Following second expert meeting for harmonising forest related definitions held during September 2002, the FRA perceives the forest management as

Transcription

1 The Conceptual Frameworks for Identification, Assessment and Aggregation of Global Variables and Criteria for Global Forest Resources Assessment Dr. Kailash Govil This paper presents the conceptual framework for identification, assessment (and aggregation) of global variables (and criteria) for reviewing sustainability of forest resources. It spans the concepts of forest capital, goods, flows, sustainability, short and long term integrity, naturalness, and aggregation. It presents spatial and functional boundaries conceived under global forest resource assessment (FRA) as well as their link to international processes of Criteria and Indicators for monitoring progress towards sustainable forest management (SFM). Concept of Capital The FRA utilises the concept of capital for assessing forest resources (Fig.1). The concept of capital is a neo-classical economic concept that defines capital as the stock of real resources with power (function) of producing goods (or utilities and service) in the future (Berkes & Folke, 1994; Daly, 1994; Hintenberger et al., 1997; Van del Perk, Chiesra, and Groot, 2000). Stock of Forest Capital Goods Services Figure 1 Stock and Flows Concept of function The FRA considers two types of functions. First type is functions for providing goods and services and second type is functions to maintain processes and system elements for structural integrity and dynamics of forest system (Van del Perk, Chiesra, and Groot, 2000). Concept of forest management Following second expert meeting for harmonising forest related definitions held during September 2002, the FRA perceives the forest management as the process of planning and implementing practices for stewardship and use of the forest aimed at fulfilling ecological, economic and social functions of the forest. It 1 (11)

2 develops a management classification that is compatible with Criteria and Indicator regime under development at international level (Holmgren, 2002). Concept of naturalness The FRA considers that the primary or undisturbed natural forests are the basis, the precondition, for a forest system. The naturalness or integrity of a given forest is a characteristic that depends on the degree of human interference. The basis of difference between undisturbed (primary natural forest) and the disturbed ( modified natural forest, semi-natural forest, and production/protection plantation ) lies in whether the disturbed forest is a substitute or complement to the undisturbed forests in short or in long term. (Berkes & Folke, 1994; Daly, 1994; Hintenberger et al., 1997; Van del Perk, Chiesra, and Groot, 2000). The FRA perceives that the forest plantations affect the forest system dynamics by competing for space and function as its complement in the short run and may function as its substitute in very long run. Concept of management function based spatial classification The FRA recognises multifunctional nature of forest capital or asset and considers forest management as a cultural interface between capital and goods and services. It spatially categorises (Fig. 2) forests in any of the five boundaries based on their prime function (production, protection, biodiversity, social and multiple) allocated by forest management (Holmgren, 2002). While doing so, the FRA understands that in reality many functions are interlinked and they are outcome of many minor functions and conditions. The FRA assigns a forest to managed for multiple function, only when it is not possible to categorise it on the basis of a single prime function. Management for Production Management for Protection Managmement for Multiple Functions Management for Biodiversity Management for Social Functions Figure 2 Spatial categorization of forest based on five management functions Concept of Linkage of FRA with International C&I processes 2 (11)

3 The FRA perceives its linkage to international processes of criteria and indicator (C&I) through the above management based functional classification of forests that is compatible with C&I process and by providing additional assessments on following external functions that address contribution of forest to sectors outside its physical limits and spatially overlapping function that are function to maintain forest integrity and dynamics across the above five management functions. a. External Functions Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle Contribution to Income, Trade and Employment b. Spatially Overlapping Functions Forest Integrity (Extent) Forest Health and Vitality Table 1 presents this link of global forest resource assessment in relation to the international processes of C&I. Based on the recommendation of the fourth expert consultation at Kotka, Finland (nicked named Kotka IV) during July 2002, the FRA does not deal with the seven criteria (Political, legal and Institutional Framework). Table 1 FRA in relation to International C&I processes. Criteria common to most Criteria under FRA 2005 International C&I Processes 1. Extent of Forest Resources and 1a. Extent of Forest Resources Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle 1b. Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle 2. Forest Health and Vitality 2. Forest Health and Vitality 3. Biodiversity Function 3. Biodiversity Function 4. Production Function 4. Production Function 5. Protection Function 5. Protection Function 6. Socio-Economic Function 6a. Social Function 7. Political, Legal and Institutional Framework Concept of Global Variables 6b. Economic Function Not dealt in FRA 2005 The global variables form the core set of information for assessment of the functions. The FRA distinguishes global variables from national variables through the process of harmonization and their commonality across countries. Table 2 provides the list of these global variables for FRA 2005 in relation to the indicators proposed by various international processes of C&I. 3 (11)

