous Broadleaved1953 112 64 48 2.76 1.54 1.221980 186 101 85 4.72 2.45 2.271995 208 103 105 5.46 2.52 2.941997 209 103 106 5.52 2.53 2.99

Slovenia

quence of different influences: ice, snow andwind (29% of the total sanitary felling), dis-eases (21%), insects (19%) and other differentfactors, for instance wildlife (peeling ), mecha-nised timber exploitation, emissions, unknownreasons, etc. Among diseases, oak (Quercus sp.)and fir (Abies alba) die-back and fungi influ-ences are the most frequent. Among insects,bark beetles are the most significant.

The extent of sanitary felling is increasing. Itsproportion in total felling exceeded 40% in1996 and 1997, mainly due to abiotic factors,which caused the amount of felled timber forsanitary reasons in the last three years to reachas much as 23% of the total felling quota; abi-otic factors were the reason for more than halfof the sanitary felling. The reason for the otherhalf in these years are predominantly bark bee-tles and die-back of firs and oaks. An addi-tional reason for the sanitary felling incrementis recognised as being because of a decrease infelling and less protection and silviculturalmeasures in forests, which together has a nega-tive effect on the health condition and resist-ance ability of forest stands.

2.5 Silviculture

Slovenia has a tradition in sustainable forestmanagement, the characteristics of which are:natural forest regeneration, conservation ofnatural tree composition, direction and usageof self-regulative natural processes, relatively

high growing stock, a high proportion of largediameter trees, conservation of forest produc-tive capacity and biodiversity, and small scalesystem management, etc. Silviculture is basedon the principle of tending, specifically for for-est stands, of the forest as a ecosystem and ofthe whole landscape. Among silvicultural sys-tems the most advanced are the ideas of selec-tion and irregular shelterwood and group sys-tem. According to the principle of close-to-na-ture forest management the funds needed forsilviculture, especially forest regeneration, andforest protection are relatively low.

The forest companies carried out silviculturaland protection measures in all forests regard-less of their ownership type until the year 1990.Special funds were raised for these purposesaccording to the defined percentage of sold tim-ber. Since 1990, forest owners are directly re-sponsible for silvicultural and protection meas-ures. The state offers assistance with expertcounselling and supplies some material help.Nevertheless, the amount of silvicultural andprotection measures has reduced substantiallyand does not achieve the planned values in for-est management plans.

2.6 Forest production

2.6.1 Timber production

Nowadays, timber felling is totally mechanised.Modern chain saws and contemporary work

Table 6. The extent of annual tree felling in the period between 1971 and 1997Years (time period)

1971/75 1981/85 1986/90 1991/95 1996 1997Annual total felling (in 000 m3) 3065 3719 3272 2140 2330 2567Annual total felling (m3/ha) 3.0 3.6 3.0 2.0 2.1 2.3

Table 7. Annual realisation of silvicultural measures

Type of silvicultural Period (year) Annual planmeasures 1971/75 1976/80 1981/85 1986/90 1991/95 1996 1997 1991-2000Forest regeneration (ha) 1836 3240 4569 4716 1753 1001 980 2848Forest tending (ha) 22239 20627 22279 22569 11347 7410 10425 21637

Slovenia

technologies are used. The majority of chainsaws are the workers’ property. A low capacityutilization of chain saws and consequently theirtechnical obsolescence is typical for privateforest owners. Due to economic as well as eco-logical reasons harvesters have not been intro-duced.

Timber extraction is mainly mechanised. Therate of manual and animal skidding is low andoften only in addition to mechanised skidding.In recent years there have been practically nochanges in extraction technology.

Capacity utilization of skidding machines, es-pecially tractors, is low which makes produc-tion more expensive. The average annualamount of extracted timber by an individualskidding machine has decreased. This is theconsequence of increasingly fragmented forestproduction as well as a relatively large numberof contractors working in the forests for shorterperiods.

Transport of timber to the market is totallymechanised. Timber for domestic utilisation isusually transported with tractor trailers by theowners themselves.

2.6.2 Timber utilisation

A considerable proportion of roundwood is puton the market, whilst the smaller proportion isused by the owners for household supply or fortheir own wood manufacturing. The annual,estimated amount of domestic utilisation ofroundwood is about 550.000 m3, the preciseamount being unknown. 250.000m3 of this arelogs. The owners use small size roundwood,harvesting residues (branches of trees),roundwood originating from trees growingoutside the forest, and wood residues asfuelwood.

The assortment of sold roundwood dependsstrongly on various circumstances affectingforests, in the past few years it is mostly a con-sequence of natural calamities.

Before WW II, Slovenia exported a lot ofroundwood. Immediately after the war largeamounts of timber, from Slovenia were ex-ported, due to the fact that timber was one ofthe most important exported goods. Later theexport of forest products decreased heavily, asthe wood processing industry developed.

Exported and imported roundwood representsapproximately 10% of the timber removed. The

Table 8. Timber extraction methods

YearExtraction method 1994 1995 1996 1997Manual (%) 9 10 7 8Animal skidding (%) 3 1 2 2Tractor skidding (%) 83 84 87 84Cable logging (%) 5 5 4 6Total amount of extracted timber (%) 100 100 100 100

Table 9. Annual roundwood removals by assortment categoriesYear

Roundwood categories 1970 1980 1985 1990 1995 1997Logs (%) 64 52 60 57 57 46Pulpwood (%) 10 19 18 21 23 29Other industrial roundwood (%) 14 19 12 11 8 9Fuelwood (%) 12 10 10 11 12 16Total (%) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Slovenia

main export partners are Italy, Austria andCroatia. The main import partner is Hungary.Export is mostly constituted by sawlogs andimport by pulpwood.

2.6.3 Non-timber forest goods

Diverse forest vegetation results in various non-timber products. The most important are mush-rooms, medicinal herbs, blueberries, strawber-ries and cowberries. The collection of non tim-ber products is free. In forests where the col-lection of fruits, fungi or herbs could endangerplant species or forest function this can be lim-ited or banned. Due to a risk of extinction, 28plant species were protected in 1976. Becauseof a special regulation in 1994, the collectionof 70 fungi species is banned or temporarilyand quantitatively limited. People usually picknon-timber goods for recreation and their per-sonal needs, although sometimes also for sale.The amount of non-timber goods and their salesis not statistically observed. Only data on thecommercial sales of fresh mushrooms is avail-able.

Table 11. Annual fresh mushrooms sale in theperiod 1994-1996Year 1994 1995 1996Fresh mushrooms (t) 1248 923 505

2.6.4 Forest functions

The concept of multipurpose forest manage-ment has been established; this means that allforests are multipurpose, and only the relativeimportance of individual functions in the areais different. The forests are divided into threecategories according to the importance of thesefunctions. In protection forests no measures aretaken or only to a limited extent. Their share is5,5% of total forest area. 0,7 % of all forestsare categorised as “special purpose forests”,which are predominantly forest reserves. Themajority of forests belongs to the category ofmultipurpose forest where different forest func-tions are enhanced. The functions are evalu-ated during forest inventories. They representspecial demands or restrictions in forest man-agement.

Table 10. Import and export of roundwood in the period from 1985 - 1996

a) Export (in 1000 m3)

b) Import (in 1000 m3)

YearRoundwood categories 1985 1990 1992 1994 1996 Logs 65 120 228 110 63Pulpwood 11 56 38 3 8Other industrial roundwood 5 30 30 ... 1Fuelwood 26 64 70 102 118Total 107 270 366 215 190

YearRoundwood categories 1985 1990 1992 1994 1996Logs 70 74 38 280 264Pulpwood 427 489 199 25 16Other industrial roundwood 1 8 7 ... 1Fuelwood 2 1 6 1 10Total 500 572 250 305 291

Slovenia

A provisional evaluation of these different func-tions, shows that protective functions are em-phasised on 20,4% of the forest area, hydro-logical on 16%, natural and cultural heritage-protection on 14,2%, tourist and recreation on8,2%, hygiene on 5,2%, wild habitat-protec-tion on 4,9%, aesthetic on 4,3%, protectivefunction on 2,3%, and education and researchon 1,2% of total forest area. Together, they areevaluated on 53% of the total forest area, be-cause individual forest functions overlap.

3 Forest economics

3.1 Forestry in the national economy

Forestry represents less than 0,5% of the grossdomestic product. After 1990, its share de-creased rapidly.

A more complete review of the importance offorestry can be observed in relation to industrybased on forestry.

3.2 Employment

The number of people employed in forestry hasstrongly decreased during the last decade as aconsequence of advanced technologies, workefficiency and forest ownership changes.

The personnel structure in forestry is quitegood. Among those employed, 12% are forestengineers with a university degree and 18% areforest technicians and forest engineers with acollege education. But there are still not enoughexperts with postgraduate education.

In 1997, there were 116 forest enterprises andabout 100 independent contractors to carry outforest work. The former forest enterprises arenow organised as joint-stock companies. Theycarry out all forest work in the state owned for-ests on the basis of concessionary contracts andpartly offer their services to private forest own-ers. They also buy timber from private ownersand deal in some other activities (horticulture,wood processing etc.). The forest joint-stockcompanies showed a profit in 1997, howeverprofitability is still low.

The private forest owners execute approxi-mately 90% of total felling and skidding with-out external assistance or with the help of fam-ily members and neighbours. They sold approx.10% of total felling as standing timber to for-est joint-stock companies who also transportedmost of the roundwood. The forest owners carryout about half of all silvicultural and protec-tion measures in their forests.

Some serious problems in the involvement ofprivate owners in forest production are present,especially their low capability for forest work,

Table 12. Share of forestry in the gross domestic product (GDP) for the period 1991-1996

Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996Share of forestry in GDP (%) 0.50 0.56 0.47 0.40 0.36 0.37

Table 13. Proportion of forestry and all wood industry in GDP and total number employed in 1991

Percentage of GDP Percentage of totalnumber employed

1987 1989 1991 1991Forestry 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.6Wood processing industry 1.6 1.0 1.2 2.0Pulp and paper industry 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.3Furniture industry 1.4 1.4 0.9 1.8Together (%) 5.1 4.7 4.1 5.7

Slovenia

low productivity and low capacity utilisationof forest machines.

3.3 Economic efficiency

Economic efficiency of the state-owned forestis especially observed. The results, reached bythe forest joint-stock companies with aconcessional contract in the state owned for-ests during the last years, are shown in table 16.

In private forests the decisive factors influenc-ing economic efficiency and the methods of tim-ber production are the size of forest propertyand the extent of felling associated with it. Thecosts are mainly influenced by the machinerywork price that is greatly dependent on the ca-pacity utilisation of forest machines. Modelanalysis of the capacity utilisation of forestmachines, costs and cost effectiveness showsthat no technology can reach a profit on smallforest property, which is predominant inSlovenia, because costs are higher than saleprice of the roundwood. Profit could be reachedonly by undervaluing the forest labour costs offorest owners. The medium size forest owners(over 30 ha) achieve positive economic effectsby only using farm tractors for skidding. Onlythe largest forest properties can find a relation-ship between the combination of different tech-nologies for timber production and positiveeconomic effects.

4 Forest policy

4.1 Legislation

The Forest Act (1993) defines particular meas-ures of forest management in accordance withclose-to-nature and multipurpose forestry. Italso strongly emphasises the public interestaspect in forests with a universal understand-ing of forest sustainability and all its ecologi-cal, social and production functions irrespec-tive of ownership.

With a gradual transition into the marketeconomy, forest policy concentrates on the pro-tection of public interest. Therefore laws andregulations concerning timber production aredecreased to a minimum level, and only thosenecessary, which relate to public utilisation re-maining.

In compliance with the Forest Act, sub-regula-tions are issued to regulate individual forestactivities and forest management in detail.

To enhance the public utilisation of forests theAct requires high quality professional work tobe performed by the Slovenian Forest Serviceand clearly defines the obligations and rightsof all forest owners. It also determines princi-ples for steady financing to ensure the imple-mentation of factors relating to the public useof forests.

Table 14. Employment in forestry for the period 1970 - 1996Year

1970 1980 1985 1990 1992 1996Number of employed in forestry 8534 7664 7548 6541 3727 3007Index 100 90 88 77 44 36

Table 15. Economic efficiency indicators of forest companies in 1997

Economic efficiency indicators Ratio Index 1997/96Total economy ( income/expenses ) 1.015 102Return on investment (ROI) (clear profit/capital) 0.014 -Share of labour costs ( labour costs/expenses ) 0.351 105Financial independence (funds /capital) 1.195 99Debt ratio 0.138 196

Slovenia

The interests of the public are shown throughthe following legislative regulations:- free access- and movement- possibility in all

forests,- free gathering of forest fruits, plants, fungi

and apiculture,- hunting and gathering of free-living animals

in all forests under the conditions of the act,- prevention of use which would endanger for-

est sustainability and its functions,- reduction of harmful influences and other ad-

verse impacts on forests,- forest depletion is banned,- some of the forests are proclaimed as protec-

tive forests and special purpose forests,- forest owners are obligated to provide protec-

tion and silvicultural measures as defined bythe act, including obligatory afforestation af-ter fire, and restoration of damaged forests,

- clear-cutting is prohibited,- public forest service is budget financed,- activities in order to implement factors in pub-

lic utilisation in privately owned forests arepartly budgeted

- conditions for forest workers are defined,- forest management planning, wildlife man-

agement planning, and silvicultural planningare obligatory regardless of ownership,

- maximum allowable cut according to forestproductive capacity is defined,

- forest roads planning and construction is de-fined in accordance with public interest.

4.2 Obligations and prohibitions

The forest owner has to take care of his forestin the best possible way so that its fertility andstand growth do not deteriorate. The forest workmust take place during an appropriate seasonof the year and in a way which causes mini-mum possible damage to the forest ecosystemand ensures forest protection and safety forpeople. Forest work is carried out in accord-ance with forest management and silviculturalplans. Based on these plans, the Forest Service(SFS) issues decrees that had previously beenagreed upon with the forest owners. The de-crees specify the following :- the necessary silvicultural measures for for-

est regeneration and the tending of seedling

stage (young growth),- the necessary protection measures,- directions and deadlines for the realisation

and repetition of individual silvicultural orprotection measures,

- the quantity and structure of allowable cut,- guidelines and conditions for timber felling

and skidding,- guidelines and conditions for the harvesting

of decoration trees and resin.

It is necessary to obtain permission from theSFS for any construction of any facility, forestdepletion and other interventions into the for-est area. Clear-cutting as a forest managementsystem is in principle prohibited and limited toa few specified cases. The use of chemicals inforests is prohibited and only exceptionallypermitted in restricted cases. The forest owneris obliged to take every possible precaution toprotect the forest against fire, diseases and in-sects or other damages. Loggers fire is prohib-ited, except in specially designed fire-places.

It is necessary to preserve the habitats of allautochthonous plant and animal species in com-pliance with forest management plans. Theamount of autochthonous populations of freeliving animals must be in accordance with theforest vegetation and must not endanger otherparts of forest ecosystem or prevent the reali-sation of the forest management goals.

Forest work may be carried out by the forestowners and forest companies or qualified con-tractors. Harvesting, skidding and transport oftimber assortments must be carried out in a waywhich protects the environment and does notdamage the forest ground vegetation cover ortrees to a larger extent than strictly necessary.All ground damage should be restored imme-diately after the harvesting or transport is com-pleted.

Stubs and logs of spruce, pine and elm must bedebarked immediately after felling regardlessof the felling site - inside and outside the for-est. The timber assortments of spruce, pine andelm which are not attacked by bark beetles areallowed to be skidded, transported and storedfor mechanical debarking. They can be proc-

Slovenia

essed with the bark, but all the roundwoodresidues must be treated properly in due time.

The forest owner may, under defined conditionsand in accordance with the silvicultural plan,collect seeds, resin, litter, decorative trees andother non-timber goods in his forest. Transportand sale of decorative trees is allowed if theyare issued with a seal by the SFS. The huntingof forest animals, and gathering of fruits, fungiand plants may be limited or prohibited in for-ests where these activities might endanger for-est functions. The species, quantity, method,location and time limitation, or prohibitiondecree, is issued by the Ministry responsiblefor forestry.

Forest roads and other forest infrastructure areto be planned, constructed and maintained in away that considers technical, economic andecological conditions in order to protect theforest grounds, plants and animals in the bestpossible way. The interests of mountain farmsas well as tourist and recreational needs shouldbe respected, especially mountain farm tour-ism development. Forest roads are open to pub-lic use.

The forest owner is in principle independentin dealings with his forest. Changes in theConstitution of the Republic of Slovenia in 1997eliminated the clause that a foreigner may notbe the owner of forests and agricultural areas.When a forest is to be sold, the neighbouring

owner has the preferential right to buy it. Thestate or the local community has the preferen-tial right when protection forests or forests withspecial purposes are to be sold.

The aforementioned regulations have two ob-jectives:- to bring protection forests and special pur-

pose forests into public property,- to decrease forest property fragmentation.

Forests that are a component part of farms areinherited according to special regulations.Farms comprising of at least 5 ha and not morethan 100 ha of comparable land area are pro-tected and may be inherited only by one heirwho has to pay off all the other heirs in fiveyears time. 1 ha of comparable land area, 1 haof fields or gardens, 2 ha of meadows or 8 haof forest is included. There are relatively fewprotected farms, therefore the measures for pre-venting property fragmentation have not provedas efficient. The key problem with inheritingagricultural areas and forests is how to enablethe heir who intends to keep the farm to payoff other heirs in due time, while at the sametime not exceedingly intervene in his forest.This problem could be solved by offering 5 or10 year long-term loans with a low interest ratewhich the heir could pay out of current revenue.

Table 16. Income, costs and net income of state owned forests in the years 1994 - 1996

* the expenses for ensuring the forest social functions** the expenses for sanitary measures in damaged forests, forest roads and forest roads maintenance costs

1994 1995 1996ECU/m3 % ECU/m3 % ECU/m3 %

Sales price of roundwood 40.04 100 44.72 100 38.24 100Felling and skidding costs 23.15 52 29.32 66 30.74 80Costs of silvicultural and protection measures 6.40 16 6.28 14 4.82 13Other costs * 1.07 3 1.17 3 0.02 -Yield product (concession payments) 9.42 24 7.95 18 2.66 7Concessionaire obligations-toward forests ** 2.96 7 4.37 10 2.50 7-other obligations 1.79 5 1.37 3 0.39 1Net income of state owned forests 4.67 12 2.21 5 0.23 -1

Slovenia

4.3 The forest policy measures

4.3.1 Forestry organisation

During the period of the socialist economy allforests were managed by the forest managementcompanies, divided into 14 regions. The sys-tem of so-called common management in allforests, enabled uniform forest managementand forest development planning, expert workand the collecting and directing of money forforest investments. Private owners were organ-ised in a special way within this common for-est management and they had preferentialrights to work in their forests. However, theirtimber had to be sold exclusively through for-est management companies. All this caused theowners to feel that their ownership was in titleonly, as their ability to make decisions in for-est management was limited. As the realisa-tion of the allowable cut defined in the forestmanagement plans was obligatory, they werestrongly limited in the dynamics of felling.

With the changed position of private owner-ship and implementation of the marketeconomy private owners are becoming the ac-tual managers of their forests. They are onlylimited by the maximum level of forest exploita-tion (allowable cut) and the obligation to re-spect the regulations concerning forest work.They also have to carry out all the silviculturaland protective measures in their forests. Theypersonally sell their timber assortments.

The public forest service (SFS) is responsiblefor forest preservation and its development. Itis divided into 14 forest regional units irrespec-tive of forest ownership. The units are dividedinto forest offices and forest districts .

The tasks of SFS are the following:- directing forest management,- monitoring the forests and their development,- constructing the forest protection plan and

ensuring that all protective operations are ac-complished,

- constructing the forest management andsilvicultural plans, as well as wildlife man-agement plans,

- directing and monitoring sanitary measuresin torrent regions,

- co-operating in land planning,- preparing expert analyses for skidding tracks

and forest roads,- planning the maintenance of forest roads,- advising and instructing private owners,- popularisation of forestry and increasing pub-

lic awareness of the forests’ importance.

The forest operations in state-owned forestsincluding timber sale are carried out by forestenterprises that may also offer expert serviceto private owners, if needed. The forest enter-prises perform the following tasks:- silvicultural and protective operations,- timber harvesting,- maintenance of forest roads,- timber sale,- timber transport,- skidding tracks and forest roads construction,- forest nursing.

Due to the small-scale of private forest prop-erty there are no typical private forest compa-nies belonging to one forest owner (smallhousehold enterprises). Such companies oflarger private owners are in the establishmentphase, but so far larger-scale forest owners al-low the forest enterprises or contractors to im-plement forest management. No privatelyowned forest household has employed its ownforest expert so far.

There is a long tradition of private forest own-ers organisations which have, however, neverdeveloped to larger extent. Nowadays two formsof organisations are most common: forest co-operatives and groups of forest owners co-op-erating in mechanised forest operations. Pri-vate owners are usually members of the forestco-operatives to assure easier timber sale, andrarely to co-operate in forest management. Thestate, in principle, supports forest co-operativesbut has so far not been able to enforce anystimulating measures to encourage forest own-ers to establish more co-operatives. The stateis more open to supporting the mutual help offorest owners in groups co-operating in mecha-nised forest operations, where the owners ex-

Slovenia

change machinery services, since this work isnot taxed.

4.3.2 Forest management planning

The national forest management policy is speci-fied by the Forest Development Programme andwas passed by the State Parliament in 1996.The programme specifies the tasks for forestpreservation and development and the condi-tions for their multipurpose use. It includes alsothe preservation and management programmeof wildlife.

The forests management plans define actualconditions for co-ordinated forest use and in-terventions, the necessary extent of silviculturaland protection measures, the allowable cut andthe conditions for wildlife management. Threesorts of forest plans exist:- the regional forest management plans (for 14

regional forest units),- the forestry unit management plans (for 254

forestry units),- forest silvicultural plans.

The forest management plans are designed ascommon plans for all forests irrespective oftheir ownership. They are based on the follow-ing elements: actual forest structure, analysesof former forest management, determined char-acteristics of forest development and the knowl-edge obtained by monitoring forest develop-ment. The forest management plans are workedout by the SFS and verified by the Minister,responsible for forestry. Regional forest man-agement plans consider the guidelines of theForest Development Programme for Slovenia.The forestry units management plans considerguidelines of the regional forest managementplan.

The regional forest management plans define:- forest functions and their evaluation,- forest management goals,- directions and measures for achieving the de-

fined goals,- directions for preservation of autochthonous

wildlife populations and the relationship be-

tween wildlife and their environment whichpresents the basis for the regional huntingplan,

- the areas of protection forests and special pur-pose forests are defined as well as the sani-tary measures and guidelines for damagedforests.

The forestry units management plans define:- the forest management goals,- intensity of forest management,- guidelines for goal achievement,- measures and methods for their implementa-

tion in different planning units (e.g. foresttypes etc) of forest area.

The forest silvicultural plans are for the pur-pose of implementation of the forestry unitmanagement plan on the stand. They define:- forest silvicultural goals, the silvicultural

guidelines and measures,- extent, intensity and urgency of silvicultural

and protection measures,- areas where individual tree marking for fell-

ing is not obligatory,- time and spatial felling plan (restrictions),- methods and conditions for timber harvesting,- guidelines to preserve and improve ecologi-

cal and social forest functions.

4.4 Financial support in forestry

The state directs private forest management alsoby economic measures, among which the mostimport are the following:A) free forest counselling,B) direct (budget) financing of some forest ac-

tivities,C) forest investment subsidies for private for-

ests.

Ad A) Private owners assured for free counsel-ling organised by the SFS.

Ad B) The Forest Act (1993) defines that thestate funds cover in total the following:- all protective measures and material regard-

ing bark beetles and other possible factors offorest disturbances,

Slovenia

- all measures regarding fire prevention in for-ests vulnerable to fire,

- all measures in the protection forests and tor-rent forest regions.

Ad C) The state funds, formed for financingand co-financing of privately owned forestswork, have been low and are at present in real-ity decreasing. The benefits available for pri-vate owners are diverse and can be divided intofour groups:- the right to full or partial funding of

silvicultural and protective measures,- the rights to partial funding of conversions of

degraded forests, sanitary measures in dam-aged forests and forest road construction,

- the right to tax concession and in some casescomplete tax exemption,

- the right to compensation for lower timberyield in the special purpose forests.

The subsidies can be realised in nature (e.g.tree plants) or in money. In privately ownedforests the following measures are partly budg-eted:- silvicultural and protective measures,- special measures to improve or maintain wild-

life habitats,- restoration of forests if the party responsible

for damage is unknown,- reforestation of forests after fires, and resto-

ration of forests damaged by natural distur-bances,

- maintenance of forest roads,- second stand thinning, conversion,- forest road construction,- production of seed in nurseries and forest nurs-

ery investments.

The basis for the budget-funding are forestsilvicultural plans, other executive plans andan annual plan of forest investments designed

by the SFS. Partial budget-funding (subsidies)depends on the following criteria:- type of measures: forest regeneration (30-

50%), cleaning (20-40%), tending of seedlingand sampling stage (30-50 %), first thinning(40-60%) etc,

- the emphasis on social and ecological forestfunctions,

- the forest property size (the right is entitledonly to the owner of the property up to 100 haof economy forests),

- social and economic status of the forest own-ers (in the demographically endangered ar-eas the owners are entitled to 30% higherpartial budget-funding).

The state covers approximately one third of theforest road maintenance costs - the basic fundsfor road maintenance are provided by the own-ers through a unified payment (tax) of 6.9% ofcadastral income. In private forests the thin-ning of pole stages, conversions, forest roadconstruction and forest nursery investments arepartially funded on the basis of public tender.So far no public tender has taken place.

The forest owner is entitled to compensation ifhis beneficial interest has been limited due tothe fact that his forest was classified as a pro-tection forest or special purpose forest. He canalso request that the state or the local commu-nity that categorised the forest buys it off. Ifthe private owner has to carry out special workdue to a specially emphasised social forest func-tion and the forest is not categorised as a spe-cial purpose forest he can reach an agreementwith the state or the local community in whichcompensation for the work and compensationfor degraded timber forest production is de-fined. About 60% of private owners are notacquainted with this right.

Table 17. Budget funds for forests in the period 1992 - 1997 (in ECU/ha of forest)Year

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997Silvicultural and protection measures 1.65 1.65 1.77 2.07 2.45 3.32Forest road maintenance 1.05 0.89 0.84 0.93 1.36 1.40Total 2.70 2.54 2.61 3.00 3.81 4.72

Slovenia

4.5 Forest education and research work

Forest workers are educated in two or threeyear-long vocational training programmes inPostojna. The same school educates foreststechnicians in a four-year secondary school.

The Department of Forestry and RenewableForest Resources of the Biotechnical Faculty,within the University of Ljubljana exercises twoeducational programmes: a four-year under-graduate study course of forestry and a threeyear higher professional study course of for-estry and management of renewable forest re-sources. The three year college course is a re-cent innovation and has substituted a formertwo year one. Both studies are based on theprinciple of close-to-nature forest management.The studies offer an integration of ecological,technical and economic knowledge. The studyof forestry is gradually widening into a holisticstudy of the whole forest landscape, thereforenew branches besides classic forest disciplinesare being lectured. Graduates are often em-ployed in the field of natural heritage protec-tion, wildlife management, urban forestry etc.Post graduate education includes regular post-graduate forestry studies. The same departmentalso carries out the interdisciplinary programmeof post graduate natural heritage studies. Thestudy is combined with practical work in a widerange of outdoor projects. There also exists anetwork of studying objects for systematic re-search and education of close-to-nature forestmanagement and nature itself. There is also anidea of having a school forest unit.

The Department of Forestry and RenewableForest Resources has regular contacts to manyfaculties abroad, and with some of them(Seattle, Washington, Zvolen, Vienna) havealso formally signed agreements of co-opera-tion.

Research activities in the forestry field are car-ried out by the faculty and the Slovenian For-estry Institute. Basic research is funded directlyby the Ministry for Science and Technology,application and development research projectsare funded by the Ministry for Science and

Technology and the Ministry for Agriculture,Forestry and Food and a certain number, al-though rare, are financed by the forest enter-prises. The research programmes includesilvicultural research of forest nature, the for-est as an object of protection and managementand the forest as part of the living environment.The university students participate in the re-search work as well.

5 Current conflicts and challengesin forestry in Slovenia

The transformed social and economic circum-stances after 1990 reveal the following charac-teristics:- the division of public and commercial activi-

ties in forestry,- public interest in forest sustainability and all

its functions is ensured by the SFS,- the transformation of forest enterprises into -

joint-stock forest companies that carry outcommercial activities,

- new subjects in the commercial sphere of for-estry,

- private forest owners are officially independ-ent and decide independently about forest pro-duction and timber sale in co-ordination withforest management plans and the public for-ests service guidelines.

The Fund of Agriculture Land and Forests ad-ministers the state owned forests, and work inthem is carried out by the forest companies onthe basis of concessional contracts. The financ-ing system of forest reproduction has beentransformed; each owner is responsible for for-est reproduction, and the state only gives as-sistance with subventions and tax exemptionsand concessions.

Successive natural calamities have stronglyinfluenced the economic benefit in forests.Problems in the wood industry, and especiallythe pulp industry have strongly influenced theconditions in forest management. Timber sale- specially of lower quality timber - is moredifficult .

Slovenia

5.1 Changes in the relative importance ofdifferent forest functions

The forest legislation (4.1) and practices haveestablished three groups of forest functions -ecological, social and production. Due to al-tered social and societal conditions the demandsfor forest products and the dependence on for-ests have changed. Ecological and social for-est functions have become more important inthe last decades. The importance of timber pro-duction remains significant because of a largeforest area and lack of other renewable and un-renewable natural sources, and ensures an im-portant development perspective that proves tobe especially successful in high quality timberproduction.

5.2 Changes in silvicultural practices

In the last fifty years the close-to nature forestmanagement system has been established . Animportant contribution has been made byphytocoenology research and forest sites map-ping, the establishment of selection and irregu-lar shelterwood silvicultural system and theestablishment of silvicultural planning (scale1:5000) that takes into account the sites andstand conditions in detail and the actual forestowners interests.

In the last decades the proportion of pioneerforests with spruce conversion has decreased.The present proportion is null while in the pastdecades the annual range was about one thou-sand hectares. The same proportion is seen forartificial forest regeneration with spruce. Thereasons lie in the different method ofsilvicultural work-funding and a changed con-cept of forest silviculture.

Among negative trends it is worthwhile men-tioning a decrease in the extent of felling andrange of tending and regeneration measures.The proportion of protective measures in-creases, the latter being the consequence of anincrease in red and roe deer population, ahigher portion of spruce stands and the lowerextent of felling and other silvicultural meas-ures.

The described changes show the realisation ofsome forestry policy guidelines specified in theForest Development Programme and these areto increase the growing stock, to change theforest structure towards a more natural one, tocarry out measures of medium intensity, and toadvance natural regeneration etc., while at thesame time some guidelines are not being pur-sued: to produce high quality and large diam-eter timber, and intensive tending during youngdevelopment phases etc.

Slovenia

Organisations related to forestry

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food, 1000 Ljubljana, Dunajska 58, SLOFund of Agriculture Land and Forests of Republic Slovenia,1000 Ljubljana, Dunajska 58, SLOSlovenian Forest Service, 1000 Ljubljana, Vecna pot 2, SLOSlovenian Forestry Institute, 1000 Ljubljana, Vecna pot 2, SLOBiotechnical Faculty, Department of Forestry and Renewable Forests Resources, 1000 Ljubljana,

Vecna pot 83, SLOSecondary School of Forestry and Wood Processing, 6230 Postojna, Trzaska 36, SLOGeneral Forestry Association, 1000 Ljubljana, Miklosiceva 38, SLOCooperative Association of Slovenia, 1000 Ljubljana, Miklosiceva 4, SLOAssociation of Slovenian Forestry Societies, 1000 Ljubljana, Vecna pot 2, SLO

References

Boncina, A. and Mikulic, V. (1998). Special features of the structure of forests, silviculture,planning and management along the gradient of altitude. - Mountain forests. Conferenceproceedings (Diaci, J. ed.). University of Ljubljana, Department of Forestry, p.29-52.

Mlinsek, D. (1988). Historische Meilensteine der forstlichen Ausbildung in Slowenien. AFZ, 8,p.166-167

Pogacnik, J. (1992). Funkcije gozdov in gozdovi v prostoru obmocnih gozdnogospodarskih nacrtih.GozdV 5-6, p.294-303.

Porocilo Zavoda za gozdove Slovenije o gozdovih za leto. (1997). Forest Service of Slovenia,Ljubljana.

Robic, D. (1988). Die Waldvegetation in Slowenien. AFZ, 8, p.163.Sinko, M., (1994). Forest and Forest Products Country Profile: Slovenia. - UNECE/FAO, New

York/Geneva.The Forest Development Programme of Slovenia. - Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food,

Ljubljana. (1996).Vidic, N., Vrscaj, B., Lobnik, F., Prus, T. and Zupan, M. (1998). Genesis of Slovenian Soils.

Montpellier, World Congress of Soil Science.Winkler, I. (1992). Gozdno zadruznistvo.(The system of forest co-operative societies). Gozdarski

vestnik 50,2, p.137-145.Winkler, I. (1992). Legal aspects of forest production in Slovenia.- Forstgesetzgebung.

Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge 11. Zürich, s.361-373.Winkler, I. (1993). Why not simply denationalise the forests.- Slovenian Business Report 1,5,

p.36-38.Winkler, I. (1994). Gesetzliche und oekonomische Massnahmen fuer die Entwicklung der

Privatwaelder in Slowenien.- Thechische Orstpolitik in der veraenderten gesselschaftsoekonomischen Bedingugen.- Samellschrift der Referate. Brno, Lesnicka fakulta, p.27.-34.

Winkler, I. (1997). Stanje in moznosti prihodnje organiziranosti gospodarjenja z gozdovi vSloveniji (Situation and the Possibilities of the Future Organization of Forest Management inSlovenia). - Gozdarski vestnik 55, 9, p.409-414.

Winkler, I. and Krajcic, D. (1997). The Attitude of the State to Small Scale Private Forest Prop-erty.- Sustainable Management of Small Scale Forestry.- Kyoto. Graduate school of Agricul-ture, p.103.-110.

Winkler., I. and Krajcic, D. (1998). Zagotavljanje gozdne reprodukcije (Safeguarding forest re-production).- Gozdarski vestnik 56, 1p.

Winkler., I. and Marence, J. (1997). Gospodarnost gospodarjenja z gozdovi v novih druzbenih ingospodarskih razmerah (Efficiency of Forestry under the new Social and Economic Condi-

Slovenia

tions).- Gozdarski vestnik 56,1.Winkler, I. and Medved, M. (1995). Changes in the Forest Ownership Structure Due to Dena-

tionalization and the Impact on Forest Management.- Private Forestry- Changes and Chal-lenges for Countries in Transition.- Mitteilungen der forstlichen Versuchs- undForschungsanstalt Baden Wuerttemberg, Freiburg 1995, Heft 186, p.55-73.

Slovenia

Spain

1 The Country

1.1 Physical Geography

SituationSpain and Portugal share the Iberian Penin-sula, which is connected to the continent by a400 km-wide isthmus that, being made up prin-cipally by the mountain range of the Pyrenees,constitutes, moreover, an importunate geo-graphic barrier counting, as it does, with manypeaks which exceed 3,000 metres in height. Thepeninsula is separated from Africa by the Medi-terranean Sea and the Ocean Atlantic whichmeet in the Strait of Gibraltar, where the dis-tance between the continents is only 14 km.

Spanish territory is completed by the archipela-gos of the Balearic Islands, in the Mediterra-nean, and the Canary Islands, off the Atlanticcoast of the Sahara desert. Ceuta and Melilla,two city enclaves in Morocco are also part ofSpanish territory

This geographical situation between two seas(the Atlantic and the Mediterranean) and themarkedly continental nature of the climate re-sulting from the coastal mountain ranges arethe main reasons why Spain is a country of veryvaried natural landscapes and of strong con-trasts between these (TERAN et al., 1978).

Geographic unitsSpanish territory can be divided into the fol-lowing large geographic units:An extensive Central Meseta or plateau, slightlyinclined towards the Atlantic Ocean, dividedinto two parts by an important mountain range

(Central System). To the north of this range isthe Meseta of the Duero, that takes in thegreater part of the basin of the river Duero andreaches average altitudes of between 700 and1000 m. To the south is the Meseta of Castile -La Mancha and Extremadura, that includesgrand part of the basins of the Tagus (Tajo)and Guadiana rivers, with average altitudes of500 to 700 m.

A mountainous ring surrounds the CentralMeseta to the north (Montes of Galicia,Cantabrian Mountains and part of the IberianMountains), to the east (Iberian Mountains) andto the south (Sierra Morena). With no impor-tant mountain systems to the west, the Mesetaslowly drops into Portugal.

Peripheral mountain ranges, resulting from Al-pine folding, to the north (the above mentionedPyrenees) and to the south (Baetic andPenibaetic ranges, the latter with the highestpeaks: the Sierra Nevada reaches over 3.400 m).

Two roughly triangular depressions outwith theCentral Meseta. In the north-east the valley ofthe river Ebro, bounded by the Pyrenees, theIberian Mountains and separated from theMediterranean by the Catalan Coastal Range.In the south-west the valley of the riverGuadalquivir, bounded by the Sierra Morenaand by the Baetic and Penibaetic Mountains,but open to the Atlantic Ocean.

A series of more or less discontinuous coastalplains. Given the proximity of the mountainranges to the sea these plains are generally nar-row and not very extensive.

Spain

Authors:Madrigal, A.; Fernandez-Cavada, J.L.; Ortuño, S.F.E.T.S. Ingenieros de Montes-Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.Ciudad Universitaria. 28040 Madrid.Tel. 34-913367086, Fax. 34-915439557E-mails: amadrigal&montes.upm.es, sortuno&montes.upm.es

Spain

The two above-mentioned archipelagos, the Bal-earic Islands in the Mediterranean and relatedto the peninsular mountain ranges; and the Ca-nary Islands in the Atlantic, of volcanic originand with the highest peak in Spain (Pico deTeide, 3.718 m).

This continuous alternation of high mountainranges, mesetas and lower mountain ranges,also explains the variety and the contrasts ofthe Spanish landscape (TERAN et al., 1978).

ReliefThe great geographic units make up a very var-ied relief, but the principal characteristic of thisrelief is its high average altitude of 660 m. Thisis twice the European average and is only sur-passed by Switzerland. However, this high av-erage altitude is not due to the importance ofthe mountain systems but rather to the exten-sive area of the Central Meseta.

The classification of Spanish territory by alti-tude gives the following results:- 11% of the area is between 0 and 200m high- 32%, between 200 and 600 m- 39%, between 600 and 1,000 m- 18%, over 1,000 m

Lithology and soils.In terms of lithology, a siliceous Spain, a cal-careous Spain and a clay Spain can be distin-guished.

The siliceous Spain is found principally in thewestern half of the Peninsula, the Central andPenibaetic Ranges, the Sierra Morena and partof the Pyrenees. The soils are mainly formedover granites and slates, and abundant vegeta-tion grows over these (especially in the northand centre of the peninsula).

The calcareous Spain is centred on a fringerunning parallel to the Pyrenees (includingpart of these same mountains) that continuesto the centre of the Cantabrian Mountains.From there it changes direction, and headssouth-east through the Iberian Mountains outinto the Mediterranean to include the BalearicIslands. It occupies a large part of the south-east of the peninsular and continues towards

the west with the Baetic and part of thePenibaetic ranges. The soils are formed oververy varied material with, in general, ratherpoor, sparse vegetation (except in the north).

The clay Spain occupies most of the CentralMeseta and of the valleys of the Ebro and theGuadalquivir. These soils are made up of terti-ary and quaternary materials, generally with ahigh pH, and are severely altered by intensiveand extensive agricultural use over many cen-turies.

The make up of the Canary Islands constitutesan oddity, being comprised of different volcanicmaterials.

The diversity of soils is notable and contributesto the bio-geographic diversity. On the otherhand, part of the erosion which exists in greateror lesser degree in a large part of the territory(see point 4.3) is one of the more unfavourablecharacteristics that conditions the application offorestry and emphasises the need for forestation.

ClimateThe geographic situation and relief explain theclimatic diversity of Spain. The Iberian Penin-sula and the Balearic Islands are affected bythe Atlantic and polar masses of air and cen-tres of action, by the Mediterranean depres-sions, and, to a lesser extent, by the continen-tal air masses of Central Europe (cold) and theSahara (very hot and dry). The climate of theCanary Islands is regulated by the moist tradewinds and dry Saharan winds (TERAN et al.,1978).

