YEAR 2000 PROGRESS REPORT

THE MONTRÉAL PROCESS:
PROGRESS AND INNOVATION IN IMPLEMENTING CRITERIA 
AND INDICATORS FOR THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE 
MANAGEMENT OF TEMPERATE AND BOREAL FORESTS

The Montréal Process Liaison Office
Canadian Forest Service 
Ottawa, Canada
April 2000

Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data

Working Group on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests

Montréal Process Year 2000 Progress Report - Progress and Innovation in Implementing Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests

Issued also in French under the title:
Le processus de Montréal Rapport de l'an 2000 - Progrès et innovations dans la mise en ouvre des critères et des indicateurs pour la conservation et l'aménagement durable des forêts tempérées et des forêts boréales

Issued also in Spanish under the title:
El Proceso de Montreal Informe del año 2000 - Progreso e innovación en la implementación de criterios e indicadores para la conservación y el manejo sustentable de los bosques templados y boreales

At head of title: The Montréal Process
ISBN: 0-662-28794-0
Cat. No.: FO42-238/2-2000E

1. Forest conservation - Congresses.
2. Forest management - Congresses.
3. Taiga ecology - Congresses.
4. Sustainable forestry - Congresses.
I. Canadian Forest Service.
II. Title.
III. The Montréal Process.

SD411.W67 2000     333.75'6

The Montréal Process Liaison Office
8^th Floor, 580 Booth Street
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0E4
Tel: 1-613-947-9061
Fax: 1-613-947-9038

Report also available in PDF Format (2.33 MB)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

VIGNETTE ON ARGENTINA
VIGNETTE ON AUSTRALIA
VIGNETTE ON CANADA 
VIGNETTE ON CHILE
VIGNETTE ON CHINA
VIGNETTE ON JAPAN
VIGNETTE ON KOREA
VIGNETTE ON MEXICO
VIGNETTE ON NEW ZEALAND
VIGNETTE ON RUSSIA
VIGNETTE ON UNITED STATES
VIGNETTE ON URUGUAY

DISCUSSION

APPENDIX A
Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators of the Conservation 
and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests

| Top |

This Year 2000 Report on the Montréal Process has been prepared for presentation at the Eighth Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), to be held in April 2000 in New York, USA, and at the XXI World Congress of the International Union of Forestry Research Organizations (IUFRO), to be held in August 2000 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The report, which incorporates input from individual countries, highlights accomplishments in implementing the criteria and indicators of the Montréal Process, including capacity-building, data collection, forest management, institutional and regulatory policy development, and technical co-operation. Countries have prepared "vignettes" which describe experiences and provide examples of progress and innovation in implementing criteria and indicators and related policy initiatives to promote sustainable forest management (SFM).

After a brief introductory chapter, a short history of the Montréal Process is included. This is followed by presentation of the vignettes on participating countries. The report continues with a discussion concerning the strengths and added values provided by working within the framework of the Montréal Process, and concludes with a statement concerning future actions to be taken by the Montréal Process Working Group. The list of Montréal Process criteria and indicators is attached to the report (Appendix A).

| Table of Contents | Top |

BACKGROUND

In 1993 Canada convened an International Seminar of Experts on Sustainable Development of Boreal and Temperate Forests. This meeting, held in Montréal, was sponsored by the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), now the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The seminar focused specifically on criteria and indicators and provided a conceptual basis for subsequent regional and international work.

The Montréal meeting represented a response to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) which was held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. The conference had focused world attention on the importance of sustainable forest management as a key component of sustainable development, defined as meeting the needs of today without hurting the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Following the CSCE seminar, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe elected to work as a region under a pre-existing initiative. Canada then took the lead in launching an initiative among non-European countries having boreal and temperate forests. The objective of this initiative was to develop and encourage implementation of internationally agreed-on national-level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. In Geneva in 1994 the Working Group on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests was formed; this is now known as the Montréal Process.

Twelve countries are involved in the Montréal Process Working Group - Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Russian Federation, United States of America and Uruguay. These countries together represent about 60 per cent of world's forests, about 90 per cent of the world's temperate and boreal forests, 45 per cent of world trade in wood and wood products, and 35 per cent of the world's population.

Between June 1994 and February 1995, the Montréal Process countries met five times to pursue the development of a comprehensive set of criteria and indicators. At the Sixth Meeting, in Santiago, Chile, in February 1995, the 10 original participating countries endorsed a statement of political commitment known as the Santiago Declaration, together with a comprehensive set of criteria and indicators for use by policy makers, practitioners, and the general public (see Appendix A). Subsequently the declaration was endorsed by Argentina and Uruguay who have become members of the Montréal Process. Since its inception, the Liaison Office for the Process has been hosted by the Canadian Forest Service. The office, located in Ottawa, provides various services including document preparation and distribution, process co-ordination and various clearing-house functions.