4 Table 2. Global Variables for FRA 2005 in relation to Various International Processes on Criteria and Indicators Criteria common to International Processes 1a. Extent of forest resources 1b. Contribution to Global carbon cycle Indicators proposed for Pan-European 1 (i). Area of Forest and other wooded land (OWL) by forest type & wood availability (ii). Age structure / diameter class by forest type & wood availability (iii) Growing stock of Forest and OWL by forest type & wood availability (i). Carbon stock of woody mass and of soils on forests and OWL Indicators Proposed for Tropical Region 2 (i) Area of Forest (natural, plantation, permanent forest estate, integrated landuse plans) (ii). Area by Forest type (iii). Demarcated forest boundaries (iv). Conversion to other land uses (i) Contribution of standing crop (not below ground) as carbon sink Indicators used infinland 3 (i). Area of Forest Cover (ii). Age structure (iii). Wood Growing stock (iv). Conversion to other uses (i). Carbon stocking (ii). Carbon balance (iii). Use of wood energy Indicators used in Canada 4 (i). Area by Forest Types (ii). Area of forest converted to nonforests use (iii). Semi-permanent or temporary loss or gain of forest ecosystems (iv). Growing Stock (i). Biomass volumes by forest type (ii). Non-tree biomass (iii). Canopy cover (iv). Soil carbon pool (v). Soil carbon pool decay (vi). Area of forest depletion (viii). Wood product life cycles (ix). Forest Sector CO2 emissions (x). Forest Carbon Products Emissions (xi). Recycling rate of wood products (xii). Forest sector energy usage Indicators used in USA 5 (i). Area of Forest by Forest types (ii) Area of Forest by forest type and age classes (i). Forest Ecosystem biomass and Carbon pool by forest type, age class, and successional stages (ii). Contribution of forest to total global Carbon Budget (iii). Contribution of forest products to the Global Carbon Budget Global Variables proposed for FRA 2005 (i). Area of Forest by management categories (production, protection, biodiversity, social services, multiple objectives) (ii). Growing stock (iii). Conversion to other uses (i). Carbon stocks (ii). Conversion among forest categories 4 (11)