In all cases the relief, and especially the align-ment of most of the mountain systems (east-west), is an element of contrast and modifica-tion of the climate.With the exception of the north and almost allthe north-west, Spain has a Mediterranean cli-mate characterised by dry summers and abruptchanges. The elevated mountains representtransitions from Mediterranean to Atlantic cli-mates. The two Mesetas, the Ebro Valley andthe mountain ranges in the interior have amarkedly continental climate.

Spain

The Lautensach-Meyer classification of precipi-tation and rainfall deficit is considered ad-equate. This establishes, through Thornwaite’sconcept of potential evapotranspiration, a defi-nition of aridity. Thus, (TERAN et al., 1978)define:- A humid Iberia, characterised by no months

with rainfall deficit, that comprises the northof the peninsula and almost all the north-west (Galicia). This is the non-Mediterra-nean or Atlantic Spain.

- A semi-humid Iberia, with one to four monthswith deficit, but a positive annual balance.This includes almost all of the mountain sys-tems in the rest of the peninsula.

- A semiarid Iberia, with four to six monthswith rainfall deficit, and without annual sur-plus. Large areas of the Central Meseta, thevalleys of the Ebro and Guadalquivir, theMediterranean littoral and Balearic Islandsare included within this zone.

- An extremely semiarid Iberia situated in theextreme south-east of the peninsula with sevento eleven months of deficit.

This panoramic view of the Spanish climate isrounded of with reference to the Canary Islands,whose climate presents the following charac-teristics. Relatively moderate rainfall in thenorth of the mountainous isles, with deficitscompensated for by the condensation of the at-mospheric humidity (in which process the veg-etation plays an important role); acute aridityin the south of the isles, and in those closest tothe African continent, with zones of transition.

In the Köppen climate classification, the ma-jority of Spain is included into the climate typeC (temperate) with two subclimates, one hu-mid temperate (C

f) in the north and northwest,

and another one temperate with dry summerseason (C

s) in the rest of the Peninsula. Smaller

presence of dry climate (B) in the SE corner ofSpain, as well as cold climate (D) in the upperlevels of the main mountain ranges (Pyrenees,Central, Sierra Nevada) may be also found.

VegetationClimate, lithology, soils, relief and geographicsituation, together with human activity duringthousands of years have configured Spanish

flora and the vegetation, rich in species (morethan of 5.500) many of which are endemic. Ac-cording to BOLOS (1978) three floristic regionsare found in the Iberian Peninsula: Boreal-Al-pine, Euro-Siberian and Mediterranean. TheCanary Islands are included in the Macaronesicregion of Atlantic archipelagos.

The Boreal-Alpine region of Spain is situatedexclusively in the highest altitudes of the Pyr-enees. It is characterised by not very extensiveforests of Pinus uncinata and Abies alba, andby other more extensive ones where these spe-cies appear mixed with Pinus sylvestris andFagus sylvatica. These latter also form purestands. Above these forest stands there aremeadows of Festuca sp. (calcareous soils) andof Nardus stricta (siliceous soils).

The Euro-Siberian region of Spain constitutesthe north (Cantabrian range, western Pyrenees)and the north-west (Galicia). It is an ideal re-gion for oaks (Quercus robur and Quercuspetrea) whose natural extension has been pro-foundly altered principally by agricultural andgrazing. The more highly degraded areas havebeen reafforested with Pinus pinaster, Pinusradiata, Eucaliptus sp. and Castanea sativa.There is also abundant heaths (Erica sp) thatrepresent the highest degradation, together withgorse (Ulex sp).

The beech woods (Fagus sylvatica) are wellrepresented, especially towards the east. Theirnatural area has generally been little alteredand is currently undergoing a certain expan-sion (abandoned grazing land, episodes of colo-nisation under the cover of conifers).The Atlantic - Mediterranean transition sectorlocated in the high mountains of the interior(Central System, Iberian Mountains) could beincluded in this region with an interesting pres-ence of Fagus sylvatica (Iberian Mountains) andvery important formations of Pinus sylvestris.In the western zone of the Central System Pinuspinaster and Castanea sativa, appear togetherwith species of Quercus.

The Mediterranean region makes up the restof the Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Is-lands, with more than 80% of Spanish terri-

Spain

tory. This is the most varied region with thehighest number of species (floristic wealth) andof associations (phito-sociologic richness)(BOLOS, 1978).

The Evergreen oak (Quercus ilex) character-ises the major part of this region’s territory, al-though its natural extension has been pro-foundly altered by substitution by crops andscrub. The most highly degraded zones havebeen reforested with the Mediterranean pinesfound in the zone (Pinus nigra, P. pinaster, P.halepensis, P. pinea). Other zones present verysparse arboreal formations, typical of the Span-ish forest landscape, the dehesas or openpasturelands.

In the continental climate zones of the easternpart of the peninsula with basic soils there is apredominance of natural coniferous formationsof (Pinus sylvestris, nigra and pinaster), ofwhich the junipers (Juniperus thurifera) standout for their originality at a European level. Inthe lowlands near the Mediterranean see Pinushalepensis predominates.

The Cork Oak (Quercus suber) predominatesthe siliceous soils of the Southwest of the regionand forests of Pinus nigra, Pinus halepensis andPinus pinaster appear in the Mediterraneanmountains. This latter species also has an im-portant presence in the continental dune of theDuero Meseta.

Mediterranean scrub (macchia) dominatesthe most arid zones the different formationsand presence of Pinus halepensis. The onlyEuropean palm: the Mediterranean Fan Palm(Chamaerops humilis) appears in the aridcoastal zone, and in the very arid extreme south-east there is a conifer from the north of Africa,Tetraclinis articulata.

The Macaronesic region, in the Canary isles,forests of Pinus canariensis characterise thehigher zones together with the presence of relicformations (from the Terciaria era), whereasthe temperate moist forests (laurisilva) occupythe areas of higher humidity. In the lower zonesthere is a range of Mediterranean transition andarid sub-tropical formations (Euphorbias sp).

1.2 Human Geography

The organisation of Spanish territory is theState of the Autonomies, an almost federal,asymmetric structure, established by the 1978Spanish Constitution, that re-established thedemocratic system, together with the funda-mental principals of the Spanish juridical or-ganisation.

The seventeen Autonomous Communities, (ta-ble 1 includes data about population and area),were not implanted by force, as in a federal statealthough they have, in fact, developed all overSpain. These organisms have assumed respon-sibility for forests and their exploitation since1986.

Spain has a population of 39.669.394 (1996)and an area of 505.960 km2, with a density of78,4 inhabitants/km2. The population is mainlyconcentrated in the coastal zones, where thedensity reaches 200 inhabitants/km2, while theregions of the interior are sparsely populatedwith a density of 25 habitantes/km2 (Castileand Leon –27-, Castile - La Mancha –22-,Extremadura –26-, Aragon –25-).

The number of municipalities in the year 1991was 8.097, a drop of around 1,000 in the last 40years. Moreover, 851 of these have fewer than100 habitants, and are thus faced with a diffi-cult future.

These figures (sparse population in the inte-rior, reduction of municipalities and the lowpopulation of many of these) are indicators ofrural depopulation, that has had and still exertsa negative effect on forest development in Spain.

In the field of the Spanish economy, the GrossDomestic Product (GDP), based on figures for1996, was 463 billion ECU (El País 1998). In1995 the per capita income was 15,586 dollars(the average figure in the European Union inthe same year was 19,918 dollars, in otherwords, the Spanish average is 78.25% of theEU average.).

The economic weight of the different sectorsof the Spanish economy is as follows (1996):

Spain

- Agriculture*: 3.7%- Industry: 24.8%- Construction: 8.2%- Services: 62.9%*reaches over 10% in Extremadura, Castile and

Leon and Castile - La Mancha.

The relatively low weight of agrarian produc-tion within the Spanish economy as a whole isclear. The forest sector represents less than 5%of this agrarian production, so its economic di-rect importance is minimum.

The active population in Spain is 16,200,000persons (1998), which represents an index ofactivity of 50%, one of the lowest in the Euro-pean Union together with Italy. Moreover, theunemployment rate is 11% (1998), used to beone of the highest in the EU but has reducedsignificantly in the past years. The distributionof the active population by sectors is as fol-lows:- Agriculture: 8,1%- Industry: 20,4%- Construction: 9,8%- Services: 61,8%

One of the pillars of the Spanish economy istourism, with more than 60 million tourists inthe year 1997, who assured a net inflow of 18billion ECU (1996) to the Balance of payments.This flow more than balanced the chronic defi-cit in the Commercial Balance of approximately13 billion ECU (1996).

Another important element for the Spanisheconomy has been the net transference of fi-nancial resources since the country’s entranceinto the European Union. These funds havebeen principally for the agrarian sector and in-frastructure and have totalled 6,4 billion ECU(1996); Spain being the principal receiver ofEU-funds with 33.2% of the total.

1.3 The forest sector

The following are the responsibilities of the cen-tral state in forest policy matters:- International relations and representation in

the EU- Airborne fire-fighting- Forest inventories- National Parks (with shared management re-

sponsibilities)- Large-scale subventions and investments (hy-

drology, re-afforestation, etc.)- Taxation- Forest and nature protection frame law.

In Spain a National Forest Policy has not beendefined yet, but negotiations on a Forest Strategyhave intensified recently (MMA, 1999). Instead,the policies of various Autonomous Communi-ties have been translated into law on a regionalbasis: Forest Law of Catalonia (1988), Navarre(1990), Andalucía (1992), Valencia (1993), etc.

The basic standing legislation is limited to twoprincipal laws:- Forest Law (Ley de Montes) (1957).- Frame Law of Conservation of Natural Areas

and Wildlife (Ley de Conservación deEspacios Naturales y de la Flora y Faunasilvestres) (1989).

In addition, most of the Autonomous Commu-nities have established their principal directiveson forestry, in the denominates Forest Plans(Planes Forestales)1.

The competent bodies in forest matters dependon different organisms according to each Au-tonomous Community.

The data corresponding to the Spanish forestareas distributed by Autonomous Communitiesappears in the table below (table 1).

In addition to this, it must be remembered thatthere are 3,278,961 ha of forest land with a

1 Plan Forestal de Andaluciá (1990); Plan Forestal de Galacia (1992); Pla General de Política ForestaledeCatalunya (1994), between others.

Spain

tree density of between 5 and 20%, known assparse woodland (arbolado ralo). These areas,as well as their importance for the area theyoccupy, include a pastoral system of special im-portance, namely the dehesas, or openpasturelands, and which, as such, are not in-cluded within of the wooded forest area men-tioned above, although they are included withinthe total forest area.

The distribution of the wooded forest area is3,713,900 ha of broad-leaved, 5.436.600 ha ofconifers and 1.475.300 ha of mixed conifersand broad-leaved.

The dominants forest species in Spain are thefollowing:- Quercus ilex: 1,965,500 ha as a pure stands

and mixed with other species (560,000 ha withQuercus suber).

- Pinus halepensis: 1,459,800 ha, principallyas a pure stands.

- Pinus sylvestris: 1,449,000 ha, in pure andmixed stands.

- Pinus pinaster: 1,494,800 ha, of which771,000 ha are in the north of Spain.

- Fagus sylvatica: 568,400 ha, in pure and mixedstands.

- Pinus nigra: 565,600 ha, in pure and mixedstands.

- Pinus pinea: 374,900 ha, in pure and mixedstands.

A very important element to bear in mind isthe area included in the Protected Natural Ar-eas, made up of 3,040,581 ha 1995, which rep-resents 6% of the territory, and where impor-tant areas of forests are protected.Spain began an intense programme of reforesta-tion in 1940. The total area forested up to 1986can be estimated in 3.7 million ha (MADRIGAL,1998) and up to now of at least 4 million ha.

The percentages of forested area, by species,appear in table 2 (MADRIGAL, 1998).

These figures illustrate a generalised use ofpines (80%) which can be explained by the pio-neering character of these species that makesthem very adequate for soil-defence reforesta-tion and a majority of slow-growing species(67%), and a predominance of autochthonousspecies (83%) for the same reasons.

Autonomous Wooded Forest Area Total Forest Area Total Area PopulationCommunity (density>20%)Andalusia 1,544,517 4,325,378 8,759,968 7,080,002Aragón 975,395 2,478,761 4,772,026 1,180,989Asturias 325,700 667,252 1,060,357 1,079,218Balearic Islands 122,475 203,902 499,168 744,153Canary Islands 91,572 485,981 744,695 1,545,532Cantabria 165,543 323,275 532,139 525,288Castile – La Mancha 1,165,769 3,473,536 7,946,185 1,654,138Castile and Leon 1,615,790 4,516,386 9,422,402 2,490,203Catalonia 1,310,506 1,855,944 3,211,325 6,093,492Extremadura 810,070 2,278,588 4,163,457 1,046,492Galicia 1,045,376 1,968,310 2,957,509 2,715,337Madrid 163,582 392,968 802,792 5,055,278Murcia 102,330 505,781 1,131,397 1,076,635Navarre 343,902 529,163 1,039,072 524,386Basque Country 350,252 469,354 723,481 2,065,670La Rioja 128,916 294,403 504,526 263,188Valencia 363,994 1,215,078 2,325,508 3,920,615TOTAL 10,625,698 25,984,062 50,596,014 39,188,194

Table 1. Area (forest and totals) and Population in Spain.

Spain

Areas of reforestation with fast-growing spe-cies, with the aim of producing wood, are esti-mated in accordance with the II National For-est Inventory as follows:- Pinus pinaster in the North of Spain: 285.000

ha.- Eucalyptus: 380.000 ha, together with

345.000 ha mixed with Pinus pinaster in thenorth of Spain.

- Pinus radiata: 174.000 ha.- Populus: 100.000 ha.- Total forest plantations: 1.284.000 ha (10%

of the total of forests)

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Typology of the natural resources

The conditioning factors of physical environ-ment examined in point 1.1 and the long his-tory of human pressure on forest resources haveled to the current situation that allows the es-tablishing of the following schematic typology:

Forests of natural originIn the Euro-Siberian region of the north ofSpain oak forests are rare and beech forests areimportant. There are also extensive stands ofpine forests with Pinus sylvestris and Pinuspinaster in the Atlantic - Mediterranean tran-sition zones.

All these forests can be considered as goodwood producers (especially wood for sawmills)

with production of fuel wood in disuse andanother complementary use for extensive graz-ing, which is a source of conflicts. The role ofsoil protection and hydrologic regulation be-comes more important the further south it is.The social demand for conservation (inclusionin Protected Natural Spaces) and recreation isgrowing.

The Mediterranean region, in which the pro-tective role must be considered as a priority,present a varied range of forests whose pro-duction is low, and where the social demand ofconservation and recreation is also growing.Pinus nigra forests are acceptable producers ofwood, Pinus pinaster moderate, but Pinushalepensis forests must be considered weakproducers.

In the Mediterranean region there is other, non-wood production such as the stands of Pinuspinaster on the Meseta of the Duero (produc-tion of resin), those of Pinus pinea (productionof fruit) and the cork oaks of Quercus suber inthe south-west (cork production).

In the Boreal-Alpine region situated in the Pyr-enees the scarce fir forests and the more exten-sive mixed stands and pine forests of Pinussylvestris and P. uncinata are preferentially pro-tectors to which their low production of woodand recreation must be subordinated..

In the Canary Islands (Macaronesic region, 1.1)there are forests of Pinus canariensis (protec-tors and producers) and temperate rain forests(laurisilva) (strictly protected).

Forests from reforestationIn general the plantations of Pinus pinaster(north), Pinus radiata and mixtures; ofEucaliptus sp (north and south) and of Populussp (zones near rivers) are preferentially pro-ducers of wood (for sawing and pulp) and manyof them are in their second and third rotations.They are all highly productive.

The rest of the stands resulting from afforesta-tion, except some localised Atlantic - Mediter-ranean transition zones, are preferentially pro-

Species % AreaPinus sylvestris 15,9Pinus halepensis 15,2Pinus pinaster (north of Spain) 7,1Pinus pinaster (rest of Spain) 14,1Pinus nigra 11,0Eucalyptus sp 9,5Pinus pinea 7,4Pinus radiata 4,4Populus sp. 2,5Other species and mixtures 12,9

Table 2. Forested area by species.

Spain

tective stands. In any case, they are far frommaturity or the age for turns, and the only woodproducts proceed from thinnings. Thinningshave been very much delayed or still has to bedone in many of these forests.

Sparsely wooded areasThese are natural forests with a low density(5% to 50% density or cover) that, in general,constitute one of the characteristics of Medi-terranean Spain (1.3). Formed by species suchas Quercus ilex and Quercus suber and otherQuercus, generally mixed, their principal useis for fuel wood and extensive grazing, someproduction of cork, and even extensive agri-cultural crops. These are the habitat of selectfauna, with species in danger of extinction(birds of prey and carrion eaters, Iberian lynx)and the abandonment of grazing has convertedthem into important hunting zones.

ScrubThe major part of the 12 million ha of non for-est land, mainly covered by scrubs is found inthe Mediterranean region. The variety of for-mations of scrub is very high, from fairly sta-ble scrubs that represent the highest possiblegrade of complexity (climactic formations),through all the stages of degradation of scrub.These latter formations are unstable (high firerisk), provide very limited soil protection andvery low direct profitability, only being apt forextensive grazing or hunting, or for some veryspecific use (aromatic plants, honey production).

2.2 Wood: stock and consumption

The evolution of wood resources in Spain be-tween 1975 and 1995 can be illustrated withthe data extracted from the two national forestinventories and seen in table 3.

The annual wood fellings in Spain is around14-15 million m3 c.c., which represents ap-proximately 50% of growth, so that by no meansforestry is a threat for the sustainability ofSpain’s forests, although there is no guaranteeof measures to prevent the excessive ageing orother external threats.

Wood consumption in Spain is approximately25 million m3 (1992), which represents 0,6 m3/person and year (the European Union averageis 1,0) and the consumption of paper is 109kg/person and year (the European Union aver-age is 158). The average Spanish values are aresult of lower per capita income. The distri-bution of wood consumption is as follows:

Total round wood consumption: 18,000,000 m3,distributed between:- Paper: 5,750,000 m3

- Boards: 4,050,000 m3

- Mining: 600,000 m3

- Sawmills: 6,650,000 m3

- Other: 950,000 m3

Used paper: 2,100,000 tons, equivalent to7,000,000 m3 of uncut logs.

The production of timber is 14,500,000 m3, andthe recovery of used paper is 1,550,000 tons,which is equivalent to 5.150,000 m3 of round

Tree number (106) Standing volume c.c. Increment (103 m3) (103 m3)

Diameter > 20 cm < 20 cm Total1º IFN 1,143.3 6,587.0 7,730.0 456.7 31.342º IFN 4,666.4 7,686.5 12,352.9 594.2 30.09 (*)2 – 1º IFN 3,523.1 1,099.5 4,622.9 137.5 -1.25% growth 308.15 16.69 59.80 30.10 -3.98

Table 3. Growing stock and increment during the period 1975-1995.

(*) The maturing of many replanted stands from the 1940s-50s produced a drop in growth.Source: 1º y 2º Inventarios Forestales Nacionales.

Spain

wood, that is, a total 19,650,000 m3. That im-plies a production deficit of roundwood that risesto 5,350,000 m3 in Spain. If the trade of woodproducts during the different steps of produc-tions is included, the deficit is approximatelydouble.

In fact, the most important proportions of for-est products imports into Spain are high-qual-ity wood for sawmills and used paper (almost700,000 t in 1996).

However, in addition to the wood deficit, an-other added problem is the low added value ofthe products generated, given that Spain pro-duces a large quantity of pulpwood and asmaller amount and of low quality forsawnwood. This is the opposite of the situationin other countries of the European Union.

2.3 Silviculture

150 years ago Spanish foresters began to learnthe forestry that was being taught in the Ger-man schools and started to apply it to Spanishforests. In general the results of this long prac-tice are positive, especially in achieving natu-ral regeneration in the Euro-Siberian andBoreal-Alpine beech forests, and in the pineforests of the Atlantic - Mediterranean transi-tion zones. There are, however, some problemsdue to excessive grazing pressure.In many Mediterranean zones, taking the pre-caution of opening the canopy avoids damageto the regeneration process as a result to pro-longed droughts and late frosts. This is the caseof the Pinus pinaster forests in the Meseta ofthe Duero, and of other pine forests in themountains of the interior and the south.

As general rule, clear cutting is applied in thePinus pinaster and Pinus radiata plantationsin the north of Spain, followed by reforestationthrough plantation. This system is also used inthe plantations of Populus sp, also with artifi-cial regeneration and in Eucalyptus sp usingits ability for coppice.

The different modes of shelterwood systems areapplied in the majority of forests, both in Euro-

Siberian and Boreal-Alpine (beech and pineforests) and in transition and Mediterraneanpine forests. When there are no problems withlivestock and precautions are taken againstdroughts and frost damage, natural regenera-tion is achieved in a reasonably short time.

There is little tradition of using the selectionsystem (fir in the Pyrenees) or poor applica-tion of this system, where, in some cases, itbecomes an unsilvicultural technique (the ex-ploitation only the best trees and without tak-ing into consideration the future developmentof the stand).

Thinning is beginning to be used increasinglyin forests coming from natural regeneration inpublic forests as well as in private Pinus radiataplantation. Little has been done in the rest ofthe forests resulting from afforestation, especiallyin slow-growing species. Low thinnings and se-lective thinnings are carried out in the best standsof beech and Pinus sylvestris forests.

Silviculture is applied within the Forest Man-agement Plans with sustained yield in almostall state-owned and municipally-owned forestsbut very little in private forests. However, re-cently a preoccupation has been observed on thepart of the forest administration to incentive thestructuring of private forests (Catalonia).

The relatively high productivity of the planta-tions in the north of Spain leads private own-ers to reforest their forests after clear cutting,although the small scale of ownership impedesthe implementing of management plans. Someforest administrations (the Basque Country andGalicia among others) support the grouping ofprivate landowners to limit the inconvenienceof forest smallholdings.

The continued utilisation of the dehesas (openoak forests as grazing land) leads to an absenceof regeneration of the tree cover, as a result ofgrazing pressure. The problem could be solvedby limiting their grazing, but this would sup-pose an important loss of income for the pri-vate landowners. This solution is not applied,and justifies the diagnosis by Quezel (1977)

Spain

which considers these formations to be fossilforests.

The enormous extension of degraded scrubraises the necessity for reforestation. More than5 million ha could be afforested to increase theprotection of soils at risk from erosion and regu-late the hydrologic regime, and around 0.5 mil-lion ha would be susceptible to afforestationwith fast-growing, high-production species (es-pecially in Northwest Spain).

Forest fires (see 4.2) constitute the critical fac-tor of continued application of silviculture. Fireprevention work is a costly tool that needs tobe intensified.

The most usual rotations are:Slow growing species:- 100-150 years for Fagus sylvatica- 100-125 years for Pinus sylvestris and Pinus

nigra- 80-100 years for Pinus halepensis and Pinus

pinaster (except in Northwest Spain)- 80 years for Pinus pinea

Medium- and fast-growing species:- 25-30 years for Castanea sativa in coppice- 30-40 years for Pinus pinaster (north of Spain)- 25-35 years for Pinus radiata- 10-20 years for Populus sp- 10-12(15) years for Eucalyptus sp- Cork 8-15 years (between the age 50-200)

2.4 Forest Production

The most important forest production in Spain,corresponding to 1995, according to the fig-ures of the Agrarian Statistical Yearbook(Anuario of Estadística Agraria) (1997) are asfollows:- Wood: 15.6 million m3. Of this production

61% is produced in the coastal regions of thenorth of Spain and 7.7% in the province ofHuelva (south-west Spain), principally euca-lyptus. Most of the wood (74,3%) is producedon private land. The distribution of wood pro-duction (1995) by species is:

- Conifers: 9,787,000 m3. Of which, 30.8% Pinusradiata, and 45.5% Pinus pinaster.

- Broadleaf: 5,785,000 m3. Of this, 77% waseucalyptus, and 13,1% poplar.

Thus 81.2% of the wood produced in Spaincomes from fast growing species, which, nev-ertheless, only occupy 12% of the wooded for-est area. In a country with the climatic charac-teristics of Spain, fast growing species have animportant role to play, the following aspects ofwhich need to be recognised:a) Environment: avoiding imports from coun-

tries where forest resources are under threat.b) Employment: creating numerous jobs in the

sector, that would not exist with other spe-cies.

c) Industry: allows the existence of industriesthat need raw material that could not be sup-plied from other sources and ensures a forestcluster which meets the needs of moderneconomies of scale.

It is important to highlight that the average in-crement of the Spanish forests is 2 m3/ha peryear, far below of the average for the EU coun-tries.

Other forest production- Fuel wood: 4,833,000 steres/year, currently

this production has recovered from minimumvalues reached at the beginning of the 1980swith 1.5 million steres. 79.6% of the produc-tion of fuel wood is obtained from privateproperties.

- Cork: 70,000-80,000 tons average productionbetween 1975-95. In earlier years productionwas somewhat above 100,000 tons.

- Resin: 1,000-2,000 tons/year, production sta-ble since 1991, year in which the productionsubsidies disappeared. Up to the mid-1970sthe production surpassed 40,000 tons/year.The possibility of re-starting help for the sec-tor is currently being studied. This measureimplies an increase in production and exploi-tation of the Pinus pinaster forests in Castileand Leon, the principal resin producing region.

- Chestnuts: 10,000-20,000 tons/year. Produc-tion is concentrated in the north-west of Spain.

Spain

- Pine nuts: 4,000-6,000 tons/year. The produc-tion is localised in three regions: Castile andLeon, Andalusia and Catalonia.

- Fungi: 25,000 tons/year. This is currentlygrowing and is of high economic value formany forested districts, principally in Anda-lusia, Catalonia, Castile and Leon and Galicia.

- Pastures and meadows: These support a live-stock load of 455,000 tons live weight a year,clearly inferior to that of 20-30 years ago dueto the process of intensification in livestock.

- Hunting: There are 1,400,000 hunters inSpain, whose catch is 17.5 million pieces witha weight of 15,500 tons/year. This economicactivity has become very important in recentyears, and constitutes the principal use of for-ests in many zones (Castile - la Mancha,Extremadura and Andalusia).

- Fishing: There are 850,000 anglers who cap-ture more than of 30 million units/year andobtain 6,000 tons of fish. Similar to hunting.Fishing is also on the increase.

- Environment and leisure: This is without doubtthe “forest” production with the highest pros-pect for growth and economic development,through of rural tourism, and the parallel eco-nomic activities that can derive from it. Therural development programmes, principallythose within the LEADER programme, are aclear example of this, and the links betweenthe forest sector, environment and rural devel-opment.

3 Forest economics and forest policies

3.1 Forest Economy

The major part of forest property in Spain is inprivate hands as can be seen from the structureof ownership (table 4).

The number of forest landholders in Spain, al-though not known exactly, is approximately 2million. This is a very high number, owing tothe smallholding structure of the sector.

The share of the forest sector to the GDP is, ap-proximately 2%, considering the whole of the pri-mary and industrial sector. The economic valueof primary forest production in 1995 was (mil-lion ECU):Timber 621Firewood 56Cork 58Acorns 11Chestnuts 7Pine nuts 1Truffles 4Fungi 50Grazing 412Hunting * 171Fishing (inland) * 27* Only the economic value of the pieces cap-tured is considered, which constitute thesmaller part of the total that these sectors out-put.

Type of ownership Forest area Total forest and other Average areaforest land area

State and regional 665,191 1,088,581 501forestsCommunal forests 2,759.811 5,382,734 619Contractual Forests (* ) 479,966 903,476 501Private Forests 6,549,206 18,041,328 2.6Other ownership 171,521 467,935Total 10,625,898 25,884,250

Table 4. Classification of the forest area in Spain according to ownership.

(*) Private or communal afforestations with management contract with the Forest Service for the length ofthe first rotation.Source: Anuario de Esta dística Agraria (1997) and 2º Inventario Forestal Nacional.

Spain

The data corresponding to the foreign trade inforest products expressed in volume and valueare as in tables 5 and 6.

between 15,000-23,000. The turnover of thisindustry is approximately 180 million ECU.

- Board and plywood industry: 470 companiesand 12.500 employees, with a turnover, onlyin boards, of 180 million ECU.

- Cork Industry: 320 companies with 5,000 em-ployees, as well as 6,000 other jobs generatedindirectly. Turnover 60 million ECU.

- Resin Industry: currently in decline, there are15 centres, although not all working, and 200workers, as well as the 2,000 resin-tapers whostill exist, although many no longer work inthe forests. The current economic value is verylow.

- Pulp Industry: 12 companies (of which 8 alsomanufacture paper), for which reason the em-ployment is reflected jointly with the paper-making industry. The turnover is 300 millionECU.

- Hunting Industry: this cannot be properly con-sidered an industry, but its growth has led toa proliferation of the “industrialisation”. Itgenerates 45,000 jobs and has a turnover of375 million ECU.

Secondary industries- Carpentry Industries: These have a turnover

of 360 million ECU, and it is necessary todistinguish between two types of industry:

- Craft industries: 25,000 companies and50,000 workers.

- Industrial companies: 2,500 companies and65,000 employees.

- Furniture industry: turnover 2960 millionECU. There are two distinct categories withinthis heading:

- Craft industries: 8,000 companies and 18,000workers.

- Industrial companies: 3,050 companies and65,000 employees.

- Paper-making industry: 200 companies and20,000 workers (including the production ofpulp). Turnover 1390 million ECU. 91% ofthe production is concentrated in the BasqueCountry, Catalonia and Valencia.

- Packaging and toy industries: Turnover 300million ECU.

- Barrel-making industry: Turnover 6 millionECU.

Product Exports ImportsWood andmanufactured products 430 950Cork 142 44Wood pulp 249 266Paper 1.203 2.117Furniture 1.286 601Source: Departamento de Aduanas e ImpuestosEspeciales.

The principal stakeholders of the forest sectorare, as well as the different public services andmunicipalities, the approximately 2 million pri-vate landowners, who represent the major partof forest production. The degree of participa-tion of the landowners in associations is verylow, despite being a smallholding sector. How-ever, the level of participation in associationshas grown notably during recent years. Themost representative organisation of the privateforest landowners is the COSE, that groupstogether the regional forest owners associations.

3.2 Industry and employment.

In first place it is necessary to highlight thestatistical difficulty with reference to the in-dustrial forest sector, so that the data are of ap-proximate nature (AITIM and VIGNOTE etal, 1996-97).

ForestryApproximately 30.000 jobs, 10% related withcork.

Industries of primary transformation- Sawmills: predominance of family-run saw-

mills, there are between 2,700 and 3,300 com-panies, of which only some 350-400 can beconsidered industries (with more than of 5employees). The total number of workers is

Table 5. Foreign trade (million ECU, year 1997):

Spain

Table 6. Foreign trade of wood and cork based products (thousands of tons, 1987-1996)

Year 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992Product EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORTPulp 673 494 664 323 619 404 595 410 565 386Paper & cardboard 973 2377 918 2381 823 2377 734 2075 624 2046Roundwood 124 1462 336 1659 202 1089 40 964 51 1544Sawnwood 31 1136 31 1114 36 936 37 940 34 1184Firewood 61 52 45 50 30 65 12 102 9 98Veneer and chipboard 469 530 406 378 407 355 490 333 286 368Palets 74 60 49 49 39 41 26 34 21 37Joinery & manufacturies 74 77 70 76 49 61 36 62 37 78Cork 54 15 57 17 52 11 53 11 46 11Furniture 153 47 124 37 101 35 63 72 60 57

Year 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987Product EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORT EXPORT IMPORTPulp 6224 410 523 384 551 323 547 422 512 429Paper & cardboard 566 1723 526 1422 472 1137 438 927 461 743Roundwood 8 1673 10 1614 98 2657 131 1395 32 657Sawnwood 57 1110 64 1184 79 1985 116 994 127 858Firewood 8 67 15 41 7 50 3 47 - -Veneer and chipboard 266 334 242 252 164 297 158 226 181 149Palets 24 24 31 12 52 12 29 4 15 7Joinery & manufacturies 37 69 47 59 49 52 45 37 42 51Cork 48 11 38 11 47 8 44 7 43 4Furniture 54 46 56 42 69 31 62 23 62 21

Source: Estadísticas de Comercio Exterior. Departamento de Aduanas.

Spain

Total amount of labour of the forest sector:330.000.

In addition to the employment generated by theindustrial sector, which represents the highestvolume, the workers directly involved in pri-mary production, extraction of wood and otherproducts (except hunting) have to be taken intoaccount. These represent between 40,000 and50,000 jobs.

4 Forest and forest related policies

4.1 Legislation and forest administration

The frame legislation currently in force is the1957 Ley de Montes (Forest Law) of the year,which has been waiting for updating since theestablishment of the Constitution (1978). Thislaw is inadequate for the actual federal organi-sation of Spain. In the absence of an effectiveframe law the different regions have approvedtheir own legislation outwith a common frame-work as can be observed in the following table.

Table 7 shows the degree of legislative develop-ment of the different autonomous communities.

The forest services are since the beginning ofthe 80’s ruled by the regions. Substantial dif-ferences in organisation between the regionscan be increasingly be observed (rank, depart-ment, budget). In general a common problemof the Spanish forest administration is the lackof qualified personnel and budget.

4.2 Research and teaching

Forest research in Spain is carried out funda-mentally by the Centre for Forest Research(Centro de Investigation Forestal; CIFOR) ofthe National Institute of Agrarian Research(INIA). There are also other centres; some re-cently created as is the case of those in Catalo-nia (CTFC and CREAF), the Basque Country,Castile - La Mancha, Valencia (CEAM) or Cas-tile and Leon (Valonsadero); and other alreadyestablished centres such as those in Galicia

(Lourizán), Andalusia or Madrid. Lastly thereare different the University departments whichalso carry out research into forests.

The teaching of forestry can be grouped on threelevels:- Forest ranger: qualification corresponding to

vocational technical training, that permits ac-cess to the corps of Forest Agents.

- Diploma in Forestry: 3-year university stud-ies taught in the universities of Madrid,Albacete, Vigo (Pontevedra), Santiago (Lugo),Leon (Ponferrada), Valladolid (Palencia),Lleida, Valencia (Gandía), Huelva and Soria.

- Degree in Forest Engineering: 5 year univer-sity studies taught in the universities of Ma-drid, Cordoba, Lleida, Santiago (Lugo) andValladolid (Palencia), as well as the privateUniversity of Ávila. There are projects to en-large BSc studies to MSc in Huelva, Albaceteand Valencia.

Table 7. Legislation on forest and nature con-servation in the different Autonomous Com-munities.

Forest ProtectedLaw Areas Law

Andalusia 1992 1989Aragón 1998Asturias 1991Balearic Islands 1991Canary Islands 1994CantabriaCastile - la ManchaCastile-León 1991Catalonia 1988 1985Extremadura 1998GaliciaMadrid 1995 1995Murcia 1992Navarre 1990 1996The Basque Country 1986I 1994La Rioja 1995Valencia 1993 1994I(Normas Forales Forestales of the Provincial Gov-ernment of Álava)

Spain

4.3 EU policies and the Spanish forest sector

The influence of the different community poli-cies on the Spanish forest sector has alwaysbeen indirect, due to the absence of a commu-nity forest policy. Basically the most importantmeasures have been:

a) Indirect policies:- Protection and promotion of the cork sector

(included in Annex II of the Treaty of Rome, 1957).- LIFE Programme: 30 million ECU in the year

1997.- Other programmes, such as the network for

control of atmospheric pollution in forests , etc.

b) Measures accompanying the reform of theCAP, which came into force in 1993:

- Reforestation of agricultural lands: 120 mil-lion ECU a year, with a reforested area of70,000 ha/year.

- Agro-environmental programme: indirect ef-fects on the forest sector. Important in rela-tion with the conservation of natural re-sources.

c) Common Environmental Policy: 5th Pro-gramme of Common Action (1995-99): its ef-fects on the forest sector are very limited.

d) Rural Development Policy: fundamentallycarried out through the LEADER pro-grammes, its effects are also tangential.

Spain’s natural resources constitute a recog-nised ecological heritage within the EuropeanUnion (first country in Nature 2000 protectedarea of the EU) thanks to their wide bio-diver-sity and to their relatively good state of conser-vation; However, the weight of the forest andenvironmental sector in the Spanish economyis very low. Thus it is difficult for the sameforest sector to conserve these resources, giventhe low profitability of the woodlands in Spain,and consequently the necessary finance mustcome from outwith the countryside, either fromSpanish society as a whole or from Europe.

5 Main current conflicts andchallenges

5.1 Lack of forest policy

The territorial division of Spain into regionsand the responsibilities these have taken to-gether with the residual responsibilities main-tained by the central state make it extraordi-narily complicated to design and implement acountry-wide forest policy that has to synthe-sise and include 17 autonomous policies.The Spanish Parliament still has to promul-gate the basic forest law that is forseen in theConstitution, although various regions havedone so. This fact will present difficulties ofco-ordination on a legal framework, a keytheme of any forest policy.

On the other hand there is no clear orientationfor the forest managers and stakeholders. Thepublic (central and autonomous) powers try toplacate that sector of public opinion which issensitive to environmental themes (and in cer-tain aspects disorientated by the ENGO) andlittle more. This favours non-intervention, andthe consequences are becoming brusquely evi-dent (forest fires) or in the longer term (ageingof the forest stands, absence of regeneration,diseases and plagues, etc.).

The statistics related to forests, with the ex-ception of the National Forest Inventories andfigures related to fires, are difficult to com-pile and delayed. The channels between theState Administration and the AutonomousCommunities for the transmission of informa-tion about the latter’s forest activities are non-existent or disorientated.

In many Autonomous Communities the admin-istration’s technical staff is small, little motivatedor is dedicated exclusively to nature conserva-tion tasks or CAP-afforestation grants and bu-reaucracy.

This rather negative panorama, (although signsof positive changes are being detected) leads tothe conclusion that the principal problem of

Spain

the Spanish forest sector is none other than thelack of a forest policy.

5.2 Forest fires

There is no doubt that forest fires constitutethe other important problem that affects theforest sector in Spain, and the Mediterraneancountries in general. The statistics for fires inSpain are as in table 8, given as average valuesfor the period.

During recent years the north-west of Spain(Galicia, Asturias, and the provinces of Zamoraand Leon) concentrates 57% of the forest fires,although only 2% of the forest area affected,most being zones of extensive grazing areas.

Causes of forest fires during 1994:- Negligence: 15,5%- Lightning: 4,3%- Other causes: 2,1%- Provoked: 54,8%- Unknown: 23,4%As can be seen, the action of man, directly orindirectly, is the major cause of fires.

The historic reasons that explain the abundant firesin Spain (Vélez, R., 1991) are:- Inadequate use of fire in the rural environment

(stubble burning, proliferation of grazingland, etc.)

- Abandonment of the forests- Grazing pressure: competition and promotion

of pastures- Restrictions of the traditional uses of the forest- Forest plantations- Pressure of urbanisation- Criminal (revenge)

5.3 Soil erosion

The erosion of the soil in Spain is a problemthat comes down from far in the past. In fact,at the beginning of the 20th century Hydro-logic Forest Divisions were set up to fightagainst this problem. Nowadays, the respon-sibility for this is shared between the centraland regional services.

The intensity of erosion in Spain can be per-ceived in the data referring to the area affectedaccording to the Hydrologic Forest RestorationPlan of 1991:- Extreme erosion (>200 Tm/ha per year):

1,112,000 ha (2.2% of the land area of Spain).- Very high erosion (100-200 Tm/ha per year):

2,561,000 ha (5.1%).- High erosion (50-100 Tm/ha per year):

5,488,000 ha (10.9%).- Medium erosion (12-50 Tm/ha per year):

12,923,000 ha (25.6%).- Low erosion (5-12 Tm/ha per year):

17,309,000 ha (34.2%).- Very low erosion (<5 Tm /ha per year):

11,151,000 ha (22%).

The cost of reconstructing the plant cover inSpain to reduce erosion to acceptable values,according to the above mentioned plan of res-toration, would suppose between 120-180 mil-lion ECU per year, a time span of 20 to 40 yearsand action on 2-4 million ha.

5.4 Profitability of the forests

The stands precedents of afforestation with fast-growing species are the most productive. Forthe rotations indicated the average productioncan be estimated as:

Table 8. Statistics for fires in SpainPeriod 1991-95 1985-90 1980-85 1975-80 1970-75Number of Fires 15,000 12,000 8,000 6,000 3,000Forest Area 97,000 90,000 99,000 95,000 48,000Total Area 207,000 233,000 244,000 240,000 103,000

Source: Anuarios de Estadística Agraria. MAPA.