Over the past five years a number of publications have been issued by the Montréal Process. The first report, issued in May 1996 and entitled Status of Data and Ability to Report on the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators, summarised the responses to a questionnaire, which had been designed to assess the availability of data and to identify the ability of countries to report on the criteria and indicators. Subsequently, in February 1997, a progress report on implementation of the Process was released. This report included brief vignettes for 10 of the countries; these vignettes provide information on the unique experiences of each country, the great variation from country to country and the special challenges or issues faced by individual countries.

A First Approximation Report of the Montréal Process was issued in August 1997. This report reviewed the history of the Montréal Process and its criteria and indicators and provided a summary of more recent Montréal Process activities, including early implementation. Advice concerning the preparation of the report was provided by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The report was primarily devoted to member-country responses to a call for updated information on the status of data assembly and on key issues associated with implementation of the Process. The survey revealed that there was a reporting rate of 87 per cent for all indicators, that data were being collected for 68 per cent of the indicators, and that specific detail was being provided for 39 per cent of the indicators. It was revealed, however, that there were gaps in the ability to report for 50 per cent of the indicators. These country reports are the key to future reports in that they provide baseline information and highlight the gaps in the available national data for each indicator.

A technical report prepared by the TAC is currently under review by the Montréal Process Working Group. A brief explanation or rationale, definitions of key terms and suggested measurement approaches are included for each indicator. The measurement approaches suggested do not necessarily represent the latest available techniques, but focus on useful and cost-effective techniques. Possible techniques are included for all indicators, even when measurement approaches may be difficult to implement fully in the short term.

Criteria and Indicators

Criteria and indicators are tools for characterising the state of a nation's forests and for providing information on how forest lands and uses are changing. This information is vital in formulating policies that promote sustainable forest management and can be used to assess national trends. Information on trends is an essential step in measuring progress toward the goal of sustainable forest management.

Comparisons of periodic national reports on the various indicators will assist the public and decision-makers to identify the current status and trends in most aspects of forests. Over time, they will document the changes and outcomes that result from forest management.

Specifically, the seven criteria identified in the Montréal Process are the essential components of the sustainable management of forests. They include vital functions and attributes (biodiversity, productivity, forest health, carbon sequestration, and soil and water protection), socio-economic benefits (timber, recreation and cultural values), and the laws and regulations that constitute the forest policy framework. The criteria and indicators provide a framework for answering the fundamental question, "What is important about forests?" The Montréal Process indicators provide ways to assess or describe a criterion. Many indicators are quantitative, whereas others are qualitative or descriptive. All indicators provide information about the present conditions of forests and their use and, over time, will establish the direction of change in these variables. It is also recognised that whereas many of the indicators can be readily measured, others will involve the gathering of new and additional data, a new program of systematic sampling, or even basic research.

Together, the seven criteria and the 67 indicators of the Montréal Process reflect an ecosystem-based approach to sustainable forest management and the need to serve human communities. The criteria and indicators are not static; they will be reviewed and refined continuously to reflect new research, advances in technology, increased capability to measure indicators and an improved understanding of what constitutes appropriate assessment indicators.

| Table of Contents | Top |

VIGNETTE ON ARGENTINA

Criterion 1: Conservation of Biological Diversity

A major inventory of forest plantations began in November 1997 and will be completed in May 2000. Partial information, including range and extension of forest species, total wood volume and species age, has been elaborated on provincial maps at a scale of 1:100 000. Total areas of forest by province are given in Table 1, with a map of provinces in Figure 1.

Also, a geographic information system, based on the indicators noted in the previous sentence and on the interpretation of satellite images, has been developed. The inventory is being carried out by the Forest Development Project, under the direction of the Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Food (IBRD).

Figure 1. Provinces of Argentina

Table 1.  Planted forests by province Provinces Planted forest area (ha) Buenos Aires 144 537 Catamarca 15 Córdoba 41 470 Corrientes 187 967 Chaco 1 620 Chubut 5 063 Entre Ríos 86 962 Formosa 389 Jujuy 18 986 La Pampa 2 701 La Rioja   Mendoza 14 500 Misiones 197 000 Neuquén 41 094 Río Negro 20 712 Salta 3 479 San Juan 4 524 San Luis 483 Santa Cruz 2 139 Santa Fe 30 414 Santiago del Estero 3 833 Tierra del Fuego 0 Tucumán 4 999 Total 812 887

Table 2. Native forest by region

The Environment Secretariat is preparing the native forest inventory.