5 2. Forest Ecosystem Heath and vitality 3. Biodiversity Function (i). Soil Condition (ii). Defoliation by intensity (moderate, severe and dead) (iii). Damage to forests and OWL (by abiotic, biotic and human induced) (iv). Deposition of air pollutants (i). Threatened forest (ii). Protected forests (iii). Regeneration by regeneration type (iv). Naturalness (v) Number of tree by forest types (vii Introduced Tree (vii). Gene Resources (viii). Deadwood (ix). Landscape Spatial Pattern (i). Damage by natural causes (fire, drought, storms, pests and diseases, others) (ii). Damage by humans (Extent and nature of Human activities damaging forests) (iii). Conservation and Protection measures (i). Rare, threatened, and Endangered (ii). Protected Areas (number, extent, IUCN categories, percentage of forest types, ranges, demarcated boundaries) (iii). Percentage of current range to former range (iv). Management (v). M&E (i). Acidification of forest land (ii). Changes in Defoliation (iii). Damage by biotic or abiotic agents (iv). Deposition of air pollutants (i). Endangered (ii). Protected Area Network (iii). Valuable forest habitats (iv). Tree composition (v). Pure and mixed stands (vi). Gene Reserve forests (vii). Decayed trees (i). Area & severity of insect attack (ii). Area and severity of fire damage (iii). Rates of pollutant deposition (iv). Ozone concentrations in forested regions (v). Climate change as measured by temperature sums (i). Number of Extinct, Threatened, Endangered and rare (ii). Population levels and changes over time of selected (iii). No. of occupying a smaller than their former range (iv). PA (Area, Percentage, and representativeness of forest types) (v). Extent of forest types (vi). Extent: Forest type and age class (vii). Habitats for selected wildlife (i). Area of forest affected by insects, disease, fire, storm, land clearance, exotic (ii). Area subjected to levels of air pollutants (iii). Area with diminished -nutrient cycling, -seed dispersion, -pollination, -eco-community. (i). Rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct (ii). Population of representative in diverse habitats (iii) Number of forest dependent (iii). No. of spp. occupying a smaller than their former range. (iv). PA (Area by forest type and IUCN Categories) (v). Extent of forest types (vi). Area by Forest types and age class (vii). Fragmentation of forest type (i). Area damaged by fire (ii), Area affected by insects (iii). Area affected by diseases (i). Number of endangered (ii). Biodiversity conservation Area (iii). Number of tree in forests. (iv). Area by naturalness (Primary natural forest, Modified natural forest, Semi-natural forest, Production and Protection Plantation) (v). Percentage of Area by ecosystem (vi). Area of degraded forests (vii). Area of fragmented forests (viii) Plantation area (Indigenous, exotic ) (ix). Landuse Change (x) Activities affecting biodiversity 5 (11)

6 4. Production Functions 5. Protective Function (i). Balance between Increments and annual wood fellings (ii). Silviculture system (iii). forest improvement measures (iv). Forest Planning (v). Profitability of private forestry (vi). Economic significance of NWFP (vii). Ecotourism (i). Area of Forest & OWL designated to prevent soil erosion, preserve water resources (ii) Area of forest & OWL designated to maintain other forest ecosystem functions (iii). Area of forest & OWL for protection of infrastructure and managed natural resources against natural hazards. (i). Quantity (Removal) of main forest primary (wood and non wood) products (ii). Sustainable level of harvest (wood and non wood) (iii). Area covered by inventory and survey for primary production (iv). Area covered by Mgmt. plans (v) Planning for production and harvesting (vi). M& E. of Management. (i). Area under Soil and water protection (ii). Protection of downward Catchment values (iii). Length of edges of water courses, water bodies and mangroves (iv) Identification of Environmentally sensitive areas (v). M&E (i). Increments of Growing stock (ii). Silviculture system (iii). forest improvement measures (iv). Forest Planning (v). Profitability of private forestry (vi). Economic significance of NWFP (vii). Ecotourism (i). Water protection in harvesting (ii). Phosphorus and nitrogen load in water caused by Harvesting (iii). Water protection plans in drainage (iv). Area under Protective forests (i). Area for timber production (ii). Removal & Sustainable volume (iii). MAI (forest type & age) (iv). Natural &Artificial Regeneration (v). Animal population (spp. of economic importance) (vi). Management and Development expenditures (i). Percentage of forest managed for soil and water protection (ii). Percentage of forest area under road construction and stream crossing (i). Area for timber production (ii). Removal (Wood) and Sustainable levels (iii). Removal (NTFP) compared to sustainable levels (iv). Growing stock merchantable and non merchantable (v). Area and Growing stock of Plantations (native and exotic) (i). Area of significant soil erosion (ii). Area with diminished soil organic matter (iii). Area significant change in soil physical properties (iv). Water bodies in forests (v). Area under toxic wastes (vi). Area for protective functions (vii). Percent stream kilometres deviating from historic pattern (i). Area for Forest by management objective (see above) and by Production function (Natural Forests, Semi-Natural Forests (by Silviculture System), Production Plantation) (ii). Removals of Wood (iii)., Removal of NWFP (iv). Increments- Growing stock (i). Area of forest under protective function 6 (11)