Spain

Populus sp. 10-25 m3/ha/yearEucalyptus sp (north-east) 18-20 m3/ha/yearEucalyptus sp (south-east) 3-6 m3/ha/yearPinus radiata 15-20 m3/ha/yearPinus pinaster (north) 6-10 m3/ha/year

The adequate application of thinnings in pineforests and genetic improvement techniques inall cases can increase these figures by at least20%.

The natural stands of slow-growing speciessubjected to Management Plans present the fol-lowing average productions:Pinus sylvestris 2-4 m3/ha/yearFagus sylvatica 1-4 m3/ha/yearPinus nigra 1-2 m3/ha/yearPinus pinaster 1-2(3) m3/ha/year (except in the north)Pinus halepensis 0,5-1 m3/ha/year

In forests of these species without ManagementPlans the figures are approximately 50% lower.

The conclusion is that, except in the case of thefast-growing species, and not even in all thesecases, Spanish forests are non directly profitablefor their owners. The absence of a forest-chainpolicy, to facilitate the connection between sup-ply and the demand has to be added to this physi-cal reality. Rural depopulation aggravates the situ-ation in that the micro-market that facilitated theconsume of wood, fuel wood and fodder by therural populations near the woods has disap-peared. The lack of management provoked bythe nature protection policy, and the abandon-ing of traditional uses leads to the multiplicationof forest fires thus complementing this chain ofproblems in need of urgent solutions.

5.5 Extensive grazing

The history of Spanish forests is closely linkedto the history of stockbreeding and grazing,given that the characteristics of the Mediterra-nean forest mean that the livestock are of spe-cial economic importance. It is also necessaryto recognise the cultural and ecological impor-tance of extensive livestock breeding in Spain,not only because of its role in the conservation

of traditional natural resources but also becauseof its by wide bio-diversity.

According to various authors (FernándezTomás, G., 1985), the economic value of pasturesas forest production, could be the mostimportant in quantity.

Problems presented by extensive grazing in itsrelation to the forest sector:

Excess of livestockHistorically, the principal cause of destructionof the forests has been related to the develop-ment of the pastures for the livestock (Mesta),and still continues to be an important problemin many zones. This problem worsened afterSpanish entry into the European Union and theapplication of the CAP, which has been “gener-ous” in subsidies for extensive livestock farm-ing. The stockbreeder’s use of fire to improveand increase the grazing both favours the ap-pearance of forest fires and impedes the devel-opment of forest regeneration.

The excessive livestock load accentuates the seri-ous problems of erosion even when it is not thedirect cause of these. Moreover it provokes thedisappearance of forest species of major interest.

Scarcity of livestockAlthough in general this can be considered as apositive factor for the development of the treecover (in fact a large part of the increase of theforest area in the last 20 years is due to thisabandonment) there are also negative elementsderived from the disappearance or reduction ofextensive livestock grazing:- Problems of rural depopulation: abandonment

of the villages and of the woodlands , which inturn accentuates the risk of forest fires.

- An increase in combustible material in thewoodlands, which in many zones with naturalfire risk has been the principal cause of theirproliferation.

- Loss of genetic material of undoubted value,and loss of the pastoral culture. The absenceof economic and social interest in the wood-lands, as well as in the population of the vil-lages also threatens a long lasting preserva-tion of the forests.

Spain

In general, the livestock problem in Spanish for-ests can be summed up as the absence of plan-ning that balances livestock load to the grazingcapacity of the forest and fixes the areas (in re-generation) closed to grazing.

5.6 Sustainability

The concept of sustainability applied to theforesty in Spain could be considered from vari-ous points of view:- Sustainable management: An instrument for

verification whose maximum expressioncould be the Eco-certification of forest prod-ucts. In Spain this certification is up to todaynon-existent.

- Environmental Impact Assessments: only de-manded for primary afforestation and changesto agricultural use.

- Management Plans: Forest management planscover today some 20% of Spain’s forests.

As far as the integral rural policy is concerned,a priori the forest sector undoubtedly forms partof Rural Development, and this is recognisedand clearly manifested in the Agenda 2,000.However this does not mean that a forest policyis articulated within Rural Development in re-sponse to the problems that face the sector, butrather that it simply recognises its importanceas a key element in sustainable development.

Spain

Organisations related to forestry

Federal Forest ServiceD.G. Conservación de la Naturaleza (Federal Forest and Nature Conservation Service), Gran

Vía San Francisco, 4, E-28005 Madrid, +34-91347 59 88

Regional Forest ServicesDirecció General de Medi Ambient, Govern Balear, Forners 10, 07006 Palma de MallorcaDirección General de Medio Natural, Región de Murcia, Luis Fontes Pagán 3, 30071 MurciaDirección General de Medio Ambiente Natural, Junta de Comunidades de Castilla-La Mancha,

Pintor Matías Moreno 4, 45071 ToledoDirector General de Medio Natural, Junta de Castilla-León, Muro 9, 47071 ValladolidDirección General de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Extremadura, C/ Juan Pablo Forners 9, 06800

MéridaDirección General de Medio Natural, Comunidad de Madrid, Princesa, 3, 8ª Planta, 28008 MadridDirección General de Medio Natural, Diputación General de Aragón, Pº María Agustín 36,

50071 ZaragozaDirección General para el Desarrollo Sostenible, Generalitat Valenciana, Arquitecte Alfaro 39,

46011 ValènciaDirección Xeral de Montes e Medio Ambiente Natural, Xunta de Galicia, San Lázaro s/n, 15703

Santiago de CompostelaDirección Regional de Montes y Medio Natural, Principado de Asturias, Edificio Administrativo,

Planta 3ª, Sector Central Izq., Coronel Aranda 2, 33005 OviedoDirección General de Medio Natural, Gobierno de la Rioja, Prado Viejo 62 bis, 26071 LogroñoDirecciónGeneral de Ordenación y Gestión del Medio Natural, Gobierno Vasco, Duque de Wel-

lington 2, 01010 VitoriaViceconsejería de Medio Ambiente, Gobierno de Canarias, Edificio de Usos Múltiples I, planta

6ª, 38001 Santa Cruz de TenerifeDirección Regional de Montes y Conservación de la Naturaleza, Diputación Regional de Cantabria,

C/ Rodríguez 5 1º, 39002 SantanderDirección General de Medio Ambiente, Gobierno de Navarra, C/Alhóndiga 1 1ª planta, 31002

PamplonaDirector General de Gestión del Medio Natural, Junta de Andalucía, Pavellón de Nueva Zelanda,

Isla de la Cartuja, 41092 SevillaDirecció General de Medi Natural, Generalitat de Catalunya, Gran Via 612, 08007 Barcelona

Forest stakeholdersCOSE (Forest Ownwer’s Confederation), Apdo 221, E-16080 Cuenca, +34-969232955 (oficina),

cose@arrakis.esAITIM (Wood industry), Flora 3, E-28013 Madrid, +34-91542 58 64ASPAPEL (Pulp & Paper), Alcalá 85, E-28009 Madrid, +34-915763003ADENA-WWF, Sta.Engracia 6, E-28010 Madrid, +34-913082309, info@wwf.esPROFOR (Professional foresters), Apartado de correos 99, 08620 Sant Vicenç dels Horts (Barce-

lona), profor@arrakis.esColegio Oficial de Ingenieros de Montes (Forest Engineers), Cristobal Bordiu 19 2º Dcha, 28003

Madrid, +34-915346005

Research centresSociedad Española de Ciencias Forestales, Apdo 127, E-36080 Pontevedra, Tel: +34-986856400INIA-CIFOR (Forestry and Wood industries), Apdo. 8111, E-28080 Madrid, +34-91347 67 72CREAF (Forest Ecology), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, E-08193 Bellaterra, +34-93581

Spain

1312, fax. 93 581 1635, e-mail. IBECD@cc.uab.esCentro de Investigaciones Forestales de Valonsadero (Forestry), Apartado 175, E-42080 Soria, +34-

97522 61 90Centro de Investigaciones Forestales de Lourizan (Forestry), Aptdo. 127, E-36080 Pontevedra,

+34-986856400IPROCOR (Forestry and Cork industry), Apdo. 437, E-06800 Mérida, +34924372241CEAM (Forest Ecology), Parc Tecnològic de València, Carrer 4, Sector Oest, E-46980 València,

Tel: +34-961318227AIDIMA (Wood industry), Parc Teconològic de València, Avda. B. Franklin 13, E-46980 València,

Tel: +34-961366070Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya (Forestry), Pujada del Seminari s/n, E-25280 Solsona,

Tel: +34-973481752

Forest FacultiesUniversidad Polítécnica de Madrid, ETSI de Montes, Ciudad Universitaria, E-28040 Madrid,

+34-91336 71 30Universidad de Ávila, Departamento Forestal, Plaza Teniente Arévalo 4, E-05001 ÁvilaUniversidad de Córdoba, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos y de Montes, Avda.

Menéndez Pidal s/n, Apdo. 3048, E-14080 Córdoba, +34-957218432, e-mail:mc1hemam@uco.es

Universidad de Santiago, Escuela Politécnica Superior, Bernadino Pardo Ouro s/n, E-27002Lugo, +34-982252231

Universidad de Valladolid, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agraria, Avda. Madrid 57,E-34071 Palencia, invesdir@wamba.cpa.uva.es

Universitat de Lleida, Escola Tècnica Superior d’Enginyeria Agrària, Avda. Rovira Roure 177,E-25006 Lleida, +34-973702500, t.lopez@ugc-etsea.udl.es

References

Text referencesBolòs, M. 1978. VI La vegetación. En Geografía general de España (M. Terán, L. Solé, J. Vilá)

Ed. Ariel Geografía. Barcelona.Darp. (ed.). 1994. Pla General de Política Forestal. Barcelona.El Pais. 1998. Anuario El País 1998.Fernandez Tomas, G. 1985. “Aspectos económicos de nuestros bosques”. Revista El Campo-BB,

nº 98, pp. 21-24.González Álvarez, M. 1997. “La industria de la madera en cifras”. Ed. AITIM. Madrid.Junta De Andalucía, (ed.). 1990. Plan Forestal Andaluz. Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca &

Agencia de Medio Ambiente, Sevilla.MAPA, (ed.). 1997. Anuario de Estadística Agraria 1995.MAPA-MMA. 1975-1997. I y II Inventario Forestal Nacional.Madrigal, A. 1998. Problemática de la Ordenación de masas artificiales en España. En Actas de

la Reunión Ordenación de masas procedentes de repoblación. Cuadernos de la SociedadEspañola de Ciencias Forestales nº 6, pp 13-20. Madrid.

MMA (ed.). 1999. Estrategia Forestal Española. Borrador 20.1. Madrid.Portillo, E. 1991. “Producción y consumo de madera industrial”. Revista de Estudios Agro-

Sociales, nº 158; pp. 149-164. MAPA.Quezel, P. 1977. Los bosques de la cuenca mediterránea. En Bosques y maquia mediterránea (R.

Tomaselli, P. Quezel, R. Morandini). Traducción española de M. Crespo. Ed. Serbel, pp 11-

Spain

57. Barcelona.Rojas, E. 1995. Una política forestal para el Estado de las Autonomías. AEDOS/Mundi Prensa,

Madrid-Barcelona-México. 342 pp.Teran, M., Sole, L. and Vila, J. 1978. Geografía general de España. 1ª Edición. Ed. Ariel Geografía.

Barcelona.Vélez, R. 1991. “Los incendios forestales y la Política Forestal”. Revista de Estudios Agro-

Sociales, nº 158; pp. 83-106. MAPA.Vignotes, S. and Jimenez, F. (1996). “Tecnología de la madera”. Ed. MAPA y Mundi Prensa.

Madrid.Xunta De Galicia (ed.). 1992: Plan Forestal de Galicia. Santiago de Compostela.

LegislationBoe (ed.). 1985. Ley y Reglamento de Montes. Colección Textos Legales nº 18. 784 pg.Mapa (ed.) 1984. Leyes Agrarias. Instituto de Estudios Agrarios y Pesqueros, Madrid. 541 pg.Ley de Montes, 8.6. BOE nº 151, 10.6.1957Reglamento de Montes, Decreto 485/1962, 22.2. BOE nº 485, 12/13.3.1962Ley 4/1989 de Conservación de los Espacios Naturales y de la Fauna y Flora silvestres, 27.3.

BOE: nº 74, 28.3.1989: 8262.Llei 6/1988 Forestal de Catalunya, 30.3. DOGC nº 978, 15.4.1988: 1532.Ley Foral 13/1990 de protección y desarrollo del patrimonio forestal de Navarra, 31.12.1990.

DON 6, 14.1.1991: 114.Ley 2/1992 Forestal de Andalucía, 15.6. BOJA 57, 23.6.1992Ley 3/1993 Forestal de la Comunidad Valenciana, 9.12.1993. BOE 23: 2652, 27.1.1994 y 52,

2.3.1993: 6826.Ley 5/1994 de Fomento de Montes Arbolados, 16.5. BOCyL nº 97, 20.5.1994: 2705.Ley 2/1995 de Protección y Desarrollo del Patrimonio Forestal de La Rioja. 10.2. BOR 22,

21.2.1995.Ley 16/1995 Forestal y de Protección de la Naturaleza de la Comunidad de Madrid. 4.5. BOCM

127, 30.5.1995.

Further bibliographyI Congrés Forestal Català (ed.). 1988. Actes de les Ponències. Barcelona.Adena-WWF Espana (ed.). 1989. El libro rojo de los bosques españoles. 389 pg.Agricultura Y Sociedad. 1998. nº 85. MAPA, Madrid. 228 pg.Alemany, S. 1994. Guía pràctica de Silvicultura. CPF, Sta. Perpètua de la Mogoda. 96 pg.Artigues, A. et al. 1998. Forestry Curricula at the University of Lleida. New Requirements for

University Forestry Education. Workshop Proceedings. Demeter Series 1-ICA. 351-358.Ayuntamiento De Cuenca (ed.). 1992 Los Montes: gestión y comercialización. Actas de las II

Jornadas Forestales. Cuenca. 219 pg.Banco De Valencia (ed.). 1996-97. Las observaciones de Cavanilles 200 años después. 4 vol.

Valencia.Bara, S. and Toval, G. 1983. Calidad de estación del Pinus pinaster en Galicia. Comunicaciones

INIA, Serie Recursos Naturales nº 24, 166 pg.Bauer, E. 1980. Los montes de España en la Historia. Ministerio de Agricultura, Madrid.Blanco, E. et al. 1997. Los bosques ibéricos. Planeta, Madrid. 572 pg.Cam (ed.) 1996. Mediterráneo, Bosque de Bosques. 229 pg.Camprodom, J. and Collell, J. 1995. El bosc més que un club. La Vola & Proa, Barcelona. 157 pg.Carretero, C. (ed.). 1997. Ordenación, uso y gestión de los espacios naturales protegidos. 2º vol. 277

pg.Carretero, C. (ed.). 1998. El aprovechamiento y Tratamiento de la Madera Insular para suUso en Carpintería y Construcción. Vol. Nº 3. 223 pg.

Spain

Catalán, G. 1977. Semillas de árboles y arbustos forestales. Monografías nº 17, ICONA, Madrid. 408pg.

Columella (ed.). 1997. Manual de Selvicultura del Pino Pinaster. Escuela Politécnica de Lugo. 75 pg.Commission Européenne (ed.). 1996. Les feux de forèt dans le sud de l’Union Européenne. DG

VI, Bruxelles. 61 pg.Consejería De Medio Ambiente (ed.). 1996. Manual de Flora para la Restauración de Áreas

Críticas y Diversificación en Masas Forestales. CMA-Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla. 208 pg.CTFC (ed.). 1998. II International Forest Policy Forum. Proceedings. Solsona.389 pg.CTFC (ed.). 1998. Actas del “Seminario sobre incendios forestales”. Nº 1, Solsona. 237 pg.CTFC (ed.). 1998. Actas del Seminario “La gestión sostenible de los bosques”. Nº 3, Solsona. 319 pg.CTFS (ed.). 1997 . Actas del “I Forum de Política Forestal”. Nº 1, Solsona. 283 pg.DIE (ed.). 1993. La indústria a Catalunya. Fusta, mobles i suro. Nº 16. 198 pg.Ecología (ed.). 1990. la restauración de la vegetación en los montes españoles. MAPA. 571 pg.El Campo (ed.). 1985. Los bosques españoles. Nº 98. BB.El Campo (ed.). 1996. El Bosque. Nº 134. BBV. 302 pg.El País (ed.). 1994. El libro de la naturaleza 1984. Madrid, 304 pg.Esteve, J. 1995. Realidad y perspectivas de la ordenación jurídica de los montes. Monografías

Civitas & Escola d’Administració Pública, Generalitat de Catalunya. 329 pg.Fernández Nieto, M. J. 1998. Forestry Curricula at the University of Valladolid. New Requirements

for University Forestry Education. Workshop Proceedings. Demeter Series 1-ICA. 359-374.Folch, R. 1981. La vegetació dels països catalans. Ketres, Barcelona.513 pg.Fundación Cánovas Del Castillo (ed.). 1995. Los incendios forestales. Serie Naranja, nº 1,

Madrid. 80 pg.Gandullo, J. M. 1972. Ecología de los pinares españoles III. Pinus halepensis.García Rollás, M. 1976. Hongos de la madera. Ministerio de Agricultura. 243 pg.Gómez Loranca, J. A. and MONTERO, G. 1989. Efectos de las claras sobre masas naturales de

Pinus sylvestris. Comunicaciones INIA, Serie Recursos Naturales nº 48, 44 pg.Gómez Mendoza, J. 1992. Ciencia y Política de los Montes Españoles. 1948-1936. MAPA, Serie

Clásicos, Madrid. 260 pg.González Molina, J. M. 1994. Typisierung von jungen Kiefern-Eichen-Mischbeständen

Zentralspaniens und Ableitung von Behandlungsmodellen. Dissertation . Schriften aus demWaldbau-Institut. Albert Ludwig Universität, Freiburg i. Br. 145 pg.

Groome, H. J. 1988. La evolución de la política forestal en el Estado Español desde el SigloXIX hasta la actualidad. Tesis doctoral. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras-Universidad Autónomade Madrid. 587 pg.

Herrerra, M. A. 1998. Forestry Curricula at the University of Córdoba. New Requirements forUniversity Forestry Education. Workshop Proceedings. Demeter Series 1-ICA. 345-350.ICONA(ed.) 1982: Paisajes erosivos en el Sureste español. Proyecto LUCDEME. Monografías nº 26.67 pg.

ICONA (ed.). 1985. Estudios sobre prevención y efectos ecológicos de los incendios forestales.Madrid, 164 pg.

INIA-Ministerio de Agricultura, Madrid. 307 pg.INIA (ed.) Resultados de 50 años de experiencias sobre el crecimiento y adaptación de diferentes

especies forestales al montano-siliceo español. Comunicaciones INIA, Serie Recursos Natu-rales, nº 25, 61 pg.

IPROCOR (ed.). 1994. Actas del “Simposio Mediterráneo sobre Regeneración del MonteAlcornocal”. Mérida, 420 pg.

Laguna, M. 1993. Flora Forestal Española. Xunta de Galicia (facsimil). 459 pg.López Cadenas, F. et al. 1978. Hidrología forestal. ETSI de Montes, Madrid. 134 pg.Madrigal, A. 1994. Ordenación de Montes Arbolados. INIA, Colección Técnica, Madrid, 375 pg.MAPA (ed.). 1981. Plagas de insectos de las masas forestales españolas. 252 pg.

Spain

MAPA (ed.). 1991. Observación de daños en especies forestales mediterráneas. MAPA & Comisiónde las Comunidades Europeas, 96 pg.

Martin Montalvo, R. 1985. Escritos Forestales Españoles. Fundación Conde del Valle de Salazar-UPM, Madrid. 290 pg.

Martínez Ruíz, E. 1996 Tres sierras, tres culturas. MAPA, Madrid. 349 pg.Mas, J. M. 1996. Dret forestal a Catalunya. Dilagro. 127 pg.MMA. 1996. Mapa forestal de España, Madrid.MMA (ed.). 1997. Los incendios forestales durante el decenio 1986-95.Montero De Burgos, J. L. and González Rebolar, J.L. (1974). Diagramas bioclimáticos.ICONA, Madrid. 379 pg.MONTES (ed.). 1992. Participación española en el X Congreso Forestal Mundial de Paris. 159 pg.Montoya, J. M. 1980. Los alcornocales. INIA-Ministerio de Agricultura, Madrid. 155 pg.Montoya, J. M. 1990. El pino piñonero. Agroguías, Mundi-Prensa, Madrid. 98 pg.Montoya, J. M. 1995. El eucalipto. Mundi-Prensa, Madrid.125 pg.Montserrat, J. M. 1992. Evolución glaciar y postglaciar del clima y la vegetación en la vertiente

sur del Pirineo: Estudio Palinológico. CSIC, Monografías del Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología,nº 6: 147 pg.

Neyra, M. and Martinez Mata, F. 1973. Terminología Forestal Española. Monografías INIA nº 1,Madrid. 480 pg.

Obra Agrícola De La Caixa D Pensions (ed.). 1988. Actes de les Sessions Tècniques sobreRepoblació Forestal. Barcelona. 88 pg.

Ortuno, F. and Ceballos, A. 1977. Los bosques españoles. INCAFO, Madrid.Padró, A. 1992. Clones de chopo para el valle medio del Ebro. DGA-SIA, Zaragoza. 203 pg.Padro, A. and Orensanz, J. 1987. El chopo y su cultivo. MAPA, Serie Técnica, Madrid. 446 pg.Pares, E. 1990. Vocabulari Forestal (català, castellà, fracès i anglès). IEC, Monografies de la

Secció de Ciències, nº 5, Barcelona.405 pg.Pita, A. 1968. Clima y vegetación arbórea. Servicio Meteorológico Nacional, Madrid. Serie A, nº

48. 39 pg.PITA, P. 1995: La planificació dels aprofitaments forestals. AEDOS & CPF, Barce-lona. 112 pg.

Reyna, S. et al. 1988. Los incendios forestales en la Comunidad Valenciana. Conselleriad’Agricultura i Pesca-Generalitat Valenciana, Valencia. 246 pg.

Reyna, S. 1992. La trufa. Agroguías Mundi-Prensa, Madrid. 120 pg.Rivas Martinez, S. 1987. Memoria del mapa de series de vegetación de España. ICONA, Madrid.Rojas, E. 1986. Die Forst- und Holzwirtschaft Spaniens. Überblick und Entwicklungsaussichten.

Holz-zentralblatt nº 8: 91-93.Rojas, E. 1991. Crisis de identidad forestal. Reflexión crítica sobre sus causas, consecuencias y

vías de superarla. Montes nº 25: 40-50.Rojas, E. 1992. Propuesta de un sistema alternativo de gestión forestal empresarial para el bos-

que comunal de Quintanar de la Sierra en ‘Hacia un sistema alternativo de gestión para lapropiedad forestal de Entidades Locales’. Actualidad Forestal de Castilla y León-SuplementoEl Campo/BBV nº 123/4: 14-29.

Rojas, E. 1994. Privatwald in Spanien. Allgemeine Forstzeitschrift nº 22: 1231-1233.Rojas, E. 1996. El marco jurídico de la propiedad forestal en España. Desde la Reconquista a la

Desamortización. Report of the IUFRO WP S6.13-00, Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge nº 16,Professur Forstpolitik und Forst-ökonomie, ETH-Zürich: 237-252.

ROJAS, E. 1996. Las externalidades de la gestión forestal ante la próxima Ley Básica de Montes.Report of the IUFRO WP S6.13-00, Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge nº 16, ProfessurForstpolitik und Forstökonomie, ETH-Zürich: 253-269.

Rojas, E. 1997. Forest Policy in Spain. Review on Forest Policy Issues And Forest Policy Processes.EFI Proceedings nº 12: 59-67.Rojas, E. 1997. Mediterranean Forest Challenges. EFI News nº 5: 5.

Spain

Rojas, E. 1998. El Coste de la Biodiversidad. Hábitats nº 3. WWF-Adena: 8.ROJAS, E. 1998: Elsector forestal en el marco europeo. RFE nº 20: 25-30.

Rosembuj, T. and Rojas, E. 1995. Contraintes et compensations en economie forestière et airesde protection de la nature. Silva Belgica nº 5: 39-41.

Ruiz De La Torre, J. 1977. Especies dominantes en la vegetación españolas peninsular. Boletínde la Estación Central de Ecología, nº 11.

Ruiz De La Torre, J. 1979. Árboles y arbustos de la España Peninsular. ETSI de Montes-UPM,Madrid. 512 pg.

Ruiz De La Torre, J. 1981. Vegetación natural y matorrales en España. Tratado del Medio Natu-ral. Madrid.

Sanchez, F. et al. 1998. Modelos de gestión de sistemas de recursos comunales en Castilla yLeón. Consejería de Economía y Hacienda-Junta de Castilla y León, Valladolid. 295 pg.

SECF (ed.). 1993. Actas del I Congreso Forestal Español. Pontevedra. 5 Tomos.SECF (ed.). 1995. Actas de la reunión de Valsaín. Grupo de Trabajo de Ordenación de Montes.

Vol nº 1. 414 pg.SECF (ed.) 1995. Actas del “Seminario sobre deterioro de los montes y cambio climático”. Nº 2.

112 pg.SECF (ed.) 1996. Actas de la reunión de Córdoba. Grupo de Trabajo de Selvicultura Mediterránea.

Vol. 3. 179 pg.Terradas, J. et al. 1996. Ecologia del foc. Proa, Barcelona. 270 pg.Toval, G. et al. 1993. Sreening Douglas-fir for Rapid Early Growth in Common-Garden Tests in

Spain. USDA-FS, General Technical Report PSW-GTR-146, 43 pg.Universidad De Huelva (ed.). 1999. I Jornadas de Historia, Socioeconomía y Política Forestal.Velazquez, C. et al. 1987. La Laurisilva. Monografías ICONA nº 46, Madrid.110 pg.Ximenez De Embun, J. et al. 1977. El monte bajo. Ministerio de Agricultura. 90 pg.Xunta De Galcia (ed.) 1996. Congreso de Montes Veciñais. 353 pg.

Web-sites

http://www.grn.es/fl.Bibliofor is a data base that includes over 15.000 bibliographic references about forestry in Spain.These references have been taken form technical reviews and journals, but not from books. Alsothey include references of papers published in proceedings of forestry meetings and some greyliterature. Bibliofor covers the period 1930-1999 and it is continually updated. Searches can bemade directly on-line by using keywords. If a search produce a lot of references, it can be refinedcombining two keywords or one keywords and one period of years. All the database is written inSpanish. But searches become easier if scientific name of species is used. Help and FAQ’s pagesare also available.

http://agrobyte.lugo.usc.es/index.htmlhttp://www.inia.eshttp://www.grn.es/fl/foro/forespano.htmhttp://www.iies.es/montes/montes.htmhttp://www.etsea.udl.eshttp://www.uco.eshttp://www.aidima.eshttp://www.arrakis.es/~eforests

Sweden

1 The country

1.1 Natural conditions

1.1.1 The climate

The annual mean temperature of theScandinavian countries is considerably higherthan that typically prevailing at their latitudedue to the prevailing south-western air currentsand the Gulf stream. Both annual and diurnaltemperature amplitudes are rather moderate,although only western coastal areas experiencetrue oceanic climate. Soil freezing occurs allover Sweden but to much greater depths in thenorth. Permafrost is not recorded with certaintyin the mineral soils except at high altitudes.For the regional features of the Swedish natu-ral vegetation climatic factors are of consider-able importance. The length of the growth pe-riod, defined as the number of days with anaverage temperature exceeding +6o C, is closelycorrelated with the major vegetation regions(cf. below).

Precipitation in Sweden is rather unevenly dis-tributed, low precipitation (appr. 400-500 mm)being typical for the Baltic islands, while highamounts (appr. 700 to 1000 mm) are found invarious areas from the south to the north in thewestern parts of Sweden. The highest precipi-tation almost always occurs in late summer. Thedepth of the snow cover is quite variable overthe country. Its maximum in the mountain val-leys of southern Lapland occasionally amountsto 1.8 m. The period of snow cover near Stock-holm on average is about 3 months, but it var-ies between years from a few weeks to over 4months.

1.1.2 The landscape from a historical pointof view

Sweden belongs to Fennoscandia, aphysiographical area predominantly character-ised by very ancient bedrock, Pleistocene gla-cial sculpture, and Late-glacial and Post-gla-cial crustal uplift. From a historical viewpointNorway, Sweden, Finland and north-westernRussia belong to the same physiographical re-gion. There has been alternating periods withbrackish water and freshwater in the Baltic. Thelast glaciation left Sweden covered by glacialdrift. The drift mainly consists of till, coveredover large areas by glacial clay, and locallycoarse-grained sediments. Long eskers are acharacteristic feature of the Swedish landscape,particularly in the eastern lowlands. Calcare-ous soil was transported by the inland ice-sheetfrom the limestone bedrock and spread overlarge areas. The bedrocks to a great extent arehard-schistose and prevailingly silicious, butthey also include softer, calcareous rocks.

About one third of the current land area wasunder water as the ice border retreated fromsouth to north of Sweden approximately 10 000years ago. The sea-level varied greatly duringdifferent stages in the recession of the ice. Oneimportant zone-determinant is the highestshoreline, which is the highest point the seareached after the melting of the inland ice. Thearea below the highest shoreline was originallycovered by silt or clay sediments. Due to waveactions this material was washed away fromthe hills and redeposited on lower parts. Theheight above sea-level of the highest shorelinevaries from about 10 m in the south of Sweden

Sweden

Authors:Heléne Lundkvist1, Lars Lönnstedt2, Hans Persson1, Per-Ove Bäckström3

SLU (The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)1 Dept. of Ecology and Environmental Research, SLU, P.O. Box 7072,S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden2 Dept. of Forest Economics, SLU, S-901 83 Umeå, Sweden3 Dept. of Silviculture, SLU, S-901 83 Umeå, Sweden

Sweden

to about 300 m in the northern provinceÅngermanland.

Most of the cultivated land in Sweden is to befound below the highest shoreline, while mostforest areas are to be found in the upland re-gions. There are two forested upland areas thatdiffer climatically and with regards to vegeta-tion from all other parts of the country – theSouth Swedish highlands and the inland, al-pine regions of Norrland.

1.1.3 Soils

Till is the most important soil type in Sweden,it consists of unsorted glacial material, such asboulders, stones and sand of varying size. Thethickness of the till layer varies from 4-5 m inthe south to 8-9 m in the north of Sweden. Insome areas such as the southern parts of Swe-den (Skåne) and in the area around the lakeStorsjön in central Sweden clay till is frequentlyfound formed by the calcareous bedrock andslate in a mixture. Clay, silt and fine sand wereoriginally deposited in the glacial lakes. Wideareas with sand of varying size are found alongthe eskers and in areas with end moraine.

The soils of Sweden are chiefly podzolic witha mor (raw-humus) layer, although mull is tobe found in combination with brown soil in thesouthern or western parts of Sweden. The de-gree of podzolisation is highest in the southernand the northern uplands. The podzol profileis characterised by the acid raw-humus layerunderlying a thin mat of needles and decayedvegetation. The thickness of the raw-humuslayer varies in different forest soils between 0 ->20 cm. Under the humus layer there is an ash-like bleached horizon poor in mineral-nutri-ents followed by a red-brown-coloured enrich-ment horizon. Cultivation of the landscape isclosely related to soil conditions. The earliestcultivated land is found in areas with calcare-ous till. Whether the soil has been cultivatedor not depends upon the composition of the bed-rock, the altitude and the local climate.

Another important type of soil is peat whichoriginally covered about one sixth of the ter-

restrial area of Sweden. The percentage ofpeatland varies from almost none in agricul-tural areas to about 70% in upland regions. Thelargest continuous peatland area is the Sjaunaarea in the northern part of Sweden (almost150 sq. miles). In the south-eastern lowlands,the peatlands are originating to a great extentfrom shallow lakes filled up gradually by veg-etation, but in the western and northern up-lands the peatlands were formed frompaludification of terrestrial soils.

1.1.4. Vegetation zones and forest types

The present plant cover of Sweden was formedafter the glacial period, the first forest trees toenter from the south were birch (Betulaverrucosa) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris).When the climate improved other forest treessuch as pedunculate oak (Quercus robur), wychelm (Ulmus glabra), alder (Alnus glutinosa),small-leaved lime (Tilia cordata) and hazel(Corulus avellana) were dominating in thesouthern and central parts of Sweden. TheNorway spruce (Picea abies) entered from thenorth-eastern parts of Sweden and the Euro-pean beech (Fagus sylvatica) from the south.The beech is successively driven back by theexpanding spruce, which not yet spontaneouslyhas reached the southernmost parts of Sweden.

Different vegetation regions may be distin-guished from the north to the south of Sweden(Sjörs, 1956):1. The alpine region (above the tree limit) andsubalpine region (dominated by birch - Betulaverrucosa var. tortuosa)2. Northern coniferous forest region (withoutoak)3. Southern coniferous forest region (with oak)4. Southern deciduous forest region (withoutNorway spruce)

The alpine region may be divided into threesubdivisions/belts: the high alpine; the middlealpine and the low alpine belt. It includes thevegetation above the tree limit, which issparsely distributed among heavy boulders androcks. In the subalpine region birch, mainlyBetula verrucosa var. tortuosa, is the most

Sweden

important forest tree. The northern forest re-gion, which is characterised by two coniferousspecies (Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies), is apart of a vast circumpolar Taiga region, whichcontinues through northern Russia, Siberia andNorth-America. In this region birch, grey al-der (Alnus incana) and aspen (Populus tremula)are common deciduous tree species. Charac-teristic for the southern coniferous region isthe dominance by coniferous tree species butwith an admixture of deciduous tree species,among others oak and ash (Fraxinus excelsior).The northern limit of those two tree speciescoincides with an important biological boarder,the “limes norrlandicus”. North of this bordermost species with a southern distribution typein Sweden are seldom found. The southerndeciduous forest region is dominated by decidu-ous trees, mainly European beech.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Population density

Sweden is a sparsely populated country. Theaverage number of inhabitants in Sweden in

1996 was 22 per sq. km land area, varying from 3in the Norrland region to 269 in the Stockholmregion (Data from “Statistisk Årsbok 1998”). Thetotal population in Sweden in 1996 reached anumber of 8.844.499 distributed on a land areaof 410.934 km2.

The Swedish population has increased by al-most five times since the 1750’s. The averagelife length has increased from appr. 40 years in1850 to 75 years in 1980. The percentage ofthe population living in the cities at present ismore than 60%.

1.2.2 The Swedish industry and tourism

Sweden is one of the main forest producingcountries in Europe, the productive forest areacovering about 57 % of the total land area. Thepulp- and paper- and the sawmill industry inthe 1980’s contributed about 1/5 of the totalexport value. The arable land production andfood manufacturing industries are concentratedto the southern and central parts of Sweden.The agricultural production in 1980 amountedto about 2.5 % of the GNP.

Figure 1. Climatic forest regions in Sweden. (From The Swedish National Atlas The Forest).

Sweden

Iron is dominating the mining industry and ironore used to be an important export product.Currently, however, most iron ore is processedwithin Sweden, and exported as highly proc-essed products by the engineering industry. Thisindustry is producing a variety of products fromnails to cars. Most Swedish employers (30-40%) are active within this industrial sector. Im-portant Swedish companies, manufacturingengineering products at the international mar-ket, are among others Atlas Copco, ASEA,Ericsson, Saab-Scania, Sandvik and Volvo.

Other important Swedish industrial activitiesare to be found in the chemical and pharma-ceutical products sectors. The building andconstruction industry sector, including thebuilding material, concrete- and stone manu-facturing parts, to a great extent is directed to-wards the Swedish market. This is also truefor the Swedish graphical industry includingnewspapers and publishing houses.

The tourism in Sweden is increasing and isdependent on the country’s wide magnificentcountryside. Sweden has 96,000 lakes and up-lands ranging from the gently to awesome peaksand 4,800 miles of coastline and 51,000 islands.Of great national importance as well as for de-velopment of outdoor tourism is the old Swed-ish common right that allows to use essentiallyall land for non destructive activities includ-ing camping and collecting of berries andmushrooms. Excluded from this common rightare areas only that are protected for some rea-son like e.g. historical sites or bird sanctuar-ies.

2 Forest resources and their uses

2.1 Forest resources and forest production

Sweden is a northern European country thatexperiences harsh winter climates and has shortgrowing seasons that limit tree growth. Rota-tion periods vary from 60 to 80 years in thesouth to 90 to 120 years in north. The forestecosystems are simple and with few commer-cially valuable tree species, Norway spruce andScots pine accounting for 46% and 38% of

growing stock, respectively. The forest resourcesituation has improved successively, and theactual as well as potential harvest has contin-ued to increase. Currently the wood balance isvery favourable. The gross annual incrementis approx. 100 million m3 (forest cubic metres);while the potential harvest is in the order of 80million m3 in the short run and 90 million m3

in the long run. The actual gross harvest is inthe order of 70 million m3 (68.5 million m3 asan average between 1990-1995, 68.1 millionm3 forecasted for 1996) (Anon. 1997).

2.2 Silvicultural systems

2.2.1 Ecological planning on the landscapelevel

During the late 1980s the necessity to leave aforest policy mainly focused on timber produc-tion became obvious. The faculty of Forestry atSLU (The Swedish University of AgriculturalSciences) since the beginning of the 1980s hadincreased research activities on biodiversity inthe forest landscape and on the prevailingclear-cutting forest management practices af-fected biodiversity. The National GovernmentOrganisations (NGO:s) working with environ-mental questions since the late 1960s had criti-cised the Swedish forestry; focussing on theforest companies and their forest policies.Around 1990 the true sustainability of theSwedish forestry was questioned by customersand consumers organisations in Europe. It be-came clear that the only way to run forestrywith both high production and maintainedbiodiversity was to integrate production andbiodiversity questions in forest planning. It wasobvious that solving the problems withbiodiversity would be impossible on the standlevel. Therefore, the interest was focused onecological planning on the landscape level. Forthe large forest companies with large coherentforest areas it was natural to consider landscapeplanning. For private forest owners with smallland holdings that was not the situation.

In the natural boreal forest fires were the mostimportant ecological factor. For pine forests ondry and mesic sites the intervals between for-

Sweden

est fires were 50 to 70 years, for spruce or de-ciduous tree-dominated forests on mesic sites100 - 200 years. Spruce forest on moist andwaterlogged sites was not devastated by forestfires and such stands became fire refugia in theboreal forest landscape.

Theoretical model work has suggested that theflora and fauna of Scots pine forests on dry ormesic sites and Norway spruce or deciduousdominated forests on mesic sites are relativelywell adapted to large scale fire disturbances.On these sites modifications within the clearfelling system are proposed. On sites seldomhit by fire, long continuity forest will develop.

Figure 2. a) Distribution of forest land in Sweden. b) Distribution of forest standing volume,all tree species. (Source: The National Forest Inventory).

Sweden

They can host species extremely sensitive tolarge-scale disturbances. When such sites areused for timber production, modified forestrypractices are suggested such as selective cut-ting, partial cutting or dense shelter wood sys-tems.

2.2.2 How to maintain the landscape

Empirical results indicate that nature reservescombined with intense timber production onthe remaining forestland will be insufficient tomaintain the biodiversity in the landscape. Topreserve features necessary to all occurringred-listed species, the landscape must be man-aged both by means of a static part e.g. non-harvested nature reserves which fulfil the de-mands of species which require continuity atthe site, and a dynamic part which harmonizeswith the fire generated dynamics in the borealforest landscape. The dynamic part may encom-pass a system of patches managed so that im-portant successional stages are continuouslypresent in the landscape.

2.2.3 What are the most important problemsfor the future?

Clear-cutting management dominated Swed-ish forestry during more than 40 years. Thescientific knowledge about clear cutting and theoutcome of that management system is wellestablished. The current forest policy with equalemphasis on timber production and maintain-ing of biodiversity is fairly new.

Other management systems are insufficientlyunderstood. Therefore, research on new plan-ning models, reforestation methods and pro-duction tables in different types of selectivecutting management practices is urgentlyneeded. In current forestry different measureshave been taken to promote biodiversity. Theseinclude leaving old trees, groups of trees, bufferzones along gullies, lakes and mires etc. It isessential to assess whether these measures re-sult in the expected biodiversity improvement,or whether additional measures have to be takento ensure sustainability of the forestry.

Figure 3. Development of standing volume for different tree species since 1920 at all land usecategories. (Source: The National Forest Inventory).

Sweden

2.3 Planning framework - special institution-alization

The National Forest Inventory (NFI) is an an-nual inventory covering the entire area of Swe-den. The object of the inventory is to providebasic data for planning and control of the for-est resource at the national and regional leveland also to give basic data for forest research.The main task is therefore to give informationon the state of the forest resource and on landuse and on how these are changing. The NFI iscarried out by the Department of Forest Re-source Management and Geomatics, Section ofForest Resource Data at SLU.