Forest types in Argentina, which totalled 60 300 000 hectares in 1970, and now total 37 380 000, have been classified into seven categories: Selva Misionera, Selva Tucumano-boliviana, Parque Chaqueño, Parque Mesopotámico, Bosque Pampeano, Monte Occidental, y Bosques Subantárticos. Forested areas by region are listed in Table 2 with a map of regions shown in Figure 2.

There are many categories of protected areas in Argentina. The largest are natural environment conservation areas, which cover 13  695 183 hectares. Also, 224 reserved areas have been established to protect landscapes and other land use under the provincial and national natural parks laws.

National Forest Reserves have been designated in 34 sites covering 2 590 301 hectares to conserve natural ecosystems.

Criterion 2: Maintenance of the Productive Capacity of Forest Ecosystems

The greatest progress has been made on plantations. Forest plantations, in 1992, totalled 20 000 hectares per year, and currently total 120 000 hectares per year. Forest policy has emphasised the expansion of commercial forests, to decrease the deterioration of native forest biomass. According to estimates for the next 10 years, commercial forest lands will occupy about 2 000 000 hectares.

Figure 2. Natural regions of Argentina

Criterion 3: Maintenance of Forest Ecosystem Health and Vitality

The National Agrifood Health and Quality Service, which participates in the Forest Agricultural Health Program is undertaking research on the pine-tree boring wasp (Sirex noctilio). At the same time, the program has signed an inter-institutional agreement with the Paraná Delta Producers' Council.

Additionally, in November 1991, a permanent Working Group on Forest Agricultural Health was created under the South Cone Plant Health Committee established by Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay. The priority objectives of this group are to analyse forest health questions in the region, to coordinate actions, to exchange experiences advising the directive committee.

Criterion 4: Conservation and Maintenance of Soil and Water Resources

The Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Food, through the Forest Development Project (SAGPyA/IBRD), has completed a study on desertification in Patagonia. One of the study's conclusions was the importance of forestation in erosion control. The study was carried out by DHV consultants BV (Holland) - SCC Swedforest International AB (Sweden), with experts from the National Agricultural Technology Institute and the Faculty of Agronomy of Buenos Aires University.

Criterion 5: Maintenance of Forest Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles

The native forest area in Argentina is estimated at about 37 000 000 hectares, and with an annual growth rate of 3 cubic metres per hectare, is increasing in volume at a rate of 105 000 000 cubic metres per year. Likewise, the forest plantations, which cover 1 000 000 hectares and have an average annual growth rate of 15 cubic metres per hectare, are increasing in volume at about 15 000 000 cubic metres per year. Accordingly, with silvicultural practices, Argentina has capacity to realise carbon absorption (Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3. Carbon sequestered by plantation forests (per hectare)

Table 4. Net carbon in forests at the end of first rotation

Criterion 6: Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Multiple Socio-economic Benefits to Meet the Needs of Societies

The Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Food, under the Ministry of Economy and Public Services and Works, is responsible for execution of the Forest Development Project.

The principal benefits foreseen by the project will include the following:

• A more efficient political-regulatory framework to develop ecological potential, in sites highly suitable for forestry but marginal for other activities
• Direct emphasis on increased productivity
• Prioritisation of effort for regions showing economic and ecological advantages
• Quality improvements in wood to be harvested and diversification of manufacturing alternatives
• Recovery of fragile or deteriorated zones, helping to diminish the pressure on natural forests
• Strengthening of peripheral research, information and extension services
• Greater participation of the private sector, in production as well as in services
• Creation and implementation of options to improve family incomes of small producers
• Enhanced technical and administrative forest capability in the public sector
• Training of technical and managerial staff in private and public areas

Criterion 7: Legal, Institutional and Economic Framework for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Management

Basically, the legal framework is composed of the legislation listed in Table 5:

Table 5. Legal framework for forest conservation and sustainable management

Furthermore, Argentina is part of several international conventions on conservation and protection of the natural resources (Table 6).