7 6(i). Social Function 6b. Economic Function (i). Accessibility to Recreation by Area of forest accessible to public for recreation (ii) Cultural values (Number of site of cultural importance) (iii). Spiritual value (Number of sites of spiritual importance) (i). Contribution of forest sector in GDP (ii). Net Revenue (iii). Forest Sector Work force (iv). Forest Holdings (v). Investment in national trade (vi). Occupational safety and health (vii). Wood consumption (viii). Wood Energy (ix). Recovery Rate of Paper (Recycling) (x). Value & quantity marketed from forests and OWL -wood -non wood -services (i). Public participation (ii) Volume and value of wood and non wood for subsistence (iii) Efficiency in distribution and fairness in sharing costs and benefits (iv) Number of people dependent on forests (v) Number of visitors for recreation (vi) Cultural values (No. of archaeological & cultural sites) (i). Contribution of forest sector in GDP (ii). Trade (Qty and Value) of wood and non wood products (iii) Employment in Forestry sector (iv) Ratio: Production to industrial capacities (v) Investment in Management, Human Resource, & Research, (vi) Economic Instruments and other incentives for SFM (i). Public participation (iii). Multiple use (iv). Cultural values (v). Recreational value (i). Contribution of forest sector to GDP (ii). Domestic and national trade (iii). Employment support (iv). Enterprise support (i). Recreational facilities (i). Contribution to GDP (ii). Net profitability (iii). Total Employment (iv). Trends in global market (v). Research and dev. Expenditure (vi). Investment in forest research (vii). Non Timber use (i). Area used for subsistence purposes (ii). Viability and adaptability of forest dependent communities. (iii). Area for recreation and tourism (iv) Visitor days to population and area (v). Area under cultural, social & spiritual values (vi). Forest Values for Non-consumptive use (i). Contribution to GDP (ii). Value of Investment (iii). Rates of return on investment (iv). Employment in forestry sector (v). Wage and injury rates n forestry (vi). Value &Volume of Wood and NWFP (vii). Supply & Consumption of Wood & NWFP (viii). Degree of recycling (ix). Investment in R&D and Education ((1). MCPFE, 2002 (2) ITTO, 2002 (3) SFF, 2001(4) NS, 2001(5) NRSF, Some indicators are under alternative criteria for comparison.) Number and Area of sites managed for (i). Recreational use (ii). Spiritual use (iii). Cultural use (i). Value of Primary production (Wood and Non wood), (ii). Employment through primary activities in forest 7 (11)

8 The FRA s list of global variables is based on its past experience regarding what may be available from countries for assessing the first six of the seven criteria (Table 1). This list of global variables may change in any assessment period due to identification of some more useful variables or redundancy of some of the existing variables. The qualitative nature of assessments may help FRA to retain the capacity to qualitatively compare assessments across different time periods. Concept of Assessment Following the concept of capital and its associated flows ( goods and services ), the FRA assesses (Fig. 3) forest resources through these three elements of the system. It checks the stock through two function to type criteria (Extent of Forest Resources, and Forest Health and Vitality) that maintain its integrity. It values the good through single criterion production function, and finally assesses the services through five criteria (Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle, Biodiversity function, Protective function, Social function, and Economic function). Goods Stock of Forest Capital Services Criteria *Production Function Criteria *Extent of Forest * Forest Health & Vitality Criteria *Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle * Biodiversity function * Protective function * Social Function * Economic Function Figure 3 Criteria Assessing the Three elements of Forest Resources Concept of Aggregation The FRA needs an aggregation protocol to assess criteria through global variables (Step 1 in Figure 4) and then to assess the state and changes in SFM in a country through these criteria (Step 2 in Fig. 4). 8 (11)