The first inventory started in 1923. Since 1953,the inventory covers the entire country everyyear. Since 1983 the annual sample consists ofsome 17,000 systematically distributed circu-lar plots. Of these 10,000-11,000 fall on forestland. The inventory uses permanent plots witha radius of 10 metres as well as temporary oneswith a radius of 7 metres. The permanent plotsare reinventoried after 5-10 years, thus allow-ing an efficient estimation of changes. The mainobservations on all land are: land use category,ownership category, growing stock, growth, treedistribution and recent felling. On forest land:terrain conditions, vegetation cover, maturityclass, age, site quality, recent and suggestedsilvicultural measures, degree of stocking dam-age and regeneration status (in young stands).

The General Forest Inventory was a public in-ventory of private farm forests that started in1980 and worked until 1994 when it was ter-minated by the new Swedish forest policy. How-ever, the importance of management planningis still emphasised in the new policy. Manage-ment planning is now also required from anenvironmental point of view. Forest ownersmust themselves provide the basic data for thisplanning.

3 Forest economics and forest poli-cies

3.1 Forest economics, forest industries andemployment in the forestry sector

The forest and forest industry sector is vital tothe Swedish economy. The forest products con-sist primarily of softwood lumber, wood pulp,newsprint and other wood products. At thesame time the role of the forests is to providenon-wood goods and services. Environmentalconsiderations are becoming increasingly im-portant. In the forest policy from 1994 the en-vironmental and productive aspects of the for-ests are given equal priority (cf. below).

A comparison with some other countries orregions demonstrate the economic relevance ofthe forestry sector in Sweden (Anon. 1998).

In 1995 the value added for the Swedish forestindustry was 55 billion kronor and for forestry23 billion kronor.

Wood fuel and by-products from the forest in-dustry are of great importance for the Swedishenergy supply. Of the total energy supply, 485TWh in 1996, 18% is bioenergy, of which themajor part is of forest origin (NUTEK, 1997).

Models for analysing non-timber value of theforest are being developed (e.g. Mattsson andLi, 1994, Bostedt and Mattsson, 1995). Thisnon-timber value of the forests, i.e. value fore.g. recreation and hunting, has been estimatedto be considerable and with a potential to in-crease.

In 1996 the number of employees in the forestindustry (wood processing, pulp, paper, andpaperboard goods industries) was 1996 93,600and that in forestry 26,300 (Anon. 1997). Inforestry the total number of workhours in thefield has decreased dramatically during the last20 years, figure 4.

Trade accounts for about 30% of Sweden’sGDP, with export of natural resource commodi-ties contributing about one quarter of the total

Sweden

export. The forest sector is the world’s secondlargest exporter of soft wood lumber and news-print (after Canada), and the third largest ex-porter of wood pulp (after Canada and the US).The most important paper and board gradesproduced in Sweden in terms of export valueare newsprint and container board.

Table 1. Forest products in the economy, selected countries and regions.Country/Region Export (E) Import (I) Balance (E - I)

Million USD Million USD Million USDSweden 10 996 1 324 9 672Finland 10 302 700 9 602Canada 25 333 2 622 22 711USA 16 973 22 599 -5 626EU (total) 50 819 51 836 -1 017Developed Countries 108 827 107 021 1 806Developing Countries 23 161 32 913 -9 752World 131 988 139 934 -7 946

Figure 4. Number of working hours in forest work in 1972-1996. (Source: Swedish OfficialStatistics, SCB).

Table 2. Employees in forestry and the forestproduct industry, 1 000s.

1980 1990 1996Forestry 50 34 26- employees 40 26 16- forest owners 10 7 10Forest product industry 132 110 93- wood processing 71 50 44- pulp and paper 61 60 49

3.2 Forest ownership

The total Swedish forest area is 22.5 millionhectares. 10% (2.2 million hectares) is ownedby the state or public agencies, 39% (8.8 mil-lion hectares) by forest companies and 51%(11.5 million hectares) by individuals. In South-ern Sweden, Götaland, the individual owner-ship is dominating, 3.9 million hectares (78%)out of 5.0 million hectares. (Anon. 1997).

Before 1993 the ownership pattern of forestland was approximately as follows: the State20%, other public agencies 5%, forest compa-nies 25%, and individual owners 50%. During1993 the principle parts of the State Forest, andthe State Forest Industry Company were mergedinto a new company, AssiDomän. Slightly less

Sweden

than 50% of the shares were sold on the mar-ket, mostly in small lots of 100 shares or less.

Many forest companies have their roots informer iron-ore companies that also ownedlarge areas of forest. One of these, Stora (Stora-Enso since 1998), celebrated its 700th anni-versary a few years ago. In connection withdevelopment of the saw-milling industry dur-ing the latter part of the 19th century, thesecompanies also consolidated their ownershipof forest land. In 1906 an Act of Parliamentprohibited companies to buy forest land.

The individual ownership has its roots in a“farmers’ class“ with specific representation inthe Swedish parliament during the 18th and19th centuries. Nowadays, the combined agri-culture/forestry family enterprises no longerdominate. The number of absentee owners hasincreased, as has the number of forest ownerswho are not economically dependent on theirforests.

3.3 Forest and forest related policies

3.3.1 A new forest policy

A new forest policy, based on Agenda 21, is ineffect since January 1’st, 1994. This policy putsequal emphasis on environmental and timberproduction aspects of forestry. The policy canbe illustrated by the first paragraph whichstates: “The forest is a National resource. It shallbe managed in such a way as to provide a sus-tainable yield and at the same time maintainbiodiversity. In forest management other pub-lic interests should also be considered”. (Swed-ish Forestry Act, 1993). The first forestry act,essentially a reforestation law, is from 1903. Ithas been followed by revisioned acts in inter-vals of 15 to 20 year. Environmental consid-eration for the first time was added to the actof 1975.

The Forestry Act, as compared to previous ones,puts less emphasis on the detailed regulationof silviculture, with the explicit aim of therebypromoting biodiversity. As means to achievethe objectives the current forest policy the gov-

ernment will buy land corresponding to 5% ofthe forest land during the coming 30 years, tocreate forest reserves.

Forestry is also regulated by the Nature Con-servation Act of 1994. This act controls forexample ditching and also gives possibilitiesto protect biotopes less than 5 ha of high con-servation values. Examples of such biotopes areforests along gullies, post-fire successional for-ests and natural and seminatural old forest.

Inventories on a national scale, aiming at thedocumentation of biodiversity, has been carriedout of wet land forests and forests of high con-servation values referred to as woodland keyhabitats.

The forestry policy is implemented by regionalForestry Boards. This is done by enforcementlaws and by guidance. The National Board ofForestry was created 1941. Until 1981, theCounty Forestry Boards previously rather in-dependent, were organised under a regionaloffice and include a number of field districts.The Boards works locally close to the forestowners.

In 1979 the State forests were put under thecontrol of the Forestry Act, and thus subject tocontrol by the County Forestry Boards underthe supervision of the National Board.

Members of the County Forestry Boards areselected to represent different local interest andownership groups. Integration with the CountyAdministrative Board was secured by makingthe County Governor chairman of the CountyForestry Board, and allowing the Chief Officerof the Forestry Board to represent the forestrysector in the sessions of the County Adminis-trative Board.

On the local level the forestry board officialswork in close cooperation with the forest own-ers association and forest industry but also withlocal organisations of environmentalists andornithologists.

Sweden

3.4 Legislation - targets and strategies

The current Swedish forest policy comprisestwo goals, one goal for forest environment andone for wood production. The two goals havethe same priority, which implies that theyshould be given equal weight in the manage-ment of forest resources (Anon. 1994a).

Environmental goal“The productivity of forest sites shall be main-tained at sustainable level. Biodiversity andgenetic variation in the forests shall also besecured. The forests must be managed so thatplant and animal species which exist naturallyin the forest ecosystems can survive under natu-ral conditions and in reproductive numbers.

Endangered species and vegetation types shallbe protected. The forest’s cultural heritage, aes-thetic and social values must be protected.“

Production goals“The forest and forest land shall be utilized ef-ficiently with the aim of a sustainable and valu-able yield. The composition of forest produc-tion must be such, that it has a potential to sat-isfy a variety of future human needs.“

The Forestry Act specifies the minimum re-quirements for landowners. Swedish legislationis formally developed at four levels:1. Acts passed by parliament2. Ordinances or orders given by the govern-

ment (written by the minister in charge)3. Directions or regulations set by the respon-

sible authority (for forestry, usually the Na-tional Board of Forestry) and supported by anact or ordinance

4. Recommendations made by the authority

The first three are legally binding, while thefourth is not and is used to further clarify howthe first three should be interpreted. An act it-self is usually very short and often weak ondetails. Further down on the list, the directionsbecome more specific. Political bodies do nothave direct managerial influence on the authori-ties, and political interference in the activitiesof the authorities is illegal. Hence, Forestry Acts

serve as general guidelines, with actual imple-mentation occurring via ordinances from theminister in charge of forestry, and directionsand recommendations provided by the ForestryBoards.

Specific environmental restrictions exist forforests in the vicinity of mountainous areas, forforests which are also used for reindeer graz-ing by the Sami people, and for forests withspecific regeneration difficulties. Selected valu-able broadleaved forests in Southern Sweden,including beech and oakwood land should beretained, but still be subject to commercial uti-lisation. There are also a number of subsidiesfor the regeneration of selected valuable broad-leaved forests.

3.5 Forest policy tools

In the Swedish forest policy of 1994 the bal-ance between the various forest policy tools hasbeen altered (Anon. 1994b, Fredman 1997).Less emphasis is laid on forest legislation andsubsidies, and more emphasis on extensionservice. Forest owners must now take greaterresponsibility from both the economic andmanagement points of view.

The new legislation has been simplified and isgenerally less restrictive. This allows forestowners considerable freedom of action. How-ever, most of the basic requirements in the oldForestry Act have been retained, but subsidiesas a policy instrument are only used to pro-mote the forest environment.

3.6 EU and other international perspectives

The Swedish political standpoint has been tooppose the implementation of a common EUforest policy. Instead over the last several dec-ades Swedish forest policies and policy imple-mentation has been guided by spirit of the UNForest Principles. The traditional “Swedishmodel“ for forest policy development and im-plementation includes an efficient and sustain-able production chain from the forest to the forest

Sweden

industries and to the international market forforest products. Over the last decades publicopinion has forced an adaptation of theprevailing management systems to meet envi-ronmental needs.

Sweden was actively engaged in the UNCEDprocess with Agenda 21, the development ofthe Forest Principles, the Helsinki Resolutionsand the IPF process as a follow-up of UNCED.Promoting the capacity of countries throughrural development have been a major goal ofSwedish foreign aid policy over the years.

3.7 Organisations - stakeholders andpartners

The Forestry Boards and the National Envi-ronmental Protection Agency have already beenpresented. Both authorities implement the for-estry and environmental policies of the gov-ernment. The County Administrative Boards,town and rural districts have established theirown environmental sections.

The forest and forest industry companies actas economic enterprises, acting to achieve thelong-term profitability. Most of the companiesare not only sizeable forest owners, they alsorun forest industries, pulp and paper mills aswell as sawmills, and aim at optimising theeconomic output of their enterprise as a whole.The forest management part of the forest com-panies are often organised as independent eco-nomical units which means that they sell theirroundwood to their industrial partner under theprevailing market conditions. These economicunits are often legally distinct units.

Previously, separate industry associations ex-isted for each of four forest industry activities:pulp and paper, packaging and other papergoods, saw milling, and other wood productsand panel products. Theses industry associa-tions now work collaboratively under the um-brella of the Swedish Forest Industries Asso-ciation in Stockholm. This association includesas members only a small proportion of the sawmilling firms, but 95% of paper producers and

all pulp producers. Since the forest companiesnow own almost 40% of the forest area, it isnatural that their associations play an impor-tant role in the development of the forest policy.

Small private forest owners are organised intoseven different forest owners’ associations. Theassociations cooperate in the National Federa-tion of Swedish Forest Owners’ Associations(Skogsägarnas Riksförbund). Their 89,000members own 5.7 million ha of forest. The as-sociations were formed to improve the finan-cial yield of forestry operations among theirmembers. This is done by co-ordinating the tim-ber trade and by helping the forest owners withlogging and silvicultural practices. In order toensure a stable market for timber and to con-trol pricing, the associations have build up theirown forest industries.

The forest sector labour unions are also impor-tant actors in forestry policy making. In the1970s and 1980s the unions were principaladvocates of the regulations that led to a focuson forest productivity at the expense of landowners’ profits. These included requirementson cutting, regeneration and thinning; for ex-ample, new paragraphs introduced in the For-est Act of 1981 could oblige forest owners toclear cut or thin stands with the objective ofincreasing short-term timber supply. However,these requirements were also designed to cre-ate employment.

A large number of other organisations playimportant roles in Swedish forestry, includingprimarily environmental organisations andrecreationists, as the World Wildlife Fund andthe Swedish Association for the protection ofthe Environment. Not the least through theability to utilize the market power the environ-mental organisations have been very success-ful in affecting the forest sector. As a result ofthe activities of these organisations chlorine isno longer used by the Swedish forest industryfor bleaching, and most of the forest area ownedby the forest companies is or will be certifiedby the Forest Stewardship Council.

Sweden

4 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges

4.1 Environment vs. forest production

In an evaluation of the current status of theimplementation of the Forestry Act, done in1997 by The Forestry Board and the EPA it isconcluded that- regeneration results are unchanged but lower

ambitions are worrying for the future produc-tion. The regenerations requirements statedby the Forest Act is filled in 80% of the plantedarea and only in 68% of the naturally gener-ated area.

- Thinnings are not carried out to a sufficientextent

- Natural- and culture heritage considerationshave improved but every fourth harvested areadoes not fulfil the requirements of the For-estry Act.

- Increased is required for nature reserves, le-gal habitat reservations and nature conserva-tion agreements in order to increase the pro-tection of biologically valuable areas.

- Inventories, regional plans of action and con-tinuing education of the forest owners is re-quired.

- Supervision and continued evaluations of for-estry practises are required, for example inhabitats with endangered species

- The rules for legal habitat protection are in-sufficient and need an overview.

The Environmental Protection Agency (1996)reports that from 1992 to 1996 290 differentreservations covering a total of, 96,000 hec-tares, including 46,000 hectares of productiveforest area has been protected as nature man-agement or national parks. Half of this area isforest in proximity of high mountains, onefourth coniferous forest outside this area andthe rest broad-leaved forest mainly in South-ern Sweden. The total area corresponds to about0.2% of the Swedish forest area. The total pro-tected area (national parks, nature reserves orForest Service reserves in Sweden is 3.66%(832,000 hectares) of the forest area. However,of this area almost 80% is forests in proximityof high mountains which means that 43% of

this area is protected. Outside of the mountain-ous regions only 0.81% of the forest area isprotected.

Comparing the periods 1923-1929 and 1989-1993 the total area of old forest (older than 140years) has decreased. This is most obvious inNorthern Sweden (except for forest in themountain regions). In the North share of forestolder than 160 years has decreased with onethird during the last twenty years. In SouthernSweden a small increase has occurred.

Between 1991 and 1996 about 500 legal habi-tat protection agreements have been signed.This corresponds to a total area of about 1,000hectares. Half of the agreements concern pri-meval conifers forest. The average compensa-tion to the land owner paid by the State is35,000 Swedish kronor per hectare. It has beenestimated that about 25,000-30,000 hectarescan be considered for legal habitat protectionagreements. At the present level of funding itwill take 50 years to cover this area.

The first agreement between a landowner andthe State special management practices basedon environmental considerations was signed inthe spring of 1994. The period for the agree-ment is usually 50 years with an average costof 6,300 Swedish kronor per hectare. Since1994 and until 1996 190 agreements have beensigned covering a total area of more than 1,000hectares of forest area.

4.2 Other areas of conflict

4.2.1 Hunting vs. forest production

Hunting is of significant recreational and eco-nomical importance in Sweden. The numberof hunters has increased during the last dec-ades and is presently limited primarily by theavailability of lease of hunting rights. It is ob-vious that forestry and hunters often will havedifferent opinions on suitable population sizesof the hunted game species. These are moose,that increased in number up to the 80’s, androedeer, that has increased in population size

Sweden

in the southern parts of Sweden. Both thesespecies cause considerable grazing damage toforest plantations, which must be comparedwith the value of the hunting (Mattsson, 1992).

4.2.2 Reindeer management vs. forestproduction

Reindeer management has long traditions inthe northern provinces of Sweden. The rela-tion between forestry and reindeer managementis complicated, since present forestry practiceswould have negative as well as positive effectson the reindeer herds. Movement routes fromwinter grazing to summer grazing areas mightbe cut off through forest operations. Importantfood sources as lichens will decrease after har-vest of old forest. On the other hand the amountof green fodder will increase with availabilityof felling residues. The number of reindeer hasincreased from 200 000 animals to 300 000during the last decades and it is unlikely thatthese big herds can be maintained on naturalgrazing only. Probably supplementary fodderwill be needed. Thus, the future reindeer man-agement will be dependent on cooperation withforestry as well as on finding optimal herd sizes(Mattsson, 1992).

5 Conclusion and outlook

In many ways, Sweden’s history and experi-ence with forest policy, and the forestry insti-tutions that have evolved, are unique. They arethe consequence of the historical development,the importance of forestry in the economy, theownership structure of forest lands, and theattitudes of the people. Forestry policy gener-ally has been the outcome of consensus, therebymaking enforcement a matter of partnershipbetween the state and the forest owner ratherthan one of confrontation.

A major characteristic of Swedish forest policyand forestry institutions has been its flexibil-ity, despite significant public regulation andintervention. Major recent changes in policyhave involved a restructuring of the forest in-

dustry, with consequent privatisation of theForest Service and layoffs of substantial num-bers of workers, and adoption of greater mar-ket incentives at the forest level. These havemade Sweden’s forest sector more competitiveand, at the same time, a greater emphasis hasbeen put on ecological functions of the forestsand the environmental soundness of the prod-ucts.

Major changes can be expected in the future.Presently the government stimulates the estab-lishment of local collages. Many of those try tofind their identity within the forest sector butalso seek specialized forestry profiles in theireducational programs.

Another interesting fact is an upcoming dis-cussion about intensively managed forest lands;plantation forestry close to the pulp mills. Theseideas can be found in a report about Forestry2021 published by the National Environmen-tal Protection Agency. Other areas would bepreserved as reservations. This would mean amajor break with the present forest policy whereproduction and environmental considerationsgo hand in hand on the major part of the forestarea. Still another change that will affect theforest sector is the closing of nuclear powerplants. The demand for bioenergy will increase.This will influence the roundwood market andconsequently the forestry policy.

AcknowledgementsWe thank Arvid Engström for valuable com-ments on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Sweden

References

Ångström, G.1953. Snö, hagel, årsnederbörd, årets medeltemperatur. Atlas över Sverige 31-32: 1-7.Anon. 1993. Statistics Today for Tomorrow, FAO.Anon 1994a. The Forestry Act Valid from January 1, 1994. The National Board of Forestry, 551 83

Jönköping, Sweden.Anon 1994b. Sweden’s New Forest Policy. The National Board of Forestry, 551 83 Jönköping,

Sweden.Anon. 1995. Management, Conservation, Sustainable Development of Forests. The Case of Swe-

den. The National Board of Forestry, 551 83 Jönköping, Sweden.Anon. 1998. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 1998 Official Statistics of Sweden. National Board of

Forestry. Jönköping.Anon. 1998a. Skogsvårdsorganisationens utvärdering av skogspolitiken. Skogsstyrelsens

meddelande 1/98.Anon. 1998b. Den nya skogspolitikens effekter på biologisk mångfald. Naturvårdsverkets rapport

4844.Anon. 1998c. Skogsvårdsorganisationens utvärdering av skogspolitiken. Skogseko 1/98, p 9-23.Bostedt, G. and Mattsson, L. 1995. The value of forests for tourism in Sweden. Annals of Tourism

Research, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 671-680.Fredman, P. 1997. Styrmedel i skogen. Rapport. Sverige 2021-Skogsbruk. Naturvårdsverket.v Kooten, G.C., Vertinsky, I and Wilson. B. 1998. Forestry Policies: International Comparisons. CAB

International. Oxon, England. Forthcoming.Management, conservation and sustainable development of forests - The case of Sweden. Na-

tional Board of Forestry 1996. 551 83 Jönköping. 30 p.Mattsson, L. 1992. Skogens nyttigheter förutom virke.In: Vår skog - vägvalet, (Eds. Elmberg, J.,

Bäckström, P.-O. and Lestander, T. LT, Stockholm. Pp. 178-183.Mattsson, L. and Li, C.-Z. 1994. How do different forest management practices affect the non-timber

value of forests? - an economic analysis. Journal of Environmental Management 41: 79-88.Statistisk Årsbok 1998, 559 pp.Sjörs, H. 1956. Nordisk växtgeografi, 229 pp.The Swedish National Atlas: The Forest. 1990. Bra Böcker, Höganäs.

Additional information, data and maps are to be found at:

The web site SkogsSverige (“Swedish Forest“): www-forest.slu.se

Switzerland

1 The Country

1.1 Natural Conditions

1.1.1 Country Information

Switzerland lies in the central part of the Alpswhich extend from Southern France to Austriaand Slovenia. The Alps and Jura mountains withthe central Plateau in between determine thecountry’s broad geographical zonation (Bär1979; SAEFL 1997). Its surface covers an areaof 41,285 square kilometres. The greatest dis-tances of 350 kilometres and 230 kilometresoccur from west to east and north to south, re-spectively. The highest elevation point is theDufourspitze in the Monte Rosa massif in thecanton of Valais (4,634 metres above sea level)while the lowest is the Lago Maggiore in thecanton of Ticino (193 masl). The geological

formation was principally determined by thecollision of the European and African plates aswell as by several periods of glaciation. Fourmajor rivers originate in the Gotthard massif andtake their course towards different Europeanregions: - Rhine, Rhone, Ticino and Inn.

1.1.2 Regional Diversity

Switzerland can be divided into five regions(BRP 1998) with the following percentages ofthe territory (figure 1): Jura (12%), Plateau(23%), Pre-Alps (16%), Alps (40%) and theSouthern Alpine slopes (9%). The diversity ofclimatic and soil conditions ranges from low-lands to high mountain elevations. The rapidlychanging topography in the Alps and the Juramountains and the relief determined by the greatvalleys led to a large variety of landscapes and

Switzerland

Authors:Dr. Franz Schmithüsen,Chair of Forest Policy and Forest EconomicsETHZ, CH – 8092 Zuriche-mail: schmithüsen@waho.ethz.ch

Prof. Dr. Willi ZimmermannChair of Forest Policy and Forest EconomicsETHZ, CH – 8092 Zuriche-mail: willi.zimmermann@waho.ethz.chhttp://www.waho.ethz.ch/ppo/

Figure 1. Major Regions of Switzerland.Source: Based on Regional Forest Zones; Federal Office for Statistics

AlpsPre-Alps

Jura

SouthernAlps

Plateau

Switzerland

vegetation forms. Beyond the timber line mossesand lichens are found, and in a short distance aMediterranean flora with chestnut forests domi-nates in the southern foothills. In higher eleva-tions conifer forests are common whereas in thecentral part and in the Jura deciduous and mixedforests are predominant.

1.2 Social, Economic and Political Aspects

1.2.1 Population and Language Groups

The population (1996) amounts to 7.1 million ofwhich 17% are in the age group below 15 yearsand 15% in the group above 64 years (SFSO1998, 16-17). 19% of the inhabitants are expatri-ates. The average population density is 171 per-sons per square kilometre. However, it variesconsiderably among the regions with a large con-centration occurring in the Central Plateau, theNorthern foothills of the Jura Mountains and inthe Southern parts of the canton Ticino.

Switzerland is a country with four main languagegroups, in which people with different culturalhabits and historical traditions live together.According to the census of 1990 the main lan-guage groups are German (63.7%), French(19.2%), Italian (7.6%) and Romantsch (0.5%).8.9% of the population have indicated anotherlanguage as means of communication.

1.2.2 Employment and GDP

3.8 million (1996) are regularly employed in fulland part-time positions. 4.7% of the labour forceare occupied in the primary sector, 26.5% in thesecondary sector and 68.7% in the tertiary sec-tor (SFSO 1998, 16-17). The unemployment ratewas 3.7%.

In 1996 the gross domestic product (GDP) percapita was 25,400 US$ (SFSO 1998, 16-17). Itwas considerably higher than the average GDPper capita in the EU countries (19,333 US$) inthe same year. However, while the average an-nual increment in real terms of the EU coun-tries was positive (+1.4%) over the period 1990-

1996 the development of the Swiss GDP percapita was slightly negative (-0.1%).

1.2.3 The Swiss Federal System

Since 1848 Switzerland is a federal state with apolitical structure at three levels: the Federation,the Cantons and the local Authorities (Linder1998; SFC 1998). The Federal Constitution (FC)determines the division of competences betweenthe Federation and the Cantons. Powers whichare not constitutionally given to the Federationare original cantonal competences. Any newtransfer of powers to the Federation requires achange of the Swiss Constitution (Art. 3 FC).Since 1978, when the Canton Jura has been cre-ated, the country is formed by 23 Cantons, threeof them are divided into two half-cantons forhistorical reasons (Art. 1 FC). Each canton andhalf-canton has its own constitution, parliament,government and courts.

The cantons, (figure 2) are divided into repre-sentative political communes in which decisionsare made by local councils (ca. 80%) or by theassemblies of all citizens (ca. 20%). The degreeof autonomy given to local authorities is deter-mined by the cantonal constitutions and varieswidely. At present there are almost 3,000 com-munes; the number tends to become smaller dueto the merging of local units.

1.2.4 Elements of Direct Democracy

In addition to the representative elements (elec-tion of the members of parliament) the Swisspolitical system shows two significant elementsof direct democracy: the compulsory respec-tively the optional referendum and the popularinitiative. Both instruments are constitutionallyfounded and currently used in different ways onthe three federal levels of the country’s politi-cal system. In general terms the referendum isan approval or a veto cast by a popular ballotwith regard to acts of parliament and/or gov-ernment. The popular initiative is a political in-strument by which citizens may seek constitu-tional amendments, changes in legislation or the

Switzerland

adoption of new legislation. At the federal levelonly popular initiatives aiming at constitutionalamendments are possible (Art. 118ff. FC).

1.2.5 Political Organisation of the FederalState

The members of Parliament are elected by some4.6 million citizens. The Federal Assembly hastwo Chambers: the National Council with 200members elected by common rules validthroughout the Federation and the Council ofStates with 46 representatives elected (2 for aCanton; 1 for a Half-Canton) by the people ac-cording to the rules of each Canton (Art. 71ffFC). The United Federal Assembly i.e. bothCouncils together elect the seven members ofGovernment (Federal Council) and the Chan-cellor in charge of the Federal Chancellery.

1.2.6 Federal Government and Administration

The Government is formed by the Federal Coun-cil (Art. 95ff FC). It defines the fundamentalgoals of state action and determines the neces-sary resources for their attainments; representsthe Federation within the country and abroad;

conducts the preparatory procedure leading tonew legislation; submits proposals, laws anddecisions to the Federal Assembly; enacts regu-lations as empowered by the Constitution andby federal laws; and makes decisions with re-gard of important infrastructure and other works.The administration is organised in 7 FederalDepartments with the following competences:foreign affairs; home affairs; justice and police;defence, protection of the population and sport;finance; economic affairs; environment, trans-port, energy and communications.

2 Forest Resources and Their Uses

2.1 Forest History

As in the neighbouring countries the forests ofSwitzerland have been influenced and partiallytransformed by long lasting and changing hu-man interventions (Hauser 1972; Schuler 1980).Of particular importance was the medieval colo-nisation with land clearing in the Central Pla-teau and the Jura which peaked during the 12thand 13th century. Forests in the vicinity of vil-lages were intensively used for local wood sup-ply, food and other forest products, and as part

Figure 2. Cantons in SwitzerlandSource: Federal Office for Statistics, 1998.

VD

VS

BE

FR

NE

JU

SO

BL AG

SH

ZH

LU SZ GLNW

OW

TI

GR

SG

TG

ARAI

BS

GE

Switzerland

of the agricultural space in combined produc-tion systems. From the 15th century onwardlarge scale forest exploitation for mining, saltproduction as well as for artisanal and indus-trial uses developed. Wood exports mainly byfloating to Austria, Germany and Italy were an-other factor that sped up changes in the forestvegetation. An outstanding example in this con-text is the Swiss National Park in the Canton ofGrison: today many people consider the park tobe a typical natural landscape, although largescale clear cuts for local industries and woodfloating on the Inn to the salines in Austria werepractised over centuries (Parolini 1995).

An interesting aspect in the Swiss forest historyare the collective and communal land use sys-tems and the logging bans for forests with im-portant protective functions (Price 1990). Theyhave been common in the Alps and Pre-Alpssince the 14th century. In the Alps common re-source use systems have been maintained anddeveloped into communal and corporative for-est ownership. In other parts of the country for-est areas were divided among their owners andbecame private farm forests.

Already during the 17th and more strongly inthe 18th century the reduction of usable forestsand the fear of a general shortage of wood in-duced efforts towards a more sustainable utili-sation and management. The physiocratic soci-eties aiming at improvements of land uses andagricultural production played an important rolein the process of introducing improved forestrypractices. During the brief period of the HelveticRepublic (1798-1803) a project for a centralforest law was elaborated, but failed to beadopted (Schuler 1998). With the reconstitutionof cantonal powers in 1803 such efforts becameobsolete and forestry matters remained cantonalcompetences. The Swiss Constitution of 1848acknowledged this fact by not referring to for-ests and forestry at all.

During the 19th century local land slides andlarge scale flooding occurred in the cantonsGrison, Ticino, Valais and Uri in 1834; in theEmmental in 1837; and in the valleys of theReuss, Rhine, Rhone as well as in those of theSouthern Alpine slopes in 1839 (Schuler 1998).

They were associated with progressive clearcutting on steep slopes along the valleys. Thisled to an increasing sensitisation of the popula-tion and politicians. Personalities such as KarlKasthofer, Charles Lardy, Xavier Marchand,Elias Landolt and Karl Culmann made valuablecontributions and provided information to thepublic. The Swiss Forestry Society founded in1843 acted in the same sense. The most impor-tant result of this political process was the adop-tion of Article 24 of the Federal Constitution in1874 (Bloetzer 1978). It established a federalframe competence in mountainous areas for pro-tective measures against the effects of naturalcalamities, for reforestation and for the preser-vation of the remaining forests. Parliamentpromulgated the first federal forest act in 1876and in the 90th the positive impacts of federalresponsibilities on forests became visible. In1897 Article 24 of the Constitution was changedand a second federal forest law was promulgatedin 1902 for the country as a whole.

2.2 Forest Ownership

2.2.1 Ownership Pattern

326,000 ha or one third of the forest area are pri-vately owned. There are approximately 260,000owners with an average forest area of little morethan 1 ha each (BFS/BUWAL 1997). The pri-vate forests traditionally belonged to farmers, butthere is an increasing proportion of owners withprofessional activities in other sectors. Privateforests are frequent in the Pre-Alps (46%) andthe Plateau (41%) and of lesser importance inthe other regions. No recent data are availableon parcelisation. Public forests cover some878,000 ha or two thirds of the country’s forestsurface. Public tenure dominates in the Alps, onthe Southern slopes of the Alps and in the Juramountains, where 70-80% of the forests belongto the public owners. In the Plateau and Pre-Alpspublic ownership amounts to more than 50%. Theaverage size of holdings is small, with 70% of allpublic owners having less than 100 ha.

Different Groups of Public Forest OwnersMore than 90% of the public forests are ownedby local communities (boroughs), municipali-

Switzerland

ties and local corporations. The local commu-nities developed as associations of burghers,whose civic entitlements included the right toshare the timber and pasture in certain forestsaround settlements. During the 19th century thetenurial rights of these associations were recog-nised by forest legislation as full right owner-ship. Today 400,000 hectares or 50% of all pub-lic forests belong to this category. A second groupof owners are political municipalities managingat present 250,000 hectares or 30% of the publicforests. Their ownership results from a transferof local rights to the political entities during the19th century and from buying forests in recenttimes. The third group, classified as corporationsand co-operatives under the forest law, includesdifferent kinds of associations which own ap-proximately 100,000 hectares, (figure 3).

2.3 Land Use and Forest Resources

2.3.1 Overview on Land Uses

The last available figures on the overall landuse pattern in Switzerland date from the 1979/85 areal statistics (BRP 1998, 52), (figure 4).

Typical for an Alpine country is the consider-able proportion of other lands which includesrivers and lakes, vegetation on steep slopes andvegetation-less areas above the timber line. Al-together the figures on the existing land use pat-tern show that settlement and agricultural areas

amount to less than half (44.2%) of the coun-try’s surface. An update of the land-use censusbetween 1992-1997 in 9 cantons in the Westernpart of the country shows that the actual settle-ment areas have expanded by 14,000 hectares(BRP 1998, 53). A similar evolution has prob-ably taken place in the other parts of the coun-try. A quite different development can be foundwith regard to forests and wooded lands, espe-cially if one considers long term trends. Between1870 and 1996 the country’s forest area in-creased from 770,000 to 1,200,000 hectares orby almost 60% (SAEFL 1997b, 17).

2.3.2 Extent and Distribution of the Forests

The national forest inventory 1993-1995 showsa total forest area of 1,234,000 hectares (Brasseland Brändli 1999). In order to be defined asforest an area needs to meet a set of minimumcriteria such as a width of 25-50 metres, a coverof 20% and a height of 3 metres. The forest areaextends from 200m altitude in the southernTicino to 2,300 m at the timber line in the cen-tral valleys. Almost half (42%) of the forest ison slopes with a gradient greater or equal 40%and one fifth on slopes over 60%. Three quar-ters of the forests are situated in mountainousareas and half at altitudes higher than 1,000metres above sea level.

The forest cover amounts to 30% of the Swissterritory, with considerable regional variations.

Public Forests 73 %

Cantons5 %

PrivateForests27 %

Confederation1 %

Communes /Corporations

67 %

Figure 3. Forest Area by OwnershipSource: BFS/BUWAL, Jahrbuch Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz 1995, p 69.

Switzerland

South of the Alps nearly half of the land is cov-ered by forest. In the Central Plateau, which isthe country’s most densely populated region,forest cover is only 24%. A similar rate of for-est cover exists in the Alps (25%), where thehigh altitude is a natural barrier to tree growth.Regional variations are even more evident if oneconsiders the forest area per inhabitant. A citi-zen in the densely populated Plateau is sur-rounded by ten times less forest than his fellowcountryman living in the Alps, (table 1).

Relative to the National Forest Inventory data1983-1986 the forest area of the country in-creased by 4% or 47,000 hectares. Regionalvariations are considerable with a small increasein the Plateau (0.5%), the Jura (1.6%) and thePre-Alps (2.6%), and a large increase in the Alps(7.6%) and the Southern Alps (5.6%).

2.3.3 Tree Species and Age Class Distribution

Tree SpeciesThe national forest inventory sampled around50 tree species. The most important tree spe-

cies in Swiss forests are Norway spruce (Piceaabies, 39%), silver fir (Abies alba, 11%) andbeech (Fagus sylvatica, 18%). Other species likeScots pine (Pinus sylvestris), maple (Acer ssp),ash (Fraxinus excelsior) and oak (Quercus spp.)are fairly common but do not reach a high per-centage in the species composition. Typical alpinespecies are for instance European larch (Larixdecidua) and Swiss stone pine (Pinus cembra).

Coniferous species are predominant in the Alps(78%) and Pre-Alps (68%). In the Jura broad-leaved species, in particular beech (Fagussylvatica), prevail but spruce (Picea abies) andsilver fir (Abies alba) cover a considerable partof the forest area. This is also true for the Pla-teau, where the distribution of coniferous andbroad-leaved species is almost equal, (figure 5).A particular case are the Southern slopes of theAlps, where the climatic conditions favour alarger range of broad-leaved species, and whereland use practices increased the area of sweetchestnut (Castanea sativa) over centuries. 60%of all trees in Switzerland are coniferous and40% deciduous.

Figure 4. Land Use Pattern in SwitzerlandSource: BRP, Vademecum (p 53), Arealstatistik 1979/85.

Jura Plateau Pre-Alps Alps South. Alps Switzerland

Forest area 201 227 220 415 171 1,234in 1000 haNo. of inhabitants in 1000 1,018 4,091 827 643 293 6,872Forest area per capita in ha 0.19 0.05 0.27 0.64 0.58 0.18

Table 1. Forest area per capita by region

Other Areasincluding Rivers,

Lakes andvegetation-lessareas above the

Timber Line26 %

Settlements,Industry, TrafficInfrastructure

6 %

Agriculture AndHigh Altitude

Pastures38 %

Total Area 41,285 km 2(100 %)

Forests andWooded Lands

30 %

Switzerland

Age Class DistributionInformation on the age class distribution is onlyavailable for even-aged stands. Where the ageof even-aged stands was estimated in two thirdsof the cases based on defined parameters. Noinventory information is available for uneven-aged stands, which represent 15.7% of the totalforest area. The age class distribution in even-aged stands shows a below average representa-tion of the classes 1-20 and 41-60 years, and anover-representation in the classes between 80and 120 years as well as over 140 years (Brasseland Brändli 1999).

2.3.4 Growing Stock, Growth and AnnualFellings

Growing StockBetween 1986 and 1996 the total growing stockin stemwood with bark increased by 42 millioncubic metres to a total of 418 million cubicmetres of which two thirds (63%) are in the di-ameter classes between 30 and 60 cm. The grow-ing stock in stemwood without bark, excludingdead and down trees, is around 388 million cu-bic metres. In comparison with other Europeancountries the growing stock volume per hectareis exceptionally high. The Swiss average vol-ume per hectare is 362 m3, with increased by 25m3 within the last 10 years. The comparisonbetween regions indicates high growing stocks

per hectare in the Plateau (433 m3) and the Pre-Alps (461 m3), whereas growing stocks in theAlps (309 m3) and Southern Alps (215 m3) arebelow average.

Distribution by SpeciesSpruce represents almost half or 198 millioncubic metres and beech another 17% or 71 mil-lion cubic metres of the total volume of grow-ing stock. Altogether, conifer species contrib-ute more than two thirds (72%) to the country’sgrowing stock with as much as 79% and 88% inthe Pre-Alps and Alps. Even in the Jura and theSouthern Alps where broad-leaved species aremore predominant, the share of conifers in thetotal growing stock is more than half. The pro-portion of conifer species decreased by 1% ofthe total growing stock and by 4% in the South-ern Alps during the last 10 years.

Annual IncrementThe mean annual increment, measured asstemwood with bark at a callipering limit of 12cm amounts for the whole of the country to8.3 m3/ha. Higher increment rates exist in thePlateau (12.3 m3/ha) and the Pre-Alps (10.4 m3/ha) and lower rates in the Alps (5.7 m3/ha) andthe Southern Alps (4.2 m3/ha). Increment includ-ing ingrowth is even higher with an additionalvolume of one m3 per year and hectare on anaverage.

Figure 5. Regional Distribution of Coniferous and Broad-leaved SpeciesSource: National Forest Inventory 1993-95.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90ConifersBroad-leaved Species

Jura Plateau Pre-Alps Alps Southern Alps Switzerland

Switzerland

Balance between Growth and Wood RemovalsA comparison on the basis of stemwood with barkshows that the total annual growth volume of theforest in Switzerland of 9.8 million m3 exceedsthe combined volume of removals and naturallosses of 7.2 million m3 by 30%. If the annualgrowth volume is compared with the yearly re-movals for commercial use of 5.4 million m3

(stemwood with bark) the difference amounts tomore than 50%. Regional variations are an indi-cation for differences in the profitability of tim-ber harvesting. Whereas for instance in the Pla-teau and Jura the harvesting rates in relation togrowth volume turn around 60%, they are abouthalf in the Pre-Alps and Alps, and drop to 16%in the Southern Alps (SAEFL 1997b, p 45).

2.3.5 Forest Threats

Principal CausesThe national forest inventory 1993-95 identi-fied the extent of forest damages over a periodof 10 years. Storms (66%), insects (13%) andvitality losses (12%) are the principal causeswith a combined effect of more than 90% of allcauses. Landslides, snow, forest fires, fungi andavalanches are other agents of mainly local im-portance. In a period of 10 years the area af-fected by damages amounted to 235,000 hec-tares or 20% of all forests. The volume of com-pulsory harvesting was in the order of 22 mil-lion m3 or almost half of all fellings.

Physical Damages to Forest StandsThe second national forest inventory (1993-1995) recorded that 28% of the sampled treeson the permanent plots had physical damages.6.1% of all trees were damaged due to timberharvesting and another 2.0% due to other directhuman impacts. The regional variations of di-rect anthropogenic damages is considerable andrelated to the intensity of harvesting practices.

Damages to Regeneration by Browsing andGrazingFigures from the national forest inventory indi-cate that 14% of the young trees are damagedby game and another 4% by other factors. As inthe case of other forest damages, one has to con-sider that regional and local variations are sig-

nificant. Especially in the mountainous areas theeffect of browsing on the establishment of natu-ral regeneration is important. Grazing is anotherfactor which has an impact on 10% of the coun-try’s forests. According to inventory data it isstill practised rather intensively on 80,000 haand extensively on 36,000 ha. Of the total re-generation area of 160,000 ha approximately20,000 ha (11%) show effects from intensive orextensive grazing practices.

Environmental Monitoring SystemsThe impact of depositions of air pollutants onthe environment is subject to continuing debatesand it is still difficult to rely causes and effects(SAEFL 1997a; SAEFL 1997b, p 29). The Na-tional Air Pollution Monitoring Network(NABEL) measures trends and current air pol-lution levels throughout Switzerland with a net-work that has 16 stations. The National SoilMonitoring Network (NABO) monitors the con-tamination of soils at 105 permanent plots ofwhich one third are situated in forest areas(BUWAL 1993).

Monitoring of Crown DefoliationSince 1983 the state of crown defoliation hasbeen regularly monitored (SAEFL 1997b, p 31;Brang 1998). Until 1992 the annual inventoryof forest condition was consistently made onpermanent plots on a 4x4 kilometre grid as partof the SANASILVA programme. With progress-ing work of the national inventory monitoringwas subsequently reduced to a 8x8 kilometregrid. Since 1995 these plots have been assessedevery three years. The changes in the monitor-ing approach imply that comparisons over longertime periods need a careful analysis before con-clusions can be made. The measurement ofcrown defoliation refer to the needle/leaf lossesof trees with a diameter grater than 12 cm. De-pending on the magnitude of the loss a tree isassigned to one of the following defoliationclasses: Class 1 identifies tree crowns with lit-tle or no defoliation, class 2 defoliation between26 and 60%, class 3 and 4 crown defoliationabove 60%. Altogether defoliation of classes 2-4 increased from 13% in 1986 to 21% in 1996.

Switzerland

2.4 Silviculture

In Switzerland silvicultural concepts and prac-tices close to nature were developed(Leibundgut 1979, 1984; Ott et al. 1997; Schütz1990, 1994, 1997). Today silviculture close tonature aims in particular at favouring forestbiotope diversity and the potential of natural standdevelopment for ecological and economical rea-sons (Schütz 1998). It comprises a great diver-sity of silvicultural techniques according toLeibundgut’s principle of “free use of cuttings”.The reference for silvicultural considerations isthe classification of Swiss forest vegetation with71 defined communities based on floristical,physiognomical and ecological criteria (Ellenbergand Klötzli 1972; Keller et al. 1998).

High forests with even-aged, uneven-aged andselection-type stands cover 80% of the forest area.The remaining area comprises a variety of foresttypes such as coppice with standards, coppice andchestnut selva, open stands as well as brushwoodclose to the timberline, (table 2). Natural regen-eration (83%) and mixed regeneration (11%) arepredominant whereas plantations (6%) are of lit-tle importance. The proportion of naturally re-generated forest varies between the regions. It isparticularly high in the Alps and Jura, howeveronly about half in the Plateau region.

2.5 Forest Production

2.5.1 Harvesting Systems and Accessibility

Based on the data of the National Forest Inven-tory current harvesting methods combine handyarding (21%), winches (22%), skidding in for-

est stands (32%), skidding on roads (30%) andskyline and cable systems (20%). Whereas skid-ding in forest stands in combination withwinches is largely practised in the Jura and thePlateau, cable yarding combined with road skid-ding are common in the Alpine regions. Theforest road density changes with region and el-evation. Road density is between 40 and 60metres per hectare in the Jura and the Plateau,and between 10 and 20 metres per hectare inthe Alpine areas. Above 1000 metres elevationthe road density is less than half in comparisonwith the lowlands.

2.5.2 Timber Uses

Annual Wood ProductionAnnual wood production (BSF/BUWAL, 1997,72-73) oscillates since the 80th between four andfour and a half million cubic meter per year withan exceptional peak of 6.2 million in 1990 dueto wind throw. The repartition between saw andveneer logs (63%), wood for other industrialuses (17%) and energy wood (20%) has re-mained fairly stable over the years. Around threequarters of the annual production is coniferous.A significant aspect is the export of coniferouslogs which has risen from 400 000 cubic metersin the 80th to the present level of 700 000 m3/year. The export of hardwood logs turns around300 000 m3/year.

Wood ProcessingThe annual production of semi-processes prod-ucts (BSF/BUWAL, 1997, 85) shows the fol-lowing aggregates. Sawnwood production turnsaround 1.5 million cubic meters of which 90%are coniferous. Plywood production has always

Forest type Area in 1000ha %Even-aged high forest 837.3 67.9Uneven-aged high forest 96.3 7.8Selection-type high forest 52.4 4.2Other forest types 153.9 12.4Brushwood and inaccessible forests 94.2 7.6total 1,234.0 100

Table 2. Forest Area by Type of Forest

Source: National Forest Inventory 1993-95.

Switzerland

been small and practically disappeared since1990. Particle board production used to be at alevel of 600-700 000 cubic meters and has de-creased during the last years. In 1996 the pro-duction of wood pulp and cellulose amount toaround 900 000 tons. Paper production was atalmost 1.5 million tons relying to a consider-able extent on recycled waste paper and imports(BUWAL 1998a, 77-79).

2.5.3 Non-timber Forest Products

A recent report (SAEFL 1997b, 51-53) containssome information on a large variety of non-woodproducts. The study made an effort to quantifythe various components. Even if the results areonly of indicative value they show the order ofmagnitude of the importance of these products.Based on economic value estimates the collec-tion of mushrooms and honey, tree nurseries andChristmas tree production, bark chips and com-post mould, as well as fodder from pasturelandare of particular importance. Hunting and gameare another factor of considerable economicweight especially if the cost for equipment andpermits are taken into account.

2.5.4 Forest Functions

From a recent representative empirical study forthe whole of Switzerland (BUWAL 1998b) weknow that during the summer period almost 60%of the population visit forests daily or at leastonce a week, another 30% once or twice permonth. During the winter season daily andweekly visits amount to almost 40% andmonthly visits to over 30%, (table 3).

Based on a studied area of 160,000 ha indica-tive data on the protective importance of for-

ests in Switzerland was collected (SAEFL 1997b,65-68). They show that 42% of the forestsprovide protection against landslides withhigher proportions in the mountainous regions.Of the total area of water protection zones 50%or 65,000 ha are situated in forests. In the Al-pine regions of the country between 7 and 19%of the forests have special protective functionsagainst avalanches, (table 4). With regard to theimportance for conservation and landscape pro-tection one should mention that more than200,000 ha of forest are in areas which havebeen classified as landscapes of national impor-tance in federal inventories. Altogether 19% ofthe forests are located in federal inventories in-dicating high values to be protected.

3 Forest Economics

3.1 Forest and Forest Industries in theNational Economy

Share of the Sector in the Gross Domestic Prod-uct: In 1995 the total value added of the Swisswood processing industry was 5.4 billion Swissfrancs or 1.5% of the gross domestic product(BFS/BUWAL 1997, 81). The value added offorestry amounted to slightly more than 400 mil-lion Swiss Francs or 0.1% of GDP (BFS/BUWAL1997, 80). The contribution of the forest andwood processing sector to the national economyfell by 50% between 1975 and 1995, (table 5).

3.1.1 Wood Consumption

Total wood consumption (in roundwood equiva-lents) rose from 5 million m3 in 1975 to a peakof almost 9 million m3 in 1990. It dropped con-siderably in 1991 and oscillated at a level be-tween 6 and 7 million m3 in the following pe-

almost once / twice once / twice less than once neverdaily a week per month per month

Summer season 13.5% 44.3% 29.2% 9.2% 3.7%Winter season 9.0% 28.9% 33.5% 16.3% 12.2%

Table 3. Frequency of Visits to Forests by Seasons / Switzerland

Source: BUWAL 1998, Monitoring of Social Demands Towards Swiss Forests.

Switzerland

riod (BFS/BUWAL 1997). The overall con-sumption pattern followed the increase in popu-lation of 1 million inhabitants during the sameperiod. The per capita consumption remainedmore or less stable at 1 m3 per person varying an-nually between 0.9 and 1.3 m3 per capita. In 1996the final wood consumption by major components(in solid wood volume) showed the following pro-portions (BUWAL 1998, 12): one third of the con-sumption is wood for construction, furniture andwooden articles; one third is consumed as paperand packaging material; and one third is used forwood energy. In comparison with the correspond-ing figures of 1991 the consumption of wood forconstruction and furniture as well the use of woodfor energy have increased, (figure 6).

3.1.2 Wood Balance

The wood balance (in roundwood equivalents)shows that approximately two thirds of the con-sumption are compensated far by annual fellings.Imports were around 7 million m3 in 1996 and

exports around 5 million m3 (BFS/BUWAL 1997,96), (figure 7).

Export and Import Values (1 Euro=1,6 SFr): Infinancial terms exports amounted to 2,609 mil-lion Swiss francs (2.9% of all exports) and im-ports to 4,861 million (5.6% of total imports),(table 6). Net imports were 2,252 million Swissfrancs. 90% of the trade in unprocessed wood,semi-finished products, finished products and cel-lulose (1996) takes place between Switzerlandand countries of the European Union. Importsoriginate mainly from Germany, Austria, France,Italy and Scandinavia. Unprocessed wood andwood products exports go mainly to Italy and Ger-many as well as to France and Austria to a lesserextent.

3.2 Employment

Employment in the wood processing industryamounts to almost 90,000 jobs, which is 8% ofthe total industrial sector and 2.4% of the na-

Figure 6. Final Wood Consumption by Type of Product 1996 (solid wood)Source: BUWAL 1998; Endverbrauch des Holzes in der Schweiz 1996, p 12.

Table 4. Percentage of the Forest Area with a Special Function for the Protection of SoilJura Plateau Pre-Alps Alps South. Alps Switzerland

Studied area in ha 13,571 3,913 23,368 95,958 25,729 162,461Protection against landslides % 35 34 47 53 58 42Protection against avalanches in % 0 0 7 18 19 10

Source: SAEFL 1997b, p.66(modified)

Energy wood35 %

Buildings24 %

Furniture7 %

Paper / Cardboard25 %

Packaging7 %

Do-it-yourself1 %

Wooden articles1 %

Total 5.5 Mio m3

Switzerland

tional labour force (BFS/BUWAL 1997, 81).Joinery, furniture making and parquetry togetherwith carpentry and timber work provide twothirds of wood processing employment oppor-tunities. In comparison with the figures of 1975,employment in wood processing has remainedstable, (table 7) but its importance in the na-tional labour market has decreased.

Employment in the forestry sector is smaller andamounts to approximately 9,000 man year

equivalent in 1995 (BFS/BUWAL 1997, 80).Total employment including forest contractorsremained stable during the last 20 years. In thepublic sector there is a clear shift towards a per-manent labour force, whereas temporary labourdecreased by 70% over a period of 20 years.Productivity in wood production per hectareincreased. Between 1980 and 1996 labour in-put for wood production in the Plateau areadropped from 30 to 15 hrs/ha, in the Jura from20 to 10 hrs/ha, and in the Alps from 10 to 7hrs/ha (BFS/BUWAL 1997, 78).

1975 1985 1995Total value added timber industry. 3,900 4,650 5,410Sawmill industry 350 400 470Particle and fibreboard industry 100 150 170Pulp, paper and cardboard industry 600 800 930Joinery, furniture industry and parquetry 2,000 2,300 2,680Carpentry, timber work 600 800 930Others 250 200 230In % of the gross domestic product 2.8 2.0 1.5

Table 5. Economic Importance of the Wood Processing Industry: in Mio SFr (1 Euro=1,6 SFr)

Source: BFS/BUWAL 1997; Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz, Jahrbuch 1995, p 81.

Figure 7. Wood Balance of Switzerland 1975-1996 (in 1000 m3 roundwood equivalents)Source: BFS/BUWAL 1997; Jahrbuch Wald- und Holzwirtschaft 1996, p 49.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

Imports Exports Domestic yield Domestic consumption

1976 19961978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994

Switzerland

3.3 Profitability of Forest Enterprises

The federal forest statistics provide informationon 3,700 public forest owners with regard to in-come, expenditure and aggregates of production(BFS/BUWAL 1997). The statistics distinguishbetween management activities related to woodproduction, other production such as nursing andsmaller wood working units, and services for pro-tection and recreation, (figure 8). The Swiss for-est owner association offers an entrepreneurialaccounting system which is used by an increas-ing number of forest owners (WVS 1996). Addi-tional information is available from federal andcantonal budgets. Altogether the figures from theforest statistics show that from 1987 onward theproceeds from wood production and services donot cover fully the expenditures of public forestenterprises with the exception of 1990 with anexceptionally high log production volume due tothe Vivian storm catastrophe.

Financing of forest management activities, (fig-ure 9) depends increasingly on public expendi-ture for securing protection values and other

public interests (Schmithüsen 1996;Schmithüsen and Schmidhauser 1998). The pro-portion of proceeds from wood sales oscillatesfor all public forests at present at a level of 60%,and at a level of 40% in the Alpine region. Mul-tiple use forest management requires an expand-ing income basis from public sources. The fed-eral and cantonal governments, other publicentities but also the public forest owners them-selves contribute in various combinations.

4 Forest and Forest Related Policies

4.1 Legislation

4.1.1 Federal Constitutional Competences

The Swiss Federal government has a compre-hensive set of constitutional competences withregard to natural resources conservation and en-vironmental protection. The set includescompetences which were established in the 2ndFederal Constitution of 1874 in particular withregard to forests and protection from water ca-

Total Wood/ Pulp/ Paper Furniture,Wood Products Cellulose prefabricated Buildings

Exports 2,609 534 86 1,735 254Imports 4,861 1,114 311 2,124 1,312Net Imports 2,252 580 225 389 1,058

Table 6. Export and Import Values of Wood and Wood Products 1995: in Million Swiss Francs (1Euro=1,6 SFr)

Source: BFS/BUWAL 1997; Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz, Jahrbuch 1996, p 48.

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995Sawmill industry 9,621 8,501 5,435 5,938 5,113Particle and fibreboard industry 1,315 2,862 2,012 1,373 1,123Pulp, paper and cardboard industry 9,142 9,593 8,852 6,159 4,156Joinery, furniture industry and parquetry 41,901 55,704 53,191 52,816 50,726Carpentry, timber work 15,202 14,715 7,183 12,976 19,623Others 11,663 6,694 3,415 3,587 2,971Wood trade and transport 3,500 4,800 4,700 4,300 4,000Total wood processing industry 92,344 102,869 84,788 87,149 87,712in % nationally 3.9 3.7 3.1 2.9 2.4

Table 7. Number of employees in the wood processing industry

Source: BFS/BUWAL 1997; Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz, Jahrbuch 1996, p 81.

Switzerland

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

year

Other Production

Wood Production

Expenditure

Protection /Recreation

Su

m o

f re

ven

ues

rel

ativ

e to

to

tal

exp

end

itu

re

1977

1992

1987

1982

Investment and Financial Contributions of Land Owners

Owner�s Uses and Consumption Owner�s Interests and Values

Proceeds from Market Sales

Wood ProductionOther Forest Products

CommercialServices

Marketable InfrastructuralServices

Proceeds from Compensations and Contributions of Third Parties

Individual Users Private User Groups Public Local Entities

Proceesa from Federal and Cantonal Goverments

Compensations for Outputs and Services

Due to Public Requirements

Incentives for Outputs and Services

in the Public Interest

Figure 8. Proportion of Revenues by Output Segments in Relation to Total Expenditure ofPublic Forest Enterprises in Switzerland (Fixed Assets Excluded)

Source: Schmithüsen and Schmidhauser 1998, 12.

lamities (Art 24), and competences introducedby constitutional amendments after World WarII (Schmithüsen /Zimmermann 1999). The lat-ter refer to the protection of nature and land-scape (Art. 24 sexies), land use planning (Art.22 quater), environmental protection (Art. 24septies) and to economic welfare (Art. 31 bis).There are further federal competences whichenable policies that have important impacts on

Figure 9. Financing of Multiple Outputs and Services from Forest Land Management in Switzerland.Source: Schmithüsen and Schmidhauser 1998, 103 (translated and modified)

forest protection and forestry development. Thisrefers to cross-sectoral competences such astraining and education, scientific research, regu-lating commerce, entrepreneurial activities andemployment. It also includes sectorialcompetences such as for water protection andmanagement, agriculture and energy (Kissling /Zimmermann 1998).

Switzerland

4.1.2 Federal Forest Law of 1993 (FL)

Starting in 1985 a total revision of the forestlaw took place (Zimmermann 1988). The newFederal Forest Law was adopted by the twochambers of the federal parliament in 1991 andis in force since 1993. The law reacts to impor-tant changes of the role of forests in society andfocuses on two central issues. First, it aims at abalance between the interests and possibilitiesof forest owners, and the increasing and diver-sified interests of public user groups. Second, ittries to establish an equilibrium between publicdemands and public commitments in order toprotect forest lands and to maintain a wide rangeof socially desirable forestry outputs. The for-est law of 1993 retains the principle of forestprotection and conservation, which so far hasproved to be useful. It provides for amultifunctional sustainable forest management,which aims at the protection from natural haz-ards, wood production, recreational and educa-tional uses, landscape and nature conservationas well as at the forest sector development (Art.1 FL). The protection of nature and landscapesbecame one of the specific requirements to beaddressed in planning and management regula-tions. Forest utilisation may be reduced in cer-tain areas, if compatible with the general objec-tives of the law. In addition, specific forests maybe set aside by the cantons in order to maintainand conserve biodiversity (Art.20 FL). Withregard to forestry development, the law intro-duces the principle of compensation to forestowners, if they are required to carry out workor provide services of public interest at costswhich cannot be covered otherwise (Art. 36-38FL). Furthermore the law regulates the federalsupport of education and training as well as ofmonitoring activities (Art. 29, 33 FL). It alsoallows for the possibility to transfer specifictasks to non-governmental organisations, andcontains a new article which stipulates that thepublic and the political authorities have to beregularly informed (Art. 32, 34 FL).

4.1.3 Revision of Cantonal Forest Legislation

Because of the shared competences as stipulatedby the Federal constitution the cantons are now

in the process of revising their forest legisla-tion. Approximately half of the cantons alreadycompleted this task. The others have preparedprojects, which are at different stages of parlia-mentary deliberations (Keel/Zimmermann1997). Major issues which require cantonalregulation and which have raised conflictingdebates during the legal process are the defini-tion of minimum criteria for forest areas; thesystem of compensation in kind for land forwhich a clearing permit is issued; the regula-tion of access for mass-events in the forests;forest management planning; public financialtransfers to forest owners; and the organisationof cantonal forest services.

4.2 Actors in Forest and Forest RelatedPolicies

At the federal level the two chambers of parlia-ment and the Federal council are the principalactors in setting the Federal public forest policy.They are responsible for the programme formu-lation and annual budgetary decisions on pub-lic funding. Since 1998 policy implementationhas been the task of the Federal Department forthe Environment, Transport, Energy and Com-munication. Within the department the SwissAgency for the Environment, Forests and Land-scape is in charge of forest related matters, suchas game protection and protection against natu-ral calamities amongst others. At the cantonallevel forestry matters are dealt by various de-partments, such as the department for agricul-ture, public infrastructures and environment. APublic Forest Service with headquarters, fielddistricts and range units exists in all cantons(Zimmermann 1997). The conferences of theCantonal Forest Directors and of the chiefs ofthe Cantonal Forest Services act as liaison unitsbetween the cantons and with the Federal ad-ministration.

The Swiss Forestry Association, the Swiss For-est Owner’s Association and the cantonal affili-ates are the principal representatives of the for-est sector. The interests of the forestry personnelare represented by other specialised organisa-tions. In the wood processing sector a largernumber of associations exists representing dif-

Switzerland

ferent branches of manufacturers and wood prod-uct traders. Joint committees and liaison groupssuch as the Swiss Association for the Forest, theRio Committee on Forests and the Swiss WoodProcessing Industry Conference have been estab-lished. These organisations facilitate an exchangeof information and foster the co-operation amongthe different policy actors.

New actors appeared on the scene, which shapepolitical processes that lead to the adoption orreinforcement of forestry programmes(Schmithüsen 1995, 48). This refers to the roleof citizens and of the mass media, which ac-quired a much higher sensitivity for the politi-cal impact of conservation. It also refers to thespectrum of political parties, environmental par-liament groups and commissions as well as alarge number of professional organisations. Asignificant development is the creation and con-solidation of a wide range of non-governmentalorganisations, which engage in the promotionof nature protection (Schmidhauser et al. 1993;Schmidhauser 1997). These groups are not onlythe driving force behind articulating public con-cern, but they also assume a major role in theimplementation of conservation programmes byusing the expertise of their members. In addi-tion, as land owners they are increasingly in-volved in conservation. By using their rights ofappeal in the courts they are important agents inthe administrative decision making process. Theconservation groups formulated criteria on sus-tainable forest resources utilisation and set upmonitoring systems in order to evaluate policyresults. The Swiss environmentalist group in-cludes approximately 10 organisations with spe-cific nature conservation objectives. Together thefour largest groups have more than 300,000 mem-bers (including double membership).

4.3 Forest Policy Tools

4.3.1 Regulative and Incentive Instruments

Whereas previous policies relied mainly on pro-hibitions and obligations, a more proactive ap-proach with a wider range of policy instrumentsis now taken (Zimmermann 1994; Kissling/Zim-mermann 1996). Regulative instruments keep

their importance, in particular with regard toprotecting forest areas from uncontrolledchanges in land-use and from devastating prac-tices. Instruments which restrict forest manage-ment decisions, however, are replaced by jointmanagement systems which engage forest own-ers and public authorities on a negotiation andcontractual basis. A critical review of the exist-ing incentives for afforestation, forest roads andco-operation of forest owners is necessary inorder to develop output oriented systems andaccurate measures of performance and impacts.New categories of incentives for silviculturalpractices close to nature, multiple use manage-ment and promoting measures are introducedin order to maintain biodiversity. Compensatorypayments to forest owners for specific tasks orrestrictions in the public interest are providedfor by the new federal forest law. On the wholepolicy instruments are more specifically relatedto determined public targets with precise com-mitments of the beneficiaries.

4.3.2 Informational (persuasive) Instruments

With the shift to a collaborative forest policy,informational and persuasive instruments gainconsiderable weight (Schmithüsen 1997). Thisrefers to information and debate in parliamentand in other political entities, to information andarbitration processes among different interestgroups, and foremost to a more substantial dia-logue between forest owners and public authori-ties. Monitoring and performance measurementsystems produce information on forest health,composition of forest stands, and on the impactof uses, as they affect forest ecosystems andbiodiversity. There is also an increasing demandfor information on the economic performance offorest enterprises and on services rendered to thepublic as part of sustainable forest management.

4.3.3 Process steering instruments

These instruments are particularly concernedwith the organisational structures andcompetences, and communication practices be-tween governmental services and non-govern-mental organisations. Decision making proce-

Switzerland

dures among public agencies, establishment oflead agencies, organisation of public hearings,as well as regular assessment and evaluation areimportant issues. A noticeable element is thetendency to separate more clearly the regula-tory function of public forest services from theirrole as managers of the forest land. The alloca-tion of financial resources in relation to specifictargets based on global budgeting and/or serv-ice contracts is a new feature in public process-steering. It requires criteria of financial control-ling which measure efficiency (output/input),effectiveness (attainment of objectives),economy (real costs/standard costs) based onbest practices, as well as distribution effects.

4.3.4 Impact of Policy Measures

To date, there has been no systematic and sci-entific evaluation, either of the whole publicforest policy programme or of some individualor specific instruments or measures (Zimmer-mann 1998). However, there are data and infor-mation available which are suitable for a partialevaluation of the principal instruments of Swissforest policy. From the Forest Statistic Yearbook,for example, we know in which region or can-ton deforestation permits have been granted.With regard to the purpose of deforestation,three categories are dominant: traffic installa-tions, raw material and refuse (figure 10).

Quite similar is the situation relative to financialcontributions, the second principal instrument ofthe federal forest policy. From the budget andthe account of the Confederation we know theamount allowed each year by the Federal Assem-bly for the financing of three types of measures:forest tending, protection against natural hazards,and improvement of forest management condi-tions. An estimate, based on the 1996 figurespublished in the official gazette, shows that theshare of the Alps and Jura in the decisions madeby the Swiss Forest Agency on public funds wasas follows (Zimmermann 1998): 85% for foresttending; 100% for protection against natural ca-tastrophes; and 75% for measures of improvingforest management conditions. 90% of the deci-sions of the agency thus referred to forests inmountainous regions, which is considerablyhigher than the proportion of these forests withinthe country, (figure 11).

4.4 Forest Policy in Relation to other PolicyAreas

The various constitutional amendments have ledto a growing network of distinct policy areasfocusing on resources conservation and envi-ronmental protection (Schmithüsen 1995, 46f.Kissling-Näf and Zimmermann, 1998):- conservation linked to the use of renewable

natural resources such as forest, water protec-tion and fishery policies,

Figure 10. Authorised Deforestations in SwitzerlandSource: BFS (several annual editions)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Circulation

Sports

Miscellaneous

Raw Material

Overground Buildings

Refuse

Mains

ha

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Switzerland

- conservation of nature and landscape as wellas of the available space;

- conservation of the environment in particularwith regard to air, soil and pollutants;

- improvement of economic conditions and ruraldevelopment.

The programmes are not only complementary, butalso in competition with each other. Sectoral re-source policies tend to integrate conservationaspects, cross-sectoral conservation policies be-come increasingly involved in regulations of spe-cific uses, and land use planning integrates allaspects of land development and conservation.

A centre-piece in the expanding federal conser-vation policies was the adoption of the Natureand Landscape Conservation Act in 1966. Thelaw was the starting point for a new policy area,which evolved considerably during the eight-ies. The law emphasises the systematic conser-vation of biotopes, remaining mire landscapesand alluvial forests. The constitutional amend-ment on environmental protection of 1971 pro-vided for “protecting man and his natural envi-ronment from harmful or irritating impacts”. Itslegal implementation was achieved in 1985,when the Federal Law on Environmental Pro-tection was adopted. The law establishes guide-lines such as the principles of prevention andresponsibility of intervention. It further containsprocedural and administrative provisions withregard to the assessment procedures and thedesignation of competent governmental authori-ties. The law addresses specifically those con-servation areas, which had not been regulatedbefore: air pollution, protection against noise,

control of environmentally dangerous sub-stances, soil protection and waste disposal.

Conservation is not limited any more to the pro-tection of certain species or endangeredbiotopes. Instead it aims at the integration ofconservation aspects in the general resourcemanagement (Keller et al 1997). One of the mosteffective instruments in this context is the rightto appeal against deforestation permits (includ-ing forest roads) by recognised private natureconservation organisations. Similarly the envi-ronmental impact assessment gives an opportu-nity for conservation agencies and private or-ganisations to intervene in administrative pro-cedures at an early stage and thus to claim thatthe forest area is maintained.

The linkages between land-use planning andforest policy programmes follow from the Fed-eral Land-Use Planning Law (Art. 3) which pro-vides for the protection of natural resources andforests, preservation of landscapes and recrea-tional areas, as well as the maintenance of im-portant forest functions. The co-ordinating roleof land-use planning involves many sectoralpolicy areas including transport, energy, agri-culture, forestry, mineral exploitation, as wellas urban and regional development. Importantlinkages between land-use planning and forestpolicy exist when determining forest areas andforestry related land-use. The forest law pro-vides for the maintenance of the country’s for-est area and of the prevailing regional distribu-tion of the forest cover (Art. 5 and 7 FL). It stipu-lates that the borders of forests have to be de-fined and are to be marked in land-use plans

Figure 11. The Financial Support allocated by the Confederation for Forest Measures (1972-1996)Source: Swiss Forest Agency, Annual Reports

0

50

100

150

200

250

300Improvement of ManagementConditionsProtection against Natural Hazards

Forest Tending

Mio

.SF

r.

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1993

1995

1991

Switzerland

(Art. 11ff FL). The Federal Law on Land UsePlanning requires the agreement of the land-useplanning and forest authorities for forest roads,forest operating centres and other permanentinfrastructure (Art. 22 and 24).

4.5 International Policy Developments

4.5.1 Rio Process

National sustainability concepts and action plansare directly linked to the 1992 UNCED Confer-ence in Rio (Agenda 21). For this purpose aninterdepartmental commission representing 20offices was established in March 1993 (IDARio1996, 1997). An action plan for sustainable de-velopment, which incorporates mid-term plan-ning, has been devised by a small high levelexpert group (Conseil du development durable1997). Based on these findings, the FederalCouncil presented a strategy for sustainabledevelopment in 1997 which is now the maindocument for further actions (Federal Council1997). With regard to forests Switzerland is ac-tively involved in the Rio follow-up process(Mühlemann 1999).

4.5.2 Ministerial Conference on the Protectionof Forests in Europe

Switzerland made specific contributions in im-plementing the six resolutions of Strasbourg aswell the four adopted in Helsinki (ConferenceReport Vol. I 1998). With regard to the guide-lines for sustainable forest management and forthe conservation of biodiversity (ResolutionsH1, H2) the main actions are an assessment ofSwiss forest policy, a national debate on appro-priate criteria and indicators for SFM, the prepa-ration of a forest development strategy, the set-ting aside of forest areas and the establishmentof a gene reserves network (Conference ReportVol. II, 227, 1998). During the preparatory proc-ess of the Lisbon Conference an important con-tribution has been made by identifying moreconsistently the social aspects of sustainableforestry (FA/ECE/ILO 1997).

4.5.3 Bilateral undertakings

Switzerland has recently completed a processof bilateral negotiations with the European Un-ion which covered amongst others trade, trafficand research. There are considerable differencesbetween Switzerland and the EU countries withregard to policies on sustainable land-uses andenvironmental conservation, but the trends pointin the same direction (Zimmermann 1998): amore consistent consideration of ecological as-pects in resources utilisation, public compensa-tions of forestry outputs in the common inter-est, and policy measures which integrate forestrymore closely at regional and local levels intorural development. Switzerland is involved inthe process of shaping the Alpine Convention.

4.6 Forest Education and Research

4.6.1 Education and Training

Technical and professional forest education isprovided for by the forest worker apprentice-ship, by two forestry schools , and by the de-partment of forest sciences of the Swiss FederalInstitute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich. Thetendency that university graduates find employ-ment in a wide range of activities increases, par-ticularly as independent professionals or asemployees in private companies (Lanfranchi etal. 1995). On the job training and continuingeducation is promoted by a central Co-ordina-tion and Documentation Centre (CODOC)which was established in 1988 by the SwissForest Agency. Professional and technical train-ing and education in wood processing is pro-vided for by the Swiss School for Wood Tech-nicians and Engineers in Biel. The Federal In-stitutes of Technology in Zurich and Lausanneoffer special programmes for architects and en-gineers in wood construction and technology.

4.6.2 Forest Research

Forest research is mainly carried out by theSwiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow andLandscape Research (WSL) in Birmensdorf and

Switzerland

Davos and its two regional branches at the ETHLausanne (Antenne Romande) and Bellinzona(Sottostazione Sud delle Alpi). Major researchcontributions are made by the Department forForest Sciences and the Department for Envi-ronmental and Natural Sciences of the SwissFederal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zu-rich. There is a growing number of institutes inCantonal universities and in other Federal Cen-tres which are engaged in forest related as wellas nature conservation and environmental pro-tection research. Wood research is mainly un-dertaken by the two Federal Institutes of Tech-nology in Zurich and Lausanne, by the FederalInstitute for Materials (EMPA) in Dübendorf andby the Swiss Wood Engineering School in Biel.

5 Main Current Conflicts andChallenges

5.1 Changing Demands on Forests

Changes occur in a highly complex society inwhich the tertiary sector contributes more thanhalf of the employment and economic activity,technology and information processing inducerapid adjustments, and in which the majority ofthe population lives in an urban or peri-urbanenvironment. As a result the forests are lookedupon not only for wood production, but also asmultifunctional resource and recreational areawhich generates many benefits to the commu-nities and which may be used by the citizens.

Two recent studies, one for mountainous regionsand one for Switzerland as a whole, inquired thepopulation’s perceptions and attitudes of forests.Both inquiries clearly show that people judge thevalue of forests for recreation and as natural en-vironment to be significantly higher than the eco-nomic values of forests (BUWAL 1998b,Schmithüsen et al. 1998; Zimmermann et al.1996, 1998). The results of the studies furtherindicate that in future the forests will be appreci-ated even more for their immaterial values andless for the goods they produce. Besides the eco-logical and recreational values, the protective roleof trees and forests will increase in importance.Demands for multifunctional forests as well as

for local and regional differences determiningtheir social meaning will be more pronounced.Wood production will remain important but willrequire increasingly a well-reasoned justification.

5.2 Old and New Forest Related Conflicts

The conflicts relate to economic efficiency in aworld wide competitive environment versus cul-tural values and personal identification; to so-cial divergences on individual demands andpersonal choices versus efforts and restrictionsin the common interest for present and futuregenerations; and to a changing understandingof the role of government in natural resourcesconservation. They involve contradictory inter-ests between the expansion of public infrastruc-ture and settlement areas versus maintaining theforest cover; between compensatory afforesta-tion and natural forest successions versus agri-cultural and touristic land use; between forestproduction and technology versus use restric-tions and nature conservation; between the in-terests of land owners and other users; and be-tween various kinds of recreational uses. Con-flicts exist with regard to various options of for-est management which result from contradic-tory positions of forest owners and forest serv-ices, non-governmental organisations and thepublic. Such conflicts reveal more fundamentaldisagreements on political and institutional is-sues in particular on forest sector regulation atthe local, regional and federal level, on finan-cial contribution to provide multiple benefitsfrom forestry; and on the role of public admin-istrations and non-governmental association inrural and urban developments.

5.3 Policy Development

Policy formation and implementation is increas-ingly concerned with the role of forests as parts ofnature and landscape, as parts of the global envi-ronment and as integrative elements of culture.Policy processes lead to a wide range of pro-grammes with growing impact on forest protec-tion and forest management. This involves cross-sectoral programmes of nature and landscape pro-tection, land-use planning and environment as well

Switzerland

as natural resources and regional developmentpolicies. A broad policy network emerges that in-tegrates different social regulations related to theprotection and sustainable use of forests. This raisesissues on the relevance of forest policy for theobjectives and measures of neighbouring pro-grammes, and refers to the impacts of policieswhich address other land-uses and cross-sectoralconservation. The linkages between differentpolicy areas have become a central element inshaping future forestry practices.

Forest planning which largely focussed on regu-lating timber flows and forestry practices hasnow an additional and crucial task in implement-ing complex policy networks at local and re-gional levels. It is an integrative part of deter-mining varying and multifunctional land-use andlandscape management, which considers eco-nomic outputs and values associated with na-ture to be of equal importance.

5.4 Challenges to Sustainable ForestryPractices

The expanding range of conservation needs,combined with more information on the valuesof biotopes and ecosystems leads increasingly toconcerns on the ways and means in which forestsare to be utilised and managed (Schmithüsen1995, 49). Forestry is no longer a uncontestedsectoral activity, which is left to forest ownersand foresters. Forest owners are accountable forthe far reaching demands of conservation groupsand the increasingly sensitive public. Forest man-agement is not limited to its traditional role ofensuring sustainable wood production. Itintegrates many more aspects and has to provethat the forest uses safeguard biodiversity andprotect cultural and aesthetic patterns.

A combined approach of conservation and sus-tainable uses puts new demands on forest man-agement in order to acknowledge the interde-pendence between investments in resources uti-lisation and restrictions of uses. This requirespolitical arbitration processes based on a broaderperspective of the economic and social issuesat stake. Conservationists need to understand therationale of forestry activities within the broader

context of regional development. Forest man-agers need to understand that economic andcompetitive wood production implies a compro-mise between uses and preservation and thatalternative solutions are as much political astechnical issues.

The values associated with forests are locallyspecific, and have different implications in timeand space. Forest management practices whichare flexible and multipurpose oriented facilitatethe integration of varying priorities. It providesfor a kind of utilisation which satisfies differentgroups of the community and leaves opportuni-ties related to changing social demands. For suchreasons conservation of natural forests,silvicultural practices close to nature, and se-lective uses which maintain specific ecosystempotentials will gain even more importance. Theneed to satisfy different user groups and simul-taneously accommodate changing demands onforests has shaped forestry practices in Switzer-land. As a result Swiss forests are characterisedby a large variety of vegetation and selectiveutilisation patterns, which in turn are a valuableasset for the future.

5.5 Challenges to Forest Owners

Due to the high share of public forests in Swit-zerland and in view of the strong instrumentsfor direct democratic intervention at all levelsof the community, the objectives of what is tobe considered as appropriate forest practices willbecome more and more subject to pluralistic po-litical bargaining processes. Such processes willbe of particular importance when local and re-gional decisions on forests are at stake. Thechange from the principle of sustainable woodproduction to the much broader meaning of sus-tainable forest management offers a basis formore differenciated and locally specific man-agement objectives which correspond to theneeds of the land and the public. Such a changeis facilitated by the fact that the past and currentforest management in Switzerland has led toforest stands which allow a variety ofsilvicultural treatments and which have a highpotential for protecting biodiversity and con-serving nature.

Switzerland

The challenges to public forest owners are fore-most to react to changing public demands in atransparent manner and to use decision makingprocesses that favour a consensus among usergroups. This again implies the task to convincethe political bodies to provide the necessary or-ganisational and financial means formultifunctional forestry practices sustaining avariety of public uses. The challenges to pri-vate forest owners are in particular to articulatetheir immediate interests, to deal with externaldemands largely focussing on immaterial val-ues, and to maintain their autonomy in manage-ment decisions in a situation where they dependincreasingly on financial support and compen-sations from public entities.

5.6 Challenges to Foresters

A new repartition of the commitments of own-ers, public entities, user groups and non-gov-ernmental organisations in a combined multi-purpose resources management perspective isthe consequence. The self-financing capacity ofthe forest sector has to be seen within a politicalframework that stimulates sustainable produc-tion satisfying private and public interests. Thechallenge to foresters in Switzerland will be todetermine the actual and potential benefits fromforests, to define the ecological limits of uses,to analyse competing as well as complementarydemands and to evaluate the impacts of alterna-tive management strategies. Their work relatesto the significance of forests in the overall land-use patterns and as a constituting element oflandscapes and environment. All this requireseconomic thinking, knowledge of political proc-esses for arbitration and consensus finding, andopenness for the social dynamics which deter-mine a specific set of demands in a country, aregion and at a given locality.

5.7 Challenges to Education and Research

Swiss forest research and education are atpresent in situation of rapid and rather profoundchanges moving from the established pattern ofapplied forest sector activities to a much broader

perspective of natural resources managementand environment. The new mandate of the WSLadopted by the Supervisory Council (ETH Rat)in 1997 shows this evolution. The institute’sprogrammes focus now on landscape includingsocial aspects, on forestry with more attentionon economic factors, and on protection fromnatural hazards including monitoring and evalu-ation. The central theme are terrestrial ecosys-tems that are less intensively used and the im-pacts which result from human interventions andconservation measures. Similar developmentsexist at the ETH Zurich with efforts to createbroader networks integrating environmental sci-ences and disciplines concerned with land-use,primary production and rural development. In-ternational research co-operation such asthrough IUFRO and IPCC as well as Europeannetworks such as Cost and FAIR are of consid-erable importance in reorienting and broaden-ing national research programmes.

5.8 Challenges to Public Forest Administra-tions

The multiple demands on forests in a rapidlyevolving economic and political environmentrequire the maintaining of the high level of forestmanagement and a flexible adaptation of forestrypractices to the complex interactions betweenprivate and public interests. The streamlining ofstate intervention in accordance with the princi-ples of new public management is one of the im-portant factors of change. It implies a more pre-cisely defined balance between political targetsand commitments, between public benefits andfinancial resources, and between multiple forestryoutputs and cost sharing to produce such outputs.New ways of implementing public policy pro-grammes based on target oriented outputs andcontractual arrangements have been introducedin order to improve the efficiency of the publicsector and to link more consistently commitmentsand required resources. The forest sector and for-est administrations have, in fact, been chosen inseveral cases as pilot projects in order to gainexperiences with the application of new publicmanagement concepts.