9 Step 1 Global Variables V1a V1b V1c Qualitative Weighting V1a*w1a V1b*w1b V1c*w1c Criteria 1a Step 2 Criteria 1a 1b a 6b Qualitative Weighting C1a*w1a C1b*w1b C2*w2 C3*w3 C4*w4 C5*w5 C6a*w6a C6b*w6b State of SFM Fig. 4 Process of aggregation The Web dictionary of Cybernetics and Systems defines aggregation as a "process by which the properties of a collection are described in terms of the sums of the properties of the units contained in that collection....the aggregation... yields measures and insights not demonstrable by means of the units aggregated thereby." A more simplistic definition is that it is the process of adding variables or units with similar properties to come up with a single number that represents the approximate overall value of its individual components. The unresolved issue is to establish aggregation regime (weighting scheme) to add different elements that integrate data without loosing its meaning or becoming subjective. On the other hand, however, the result would be multiple priorities with no way of comparing results across countries (Background paper 2 for CSD 9, 2001). The problem of development of an aggregation protocol becomes complicated because every country has different priorities and has different set of forests and its contextual conditions. If same or equal weights are assigned to different variables then it means every variable has the same capacity to affect the forest system which is not realistic. If each country is allowed to develop their own differential weighting scheme to reflect its national priorities then it may help to understand the efficiency of their national policies however such aggregation limits the possibility of comparing across countries. 9 (11)

10 The FRA uses the concept of well informed societal process of aggregation, like Delphi process of expert group convergence, to qualitatively aggregate the variables. It is mainly because social weights capture contextual dynamics in which forests reside. It is also due to the fact that different global variables belong to different dimensions or themes and thus difficult to add in a quantitative manner. The Delphi method demands complete transparency and documentation of the process as the intermediate information is lost during the Delphi process. The FRA provides for two sets (national and international) of aggregation regime. Each country uses Delphi method to develop its aggregation regime based on its culture and contextual conditions in which its forests reside. This provides realistic assessment of sustainability of forest resources at national level and may lead to improvement of national policies for sustaining forest resources. At the same time, the FRA provides for developing consensus among expert panels using Delphi method to design an international aggregation regime for establishing international bench marks for monitoring and comparing the progress towards SFM across countries. Conclusion The FRA uses the basic concept of capital and related concepts of stock and goods and services for forest resource assessments. It checks the integrity of the of forest resources as stocks through two criteria (Extent of Forests and Forest Health and Vitality). It assesses the state of flows from the capital of forest resources; goods through single criterion of production function. and services through five criteria (Contribution to Global Carbon Cycle, Biodiversity function, Protective function, Social function, Economic function). All these criteria are assessed through set of identified global variables that are common across countries and have been harmonized at international level for providing capacity of inter-country comparisons to FRA. References Background Paper 2, Report on the Aggregation of indicators of Indictors of Sustainable Development. Background paper for the ninth Session of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Division of Sustainable Development, United Nations. Berkes, F. and C. Folke Investing in Cultural Capital for sustainable use of natural capital. In Investing in natural capital (1994), Jansson et al. (eds.). Daly, H. E Operationalizing sustainable development by investing in natural capital. In Investing in Natural Capital (1994), Jansson et al. (eds.). Hintenberger, F. et al Material flows vs. Natural Capital. What makes an economy 10 (11)

11 Holmgren, Peter Variable describing Naturalness and Management in the Global Forest Resource Assessment: Concept Note. First meeting of Advisory Group to Global Forest Resource Assessment, October 14 to 18, 2002 at Nairobi, Kenya. Van der Perk, Chiesura, and Groot Towards a Conceptual Framework to identify and operationalise Critical Natural Capital. Discussion paper for second meeting of the CRITINC project, Dec 1998, Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Paris, France 11 (11)