Switzerland

The diversification of public demands on for-ests, a new understanding of sustainable devel-opment, profound changes in the relationshipbetween government and citizens as well asstructural limitations on financial resources aredecisive factors that determine the range of ac-tion of public forest administrations. In futurethis requires even more than now:- openness and flexibility in reacting to public

demands on forests and forestry practices;- comprehensive and continously renewed

knowledge on the ecological, social and eco-nomic criteria which determine their politicalrelevance;

- transparency in the preparation of decisionsand negotiation abilities with non-governmen-tal organisations, citizen groups and other ad-ministrations;

- and economic thinking in efficiently usingscarce public funds for specific tasks in orderto foster multifunctional forest resource devel-opment.

The ongoing changes, both at the level of thefederal government and of the cantonal forestservices, are steps in this direction. Further ef-forts will be required to ensure sustainable usesand the conservation of nature in the forests ofSwitzerland.

Switzerland

References Cited in the Text

BÄR, O. 1979. Geographie der Schweiz, Zürich.BSF/BUWAL. 1996. Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz: Jahrbuch 1995. Bundesamt für Statistik/

Eidgenössische Forstdirektion, Bern, 147p.BSF/BUWAL. 1997. Wald- und Holzwirtschaft der Schweiz: Jahrbuch 1996. Bundesamt für Statistik/

Eidgenössische Forstdirektion. Bern, 143p.BLOETZER, G. 1978. Die Oberaufsicht über die Forstpolizei naach schweizerischem

Bundesstaatsrecht. Zürcher Studien zum öffentlichen Recht, Nr. 2, Schulthess PolygraphischerVerlag, Zürich.

BRANG, P. 1998. Sanasilva-Bericht 1997. Ber. der Eidgenoess. Forsch.anst. Wald Schnee Landsch.345, 102p.

BRASSEL, P. and BRÄNDLI, U.B. 1999. Schweizerisches Landesforstinventar, Ergebnisse derZweitaufnahme 1993-1995. Eidg. Forsch.anst. für Wald, Schnee und Landschaft, Birmensdorf.

BRP. 1998. Vademecum Raumplanung Schweiz. Bundesamt für Raumplanung, Bern, 168p.BUWAL. 1993. NABO Nationales Bodenbeobachtungsnetz. Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 200, Berne,

175p.BUWAL. 1998a. Endverbrauch des Holzes in der Schweiz 1996. Environmental Documentation No

94, Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft, Bern, 106p.BUWAL. 1998b. Monitoring of Social Demands Towards Swiss Forests. Research Project of the

Institute for Sociology, University of Berne and the Chair of Forest Policy and Forest Econom-ics of the RTH Zurich; Final Report.

CONFERENCE REPORT. 1998. Follow-up Reports on the Ministerial Conference on the Protection ofForests in Europe; Vol. I, Strasbourg and Helsinki Resolutions, Vol. II, Sustainable Forest Man-agement in Europe / Country Reports. Third Ministerial Conference on the Protection of For-ests in Europe, Lisbon, 100 p. / 274 p.

CONSEIL DU DEVELOPPEMENT DURABLE . 1997. Nachhaltige Entwicklung - Aktionsplan für die Schweiz.BUWAL Dokumentationsdienst, Bern, 31 S.

ELLENBERG, H. and KLÖTZLI, F. 1972. Waldgesellschaften und Waldstandorte der Schweiz. Mitt. derEidg. Forschungsanstalt für Wald, Schnee und Landschaft, Band 48: 587-930.

FAO / ECE / ILO. 1997. People, Forests and Sustainability – Social Elements of Sustainable ForestManagement in Europe. International Labour Office, Sectoral Working Papers, Geneva, 213 p.

FEDERAL COUNCIL. 1997. Sustainable Development in Switzerland – Strategy. BUWAL,Dokumentationsdienst, Bern, 13 S.

HAUSER, A. 1972. Wald und Feld in der alten Schweiz. Artemis, Zürich und München.IDARIO. 1996. Nachhaltige Entwicklung in der Schweiz. BUWAL Dokumentationsdienst, Bern,

53 S.IDARIO. 1997. Nachhaltige Entwicklung in der Schweiz – Stand der Realisierung. BUWAL

Dokumentationsdienst, Bern, 58 S.KEEL, A. and ZIMMERMANN , W. 1997. Der Waldgesetzgebungsprozess in den Kantonen.

Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen, 148/12, 973-982.KELLER, P.; ZUFFEREY J-B. and FAHRLÄNDER K. L. 1997. Kommentar NHG – Kommentar zum

Bundesgesetz über den Natur und Heimatschutz. Schulthess Polygraphischer Verlag, Zürich.643 S.

KELLER, W.; WOHLGEMUTH, TH.; KUHN, N.; SCHÜTZ, M and WILDI , O. 1998. Waldgesellschaften derSchweiz auf floristischer Grundlage. Mitt. der Eidg. Forschungsanstalt für Wald, Schnee undLandschaft, Band 73,2: 93-357.

KISSLING-NÄF, I. and ZIMMERMANN, W. 1996. Aufgaben- und Instrumentenwandel dargestellt amBeispiel der schweizerischen Forstpolitik. Swiss political science review, 2, 47-79.

KISSLING-NÄF. I. and ZIMMERMANN, W. 1998. Formulation and Implementation of a National ForestPlan in Switzerland – A Country Report. Paper presented to the Seminar on National Forest

Switzerland

Programmes, Freiburg/Brsg.LANFRANCHI, F.; SCHMITHÜSEN, F. and ZIMMERMANN, W. 1995. Die berufliche Situation junger

Forstakademikerinnen und Forstakademiker – Ergebnisse einer Befragung der Diplomjahrgänge1988-1992. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 1995 (146) 6: 417-438.

LEIBUNDGUT, H. 1979. Wald - Mensch - Waldbau. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 130/9-10, 280 S.

LEIBUNDGUT, H. 1984. Die Waldpflege. Verlag Haupt Bern/Stuttgart, 214 S.LINDER, W. 1998. Swiss Democracy – Possible Solutions to Conflict in Multicultural Societies.

Macmillan Press, 2nd Edition, 210 p.MÜHLEMANN, P. 1999. Suivi forestier de Rio: Activités, évaluation der résultats, perspectives.

Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 150. 1999. 1:12-16.OTT, E.; FREHNER, M.; FREY, H.-U. and LÜSCHER, P. 1997. Gebirgsnadelwälder. Verlag Paul Haupt,

Bern, 287 S.PAROLINI, J.D. 1995. Zur Geschichte der Waldnutzung im Gebiet des heutigen Schweizerischen

Nationalparks. Diss. ETH, Nr. 11 187, Zürich.PRICE, M. 1990. Mountain Forests as Common-property Resources Management Policies and Their

Outcomes in the Colorado Bockies and the Swiss Alps. Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge derProfessur Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie, ETH Zürich, Nr. 9, 251p.

SAEFL. 1997a. The environment in Switzerland 1997. Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forestsand Landscape, Berne, 372p.

SAEFL. 1997b. Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in Switzerland. SwissAgency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, Berne, 80p.

SCHMIDHAUSER, A.; Schmithüsen, F. and Zimmermann, W. 1993. Zum Verhältnis zwischenForstwirtschaft und Natur- und Landschaftsschutz. Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 202, Bundesamtfür Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft, Bern, 212p.

SCHMIDHAUSER, A. 1997. Die Beeinflussung der schweizerischen Forstpolitik durch privateNaturschutzorganisationen. Mitt. der Eidg. Forschungsanstalt für Wald, Schnee und Landschaft,Band 72(3), Birmensdorf, 247-495.

SCHMIDHAUSER, A. and SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1998. Finanzierung einer multifunktionalenWaldbewirtschaftung öffentlicher Waldeigentümer im Schweizerischen Alpenraum. In: Sekot,W. (hsg.). 1998: Beiträg zur Forstökonomie - Festschrift für o.Univ. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Sagl.Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Sozioökonomie der Forst- und Holzwirtschaft, Bd. 31, 173-198.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1995. Evolution of Conservation Policies and their Impact on Forest policy De-velopment: The Example of Switzerland. The Commonwalth Forestry Review, Vol. 74(1),45-50.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. and KAZEMI, Y. 1995. Analyse des rapports entre les attitudes des gens envers laforêt et leurs attitudes envers la gestion forestière. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen146 (1995) 4, 247-264.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1996. Communal Forest Tenure in Switzerland: Towards Co-Financing ForestManagement Systems. In: Forstwissenschaftliche Beiträge der Professur Forstpolitik undForstökonomie der ETH Zürich, Nr. 17 (1996), 201-211.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1997. Forest Legislation Developments in European Countries. Forum de PoliticaForestal 1996: 125-137; Centre Tecnologic Forestal del Solsones, Solsona/Spain.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1998. International Legal Instruments Relating to Forests and Forestry in theContext of Rural Development. Paper Presented to the Final Scientific Conference of COSTAction E3 Forestry in the Context of Rural Development; Villa Real / Portugal, May 1998.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. and SCHMIDHAUSER, A. 1998. Verbreiterung der Ertragsbasis als Voraussetzung fürdie Finanzierung einer multifunktionalen Leistungserstellung der Forstbetriebe öffentlicherWaldeigentümer in der Schweiz. Centralblatt für das gesamte Forstwesen, 115. 1998. 3/3: 99-121.

Switzerland

SCHMITHÜSEN, F.; WILD-ECK, S. and ZIMMERMANN , W. 1998. Wissen, Einstellungen sowieZukunftsperspektiven der Bevölkerung im Berggebiet zum Wald, zur Forstwirtschaft und zurForstpolitik. Ergebnisse einer Befragung in sechs schweizerischen Gebirgskantonen.Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsprojekt COST E3, Professur Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie,ETH Zürich, 210p.

SCHMITHÜSEN, F. and ZIMMERMANN, W. 1999. Forests, Forestry and Forest Policy in Switzerland –Basic Information and Institutional Framework. Arbeitsberichte, Internationale Reihe. Professurfür Forstpolitik und Forstökonomie, ETH Zürich.

SCHULER, A. 1980. Wald- und Holzwirtschaftspolitik der alten Eidgenossenschaft. Beiheft zu denZeitschriften des Schweizerischen Forstvereins, Nr. 68, ETH, Zürich.

SCHULER, A. 1998. Wald- und Forstgeschichte. Skript zur Vorlesung 60-316, Departement Wald-und Holzforschung, ETH, Zürich.

SCHÜTZ, J.-PH. 1990. Sylviculture 1: Principes d’éducation des forêts. Presses polytechniques etuniversitaires romandes, 243 S.

SCHÜTZ, J.-PH. 1994. Der naturnahe Waldbau Leibundguts: Befreiung von Schemen undBerücksichtigung der Naturgesetze. SZF 145/6, 449-462.

SCHÜTZ, J.-PH. 1997. Sylviculture 2: La gestion des forêts irregulières et mélangées. Pressespolytechniques et universitaires romandes, 179 S.

SCHÜTZ, J.-PH. 1998. Close-to-nature Silviculture: Is this Concept Compatible with Favouring Spe-cies Diversity in Forests? Forestry (submitted for publication).

SFC. 1998. The Swiss Confederation 1998 - A Brief Guide. Swiss Federal Chancellery, Berne,64p.

SFSO. 1998. Statistical Data on Switzerland 1998. Swiss Federal Statistical Office, Berne, 33p.WVS. 1996. BAR Grundlagenhandbuch. Waldwirtschaftsverband Schweiz, 3. Aufl., Solothurn.ZIMMERMANN , W. div. Jahrgänge: Rückblick auf die wichtigsten forstpolitischen Entscheide des

Bundes. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen, 1983, S. 259; 1984, S. 339; 1985, S. 275;1986, S. 281; 1987, S. 321; 1988, S. 283; 1989, S. 287; 1990, S. 249; 1991, S. 265; 1992, S.249; 1993, S. 313; 1994, S. 257; 1995, S. 379.

ZIMMERMANN , W. 1988. Auf dem Weg zu einem neuen Schweizerischen Waldgesetz. Forstarchiv1988/59, S. 106.

ZIMMERMANN , W. 1994. Neue Instrumente braucht das Land. Umweltrecht in der Praxis, 8, 237-263.

ZIMMERMANN , W.; WILD-ECK, S. and SCHMITHÜSEN, F. 1996 . Einstellungen der Bergbevölkerung zuWald, Forstwirschaft und Forstpolitik. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 147 (1996)9, 727-747.

ZIMMERMANN, W. 1997. Gedanken zu aktuellen Entwicklungen und Trends bei den Forstverwaltungender Schweiz. In: FAO/ECE/ILO, 1997: People, Forests ans Sustainability. Sectoral WorkingPaper, 205 – 210, International Labour Office, Geneva.

ZIMMERMANN , W. 1998A. Evaluation of Policy Means Focused on Forests and Forestry in Switzer-land. In: GLÜCK Peter and WEBER Michael (eds,): MOUNTAIN FORESTRY IN EUROPE– Evaluation of Silvicultural and Policy Means. Publication Series of the Institute for ForestSector Policy and Economics, Vol. 35, Vienna 1998

ZIMMERMANN, W. 1998B. Entwicklungstrends der Forstpolitik in der Schweiz und der EuropäischenGemeinschaft. Beitrag zur Jahrestagung des Waldwirtschaftsverbandes Schweiz, September1998.

ZIMMERMANN , W.; SCHMITHÜSEN, F. and WILD-ECK, S. 1998. Main Findings and Policy Implicationsfrom the Research Project Public Perception of Mountain Forests in Switzerland. In: Wiersum,F. (ed.) 1998. Proceedings of Working Group 1, Final COST Conference, Vila Real / Portugal.

Switzerland

Useful Internet AddressesDepartment of Forest and Wood Sciences; ETH http://www.waho.ethz.chChair of Forest Policy and Forest Economics http://www.waho.ethz.ch/ppo/ Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research http://www.wsl.ch/Federal Office for Statistics Vademecum Forest http://www.admin.ch/bfs/stat_ch/ber07/dtfr07f.htmSwiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape SAEFL http://www.admin.ch/buwal/- effor2 http://www.effor2.ch/News from Environment Legislation http://www.umwelttech.ch/gesetz.htm

Swiss Forestry Society http://www.forest.ch/index.htmSwiss Forestry Association WVS http://www.wvs.ch/Forestry School Maienfeld http://www.fzm.ch/CODOC (Info Forest Employment) http://www.codoc.ch/LIGNUM Promotion of Wood http://www.lignum.ch/index.htmlSwiss Wood Energy Association http://www.vhe.ch/

Alpine Convention - Index Page http://www.cedar.univie.ac.at/data/alpenkonvention/AMBIOS Environment http://www.ambios.ch/Mountain Forest Project http://www.bergwaldprojekt.ch/Greenpeace Switzerland http://www.greenpeace.ch/WWF Switzerland http://www.wwf.ch/Pro Natura http://www.pronatura.ch/LOGPOOL Forest Links http://www.logpool.ch/

Switzerland

Ukraine

1 The Country

Ukraine (Ukrainian Ukraina) is the largest stateof Europe after Russia. Ukraine includes thesouth-eastern part of the East European Plainand the Ukrainian Carpathians, which formpart of the Eastern Carpathians. Its total areacomprises 603,700 square km (233,090 sq mi),with a maximal east-west extension of 1,316km (818 mi), and a north-south extension of893 km (555 mi). It is located: eastern lengthfrom 22 Grad 08 Minutes till 40 Grad 05 Min-utes northern latitude from 52 Grad 18 Min-utes till 44 Grad 22 Minutes.

1.1 Nature

Two great tectonic structures dominate the ter-ritory of Ukraine - the East European platform,and the Alpine geosynclitic region. The plat-form is a rigid, low motion tectonic structurewhose lower part consists of ancient crystalinemountainous rock (granite, basalt, crystalslates, etc.), while the upper part is made of

insignificant layers of sedimentary rocks (sand,clay, lime, etc.). The Alpine geosynclitic re-gion (Carpathians and Crimean mountains) isan area of relatively young, intensive tectonicmotions. Sedimentary mountainous rock domi-nates its structure.

Most of the territory of Ukraine is dominatedby the East European plain. Mountain rangesonly rise in the west (Ukrainian Carpathians)and in the extreme south (Crimean mountains).The highest point in Ukraine is Hoverla (2061m) in the Ukrainian Carpathians. The plainscover almost 95% of the country, with an aver-age elevation of 175 m above sea level. Thereis a considerable surface incline from north tosouth and from west to east (to the Dnieper).The largest rivers are Dnieper, Dnister, Bugand Donets.

The climate is predominantly moderate conti-nental, except for a narrow strip along thesouthern shore of the Crimea, which has a sub-continental climate. Typical continental climatecharacteristics increase from the west to the

Ukraine

Contact Address:Ukrainian State University of Forestry and Wood Technology290057 Lviv, Ukraine, Gen.Chuprynka str., 103tel/fax: +380-322-971765, 352269, tel: +380-322-352411e-mail: ukrdltu@forest.lviv.uaRector, Prof. Dr. Yu. Tunytsya

Figure 1. General view of Ukraine among neighbouring states

L�viv

Luts�k

Zhytomyr

Chornobyl�

KirovahradChernvtsiUzhhorod

Kryvyy Rih

Mykolayiv

Reni

Kherson

Illichivs�k

SevastopolSimferopol�

Odesa

Izmayil Kerch

Berdyans�kMariupol�

Zaporizhzhya

Dcnets�kDnipropetrovs�k

Luhans�k

Kharkiv

Chernihiv

KIEV

Yalta

CrimeanPeninsula

Bukovina

Bessarabia

Dnipro

BELARUS

SLOVAKIA

HUNGARY

ROMANIA

SERBIA

POLAND

RUSSIA

0 100 200 km

0 100 200 ml

MOLDOVA

Black Sea

Sea ofAzov

Ukraine

east, and there is some variation in climaticfactors (precipitation, humidity, wind regimes)in relation to latitude.

The coldest month is January, with an averagetemperature of -7°C in the north-east to 4°Calong the southern Crimea. The warmest monthis July, with average temperatures of 18°C inthe west, 19°C in the south-east, 22-23°C inthe south, and up to 24°C along the southernCrimea. The average annual precipitationamounts to 550-650 mm in the mixed forestzone, 450-650 mm in the forest-steppe zone,300-350 mm in the south, over 1000 mm inthe Crimean mountains, and over 1500 mm inthe Carpathians.

The following agrosoil zones can be found inUkraine: Polissya, Forest-Steppe, Steppe, DrySteppe, and Carpathian and Crimean moun-tain regions; they all show a wide variety ofsoil structures.

Derno-podzolic soils are predominant in thenothern regions. There is deficiency in humusand nutrient substances in those soils. But theapplication of organic and mineral fertilizersas well as lime application increases its fertil-ity. The lowlands in the Polissya are occupiedby meadow and meadow-swamp soils.

In the Forest-Steppe zone, especially in Volynand Podolsk Hills, gray and dark-graypodzolized soils prevail. Ukraine is famous forits chernozem soils (44% of its territory), whichare the most valuable in the region. In the mid-dle Forest-Steppe zone soils are predominantlypodzolized, and they gradually change intotypical chernozem southwards. Solid tracts ofchernozem soils are deposited in the Steppezone.

Dark chestnut and chestnut soils are typical ofthe southern coastal regions and the NorthernCrimea.

The vegetation of Ukraine is rich and diverse.The natural flora consists of about 30,000 spe-cies, including 4,000 sea plants, 15,000 mush-rooms and micromycetes, over 1,000 lichens,800 mosses, and 4,523 vascular plants. An ad-

ditional 1,000 species of vascular plants arecultivated in forests and botanical gardens. Inaddition to the native flora of Ukraine, vegeta-tion continues to diversify by introduced spe-cies.

About 600 species of higher plants are endemicto Ukraine. More than 600 species are rare andendangered and need protection. About 30%of the native plant species grow in forests, hedgerows, and forest meadows; 15% in dry and wetmeadows; 20% in steppe; 10% in swamps andwetlands; 15% are found in waste-land andfallow habitat; with an additional 5% exfoli-ates and 5% on saline lands and along seashores.

Certain zones are found within the territory ofUkraine: mixed forest zone (Polisya), forest-steppe zone and steppe zone:

Ukrainian Polissya. The zone of mixed forestsin Ukraine occupies the northern part of its ter-ritory. It is called the Ukrainian Polissya andcovers 14,5% of its territory (113,5 thousandsq. km). The Polissya is one of the most im-portant forest resource regions in Ukraine. Pine-oak forests are predominant in a large part ofits area. Oak-hornbeam forests grow in thesouthern part. The largest area of swamps inUkraine is in the Polissya. These are lowlandswamps with rich and diverse plant cover.

Forest-Steppe. The forest-steppe zone is situ-ated south from the zone of mixed forests,stretches widely for 250-350 km from west toeast, and occupies 202,8 thousand sq. km(33,6% of its territory). A peculiar feature ofthe zone is the alternation of vast steppe areaswith strips of broad-leaved forests. Forests oc-cupy about 15% of the zone and are more regu-lar in the western part of the Forest-steppe. Herebeech, oak-pine, oak-hornbeam, and alder for-ests grow. The number of species such as oaks,hornbeams and limes increases eastwards. Pineforests grow on sandy terraces.

Steppe. The Steppe zone is situated in the south-ern part of Ukraine and stretches for 1100 kmfrom south-west to north-east and for 500 kmfrom north to south to the Black and the Azov

Ukraine

seas and to the foothills of the Crimean moun-tains. The total area is 240,2 thousand sq. km(about 40% of the Ukrainian territory). As toits soil-climatic conditions this zone is dividedinto the northern, central, southern and drySteppe. Formerly steppes were covered withnatural grass vegetation. At present they areploughed up. Natural vegetation is preservedon the slopes of gullies, at the foothill regionsof the Crimea and in some nature reserves.

Ukrainian Carpathians. The natural complexof the Ukrainian Carpathians consists of thePre-Carpathian hilly plain, mountain rangesand Zakarpatya low land, it occupies 37 thou-sand sq. km. Forests cover 40% of its area,natural forage lands - 35%, and agriculturalland - 25%. In the Ukrainian Carpathians thereare more than 2 thousand higher sporiferousand flowering plants. Among flowering plantsthere are 70 tree species, 110 bush species, theremaining part being grass vegetation. Fivealtitudinal vegetation belts can be identified:1) oak forests growing in the foothills ofZakarpatya, at an altitude 100-580 m above sealevel, where common and sessile oaks, beeches,hornbeams, ashes, elms, and birches prevail;2) beech forests (altitude - 450-1030 m) withstrips of pure beech, fir-beech and fir-spruce-beech forests. This zone occupies 70% of the

Ukrainian carpathians area; 3) spruce forests(up to 1470 m) with strips of pure spruce andmixed (fir and beech) forests; 4) thesubalpestrine belt (1200-1600 m), where moun-tain pine, alder, blackberry, bog bilberry, andrhododendron prevail; 5) an alpestrine belt, theso-called, the poloniny (1800-1850 m above sealevel), here the major areas are under grassvegetation.

The Crimeans. The Crimeans are divided into3 natural geographic zones: the Foothills, theMain range and the Southern coast of the Cri-mea. The Crimeans stretch for 150 km in lengthand up to 50 km in width along the Southerncoast of the Crimean peninsula. The mountainvegetation is very diverse. The northern slopesare chiefly covered by oak and beech forests,the southern ones - by separate forest tractsconsisting of common and Crimean pine, oakand beech forests. There are many relict plantspecies here.

1.2 Society

On August 24, 1991 the Supreme Soviet ofUkraine passed the Act of Independence forUkraine. On December 1, 1991 an all-Ukrain-ian referendum was held which supported in-

Figure 2. Natural zones on the territory of Ukraine

POLAND

BELARUS

ROMANIA

MOLDOVA

RUSSIA

RUSSIABlack Sea

Sea of Azov

Steppe

Forest Steppe

The Crimeans

ukrainian Polissya (mixed forest)

Ukrainian Carpatians

Kiev

Odesa

L�viv

Donets�k

Kharkiv

Ukraine

dependence with 90% of all votes. Ukraine is apresidential parliamentary republic. Its capitalis Kyiv. The head of state (president) is electedby the citizens for a five-year term. The legis-lative body is the parliament (Verkhovna Rada)which is elected for a four year term and con-sists of 450 people’s deputies. There are fiftyregistered political parties, and the factions ofeight parties (and blocs) are represented inVerkhovna Rada.

Ukraine is an industrial-agrarian country. It isrich in coal, iron, ore, manganese, nickel anduranium. The leading industrial branches in-clude ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, ma-chine, ship and instrument building, space tech-nology and aircraft construction, power engi-neering, mining industry, as well as food andtextile industries. Overall, there are almost 300industrial branches. The total arable land areaamounts to 34,2 million ha. Construction andtransportation systems are well developed, andthe labour force is highly qualified. Reformsare under way to aid Ukraine’s transformationfrom a planned market system to a marketeconomy. It has opened its doors to foreign capi-tal investments, international cooperation, andtourism. Reforms touch all areas of life -economy and policy, science, culture and edu-cation.

The value of Ukraine’s gross domestic product(GDP) in 1995 was estimated at $35.9 billion.Agriculture, which includes forestry, accountedfor 13.2 percent; industry, which includes min-ing and manufacturing, accounted for 34.4 per-cent; trade and other services accounted for 36.9percent; and other sectors, including construc-tion, accounted for 15.5 percent.1

The population of Ukraine is 50.9 million(1998), with a population density of 85,7 per-

sons/square km. The population consists of 72% Ukrainians; the remainder represents a mixof Russians, Jews, Belorussians, Moldovians,Bulgarians, Hungarians, etc. Overall, morethan 110 different nationalities are represented.About 68 percent of the population lives in cit-ies and towns.

The country’s labor force totals approximately28 million people. About 40 percent of work-ers are employed in industry, 40 percent in theservice sector, and 20 percent in agriculture andonly 0,3 percent in forestry. Unemployment isrising steadily, especially in the form of hid-den unemployment, which includes people whohave been kept on payrolls but have not beenpaid salaries.2

The transition from the Soviet period hasbrought serious new problems. Much of the oldelite (nomenklatura) has weathered the transi-tion well. Many Soviet-era managers and fac-tory directors retained their positions and prof-ited from privatization. Highly placed mem-bers of the Communist Party hierarchy and se-curity apparatus moved into business, often ofa dubious kind. A thin stratum of new rich hasbegun to appear.

For the vast majority of the population, how-ever, the transition has meant a catastrophicdecline in living standards. Since 1991 the av-erage standard of living has declined by 80 per-cent. An estimated 45 percent of the popula-tion, especially the elderly, now lives below thepoverty level. Unemployment is growing, andhealth care is deteriorating. Life expectancy ofmales has dropped from 65 to 58 years. Eco-logical disasters, poor diet, and other factorshave lowered resistance to diseases. Epidemicsof diphtheria, cholera, and hepatitis have beenfrequent in recent years. A tragic consequence

1"Ukraine,” Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights re-served.2"Ukraine,” Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights re-served.

Ukraine

of the Chernobyl’ explosion has been a largeincrease in thyroid cancer in children.3

Ukraine is moving towards integration intoEurope by developing its national economy,creating a social system and coping with eco-logical crises.

2 Forest Resources and Their Uses

2.1 Forest History

During the first millennium A.D., almost allof Ukraine was covered with forest, except thesteppe zone, where tree growth was restrictedto gullies and river banks. The Polissya zone,Carpathians and Crimean mountains had analmost closed forest canopy. Only swamps,sandy soils and steep mountain slopes remainedtreeless. The forest-steppe zone, especially atGalychyna and Podillia, was also denselywooded. The most comprehensive informationon forest distribution in the Ukraine during the16th and 17th centuries can be gleaned fromBeauplan’s maps (Guillaume le Vasseur Sieurde Beauplan (1959)), and the maps of forestdistribution during the first millennium. Thesemaps verify that a considerable decrease offorested land occurred. During the 19th and20th centuries, the virgin forests of the Polissyaand the forest-steppe zone were reduced tosmall remnants. According to the 19th centuryforest maps, coniferous forests dominated inthe forest fund land of Polissya. The main spe-cies was pine, intermixed with small numbersof oak, black alder, poplar, etc.

From 1946 until 1978, about 3.5 million ha ofnew forests were created in Ukraine. Affores-tation occurred particularly in the steppe zone,where the forested area increased by a factor of2.5 to 3. Overall, the increase in forested areaduring this period was a mere 3%.

Development of industry during the second halfof the 19th century increased demand for tim-

ber and led to the mass destruction of forests inUkraine.

The natural composition of forests deteriorated,along with a decline in forest resources andoverall wooded area. As a rule, valuable spe-cies such as oak and pine were felled in Polissyaand the forest-steppe zone, and beech in theCarpathians. They were replaced by less valu-able species such as hornbeam, maple, limetree, and birch, etc.

Excessive exploitation of the Carpathian for-ests resulted in a 25% decrease of oak and beechforest during the last 100 years. This in turnled to soil erosion, increased flooding and othernegative impacts.

Deforestation was mainly linked with the needfor land for agricultural purposes. Large areasof Ukrainian forests were replaced by agricul-tural crops or settlements. Also, deforestationfor increased land utilisation, by making pas-tures in mountainous regions (like Carpathiansand Crimea), was recorded.

2.2 Forest Ownership (privatization,fragmentation)

Ownership of natural resources, including for-ests, is determined by the Constitution ofUkraine. Article 13 of the Constitution declares:“Land and fossils, the atmosphere, water andother natural resources which are within theterritory of Ukraine, as well as natural resourcesof its continental shelf, are subject to the own-ership rights of the Ukrainian people. The own-ership right is executed on behalf of the Ukrain-ian people by the bodies of state and local ad-ministration within the limits set by this Con-stitution.”

The ownership of forests and their use are de-termined by the Forest Code. Article 6 of theForest Code declares: “All forests of Ukrainebelong to the state. On behalf of the state, man-

3"Ukraine,” Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights re-served.

Ukraine

agement of the forests is carried out byVerkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Verkhovna Radadelegates its powers of forest management tocorresponding Radas of people’s deputies de-termined by this Code and other legislative acts.The Radas of people’s deputies award land ar-eas of the forest fund for permanent use or takethem back within their competence in the fash-ion determined by this Code.”

The state forest land, which is managed by theState Committee of Forestry of Ukraine (Kyiv),contains 73.2% of the total forest area, withthe remainder of forests in long-term use un-der the management of peasants’ unions andother users.

Some scientists, politicians, and specialists onUkraine, question the value of forest privatiza-tion, as it may result in the deterioration of thestate of forests, lead to a decrease in productiv-ity, and exert a negative impact on the climateas well as recreative, protective and other use-ful forest functions.

2.3 Land Use and forest resources

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

Ukraine has the largest area of arable land inEurope and almost 40% of the world’s totalarea of the most productive black soils. Thedistribution of lands by different types is pre-sented in figure 3.

The state forest land of Ukraine amounts toabout 10 million ha, 8.6 million ha of which iscovered by forest vegetation. There are 0,17 haof forest per person. The total forest cover ofthe country is 14.3%. Forest plantations makeup 40% of all forest land. The total forest stockamounts to 1.3 billion cubic meters.

2.3.2 Extent and Distribution of the Forests

The forests of Ukraine show a very uneven dis-tribution. In Polissya, the percentage of woodedarea is 26.1%; in the forest-steppe zone, 12.2%;

in the steppe zone, 3.8%; in the Carpathians,40.5%: and in the Crimea, 32%.

This uneven distribution of forest resources andthe current level of forested area are the resultof climatic conditions and anthropogenic in-fluences over a long period of time. For exam-ple, from 1814 to 1914 the forested area ofUkraine decreased by 30.5%.

The most wide-spread conifer species are pine,spruce, and fir. Oak, beech, and white mapledominate among the deciduous species. In85.3% of all forested area, these species pre-dominate. Overall, forests in Ukraine show thefollowing composition: 47.7% coniferous;41.7% hardwood broad-leaf species; 10.9%softwood broad-leaf and brushy species.

The age structure of forests is characterized bythe predominance of young (32% of all forestedarea) and middle-aged stands (44%), with arelatively small percentage of mature (11%) andripening (13%) stands.

The percentage of stands with a prevalence ofmature trees of such valuable species as pineand oak with tall trunks is low (2% and 1.9%,respectively). The percentage of mature standshas decreased sharply, due to intensiveclearcutting, mostly before 1965. This resultedin the depletion of forest resources and the de-crease of water-protection and other protectiveforest functions.

2.3.3 Tree species origin and distribution

Favourable soil-climatic conditions support adiverse species composition in Ukraine’s for-ests. Twenty-five valuable deciduous and co-niferous species grow within the country’s ter-ritory, including high-quality timber speciessuch as oak, beech, maple, white maple, andash (table 1). There is also a considerable ad-mixture of such species as cherry, pear, maple,and white maple, which form valuable raw ma-terial for the furniture industry.

Ukraine

2.3.4 Total Growing Stock, Growth and TotalFellings

The general state of forests in Ukraine does notmeet ecological and economic requirements.Great damage occurred during the reconstruc-tion of the national economy period in the post-war years. Felling rates at that time exceededscientifically substantiated standards. This re-sulted in changes in forest structure, deteriora-tion of natural ecosystems, degradation of veg-etation cover, and depletion of forest resources.Excessive thinning of plantations (improve-ment felling) and forest draining during 1970-1980 did not lead to the desired results. Theproductivity of forest plantations used by non-specialized departments (specifically of theagricultural enterprises), is low. Inadequatemanagement practices have led to forest dam-age by pests and diseases.

Logging volume has been reduced from 15.3million cubic metres in 1990 to 12.1 millioncubic metres in 1995. A dangerous situationhas developed through an attempt to meet thenation’s timber demands. The annual shortageamounts to 18-20 million cubic meters, andonly 30-35% of the country’s actual timberneeds can be met by utilizing local resources.

The total forest stock of Ukraine is estimatedat 1.3 billion cubic meters, with an average

stock of timber per ha of 153 cubic meters, andan annual increment of 4.2 cubic meters perha.

2.3.5 Forest threats

All forests of Ukraine are heavily impacted byanthropogenic factors, along with the damagecaused by a number of biotic and abiotic fac-tors.

During 1981-1991, 2,500 ha of forest died be-cause of industrial emissions. The general de-cline of industrial production in recent yearshas led to a decline of emissions (by 40% from1991-1995). The output of atmospheric pollut-ants from stationary emission sources alone de-clined by 8% from 1994 to 1995.

According to 1995 figures, the contribution ofvarious industrial branches to overall emissionsamounts to the following percentages: electricpower, 33%; metallurgy, 25%; coal industry,23%; chemical industry and oil refineries, 2%.The decrease of total emissions (caused by theeconomic crisis) coincides with structuralchanges of the emissions. The use of low-qual-ity coal by electric power plants has led tohigher levels of sulfur and ash, increasing theamount of detrimental emissions from manyUkrainian plants. Forest damage is highest

Figure 3. Structure of land resources of Ukraine

(3) 2%

(2) 2%(9) 4%

(8) 2%

(7) 2%

(6) 4%

(5) 18% (4) 9%

(1) 57%

arable land - 1

perennial plantations - 2

land for hay production - 3

pastures - 4

forest land - 5

developed land - 6

open bogs - 7

open land withoutvegetation cover - 8water - 9

Ukraine

Notes: origin A - aboriginal species (native); I - Introduced.*Spreading: 1) Western and right-bank of Polissya; 2) Left-bank of Polissya; 3) Right-bank of Forest-Steppe; 4) Left-bank of Forest-Steppe; 5) Steppe (including the steppe of Crimea);6) The Crimea mountains (The Crimeans); 7) The Carpathian Mountains; 8) Trans-Carpathian.

Species Origin Spreading*Abies alba Mill. A 7Acer platanoides L. A 1,2,3,4,7,8A. pseudoplatanus L. A 3,7,8Alnus glutinosa (L) Gaertn. A besides 7A. incana (L) Moench. A 1,2,7Betula pendula Roth A everywhereB. pubescens Ehrh. A 1,2Carpinus betulus L. A 1,3,7,8Castanea sativa Mill. I 6,8Cornus mas L. A 3,4,5,6,8Fagus sylvatica L. A 7,8Fraxinus exelsior L. A everywhereLarix decidua Mill. A 7Picea abies (L) Karst. A 7Pinus sylvestris L.. A 1,2,3,4,6Populus nigra L. I 5P. tremula L. A everywhereQuercus robur L. A 1,3,6,7,8Q. borealis Michx A 5,6Robinia pseudoacacia L. A everywhereSalix alba L. A 1,2,3,4,6,7,8Taxus baccata L. A 1,2,3,4,6,7,8Tilia cordata Mill. A 3,6,7,8T. platyphyllos Soop. A 7Ulmus carpinifolia Rupr. ex Suckow. A 1,3,7,8

Table 1. Main types of wooden species

Figure 4. Dynamics of the main felling in ha and the allocated and actual harvest

6034,15846,15904,15883,46105,4

51194950,45238,15558,45754,7

2680025000

26000 23900 23200

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995years

Estimated felling site, 1000cubic meterscut in 1000 cubic meters

hectares cut

Ha

Ukraine

around the main industrial centers of the coun-try.

Due to harmful emissions, the protection func-tion of many forests has been lowered consid-erably, leading in turn to a decrease in standgrowth. In the Severodonetsk region, for ex-ample, average annual growth of young pinehas decreased by 50-59%, due to pollution. Insome cases, pollution has led to complete deg-radation and even the death of stands.

The Chernobyl catastrophe had a very damag-ing impact on Ukraine’s forests. An area of 3.5million ha was polluted with radio nuclides,and 200,000 ha had to be taken out of the har-vest plans. As a result, the Polissya region alonesuffers an annual loss of 11 million cubic me-tres of wood.

In Ukraine, the proportion of mature standsamounts to no more than 4.2% of the entireforested area, which compares badly to the sci-entifically based norm of 17%. Most of the in-dustrial wood is thus harvested in the course ofthinning and sanitation cutting. Excessive cut-ting of mature stands leads to an overall de-crease of the forests’ health and a weakeningof the forest ecosystems. As a result, infesta-tions with harmful pest species (bark beetles,fungal diseases, etc.) may occur. Pest infesta-tion is a particularly serious problem in thenortheastern part of Ukraine. In recent years,there has been a marked spread of such dis-eases, which now affect about 10% of allforested areas.

Another factor in the destabilisation ofUkraine’s forest is fire. In recent years, therehas been an increase in forest fires. From 1989-1992, an average of 3,000 fires a year were re-ported, damaging about 2,300 ha of woodland.In 1994, 7,400 fires were reported, damaging3,100 ha of forest land.

Visitors to the forests caused about 95.1% ofall fires in 1994; 0.1% were due to logging ac-tivity, 2.1% to agricultural combustion, 0.4%were caused by lightning, and other reasonsaccounted for 2.3%.

In some years, strong winds account for con-siderable forest damage. They are most detri-mental to pure fir plantations and poorly man-aged areas (over-thinned stands, badly locatedcuts, ignorance of main wind direction, etc.).

Wet snow may also cause some forest damage.In 1996, stands of birch, fir, and artificial pineplantations in the western part of Ukraine wereheavily affected by wet snow.

2.4 Silviculture

Regeneration of forests in Ukraine is donemostly by replanting. In 1995, 38,600 ha ofnew plantations were established on forest fundland, with an additional 12,900 ha planted inquarries, ravines and other unfavourable areas,and 1,900 ha were planted to create wind belts.

Today, Ukraine has about 1.4 million ha ofnewly planted field protection and erosion con-trol belts, 150,000 ha of which cover the banksof small rivers and ponds, and 440,000 ha serveas wind belts, protecting up to 13 million ha ofarable soil.

However, today’s system does not provide ad-equate protection to agricultural fields fromwater and wind erosion. Some farms do nothave wind belts at all, while others only have afew. Ca. 30% of all forest belts are in an unsat-isfactory condition and in need of reconstruc-tion. Planting happens too slowly, and riverbanks are in need of further afforestation. Over-all, the existing system does not favour the pro-tection of agricultural landscapes and the landfund.

Through the establishment of new plantations,the use of nature’s productivity could be in-creased, along with the overall amount offorested area. Introductions as well as naturalselection and genetic manipulation leads to afurther increase in valuable woody species.

Forest cultures (plantations) were first intro-duced in Ukraine at the end of the 17th/begin-ning of the 18th centuries. Before the 20th cen-

Ukraine

tury, technologies for establishing forest plan-tations, advanced soil preparation and furthertreatment of young trees had already been de-veloped and improved.

During the past 70 years, more than 5 millionha of forest cultures and 1.74 million ha of windbelts were planted. The forest cultures use about20 different species of conifers and broad-leaftrees, and about 40 types of the highly produc-tive domestic species.

Since 1971, a special inventory of valuable seedstands has taken place. Selected seed trees aremarked within the stands, and their seeds areused to establish special plantations, which inturn supply young trees for further plantings.

The principal method for the creation of forestcultures in Ukraine is sowing and planting(80% are planted).

One of the management goals of Ukraine’s for-esters for the 21st century is to increase thecountry’s forested area by 25%, for which anadditional 5 million ha need to be planted.

2.5 Forest Production

2.5.1 Harvesting systems, accessibility

According to Ukrainian legislation, main fell-ing include 3 systems: clear cutting, selectivecutting, and gradual cutting which are inter-nationally well known.

The selection of a specific cutting type is influ-enced by organizational and technical factors,and the consideration of environmental protec-tion aspects and preservation of forest functions.Furthermore, groups and categories of forests,properties of individual species, trends in theforest regeneration process, forest type, agestructure and stand condition, soil stability andother factors are taken into account.

Clear cuttings are cuttings where all trees areharvested at the same time (as a rule duringone year). The main technical and organiza-

tional factors to consider include dimensionsand location of the felling site, felling site de-velopment, orientation of the felling site andfelling direction, and clean-up procedures af-ter felling.

Gradual felling involves the removal of treesin several steps. Important factors are the se-lection of trees at each step, the number of steps,timber stock at each step, and time betweenfelling steps.

In selective felling, only a small proportion (nomore than 10%) of mature and overmature treesare cut, maintaining an uninterrupted tree coveron the site. Organisational-technical considera-tions are basically the same as for gradual fell-ing.

Besides the three systems mentioned above, acombined felling system is used which includeselements of all three systems.

All forests of Ukraine are accessible to con-ducting a forestry activity. The certain difficul-ties are available only in the very humidifiedand mountain forests.

2.5.2 Timber uses (industries, sawn goods,fibre, paper, fuelwood etc.)

Of Ukraine’s total annual timber harvest, 30%is used for lumber, 19% for packaging purposes,18.1% for construction, 14% for furniture pro-duction, 11% for lodge poles, 6.1% for indus-trial purposes, and 1.7% for pulp.

The statistical data on import and export ofwood are absent however actual timber needsof a national economy are satisfied approxi-mately only on 30-35% at the expense of localresources.

2.5.3 Non-timber Forest Products

Non-timber Forest Production is an officialactivity of the forest enterprises and there is ancertain official market for these products.

Ukraine

The output of non-timber products fromUkraine’s forests per ha amounts to 65-70 kgof mushrooms, 10 tons of birch juice, 6 tons ofvitamin powder, 30 kg of raw material for me-dicinal and technical use, 6 tons of birch bark(for pitch production), 200-450 kg wild fruit,100-120 kg grass (for hay making), up to 650kg of gum and turpentine, and 100-200 kg ofhoney.

The annual output of the country’s forest en-terprises comes to ca. 16,000 tons of wild fruitand berries, ca. 3,500 tons of mushrooms, 40-45 tons of birch juice, 260 tons of honey, 1,200tons of raw material for medicinal and techni-cal use, 30,000 tons of hay, 60-70 tons of vita-min powder, and 11,000 tons of gum and tur-pentine.

The total area of forest land open to hunting inUkraine amounts to 50.8 million ha. About 30species of animals and more than 80 species ofbirds constitute the traditionally hunted spe-cies. Main game species are elk (moose), reddeer, wild boar, hare, and red fox.

2.5.4 Forest functions

The basis of forest use in Ukraine is the divi-sion of forests into forest groups (in accord-ance with the Forest Code of Ukraine Resolu-tion of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of Janu-ary 21, 1994). The Forest Code defines the for-ests of Ukraine as a national heritage whichfulfills ecological, protective, recreational, aes-thetic, and educational functions. The forestshave a limited significance in terms of exploi-tation and are subject to state audits and pro-tection. The state forest land of Ukraine is di-vided into two groups: forests which mainlyfulfill protective functions (water protection,nature preservation), and forests which, alongwith their ecological significance, are subjectto exploitation. To ensure the continued pro-tective function and sustainable use of the lat-ter, limited use regimes have been established.The first group comprises 3.453 million ha, thesecond, 3722 million ha.

Technological progress and spreading urbani-zation in Ukraine have led to a strong increaseof recreational demands from the population.The country’s forests serve as prime recreationareas. The positive social effects are counter-balanced, however, by the sometimes negativeimpact of increased recreational pressure andtourism on the forest ecosystems.

Special recreational areas have been set asideunder the state forest land, including bothwooded and non-wooded forest land, as wellas non-forest areas such as rivers, lakes, hedgerows, alpine meadows, rocks and cliffs, roads,etc.

3 Forest Economics

3.1 Forest and forest industries in nationaleconomy

Ukraine is involved in forest-economy coop-eration on a European level, concerning thefields of forest regeneration, forest resource use,and reform of economic mechanisms. Such co-operation occurs with Sweden, Germany, Swit-zerland, Italy, Russia and other European coun-tries. Ukraine exports timber, lumber, mush-rooms and other forest products to countries inEurope, and is involved in joint ventures in-cluding logging, tourism, recreation and othertypes of forest-related activities.

Unfortunately, the cooperative efforts ofUkraine are not altogether successful. Increasedexport of secondary and round timber, whichis in high demand on the domestic market, leadsto shortages within Ukraine and has negativeeffects on the country’s wood-working indus-try. The European models of sustainable forestuse and management have not been sufficientlystudied in Ukraine, and their practical imple-mentation is sadly lagging behind.

3.2 Employment

The forestry sector supplies employment for aconsiderable part of the population, particularly

Ukraine

in western and northern Ukraine. In 1991, 97,750workers (it makes 0,2% of total population or0,3% of the country’s labor force) were employedin state forest enterprises (including 42,407 inforest production, 38,864 in industrialproduction, and 12,525 in capital construction).There is a marked shortage of young workersand female employees in the forestry sector - animbalance which fuels social problems.

Due to inflation, insufficient funding to forestrythrough the state budget, and a decrease of theoperational volume of forestry production, thenumber of people employed in the forestry sec-tor has decreased considerably.

3.3 Profitability

The forestry sector is of great importance tothe economy of Ukraine as a source of staterevenues, forest resources (raw materials), andimprovement of the country’s environmentalhealth. The forests are state-owned, and differ-ent ministries influence the activity of forestenterprises. Under the communist system ofplanned economy, the main objective of forestenterprises (state forestry) was not to obtainrevenues but to collect, by all means, moneyfrom the state budget for forestry production.This old system has now lost its influence onthe forestry sector, and new instruments of plan-ning and cost evaluation are being developed.

Wood products continue to be the main sourceof income from the forestry sector. Since thereis no established market for certain non-tim-ber forest products and forest functions (e.g.,recreational, protective functions, etc.), the stateforestry does not generate any income fromtheir use.

4 Forest and forest related policies

Ukraine state forest policy is the combinationof legal, economic, administrative, social andforest management measures directed towardssustainable forestry.

4.1 Legislation

Forest management is carried out in accord-ance with Ukraine‘s current legislation, in par-ticular with the Forest Code of Ukraine, regula-tions on the forest fund of Ukraine, resolutionson hunting, and other normative documents.

Forestry legislation in Ukraine was establishedby the different Legislative Acts of 1918, 1968,1977, 1979, 1994. On January 21, 1994 a new«Forest code of Ukraine» was adopted, in whichUkraine‘s forests became the property of thestate (Article 6). Acting for the state, theVerkhovna Rada of Ukraine is in charge of allstate forests. It delegates its powers concern-ing forest management to the correspondingSoviets of People’s Deputies, who within theircompetence, give land plots from the ForestFund for constant use or withdraw them ac-cording to the order determined by the Landand Forest Codes.

Forest land plots from the Forest fund are givenfor constant use to specialised forest enter-prises and organisations where there arespecific departments for forest management, af-forestation, health improvement, sport andtourist purposes, and research. If citizens (ofUkraine) have special training they can be givenindividual forest land plots from the Forest Fundwith an area up to 5 hectares, provided that it ispart of the farmer’s property. According to anew Law, the forests of Ukraine are its nationalwealth, and according to their purpose and lo-cation perform chiefly ecological (waterprotection, protection, sanitary, health-improvement, recreation), aesthetic,educational, and other functions; they alsohave exploitation purposes and are subject tostate registration and protection (Article 3). Themain requirements concerning forest manage-ment organisation are also envisaged (article34). These are: forest preservation, their pro-tection from fires, protection against harmfulinsects and diseases, improvement of waterprotection, climate regulation, sanitation,health-improvement, and other useful proper-ties of forests for the purpose of people, andhealth protection. This rational use of the for-

Ukraine

ests is in order to systematically meet the re-quirements of production and population intimber and other forest products, extended re-production, improvement of species composi-tion and forest quality. Improvement of forestproduction efficiency is on the basis of unifiedtechnical policies, and science and technologi-cal achievements. In fact, this is the strategy offorest growth and the role of forests in the stateof Ukraine. It should be noted that, based oncomplex management, the principle of continu-ous and rational use of forests (it correspondswith principles of sustainable forestry), with theirdominant water protection, water regulation, cli-mate regulation and environment creating role,started to be realised in Ukraine in 1959.

The Ukrainian state forest policy is a combina-tion of legal, economic, administrative, andforest management measures directed at pres-ervation and reforestation, rational use, andenhancement of the multi-functional role offorests as a global ecological factor in the in-terests of the nation.

4.2 Actors in Forestry and Forest RelatedPolicies

The main actors in forest policy, defined by theForest Code, are institutions, such as: Minis-try of Fotrestry, Ministry of Agriculture, Min-istry of Environmental and Nuclear Safety,other ministries and users of forest resources,and state administrations at different levels.

Political parties and non-governmental organi-sations and other nature conservation and en-vironmental movements, have a significantinfluence on forest policy. Among them the bestknown are Green party, Rukh, Zelenyj Swit(Green World), Association of Foresters, GreenPeace Ukraine, National Ecocenter etc.

4.3 Forest policy tools

The Ukrainian State University of Forestry andWood Technology, in accordance with the cur-rent legislation of Ukraine, has developed the

national scientific-technical program “Forest”:regeneration, protection, and rational use offorest resources for 1996-2015, which was ac-cepted by the ministries and departments ofUkraine and the National Academy of Sciencesof Ukraine.

The program’s goal is to lead Ukraine out ofits current ecological-economic crisis and cre-ate stable economic conditions through increas-ing the forested area to an optimal level, meet-ing the demand for forest raw materials, andprotecting forest ecosystems and their naturalfunctions.

Priorities in the Realisation of the Program:- substantiation and realisation of the complex

interrelated measures aimed at increasing thetotal forested area by a factor of 1.5-2;

- establishment of a safe forest production com-plex in the zone of the Chernobyl APS;

- creation of conditions for the natural regen-eration of forests and intensive forest re-growth on eroded land, -realisation of meas-ures for protection and preservation of for-ests, reasonable use of those environmentalresources which play a role in maintainingnatural forest functions;

- orientation of the forest industry towards theapplication of ecologically safe and energy-efficient techniques and technologies for log-ging, resource transportation, yarding, pres-ervation and primary processing of wood andwaste material;

- transfer of the processing branches of variousindustries - woodworking, forest chemical,pulp and paper, etc., towards a regime of rea-sonable timber use, and partial transfer toother materials.

Adoption of this program seems a high prior-ity for the forest sector, especially on the thresh-old of the new millennium.

Since 1993, the sectoral state scientific-tech-nical program for the development of forestryhas been operational in Ukraine.

Ukraine

4.4 Forest Policy at the European Level

The State Forest Policy of Ukraine is determinedby directions of rational use, preservation andrenewal of Ukrainian forest resources, in thecontext of requirements adopted in theresolution of World Conference on Environ-mental Problems and Development in Rio-de-Janeiro, 1992.

Ukraine has been in attendance in the HelsinkiProcess (Ministerial Conference on the Protec-tion of Forests) since 1996, as well as in someanother events of the Intergovernmental Panelon Forests of the UN Commission on Sustain-able Development (for instance the Sessions inNew York, 1997, 1998 etc.). The UkrainianDelegation had a few meetings in New-Yorkwith representatives of EU, Canadian and Rus-sian delegations, and representatives of East-ern and Central European countries to furtherdevelop the co-operative framework of theIntergovernmental Panel on Forests. Ukrainesupported the proposals concerned with prepa-ration of a “Forestry Convention”, dealing withBio-diversity, Climate Change, etc.

Since 1992, Ukraine has taken part in theproject of the International Program“Biodiversity” which is financed by the WorldBank at the through a specially founded Glo-bal Ecological Fund. Since 1994, with the helpof the INTAS Fund, Ukraine has an opportu-nity to join the EUFORGEN Program for for-est genetic resources preservation.

Ukraine takes an active part in the develop-ment of measures aimed at preservation andincrease of forests in the border regions withthe following countries: Poland, Belorus, (pro-gram “Green Lungs of Europe”), Russia, CzechRepublic, Slovakia, Romania, and Hungary.These are joint measures for the utilization anddevelopment of forests and recreational re-sources of these countries.

4.5. Forest Education and Science

The Ukrainian State University of Forestry andWood Technology (USUFWT; Lviv) trains for-

estry specialists. It is the only higher educa-tional establishment with a profiled forestryprogram, and is a well-known centre for forestryeducation and science in the country. It wasfounded in 1874 within the Krajova forest schoolin Lviv. The university has six faculties: thefaculty of forestry, the faculty of loggingengineering and mechanics, the faculty of wood-working technology, the economic faculty, anextra-mural faculty, and the faculty of pre-university and post-university training and hasmore than 4,000 students. Over 300 qualifiedlecturers work within a total of 29 chairs.

USUFWT trains specialists in a wide varietyof forestry branches. Since 1997, it is involvedin a full-scale joint European project, which isfinanced by the Tempus-Tacis program. As partof this project, the university started a Mas-ter’s program in environmental economics andnatural resources in 1998.

Forestry specialists are also trained at the fac-ulty of forestry of the National AgriculturalUniversity (Kyiv), at Kharkiv State Agricul-tural University (Kharkiv), and eight collegesand technical schools of forestry.

Current research in forestry, forest science andthe woodworking industry is conducted at theUkrainian State University of Forestry andWood Technology (Lviv), the National Agri-cultural University (Kyiv), the Kharkiv StateAgricultural University, the Ukrainian Scien-tific Research University of Forestry and Agro-forest Recultivation (Kharkiv), and the Ukrain-ian Scientific Research Institute of MontaneForestry (Ivano-Frankivsk).

The scientific-technical staff at USUFWT in-cludes 34 Doctors of Science, professors, and200 candidates of science, and associate pro-fessors. Research at USUFWT covers the fol-lowing fields:1. Problems of specialized training under a

multi-level educational system.2. Increase of productivity and biological sta-

bility of forest and urbanized ecosystems.3. Development of energy and resource-saving

technologies and equipment for the forest-in-dustrial complex of Ukraine.

Ukraine

4. Development of advanced technologies,materials, and equipment for the woodwork-ing industry.

5. Improvement of the organization and man-agement of forestry, forest and woodworkingindustries.

6. Economic and social development of the for-est complex under the conditions of national-cultural revival of Ukraine.

USUFWT is a member of IUFRO, and host tonumerous international conferences, symposia,and seminars.

5 Main current conflicts and chal-lenges in each country

In order to continue to provide Ukraine withforest resources it is necessary to carry out pro-found transformations in the areas of forestgrowing, forest use, and timber use, and com-bine methods of forest exploitation with eco-logical requirements. This calls for the follow-ing measures:1. Increase of forested area through the gradual

fading-out of agricultural use, and subsequentafforestation of eroded, low-productivity land(formerly forested areas as well as previouslytreeless land, i.e., on alkaline soils).

2. Intensification of forest utilization by meansof more efficient logging techniques, includ-ing the harvest of soft-wood broadleaf spe-cies, faster growth rates, and restoration oflow-productivity stands.

3. Improve economic conditions by accelerat-ing market relations in the field of forest re-source use and stand regeneration.

4. Implement structural improvements in for-est management, with the goal of a more effi-cient timber use.

5. Establishment of an interconnected web ofnature reserves, representing the differentecological zones in their natural state, withthe aim of building a regional system of eco-reserves of about 6-6.5 million ha; set up amonitoring system for natural resources andthe environment.

6. Establish a technique to decrease radioac-tive pollution of forest resources; developmentof a forest management system for forests

polluted with radio nuclides, and preventionof secondary pollution by means of fire sup-pression, especially in forests with high levelsof radioactive pollution. The implementationof the above measures will contribute to theincrease of a forest resource base, the decreaseof the timber deficit, stabilization of the forestrycomplex, and aid Ukraine in its transition intothe next millennium, ensuring a continuedsupply of the country’s own forest resourceswhile at the same time preventing the destruc-tion of the forest’s ecological functions.

Ukraine

Organisations related to forestry

State Committee of Forestry of Ukraine, 5, Khreshchatyk str., 252601 Kyiv MSP, UKRAINE, Tel.+380-44-228 56 45, -226 32 53, Fax: +380-44-228 77 94, E-mail: yyy@mlg.kiev.ua

Ukrainian Research Institute of Forestry and Farm Forestry after G.M.Vysotskyy, Director IhorPatlai, 86, Pushkin str., 310024 Kharkiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-572-43 15 49, Fax: +380-572-43 25 20, E-mail: root@u-fri.kharkov.ua

Ukrainian Research Institute of Mountain Forestry after P.S. Pasternak, Director Vasyl Parpan,31, Hrushevskyy str., 284000 Ivano-Frankivsk, UKRAINE, Tel/Fax: +380-3422-252 16, E-mail: lis@girlis.ivano-frankivsk.ua

Ukrainian State Project Forest Inventory Production Association “Ukrderzhlisproekt”, The ChiefAnatoliy Zaremskyy, 22, Proletarska str., 255 710 Irpin, region Kyiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-4497-55 155, Fax: +380-4497-55 156

Ukrainian State Design and Survey Institute of Forestry “Ukrdiprolis”, General Director StepanKryvovyazyy, 50, Bratislavska str., 253 139 Kyiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-44-512 2754, -5122612, Fax: +380-44-512 2754

Kharkiv State Design and Survey Institute of Farm Forestry and Forestry, “Kharkivdiproagrolis”,Director Mykhailo Trohymenko, 36, Serikovska str., 310 017 Kharkiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-572-12 52 52, -12 16 07

Ukrainian Center of Training, Retraining and Improvement of Professional Skill of the Staff ofForestry “Ukrtsentrkadrylis”, Director Petro Dyshko, 2, Lisodoslidna str., 255 510 Boyarka,region Kyiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-4498-35 988, Tel./Fax: +380-4498-35 879

State Special Forest Protection Assosiation “Ukrlisozahyst”, General Director ViktorKucheryavenko, 127, Internationalna str., 312 140 Pokotylivka, region Kharkiv, districtKharkiv, UKRAINE, Tel./Fax: +380-572-493 075

Ukrainian State Forest Seed Station “Ukrderzhlisnasinnia”, General Director VolodymyrZaichenko, 14, Lisodoslidna str., 255 510 Boyarka, region Kyiv, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-2983-52 97, -50 60

Ukrainian State Base of Air Protection of Forests, The Chief Mykola Andryushchenko, 5,Khreshchatyk str., 252601 Kyiv MSP, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-44-229 6322, Fax: +380-44-228 5608

Azov-Sivash National Natural Park, Director Volodymyr Zubkov, 54, Petrovskyy str., 326 610Genichesk, region Kherson, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-5534-221 09, Fax: +380-5534-233 89

Shatsk National Natural Park, Director Mykhailo Lvovych, 264 663 Svityaz, region Volyn, dis-trict Shatsk, UKRAINE, Tel./Fax: +380-3355-230 43

Forest and Hunting Magazine, The main editor Valentyna Maksymenko, 5, Khreshchatyk str.,252601 Kyiv MSP, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-44-229 5984

Society of Foresters of Ukraine, The chairman Yuriy Marchuk, 5, Khreshchatyk str., 252601Kyiv MSP, UKRAINE, Tel.: +380-44-226 2655

Ukraine

State Higher Forest Educational Institutions in UkraineUkrainian State University of Forestry and Wood Technology, 103, General Chuprynka Str.,

Lviv, 290 057, Ukraine, Rector Prof. Dr. Yu.Tunytsya, Tel.:+380-322-35 24 11, Tel./Fax:+380-322-97 17 65, E-mail: ukrdltu@forest.lviv.ua

Specialities:Forest, Park and Garden Management BSMPlant Protection, Forest Ecology BSLandscape Architecture BSMLogging and Wood Processing BSMForestry Equipment BSMAutomation of Technological Processes and Production BSMArtistic Design BSAccounting and Audit BSManagement BSM

National Agrarian University, 15, Gueroyiv Oborony Str., Kyiv, 252 041, Ukraine, Rector Prof.Dr. Dmytro Melnychuk, Tel.: +380-44-263 51 75, -267 82 33, Tel./Fax: +380-44-263 71 55,E-mail: rector@usau.kiev.ua

Specialities:Forestry - BSM

List of AbbreviationsB - BachelorS - SpecialistM - Master

References

Bondarenko V.D., Furdychko O.I. (1994). Lis i rekreatsia v lisi, Lviv. In Ukr.Bozhok O.P. (1991). Vintoniv I.S. Derevoznavstvoz osnovamy lisivigo tovaroznavstva. -Kyiv,

1991. In Ukr.Chernjavskij, M. & Shvadchak, I. (1994). Preservation of the Biodiversity of the Ukrainian for-

ests and Ecological Balance (Trends and Prospects). In: J.Paulenka, L.Paule (ed.) Conserva-tion of Forests in Central Europe. Arbora Publishers, Zvolen. 123-130 pp.

Forest Code of Ukraine (1994). In Ukr.Gensiruk S., Nizhnik (1995) Geography of the forest resources of Ukraine, protection, utiliza-

tion, regeneration. Lviv. In Ukr.Gordienko M.I., Koretsky G.S., Maurer V.M. (1995). Lisovi kultury - Kyiv. In Ukr.Guillaume le Vasseur Sieur de Beauplan. (1959). A description of Ukraine. New York: ODFFU.Hensiruk, S.A. (1992) Forests of Ukraine. In Ukr. Kyiv. 408 p.Jaksch T., H.-R.Bork, Dalchow C., Dräger (Hrsg.). (1996) Landnutzung im Mittel und Osteuropa.

Munchen/Kiado, Budapest.Kalinin M.I. (1994). Lisovi kultury i zakhisne lisorazvedennya – Lviv.. In Ukr.Okhorona navkolyshnogo seredovushcha v Ukraini. 1994-1995. Kyiv. vyd. Rayevskogo (1997).

In Ukr.Proekt natsionalnoi naukovo-tekhnichnoi programy. Vidtvorennya, okhorona, ratsionalne

vykorystannya lisovykh resursiv na 1996-2015. In Ukr.Ryabchuk V.P. (1996). Nederevna productsia lisu. (Non-timber forest products). Lviv: Svit. In

Ukr.

Ukraine

Shelyag-Sosonko Yu.R., Stoiko S.M., Vakarenko L.P. Lisy Ukrainy. (1996). Suchasnyi stan,zberezhennya, vykorystannya. (Forests of Ukraine. Current State, Preservation and Using)/Natsionalnyj ekologichnyj centr Ukrainy. Kyiv. In U kr.

Spravochnik lesovoda. P.S.Pasternak, P.I.Molotkov, I.N.Patlaj i dr. (1990) (Forester ReferenceBook. P.S.Pasternak, ed.). Kyiv: Urozhaj. 296 p. In Ukr.

Synyakevitch I.M. (1995) Ekonomika galuzej lisovogo gospodarstva (Economics of forest man-agement branches). Lviv. In Ukr.

Tunytsya Yu.Yu. (1987) Komplexnoe lesnoe khozyaistvo (Complex Forest Management). Moskva,Agropromizdat. In Russ.

Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republik. In Russ. Kyiv, 1967. 591 p.

Further references for students“Ukraine,” Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All

rights reserved.Kappeler, Andreas: Kleine Geschichte der Ukraine. Beck’sche Reihe 1059. Muenchen 1994Luedeman, Ernst: Ukraine. Beck’sche Reihe 860. Muenchen 1995Scheer, E; Schmidt, G.: Die Ukraine entdecken. Unterwegs zwischen den Karpaten und dem

Schwarzen Meer. Trescher-Reisehandbuch. Berlin 1998

Web-Sites

http://www.day.kiev.ua/DIGEST/http://www.gu.uahttp://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/up.htmlwww.rada.kiev.ua

United Kingdom

1 The Country

The British Isles lie off Western Europe’s sea-board. The largest island, Great Britain, con-sists of three nations: England, Scotland andWales. Ireland, to the west, consists of the IrishRepublic, a separate state within the EuropeanUnion, and the British province of Northern Ire-land. The nations of Great Britain and the prov-ince of Northern Ireland constitute the UnitedKingdom (UK). The Channel Islands and theIsle of Man are self-governing in terms of do-mestic policy, though the UK is responsible fordefence and international relations: they are partof neither the UK nor the European Union.

1.1 Natural conditions

1.1.1 Geology

The United Kingdom is founded on rocks of allgeological periods, with no one period predomi-nating. There is a systematic progression, fromthe youngest formations in the south-east ofEngland to the oldest, Precambrian rocks innorth-western Scotland. Faulting, folding, ero-sion cycles and volcanic activity have producedcomplex local variation, more noticeable in thesolid geology of the north and west. Much ofthe country was glaciated during recent ice ages,and surface deposits throughout the country re-flect this history.

1.1.2 Topography

Mainland Britain is about 1000 km long. Thecountry is generally low-lying in eastern and cen-tral England. Mountains occur in north-west Eng-land, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, withhigh moors in south-west England and forming aridge through northern England. Although steep,the mountains exceed 1000 m only rarely. Brit-ain has many, but short, rivers. There are numer-ous off-shore islands especially off the west coast.The land area of the UK is 241,800 sq. km.

1.1.3 Climate

The climate is mild and oceanic. Prevailingwesterly winds, warmed by the Gulf Stream, givethe country a warm climate relative to its lati-tude. The mean annual temperate ranges from6°C in the Scottish Highlands to 10°C in coastalsouthern England and Wales. Most of the west-ern UK receives 800-1200 mm of precipitationannually, while the east receives 600-800 mm.Local extremes range from 500 mm to 5000 mm.Precipitation is well distributed through the year,but is greater in autumn and winter; it fallslargely as rain, except on the higher mountains.The western UK is among the windiest placeson Earth.

1.1.4 Soils

The lowland areas of the south and east com-prise brown earths (cambisols) of varying pHand nutrient status according to parentage

United Kingdom

Authors:Colin Price and John SamuelSchool of Agricultural and Forest SciencesUniversity of Wales, BangorGwynedd LL57 2UWUnited Kingdom

Correspondence to Colin PriceTelephone: 44-1248-382454 Fax: 44-1248-354997 e-mail: c.price@bangor.ac.uk

United Kingdom

(whether derived from calcareous rocks), to-gether with gleys (gleysols) in poorly drainedareas. In sandy areas podzols have developed,carrying heathland. Upland areas generally com-prise acid brown earths (dystric cambisols) (pH4-5) which may still carry oak woodland. How-ever, in the wetter and cooler areas soils haveoften acquired a humic surface horizon and arenow humic gley soils (dystric gleysols) orstagnopodzols (humic gleysols/placic podzols)both of which are generally highly acidic andnutrient-poor. Some extensive upland sphagnumpeats (dystric histosols) have developed, and,on harder rocky areas, shallow peaty rankers(shallow dystric histosols).

1.1.5 Vegetation

The climatic climax vegetation type of most ofthe UK is woodland: mixed deciduous temper-ate in the south (oak (Quercus spp.), elm (Ulmusspp.), lime (Tilia spp.), ash (Fraxinus excelsiorL.)), grading towards a sub-boreal type, domi-nated by Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) andbirches (Betula spp) in the far north. (Prior tothe last ice age, Norway spruce (Picea abies L.(Karst.) was also part of this assemblage.) Onlyat high elevations would alpine shrubby and herbcover arise. Since the last ice age, up to 99% ofthe area may at one time have had forest cover.

Two important factors have obstructed forma-tion or retention of the climatic climax:- the breaking of the land bridge to continental

Europe after the ice age, and the isolation ofmontane areas, which prevented recolonisationand left a flora impoverished compared withother European countries;

- prolonged and massive human intervention,such that there is hardly any primary wood-land which has been largely unmodified byhuman activity.

The National Vegetation Classification is usedto classify semi-natural woodlands into 19woodland and six scrub communities.

The Ecological Site Classification is still beingdeveloped by the Forestry Commission Re-

search Agency. It “is intended to provide asound ecological basis for the management offorests for timber production, wildlife conser-vation and other benefits. It is applicable to allkinds of woodlands, from plantations of a sin-gle species through the range to semi-naturalwoodlands of many species.” It can also be usedto evaluate the potential of non-woodland sites.

1.2 Society

1.2.1 Population distribution and density

With population of 58.5 M (1995) and popula-tion density 242 inhabitants per sq. km, the UKis Europe’s third most densely populated coun-try (after the Netherlands and Belgium). Overthousands of years, there have been successivewaves of in-migration from countries on thenorth-west seaboard of Europe. More recentlyother ethnic groups, now making up about 5% ofthe population, have migrated, largely from theIndian sub-continent, Africa and the Caribbeanarea.

Depending on definition, between 75% and 90%of population live in urban areas, with concen-trations in south-east, central and parts of north-ern England, south Wales, and in Scotland be-tween Glasgow and Edinburgh. In the north andwest, particularly of Scotland, population is verysparse.

There has been slow population growth sincethe early 1980s (0.3% p.a. 1985-95). There ismarked ageing in the demographic structure.

1.2.2 Political structure

Politically, many matters, including control overland use change, are under the charge of localgovernment entities or regional authorities. Overthe past 20 years there has been a tendency forcentral government to exert stronger influenceover implementation of policy. By contrast,some powers, including development of forestrypolicy, are in process of being devolved to thenations of Scotland and Wales. Forest policy in

United Kingdom

Northern Ireland is the responsibility of theDepartment of Agriculture for Northern Ireland,not of the British Forestry Commission: forestrystatistics for Northern Ireland are not includedin those given as applying to “Britain”.

1.2.3 Industry

The UK’s industrial structure is partly a legacyof its early historical industrialisation. Primary(extractive) industries have declined dramati-cally, except for oil and gas; manufacturing hasalso declined relatively; service industries nowdominate both contribution to gross domesticproduct (GDP) and employment (see table 1).

Geographical concentrations in former extrac-tive and heavy industry areas has been perpetu-ated by population inertia, although new indus-trial areas have also been encouraged by gov-ernment policy.

2 Forest resources and their uses

In the UK there is no very clear definition of“forest”. It was formerly a legal designation,referring to areas where the “forest law” applied.It is often used to indicate extensive areas whichare (normally) tree covered for the purpose oftimber production, as distinct from small, multi-purpose “woodlands”. However, this distinctionhas no official recognition in statistics, whichrefer to tree-covered area irrespective of sizeand purpose.

2.1 Forest history

Although formerly heavily forested, the UK hasexperienced extensive deforestation from prehis-toric times. By the time of the Norman Conquestof England (AD 1066), the recorded forest coverof that country had declined to about 15%. Clear-ance of forests for arable agriculture and sheepgrazing continued through the following centu-ries, although with periodic attempts to encour-age reforestation for strategic reasons. Follow-ing the Industrial Revolution, both strategic andindustrial timber supplies from domestic sourceswere considered unnecessary, and tree plantingcame to have a dominant aesthetic role.

From a low point of only 5% forest cover in1900, Britain has undertaken major afforesta-tion this century leading to a doubling of forestarea. The history of the forests means that theyare largely divided between broadleaved spe-cies, mostly under formal management for avariety of objectives, with age classes rangingup to 200 years and more, concentrated in thesouth-east of the country; and conifer forestsformed artificially for largely commercial pur-poses during the twentieth century, concentratedin the north and west.

2.2 Forest ownership

The state forest enterprise became an increas-ingly significant owner during the century, andwas the main agent of forest expansion until1982, when the private sector overtook it. At

Agriculture, forestry, hunting & fishing 2.0 %Mining & quarrying including oil & gas 2.3 %Public administration, defence and social security 6.7 %Construction 5.4 %Electricity, gas and water 2.7 %Wholesale and retail, restaurants, hotels 14.4 %Transport, storage, communications 8.5 %Manufacturing 20.9 %Financial, real estate and business activities 26.7 %Education, health and social work 11.9 %Other services 3.8 %

Table 1. Contribution to GDP by Industrial Sectors (1994). Anon. (1996)

United Kingdom

the same time, a sale of some of the state’s for-ests was initiated, along with privatisation ofpublic utilities – notably water boards – with aforest holding. A proposal to privatise ForestEnterprise has so far not been implemented,largely as a result of widespread public opposi-tion. Presently 34% of forest area is owned bythe Government through the Forestry Commis-sion, and is run by Forest Enterprise. Other pub-lic ownership, by local government and envi-ronmental agencies, is on a smaller scale, withtimber production only incidental.

Charitable bodies, e.g. Woodland Trust, theNational Trust [for Places of Historic Interestand Natural Beauty] and its equivalent body inScotland, also own rather a small, though in-creasing, area, unimportant for timber produc-tion, but often very important for landscape andrecreation objectives.

Community forests in the European sense do notexist in the UK. “Community Forests” have adifferent meaning, being the result of recent ini-tiatives to encourage planting by diverse landowners, with a view to improving environmentand public access, but not necessarily ownership.

Private ownership of forests was, until about1960, mostly as part of a larger estate embrac-ing agricultural and shooting interests. Expan-sion from that time until 1988 was largely un-dertaken as a tax management exercise, usuallyfor those with no traditional involvement in ru-

ral matters; forest management companies pro-vided the professional services.

Financial institutions (e.g. pension funds) be-came more important owners during the 1980s,with the objective of gaining capital growth.

The wood processing industries have only re-cently become significant forest owners. Theyhave attempted to secure a portion of their tim-ber supplies by acquiring forests which are ap-proaching rotation age – often those establishedunder the earlier tax incentives (now that forestownership for tax purrposes has become lessattractive).

Table 2 shows the estimated distribution of pri-vate ownerships by size categories.

2.3 Land use and forest resource

2.3.1 Global overview of the land use

Present land use in the UK is divided as in table3, which also shows the prevalence of variousland designations (some of these overlap).

2.3.2 Extent and distribution of the forests

Forest cover increased during 1950-1990 at anaverage of more than 30 000 ha y-1. The meanrate of expansion during the 1990s has fallen to

Size category Number of % of total Area of % of total(ha) holdings holdings< 1 27 100 26 14 000 11 – 2 19 400 18 29 000 22 – 5 25 700 24 81 000 65 – 10 14 500 14 104 000 710 – 20 8 400 16 119 000 920 – 50 6 200 6 198 000 1450 – 100 2 500 2 188 000 13100 – 500 1 800 2 364 000 26500 – 1000 360 <1 242 000 17> 1000 40 <1 58 000 4Total 106 000 1 397 000

Table 2. Size of private forest ownerships

United Kingdom

18 000 ha y-1. By 1998, cover had reached2.440 M ha, of which 2.229 M were classed as“productive”. Present percentage cover of Brit-ain, about 11%, is unevenly distributed, withonly 8% in England, 12% in Wales, and 16% inScotland. The forest area of 0.04 ha per head isvery low by world standards. Proposals havebeen made for further increase by 50-100% dur-ing the next 50 years.

Owing to the process of selective forest clear-ance for agriculture, and the primacy given tofood production during the era of most rapidafforestation, most woodland in the UK occu-pies the poorer soil types and steeper sites. Inparticular, conifer afforestation has been largelyconfined to dystric cambisols, histosols andgleysols in the upland west (mostly spruces), andsands and podzols of the lowland sandy heaths(mostly pines).

2.3.3 Tree species: origin and distribution

Most coniferous plantations are of exotic spe-cies, usually originating from the west coast ofNorth America. The exotic Sitka spruce (Piceasitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) covers 28% of Brit-ain’s forest area, especially in uplands of the westand north, where lodgepole pine (Pinus contortaMill. Ex Mirb.) is also planted on peaty sites.Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) is the only na-tive coniferous timber tree, found or plantedusually on rocky or sandy sites, which on theeast side of the country it shares with Corsican

pine (Pinus nigra var. maritima (Ait.) Melville).Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi (Lamb.) Carr.)and its hybrid with European larch are plantedon better-drained sites in the uplands. Overall,conifers occupy 63% of forest area, ranging from39% in England to 83% in Scotland.

Broadleaves are mostly native or more ancientlyimported species (there is some debate aboutwhether some important species, e.g. beech(Fagus sylvatica L.), arrived naturally). Themost important, both by area and for timber pro-duction are oak (Quercus spp.), beech, ash(Fraxinus excelsior L.) and sycamore (Acerpseudoplatanus L.). The distribution of the mainspecies by area is given in table 4.

Spruces are preferred for pulp production, andare also used for relatively low grade sawnwood.High growth rates compromise the structuralvalue of several conifers, but “minor” speciessuch as Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii(Mirb.) Franco) can produce high grade saw tim-ber. Broadleaves have a range of specialist uses,with Quercus, Fagus and Fraxinus preferred forfurniture. Birch (Betula spp.) is hardly consid-ered as a commercial species presently.

2.3.4 Total growing stock and growth

Estimated UK growing stock volume at 1997was about 273 M m3, or about 110 m3 ha-1. Therehas been a 50% increase in volume since 1950mainly for two interconnected reasons. Firstly

Agricultural 75%Productive forest 10%Other woodland 1%Urban, industrial, waste and other 14%National Forest Parks 0.8%National Parks 9.3% (England & Wales)Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty 14.6% (England & Wales)Sites of Special Scientific Interest 9.0%Environmentally Sensitive Areas 7.2%Country Parks 0.1% (England and Wales)Community Forests 3.0% * (England)* Actual woodland cover is only 5.5% of that area

Table 3. Land use categories in Great Britain (compiled from various sources)

United Kingdom

there has been a 30% increase in the forest areaof the UK since 1950. Secondly, much of thisarea was planted with coniferous species and isnow reaching its greatest mean annual incre-ment. Growing stock continues to increase by4–5 M m3 y -1, with about 1% annual increase ingrowing stock per hectare.

Increment ranges from 4-24 m3 ha-1 y-1 for coni-fers, with a mean of 10-12 m3 ha-1 y-1, while thatfor commercial broadleaves is in the range 4-12 m3 ha-1 y-1 (except for poplars, which are morecomparable in increment with conifers).

The age class distribution of the growing stockis shown in table 5.

By European standards this distribution is veryyoung. This results from both the recent large-scale afforestation and the practice of felling atthe optimal economic rotation. For conifers, thematuring of young forests will increase both totalgrowing stock, and the percentage in the 40-80year class. For broadleaves, the future of boththe total and its distribution is less clear: there

has been much recent planting of broadleaves,but also a move to exploit over-mature stock.

2.3.5 Forest threats

Two major problems in silvicultural practice aredeer (red (Cervus elephas L.), roe (Capreoluscapreolus L.), fallow (Dama dama L.) and sika(Cervus nippon Temminck); and wind.

Deer browsing is a particular problem in artifi-cial regeneration of conifers, unless exclusionor rigorous population control is achieved. Theexotic grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensisGmelin) is also a problem in the establishmentof broadleaved crops.

Commercially significant insect problems havebeen posed by Dendroctonum micansKugelmann and Elatobium abietinum Walker(spruces) and Panolis flammea Denis andSchiffermueller (lodgepole pine). Adelgesnordmannianae Eck. is said to be the reasonwhy European silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) ishardly grown commercially in the UK. Defolia-tion of oaks by Tortrix viridana L. may preventnatural regeneration of oak woodland. Hylobiusabietis L. and Hylastes spp. both cause prob-lems requiring routine treatment in establish-ment of conifer crops.

Dutch elm disease, caused by fungi of the ge-nus Ophiostoma and spread by bark beetles ofthe genus Scolytus, has wiped out the ruralpopulations of English elm (Ulmus proceraSalis.), and other broadleaved species have suf-fered from vascular wilts. The butt-rot fungusHeterobasidion annosum (Fr.:Fr.) Bref. is aproblem for conifers especially on mineral soils,but has been successfully checked by treatment

Picea sitchensis 28%Pinus sylvestric 13%Quercus spp. 9%Larix spp. 8%Pinus contorta 7%Picea abies 6%Betula spp. 4%Fraxinus excelsior 4%Fagus sylvatica 4%Pseudotsuga menziesii 2%Pinus nigra 2%

(FICGB undated).

Age class Conifers Broadleaved species>120 years 0.5 % 11,0 %80 - 120 years 1.5 % 22,0 %40 - 80 years 13,0 % 32,0 %0 - 40 years 85,0 % 35,0 %Area of forest land: million ha 1.52 0.63

Table 5. Age Class by Species Group (FICGB, undated)

Table 4. Species by Area.

United Kingdom

of cut stumps. Other fungal agents (e.g.Brunchorstia pinea (Karst.) v.H.) may restrictuse of some conifers on some sites.

Wind is particularly important on the west sideof the country where wind speeds are highestand soils often provide poor rooting conditions.Thinning may so predispose crops to windthrow,that the operation is not normally undertakenon exposed upland sites. The rotation length isoften curtailed at even less than the normal “eco-nomic” rotation, when the crop reaches a heightat which a substantial proportion of the trees islikely to blow down.

Fire is normally only a serious problem in youngconifer plantations, more particularly on thedrier, heathland sites. Low temperatures anddesiccation are also usually a problem only foryoung crops. Atmospheric pollution has gener-ally been considered of minor and local impor-tance for trees in the UK, compared with theproblem in parts of continental Europe.

2.4 Silviculture

By far the most common system is clearcutting(usually with artificial regeneration by planting,though use of natural regeneration is increas-ing). Shelterwood systems are used on a smallscale in lowland Britain, but there are few ex-amples of true selection systems. Neglected ar-eas of simple coppice in southern England arebeing brought back into production on a smallscale. Nominally, coppice occupies about40 000 ha.

There is increasing interest in “continuous cover[non-clearcutting] forestry”. Transformation fromeven- to uneven-aged structure is being attemptedon a small scale; but in upland Britain windthrowrisk limits this. Perhaps 10% of forest may even-tually be converted to this system.

Especially during the major afforestation phase,crops were normally planted as monocultures,often over wide areas, reflecting the productivesuperiority of such species as Sitka spruce,across a range of site types. Plantings of inti-

mate mixtures are hardly more common in re-stocked areas. Sometimes conifers are mixedwith broadleaves as a “nurse crop”, and some-times a mixture of a productive with a less pro-ductive species is planted in the expectation thatthe less productive component will eventuallybe suppressed. In either case a monoculture isthe intended and expected outcome. More com-mon presently are mosaics, in which species,especially a prescribed proportion ofbroadleaves, are planted in adjoining standsrather than intimately mixed.

Use of biocides is largely confined to tree nurs-eries and the crop establishment stage. The in-secticide permethrin is used against attack onseedlings by Hylobius and Hylastes, and on low-land sites control of weed competition usingglyphosate is normal. Exceptionally, aerial spray-ing is undertaken against defoliating insects.

2.5 Forest production

In 1996, 8 630 000 m3 were felled in Britain, ofwhich 7.7 M m3 were of conifer timber, and ofthis 4.6 M m3 came from the state forests. An-nual removals had risen to 9.3 M m 3 in 1998,and are predicted to reach 16.3 M m3 by 2025,as the conifer plantations from the main expan-sion period reach their optimum economic ro-tation. Average annual harvest area during 1989-93 was about 34 000 ha in state forests, withfinal felling comprising 26% of this area, thin-ning the remainder (FICGB, undated). Atpresent annual increment exceeds annual cut andother losses by more than 4 M m3.

Much the greatest part of broadleaved volumewas obtained from the private sector. This pro-duction is now declining, owing partly to envi-ronmental constraints, but private conifer pro-duction is projected to overtake that of the stateby about 2010.

2.5.1 Harvesting systems

Some important features of harvesting are sum-marised in table 6.

United Kingdom

Mechanised harvesting is becoming ever morecommon in the large coniferous forests of theForest Enterprise. However, mechanised har-vesting is less common in the private sector, andcan be as little as 10% in broadleaved wood-lands in some areas of the country.

Most cross-country movement of timber is un-dertaken by forwarder, with only around 10%moved by cable systems in terrain too steep,rough or wet for tractor access. Very little forestarea is considered inaccessible for harvesting.

2.5.2 Marketing methods

There are three principal methods of sale in theUK. In standing sales the buyer is responsiblefor harvesting, transportation and clearing thesite. In roadside sales the owner is responsiblefor harvesting and converting the timber tolength; it is sold at a place in or near the wood-land easily accessible by road transport. The fi-nal method has the owner responsible for har-vesting and transporting the converted-to-lengthtimber to the customer. The most commonmethod, for Forest Enterprise is by standingsales especially for larger areas of even-agedgood quality coniferous timber. Long-term sup-ply contracts have been introduced for specificindustrial buyers.

Broadleaved timber is sometimes sold at stump:the owner fells the tree and the purchaser canthen inspect the quality of the timber. The ex-

traction and transportation may then be carriedout by either the owner or the buyer.

Forest Enterprise publishes the prices it receivesfor auctions of timber and these often act asguide prices for private forest owners. There area number of initiatives to help private wood-land owners sell their timber, as market demandand prices are particularly weak for small di-ameter roundwood, especially of broadleavedspecies.

Management companies and timber merchantshandle a large proportion of the private timbersales.

2.5.3 Timber uses

In the United Kingdom centralisation is appar-ent with only 4 paper mills and 7 panel mills.The still-increasing concentration results frommergers, closure of small plants, and openingof high capacity mills. Paper production con-sumes some 1.3 M m3 of UK roundwood (15%of production) and board production consumessome 1.7 M m3 (22% of production). There are212 sawmills utilising over 1000 m3 y-1 ofroundwood, having a combined consumption ofUK grown wood of 3.7 M m3 y-1 (49% of pro-duction) . A further 0.7 M m3 of wood (9.5% ofproduction) is utilised as fuel and firewood, infencing, implements, horticultural and gardenproducts, poles, turnery and craft products(FICGB, undated). In 1997 imports of wood and

Average annual harvest (1989-93) 33 661 ha I

Share of standing sales 86 % I

Share of roadside or transported to mill sales 14 % I

Share of motor-manual felling 30 % II

Share of mechanised felling 70 % II

Share of log-length harvesting system 99 % II

Share of tree-length harvesting system < 1 % II

Share of road as a long-distance transport mode 98% II

Share of rail as a long-distance transport mode 2% II

I State forests onlyII Estimated

Table 6. Distribution of Wood Harvest Methods (Forestry Authority (undated); Forestry ContractorsAssociation pers. comm.)

United Kingdom

wood products had a wood raw material equiva-lent of 47.7 M m3 under bark compared withhome production of 7.7 M m3 under bark.

Investment in the forestry processing sector hasbeen over £1300 M (»1900 M ecu) in the pastten years. The new and modernised processingmills are mostly foreign owned, using the in-creased supply of British grown timber and re-cycled paper.

Expansion has involved successful replacementof a wide range of previously imported woodproducts. Further expansion is expected withincrease of home wood supplies.

2.5.4 Non-timber forest products

Formerly, common rights to gather firewood, cutpeat, pasture pigs and graze other animals ex-isted in forests (James, 1981). These rights,where they still exist, are now exercised onlyvery locally. Unlike in many European coun-tries, there is little tradition in the UK of gather-ing berries, mushrooms and other non-timberproducts.

2.5.5 Forest functions

Recreation in forests has had a steadily broad-ening base over the centuries, from exclusive useby the aristocracy for hunting to present-day ac-cess by a large proportion of both rural and ur-ban population: this tends to be concentrated inwoods owned by local government or charitablebodies close to cities, and in state forests in theremoter rural areas. There were an estimated 346M recreational visits, mostly of a day’s durationor less, to woodlands and forests in 1996. Nolegal right of access to private woodlands for rec-reation exists at present, though legislation is pro-posed to extend recreational access generally.Within the past few years, forest tourism has beenpromoted in the state sector.The landscape effect of forestry is considered par-ticularly important in the UK. Though it is diffi-cult to quantify, both state and private sectors givedetailed attention to this matter in forest design.

Despite their small percentage of land area, for-ests form an important wildlife habitat, and theirexpansion during this century has been associ-ated with a gain of species and of numbers forsome species formerly rare. On the other hand,loss of open and wetland habitat to plantations,and earlier conversion of native broadleavedwoodland to exotic conifers have been consid-ered detrimental. Current multipurpose forestpolicy emphasises diversity of habitat (species,age-class, open areas).

Protective forests have been planted particularlyon reservoir catchments, and to some extent onthe spoil heaps of extractive industries, in aneffort to reduce soil erosion and prevent boul-der avalanches. (Snow avalanches are not aproblem.) Commercial forests have had a lessbenign effect. Mechanised cultivation prior toplanting, and use of heavy machinery on steepslopes during harvesting, have increased sedi-ment loads where forests have replaced sheepfarming. In consequence particularly of theirefficiency in “scrubbing” wet and dry particlesfrom the atmosphere, conifer forests have beenassociated with increasing acidity of water-courses in western Britain. On the other hand,woodlands introduced on former arable farm-ing sites have reduced ionic flows into water-courses.

Conifer afforestation has also adversely affectedtotal volume of run-off from catchments, withdetrimental effects for domestic and industrialwater supply and hydroelectricity generation.

3 Forest economics

The UK official statistics do not split forestryfrom agriculture or hunting and fishing (Anon.,1996). It can be estimated that the contributionof forestry to GDP is less than 0.5%.

3.1 Forest and forest industries in thenational economy

The situation of the United Kingdom has to beseen in the context of extensive deforestation in

United Kingdom

prehistoric and historical times, followed by adoubling of forest area through afforestationduring the twentieth century.

Reliant as it is on imports of timber (about 85%of apparent domestic consumption), the UK’sforest revenues are dominantly conditioned byworld timber prices. Imports of conifer timberpresently come largely from Scandinavia andthe Baltic States; that of broadleaved timber,from tropical countries, the USA, France andGermany. There is little tariff protection for theindustry. Most domestic production is directedtowards bulk, rather than high-quality markets,and prices are accordingly low.

3.2 Employment in the forest sector

Employment in forestry, and in that part of thewood-processing industry which is directly re-lated to domestic wood production, is only about0.2%. According to a 1993-4 survey, the totalnumber of people employed in the forestry andwood processing sectors is about 35 000 (18 185actually in forests). The Forestry Commissionemployed 6650; private forest owners 10 750;forestry management companies 1910; timberharvesting companies 4295; and the woodprocessing industries 11 215 (FICGB, undated).

Although providing rural employment and sta-bilising rural populations have been explicitpolicy objectives of forestry, the evidence thatit has been able to achieve them is equivocal.This is partly due to rapid mechanisation, andto the use of contractors who seek employmentover a wide area (Johnson and Price, 1996).Farm forestry will not achieve its full potentialfor rural employment unless farmers acquiremore forestry skills: currently most work is un-dertaken by contractors. Total forest-based em-ployment is now declining, despite the increasein forest area and harvesting activity.

3.3 Profitability

3.3.1 The state sector

From the foundation of the Forestry Commissionin 1919, until the forest policy statement of 1958,the main objective of UK forestry was strategicexpansion: economic considerations were orien-tated towards achieving this at minimum cost.Since 1958 economics has played a more impor-tant role in defining ends as well as means. Thenormal economic criterion for Government de-partments and agencies in appraising investments,as in new planting, is a rate of return of 6%, or8% for commercial activities (which may com-pete with the private sector) (Treasury, 1991).While a 6% discount rate is advocated to be usedin silvicultural decisions (such as on fertilising,thinning and rotation length), rates of return onafforestation and restocking are generally in therange 1-5%. This is partly a consequence of thepoor quality of land historically made availableto forestry. On better quality land, e.g. that fall-ing out of agriculture, rates of return up to 8%may be possible.

Since 1995, the state Forest Enterprise has beenset a target of breaking even financially in itsyear-on-year operations, without the addition ofinterest. This target it has successfully met. Theabsence of a positive interest-earning require-ment is variously attributed to the new circum-stances of a shift from afforestation to restock-ing, and to the need to account for the additionalvalues of non-market effects. Forest economistsfind neither of these arguments persuasive, since- restocking remains a long-term investment in

revenue from the future rotation, and- the correct treatment of non-market benefits (and

costs) is to value then as far as possible in mon-etary terms, or failing that to calculate the op-portunity cost of decisions made to favour them,using the appropriate discount rate.

The debate about what is the appropriate discountrate for natural resource development and envi-ronmental values is a separate issue, which con-tinues to be in active discussion (Price, 1993).

United Kingdom

3.1.2 The private forest economy, taxationand grants

The active expansion of private forestry in theUK may be largely attributed to state-providedfinancial incentives. Until 1988, forest expen-ditures could be offset against income tax liabili-ties, while revenues from timber sales were ef-fectively tax free. At one time this allowed ratesof return up to 15%, tax free, to be earned onforest investment. Forestry has also benefitedfrom advantageous treatment under capital taxa-tion. Its products are subject to value added taxunder normal rules.

Since 1988, the emphasis has been on grant aid,with particular incentives to farmers. The switchto grants reduced the available rate of return onplanting, which may now be around 5% in com-mercial plantations. More important seems tohave been the psychological effect on the pri-vate sector, and the fact that receipt of grant aid,unlike the reclaiming of tax, is dependent upona time-consuming consultative procedure, afterwhich award of grant may be conditional oncompliance with certain costly stipulations.

Death duties in forestry received very favour-able treatment up to 1975, and since 1992 noduties have been payable on transfer of a forest,provided that the donor survives for at least twoyears. Death duties themselves have unquestion-ably caused fragmentation of private estates andsome premature felling of trees. However, thespecial arrangements for forestry should havealleviated these effects, and a well managed for-est estate should always have been able to pro-vide a sustainable post-tax surplus of incomeover expenditure.

4 Forest and forest-related policies

The UK’s forest policy is of a rather informalkind. Rarely, specific Forestry Acts of Parlia-ment are promulgated (the last in 1967). Themost important was that of 1919 which estab-lished the Forestry Commission and set its stra-tegic objective. Since that time there has been amovement towards a multiplicity of objectives,

driven largely by more general legislation, forexample the Wildlife and Countryside Act of1981. From time to time, ministerial statementspresage a change of emphasis within the multi-purpose framework.

Both Forest Enterprise and Forestry Authorityhave a detailed set of diverse and more specificobjectives.

4.1 Legislation

Specific forestry legislation, enshrined in thevarious Forestry Acts, empowers the ForestryCommission to purchase land compulsorily (apower scarcely used), to control felling and im-pose conditions (usually replanting) on the grant-ing of felling licences, and to perform other regu-latory functions.

Tree Preservation Orders are applied under theTown and Country Planning Act, 1971, usuallyby local planning authorities to individual trees,groups of trees or whole woodlands. These aretrees of intrinsic beauty, large contributors tothe landscape, are scarce or have important wild-life habitats. They must not be felled, pruned ortopped. Conservation Areas (designated by lo-cal authorities), Sites of Special Scientific In-terest (Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981) andHistoric Parks and Gardens (National HeritageAct, 1983) also have various regulations pre-venting disturbance, felling or damage to indi-vidual or groups of trees.A whole web of contingent legislation affectingissues from health and safety at work, throughplant health and pest control to wildlife conser-vation impinges significantly on the practice offorestry.

4.2 Actors in forest and forest-relatedpolicies

4.2.1 Government forestry bodies

The Forestry Commission is the Governmentbody advising on and implementing forestpolicy, responsible to the Minister of Agricul-

United Kingdom

ture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretaries ofState for Scotland and Wales. In 1992 the For-estry Commission devolved its major functionsto the Forestry Authority and Forest Enterprise.The Forest Enterprise is an executive agencywhich manages the Britain’s state forests. TheForestry Authority is the regulatory arm of theForestry Commission, responsible for imple-menting control of tree felling under the For-estry Act 1967, awarding grants to private wood-land owners under the Woodland Grant Schemeand ensuring that relevant legislation and stand-ards are complied with. Both have a territorialhierarchy, which gives scope to develop distinc-tive regional emphases. The devolved ScottishParliament and Welsh Assembly will take overnational forestry policies in 1999. Since 1997the Forestry Commission Research Agency un-dertakes research contracts, both for public andprivate bodies.

The Ministry of Agriculture (and soon its Welshand Scottish counterparts) has a second routeof influence, through the growing importanceof farm forestry. Its advisory service to farmersnow incorporates some forestry expertise.

4.2.2 Private forestry bodies

A number of trade associations look after theinterests of the private sector, providing infor-mation, some marketing services, and politicallobbying. Among those representing the forestowners are:- the Timber Growers Association representing

about 2000 private woodland owners and busi-nesses, who hold most of the commercial pri-vate woodland in the UK;

- the Country Landowners Association repre-senting (usually large) landowners;

- in future, the farming unions may come to havea greater importance.

- The British Timber Merchants Association hasmore than 100 members in the sawmilling andmerchant sectors, utilising British-grown timber.

The wood processing industry is representedvariously by the Wood Panel Industries Federa-tion, the Paper Federation of Great Britain, the

UK Wood Processors Association and the UKSoftwood Sawmillers Association.

The Forestry Industry Council of Great Britain,the Timber Industry Alliance and the TimberTrades Federation bring together these interests,with a general view of promoting the cause ofthe forestry industry.

4.2.3 Statutory forest-related organisations

Under the 1967 Forestry Act, the Forestry Au-thority is required to consult with other relevantstatutory authorities, such as local planning au-thorities, on applications for felling licences orwoodland grants). In Scotland, local authoritiesare required to draw up Indicative Forestry Strat-egies, giving guidance about where (and to anextent, how) forest expansion would be encour-aged, or unwelcome. Such strategies also existin other UK local authorities.

A number of other agencies, semi-independentof Government, can influence the nature of for-estry, especially when forests are within desig-nated areas. Particularly influential are the Coun-tryside Commission and English Nature (Eng-land), the Countryside Council for Wales, andScottish Natural Heritage. These can award theirown grants to aid or influence forestry operations.

4.2.4 Charities and pressure groups

The Councils for the Protection of Rural Eng-land/Wales and The National Trusts have leanedtowards maintaining the landscape status quo, ashas the Ramblers Association. The Royal Soci-ety for the Protection of Birds is involved in for-estry issues due to its interest in habitat for birdsand as an owner of several woodlands. It hasopposed afforestation when valued open habitatshave been involved. The World Wide Fund ForNature has been actively involved in the settingup and running of the Forest Stewardship Coun-cil’s and other certification schemes.

Although these groups, and others more tempo-rary and local, have in the past campaigned ac-

United Kingdom

tively against afforestation, they now operatein more collaborative mode, with representationon some forestry committees.

Increasingly, local residents are consulted onforest issues, though they do not yet have statu-tory powers in decision making.

4.3 Forest policy tools

Forest Enterprise pursues policy by managementof its own forests. The Forestry Authority doesso by seeking to secure compliance with policy,in both public and private forests, using a mix-ture of regulations and laws (already alluded to),moral persuasion and advice, and financial in-centives. Advice was formerly available freefrom both Forestry Commission and Ministryof Agriculture, but the mood of the times is forsuch advice to be made commercially availableby consultants.

To obtain planting, restocking and managementgrants, owners must comply, as appropriate, withthe guidelines laid out in a series of ForestryCommission publications (on nature conserva-tion, recreation, water, landscape design, com-munity woodland design and archaeology. Ifguidelines are not followed then the grant moneymay be reclaimed (with interest).

There are also prescriptive guides to the man-agement of eight recognised types of semi-natu-ral woodland. Owners of this type of woodland,if grant aid or felling permission is sought, needto follow the guides unless there are good man-agement reasons for not doing so. The creationof new native woodlands on open land by natu-ral colonisation or planting, where species com-position and site are suitably matched, is encour-aged by grant aid, especially on areas close toexisting semi-natural woods.

Higher grant levels are available for planting ofbroadleaves, of woods suitably located for com-munity recreation, and on better quality agri-cultural land (as part of the policy to reduceagricultural surpluses).

No long-term forest management plan is re-quired, but agreement of a shorter-term plan ofoperations (typically, for five years) is a condi-tion for grant aid and felling licences. The pos-sibility of financial assistance for longer-termforest design plans is now being discussed.

The Forestry Authority also exerts control overForest Enterprise, by requiring its approval begiven for forest design plans for state forests.

As yet there is no official National Forestry Pro-gramme. The original strategic objective, toachieve a 2 M ha area of productive woodlands,could have been so considered, and the move-ment towards a formal programme is discussedin section 5.3.

4.4 Forest policy in relation to othernational policy areas

Policy matters not explicitly directed to forestry– particularly those related to access to the coun-tryside for recreation, the visual appearance ofthe countryside, and nature conservation – havebeen pivotal in inducing changes of orientationof forestry activities. However, the Town andCountry Planning Act of 1947, which closelycontrols most aspects of land use change anddevelopment, does not apply to afforestation, fell-ing or any other forest operations. Recent devel-opment are discussed in 5.2.

4.5 European Union forest and forest-related policies

Between 1979 and 1997 successive Conserva-tive governments were generally opposed to thedevelopment of a forestry strategy for the UK –though other bodies advocated one. This, andBritain’s generally equivocal relationship withthe European Union over this period, led to lackof official enthusiasm about a European ForestPolicy. However, European legislation andpolicy, particularly on agriculture and on theenvironment, affects UK forestry.

United Kingdom

Changes in the Common Agricultural Policy inconsequence of over-production of food havestrongly redirected the UK’s forest expansiontowards farmland. Grants from the ForestryAuthority are favourable to the planting of ar-able land, while the Farm Woodland PremiumScheme, in line with European policy, givesannual payment for land diverted into forestry,according to the amount of agricultural produc-tivity decommissioned. Grant-aided planting inEnvironmentally Sensitive Areas is also withinthe Ministry of Agriculture’s policy remit.

A number of EC and EU directives on environ-ment are applied. Of these the most prominentconcerns environmental impact assessment. Ingeneral planting schemes under 10 ha do not re-quire an environmental statement, those between10 and 100 ha may do, if likely to affect ecologyor landscape, while those over 100 hectares oraffecting statutorily designated areas will do.

4.6 Forest education and research

Up to the 1990s, four UK universities offeredundergraduate or postgraduate degrees, or both,in forestry subjects, with three higher educationcolleges providing technical diplomas. Recentdevelopments in UK higher education have ledto a proliferation of forestry degrees, and a blur-ring of the distinction between professional andtechnical qualifications.

The Institute of Chartered Foresters sets its ownexaminations for recognition of professionalcompetence.

As well as by the Forestry Commission’s Re-search Agency, forestry and forest-related re-search is undertaken in a number of universitydepartments besides those offering forestryqualifications, and including disciplines in thesocial as well as the biological sciences. Simi-larly, wood-processing-related research is un-dertaken in, for example, chemistry departments.

5 Current conflicts and challenges

5.1 Relations between actors and interests

Historically, conflicts have arisen from reductionof forest area as a result of agricultural expansion(over many centuries) opposition between whatmay be broadly termed “production” and“environmental” interests – periodically throughthe last millennium, and particularly during thepast 60 years.

The first has led farmers to show a lack of un-derstanding of and antipathy towards forestry,which is not found in those European countrieswith a strong tradition of farm forestry. Ob-versely, foresters have felt ill-treated, as the re-cipients of land that “even the sheep farmersdon’t want”, and have regarded farmers as anenemy force.

This situation has begun to change, slowly, as aresult of over-production of agricultural prod-ucts within the EU, with concomitant financialincentives to divert land out of food productionand into forestry; the near-cessation of land ac-quisition by the state’s Forest Enterprise, andsevere curtailment of tax-driven private plant-ing since 1988 – these changes leaving farmersas a major source of land for forestry activity.

An outcome of these combined changes has beenthat farmers began planting in the late 1980swith what appeared to be largely environmentalobjectives (Price and Willis, 1994). The pro-portion of broadleaved species planted by farm-ers was 71% during the period 1992-4, and theaverage size of planting scheme only 6.8 ha.There has been some concern in the wood-processing industries about the implications ofblock size, low accessibility and species mix-ture for future raw material supplies (though atrend to larger plantations, with a predominanceof conifers, is notable in Scotland).

Conflict between production forestry and envi-ronmental values reached a peak between 1970and 1990. Rather in opposition to the situationelsewhere, the planting of forests, rather than theirfelling, has been viewed as the environmental

United Kingdom

problem. During the expansion in the uplands,the strongest objections were initially based onthe visual appearance of plantations, usuallymonocultures of unfamiliar species planted inshapes unsympathetic to the topography. In thelowlands, replacement of native or long-natu-ralised broadleaves by exotic conifers drew ob-jections on grounds of both landscape and eco-logical impact. The ecological objections spreadto the uplands, especially when large open moor-land or wetland habitats were afforested. Indeed,the large-scale afforestation of a notable wetlandhabitat in North Scotland was a major triggerfor the tax changes of 1988.

At a more technical level, water supply agen-cies and the electricity boards have expressedconcern about the adverse impact of forests onwater quality and quantity. However, this hasnot appeared to move into the political arena.

The conflict is more muted at present, with thereduction in upland forest expansion. The move-ment of planting to the lowlands, often on sitesof environmentally damaging intensive agricul-ture, has been generally, though not universally,welcomed. In this setting diversification of land-scape and ecosystems with a variety ofbroadleaved species, planted on a small scale,represents a considerable environmental gain.The English Countryside Commission has nowbecome a committed supporter of major forestexpansion, in the lowlands at least.

Environmental objectives have now been inter-nalised, to a greater or lesser extent, in bothpublic and private sectors. A consensus notionof good practice is embedded in the ForestryStandard, further referred to in 5.2.3.

5.2 UNCED, multipurpose forestry andsustainability

The Rio Earth Summit of 1992 both reflected priortrends in the UK, and provided a focus for theirfurther development. Since the mid 1980s, the UKhad placed a high priority on the development ofcodes of good environmental practice in forestry.The private sector has supported these develop-

ments, and sometimes played a pioneering role(Timber Growers’ United Kingdom, 1985).

5.2.1 Sustainable development

High public commitment to sustainability is ex-plicit in the statement of the then Secretary ofState for the Environment that “The United King-dom is determined to make sustainable develop-ment the touchstone of its policies” (Gummer,1994). (It is less easily discerned in successiveGovernments’ advocacy of heavily discountingthe value of future costs and benefits.)

Following the 1993 Ministerial Conference onthe Protection of European Forests in Helsinki,the Government formally adopted a forestrypolicy to promote sustainability. This was ex-pressed in the following terms:- sustainable management of our existing woods

and forests;- and a steady expansion of tree cover to in-

crease the many diverse benefits that forestsprovide.

The UK’s international commitments werespelled out in Sustainable Forestry – the UK Pro-gramme, one of four linked plans, the others cov-ering sustainable development, biodiversity, andclimate change.

As well as direct pursuit of sustainability throughforest management, pressures were being builtfrom the demand side. Some of these are basedon protocols such as those of the InternationalStandards Organisation. Other initiatives arenon-governmental in origin, such as the certifi-cation scheme promoted by the Forestry Stew-ardship Council. This aims at certificating woodproducts, where these can be shown to comefrom sustainably managed forests.

5.2.2 The UK Forestry Accord

In 1996, many organisations representing a widerange of business and environmental interestsin UK forestry adopted The UK Forestry Ac-cord (Forestry Commission, 1998). Its signato-

United Kingdom

ries shared objectives and principles for the fu-ture management and development of forestryin the UK, while interested non-signatories in-dicated a broad approval for its ethos. Its sixsummary principles are:- Forestry is a uniquely sustainable land use and

investment in all types of sustainable forestryshould be encouraged.

- conservation of biodiversity and natural re-sources should lie at the heart of forest man-agement.

- Forest management should safeguard and en-hance landscape and heritage resources.

- Sustainable productive forestry to provide tim-ber benefits should be encouraged.

- Research, education and training should coverall aspects of sustainable forestry.

- The public should be widely involved in andconsulted on forestry matters.

5.2.3 The UK Forestry Standard

In 1995 the UK Government began work onpreparing a UK Forestry Standard (ForestryCommission, 1998) whose purpose was “to setout the criteria and standards for the sustain-able management of all forests and woodlandsin the UK.” While the standard was intended tobe compatible with previous international com-mitments, it recognised that emphases and con-straints would differ in the light of the country’sparticular conditions. For example, it explainedthat:

“… some issues (such as soil erosion and fire)… are globally important but not usually criti-cal in the UK. The use of native species is alsoan area of different emphasis: only one nativeconifer species (Pinus sylvestris) is commer-cially utilisable for timber, and as a consequence,non-native trees play a major part in UK for-estry. Hence, the UK Forestry Standard has lessto say about fire and forests for soil protection,and more about non-native species, than mightbe expected in other European countries”.

It aimed to develop detailed criteria and indi-cators, so that general international agreementscould be readily interpreted in practical termsby managers on the ground, without being too

heavily prescriptive. To facilitate its integra-tion into policy, weight was given to previouslyexisting guidelines.

There were two rounds of consultation with thepublic, agencies and individuals with known for-estry interests, and the final version was publishedin 1998, with a foreword by the Prime Ministerindicating the importance placed upon it.

5.3 The future

The change of government in 1997 has not ledto a palpable discontinuity in the long-runningantipathy to public ownership and management,nor have statements on this theme made prior tothe election been determinedly adhered to. Inthese circumstances, the state’s Forest Enterprisewill probably confine itself to defending what itholds, with expansion occurring largely in theprivate sector, and probably driven by the searchfor the “least-cost” method of maintaining ruralemployment and farming population.

Politically, the environment has at least a super-ficial ascendancy within the multipurpose frame-work, with biodiversity much talked of, even iflandscape is closer to the British heart. The effi-cacy of forestry in averting global warming willcontinue to be misunderstood by the populationas much as by their political representatives.

All this has brought some reappraisal of silvicul-ture and harvesting. That broadleaves are beauti-ful and conifers less so, that small is beautifuland big not at all so, are beliefs enshrined in popu-lar wisdom, and gently underwritten by the UKForestry Standard. There will be diversificationof species planted, with broadleaves occupyinga statutory minimum area. The age classes of theextensive even-aged plantations will also be di-versified, as a natural consequence of differentgrowth rates and patterns, and, at some cost, as adeliberate attempt to meet environmental objec-tives. Forest operations on a large scale will begenerally frowned upon, although some conces-sion to matching the scale of landscape may nowbe permitted. Uneven-aged silvicultures, and soil-friendly harvesting techniques will be proposedwidely, and adopted locally.

United Kingdom

Public consultation, one of those self-evidentlygood things which one should not oppose, willbe undertaken on topics which are appropriate,and also on some where experts are actuallybetter able to inform a good decision. Manyuniversity researchers will prosper on grants toundertake psychometric and contingent valua-tion studies of the benefit the public expects fromforests.

The traditionally dominant timber seems, for themoment, almost consigned to the role of by-product of the environmentally beneficent for-est, though there will no doubt be a gentle swingof the pendulum back in due course. However,the most recent enlargement of the EuropeanUnion brings the question of what is the appro-priate political entity within which to pursue amovement towards self-sufficiency in timbersupplies – which was the point of departure forthe UK’s forest policy this century.

From time to time economists have deliberatedon whether the UK has comparative advantagein timber production. While the forests arehighly productive by north and central Europeanstandards, their establishment is relatively ex-pensive, and the processing industries lackeconomies of scale and transportation. UK for-esters have less frequently compared theirgrowth rates with those of southern Europe.

In a strange way, it may be that the existence ofa forest resource, for dominant environmental(and secondary social) objectives, provides thejustification for a home-based wood industry.However, a more critical and site-specific ap-proach to the evaluation of environmental ben-efits, and to natural resource economics gener-ally, will be needed before that can be confirmedas an appropriate destiny for UK forestry.

United Kingdom

Addresses of organisations related to forestry (all in UK)

Research and Educational establishmentsBuckinghamshire Chilterns University College, Queen Alexandra Road, High Wycombe, Bucking-

hamshire HP11 2JZ , Tel: +44-1494 522141; Fax: +44-1494 524392; http://www.bcuc.ac.uk/CAB International Forestry Bureau, Wallingford Oxon OX10 8DE, Tel: +44-1491-32111; Fax: +44-

1491-33508; e-mail: 84:CAU001Cumbria College of Agriculture and Forestry, Newton Rigg, Penrith, Cumbria CA11 0AH, Tel:

+44-01768-863791; Fax: +44-01768-867249: e-mail: info@newtonrigg.ac.ukDe Monfort University, School of Agriculture & Horticulture, Risehome Hall, Lincoln LN2 2LG,

Tel: +44-1522-895317; Fax: +44-1522-545436Department of Agriculture for N. Ireland, Room 615, Dundonald House, Upper Newtownards

Road, Belfast BT4 3SB, Tel: +44-1232-524068; Fax: +44-1232-525546Forestry Commission, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, Tel: +44-131-3340303; Fax:

+44-131-3343047; e-mail, URL: http://www.forestry.gov.ukForestry Commission Forest Research Station, Alice Holt Lodge, Wrecclesham, Farnham, Surrey

GU10 4LH, Tel : +44-1420-22255; Fax: +44-1420-23653Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 OQB, Tel: +44-131-

4454343; Fax: +44-131-4453943; e-mail: bush.ite.mgrc@mail.nerc-bush.ac.ukInstitute of Terrestrial Ecology, Merlewood Research Station, Grange-over-Sands, Cumbria LA11

6JU, Tel: +44-15395-32264; Fax: +44-15395-34705Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon PE17 2LS, Tel: +44-

14873-381; Fax: +44-14873-467Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen, Scotland AB9 2QJ, Tel: +44-

1224-318611; Fax: +44-1224-311556Oxford Forestry Institute, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3RB, Tel: +44-1865-275000; Fax: +44-

1865-275074; e-mail: ofi@plants.ox.ac.uk, URL: http://www.plants.ox.ac.uk/ofi/index.htmSchool of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University of Wales Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, Tel:

+44-1248-351151; Fax: +44-1248-354997; URL: http://www.bangor.ac.uk/safs/Shell Research Limited, Forestry Research Unit, HRI East Malling, Kent ME19 6BJ, Tel: +44-1732-

843833; Fax: +44-1732-874779Sparsholt College, Sparsholt, Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2NF, Tel: 44-1962-72441University of Aberdeen Department of Forestry, MacRobert Building, 581 King Street, Aberdeen

AB24 5UA, Tel: +44-1224-272677; Fax: +44-1224-272685, URL: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/forestry/index.hti

University of Abertay, Kydd Building, Dundee DD1 1HG, Tel: +44-1382-308000; URL: http://www.tay.ac.uk University of Edinburgh Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, Darwin Building, Kings

Building, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JU, Tel: +44-131-6501000; Fax: +44-131-6672601,URL: http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/ierm/

Forestry, timber trade and environmental organisationsArboricultural Association, Ampfield House, Ampfield, Romney, Hampshire SO51 9PA, Tel: 44-

1794-68717Council for the Protection of Rural England, Warwick House, 25 Buckingham Palace Road, Lon-

don SW1W 0PP, Tel: +44-171-9766433; Fax: +44-171-9766373Country Landowners Association, 16 Belgrave Square, London SW1X 8PQ, Tel: +44-171-2350511;Fax: +44-1712354696Countryside Commission, John Dower House, Crescent Place, Cheltenham, Glos GL50 3RA, Tel:

+44-1242-521381; Fax: +44-1242-584270Forestry Industry Council of Great Britain, Golden Cross house, 3/8 Duncannon Street, London

United Kingdom

WC2N 4JF, Tel: +44-171-9309422; Fax: +44-171-9309426Institute of Chartered Foresters, 7a St Colme Street, Edinburgh EH3 6AA, Tel: +44-131-2252705;

Fax: +44-131-2206128National Trust, 36 Queen Ann’s Gate, London SW1H 9AS, Tel: +44-171-2229251; Fax: +44-171-

2225097Paper Federation of Great Britain, Papermakers House, Rivenhall Road, Westlea, Swindon, Wilts

SN5 7BD, Tel: +44-1793-886086; Fax: +44-1793-886182; URL: http://www.paper.org.ukRoyal Forestry Society for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, 102 High Street, Tring, Herts

HP23 4AF, Tel: +44-01442-822028; Fax: +44-01442-890395; e-mail: rfshq@rfs.org.ul; URL: http://www.rfs.org.uk

Royal Scottish Forestry Society, The Stables, Dalkeith Country Park, Dalkeith, MidlothianEH22 2NA, Tel: +44-131-6609480; Fax: +44-131-6609490

Timber Growers Association Ltd, 5 Dublin Street Lane South, Edinburgh EH1 3PX, Tel: +44-0131-5387111; Fax: +44-0131-5387222; e-mail: tga@ednet.co.uk; URL: http://www.timber-growers.co.uk

Timber Trades Federation, Clareville House, 26/27 Oxendon Street, London SW1Y 4EL, Tel:+44-171-8391891; Fax: +44-171-9300094; URL: http://www.ttf.co.uk/

UK Forest Products Association, John Player Building, Stirling Enterprise Park, Springbank Road,Stirling FK7 7RP, Tel: +44-1786-449029; Fax: +44-473112

Wood Panel Industries Federation, 28 Market Place, Grantham, Lincs NG31 6LR, Tel: +44-1476-563707; Fax: +44-1476-579314; e-mail: wpif.panelboards@virgin.net

Woodland Trust, Autumn Park, Dysart Road, Grantham, Lincs NG31 6LL, Tel: +44-1476-574297;Fax +44-1476-590808

WWF-UK, Panda House, Weyside Park, Godalming, Surrey GU7 lXR, Tel: +44-1483-426444;URL: http://www.wwf-uk.org

References in the text, and other sources used in compilation

Note: all these texts are in English; their content is not described where it is obvious from thetitle.

Anon. 1996. Britain 1996 : An Official Handbook. HMSO, London.Anon. (undated) The Commonwealth OnLine. [UK socio-economic geography].FICGB. (undated). The Forest Industry Yearbook 1996. Forestry Industry Council of Great Brit-

ain, London.FICGB. 1998. The Forest Industry Handbook 1998. Forestry Industry Council of Great Britain,

London.Forestry Commission (undated). Forestry Facts and Figures 1996-97. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh.Forestry Authority 1998. The UK Forestry Standard. Forestry Authority, Edinburgh.Gummer, J.S. 1994. In: Anon.: Sustainable Development: the UK Strategy. Cmnd 2426, HMSO,

London.Hanson Cooke Ltd. 1998. Great Britain. http://www.tcol.co.uk/britain/gb2.htm#geographyJames, N.D.G. 1981. A History of English Forestry. Blackwell, Oxford. [Legislation and policy]Johnson, J.A. and Price, C. 1996. Afforestation, employment and rural populations: a case

study from North Wales. In: P. Hyttinen, A. Mononen, and P. Pelli (eds) Regional Develop-ment based on Forest Resources – Theories and Practice; EFI Proceedings 9, 1996. Euro-pean Forest Institute, Joensuu, pp.245-55.

Miller, H.G. 1998. Formulation and implementation of national forestry programmes: country re-port – Great Britain. Report presented at the SILVA Freiburg Meeting, May 1998.

Price, C. 1993. Time, Discounting and Value. Blackwell, Oxford. [Policy andeconomics]

United Kingdom

Price, C. 1997. The Economics of Forestry in the National Context. University of Wales, Bangor.[Policy and economics]

Price, C. and Willis, R.M. 1994. FRCC Research Follow-up, Report to Ministry of Agriculture,Fisheries and Food and Natural Environment Research Council. University of Wales, Bangor.[Review of environmental, economic and social effects of farm forestry]

Timber Growers Association. 1997. TGA Handbook 1997-98. Timber Growers Association, Edin-burgh. [Compendium of information and addresses]

Timber Growers United Kingdom. 1985. The Forestry and Woodland Code. Timber Growers UnitedKingdom, London.

Treasury. 1991. Economic Appraisal in Central Government: a Technical Guide for GovernmentDepartments. HMSO, London.

UN-ECE/FAO 1990. Forestry Resource Assessment. Vol. I General Forest Resource Information.UN-ECE, Geneva.

Useful URLs

British Trees Home Page http://www.u-net.com/treesFinancial Information on Forest Products, Pulp & Paper, and Other Wood Related Companieshttp://www.forestdirectory.com/stocks.htmForestry Commission Information and Publications http://www.forestry.gov.ukForest Resources http://www.forestsource.comForest Sector Homepage http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg06/fore/index_en.htmForestry http://www.metla.fi/info/vlib/ForestryForest Products, Wood, Trees, and Sustainable Forests Marketplace http://www.forestworld.com/marketplace/marketplace_home.htmlInternational Union of Forestry Research Organizations http://iufro.boku.ac.atTimber http://www.unece.org/trade/timber

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Christine Cahalan, Roger Cooper, Alister Henderson, Graham Mayhead andDavid Jenkins for supply of information, comments and suggestions.

Forestry in

Changing

Societies in

Europe

Forestry in C

hanging

Societies in

Europe

Map of Europe