Table 6. Participation in international conventions

The policy and legislative framework for forests has considered the following objectives in the Cultivated Forest Investment Law (Nº 25.080/99) and the Decree (Nº 133/99):

• Protection of natural forests, prohibiting their use except where management plans to promote active management have been approved
• Expansion of the forest base through forest plantations, using appropriate species on land with medium to low agricultural productivity, with an approved sustainable management plan.

| Table of Contents | Top |

VIGNETTE ON AUSTRALIA

Summary

This report highlights developments since 1997, when Australia's First Approximation Report (FAR) was produced. Australia finalised A framework of regional (sub-national) level criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management in Australia in 1998, after a two-year consultative process between government agencies at Commonwealth (Federal), State and Territory levels, and stakeholders. The framework was endorsed by forestry and environment Ministers at all levels and was released publicly in August 1998. The framework is based on the internationally accepted national-level criteria and indicators of the Montréal Process. It provides a co-ordinated approach to monitoring trends in forest conditions and to the sustainability of Australia's forest management practices at a sub-national level. This will enable data to be aggregated for use at the national level. A phased approach to implementation of indicators has been agreed on, giving States and Territories flexibility regarding implementation.

To support this work, Australia is undertaking a number of research and development projects that aim to deliver practical, cost-effective and sensitive indicators. As outlined in the FAR, several key challenges exist for Australia, including collection of data from non-commercial forests on public land and from the large majority of privately managed forests. Given that these tenures constitute about 90 per cent of Australia's forest estate of 157 million hectares, this amounts to a significant issue.

Development of a Framework of Criteria and Indicators for Use at Sub-national Level

In July 1996, Australia's Ministerial Council on Forestry, Fisheries and Aquaculture (MCFFA) requested that a framework of regional-level criteria and indicators be developed. The MCFFA's Standing Committee on Forestry (SCF) and the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council's (ANZECC) Standing Committee on Conservation (SCC) agreed to establish the Montréal Process Implementation Group for Australia (MIG), a Commonwealth-State body, to develop the framework of regional criteria and indicators. The MIG process has included stakeholder meetings, expert workshops, seminars and a period for public comment. Stakeholders and experts provided input on the adequacy of the indicators to capture key attributes of sustainable forest management (SFM) at a regional (sub-national) scale and for Australian conditions. Advice was also provided on research needs.

The MIG process confirmed that the seven Montréal Process criteria are relevant to all land tenures and all forest types in Australia. However, consistent with Australia's National Forest Policy Statement, the application and importance of the criteria and their respective indicators will vary among tenures and broad forest types.

Of the 67 Montréal Process (national) indicators, 30 have been accepted as regional-level indicators and 10 have been classed as not relevant at a regional level. Twenty-five national-level indicators have been reworded to reflect regional issues more accurately, and two indicators have been amalgamated with related indicators. Twelve new or interim indicators have been developed for use at the regional level. In summary, the regional framework also has 67 indicators.

There has been agreement in Australia that it is not possible, practical or cost-effective to fully implement and monitor all indicators in the framework at this time. Therefore, the framework identifies three sub-sets of indicators:

• Category A, which can be measured immediately for most forests
• Category B, which require further work on methods or resourcing before indicators can be implemented
• Category C, where significant research and development is required to develop practical, sensitive and cost-effective implementation (see Table 7).

Table 7. Phased implementation of indicators

Research and development work is being funded for these indicators. As this research is completed, the indicators will be reviewed to establish the feasibility of their inclusion in Category A. The three categories cover all seven Montréal Process criteria, and provide a strategy for phased implementation.

The remaining 20 indicators are not seen as having a high priority for regional implementation, or for research and development, over the short to medium term. However, they may be important in particular regions and could be adopted where needed.

Although Australia is committed to monitoring and reporting against the regional framework of criteria and indicators, there is no expectation of uniform implementation of indicators across the nation. It is also worth noting that the framework is not legally binding, nor is it a compliance document or an operations manual.

The ability of agencies, industry, forest owners and growers, and the broader community to contribute to monitoring will vary.

Links with Other Domestic and International Activities

There are important linkages between the implementation of the framework and work being undertaken on other key initiatives, including Australia's Regional Forest Agreement process, the National Forest Inventory, State of the Forest and State of the Environment reporting, greenhouse activities, and international reporting. Not only does the framework provide a common approach to monitoring, with the specific purpose of progressively improving forest management on all land tenures, it endeavours to avoid duplication in forest-related data collection. The framework will allow aggregation of data from the regional level to a State and national level in a transparent and credible way in both Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) and non-RFA regions.

Regional Forest Agreements

A key element of the approach adopted in Australia's National Forest Policy Statement involves RFAs between the Commonwealth and State governments, which are being developed following comprehensive studies of forest values and consultation with stakeholders. The agreements will seek to conserve the full suite of environmental and heritage values that forests can provide for current and future generations by ensuring that the forest conservation reserve system is comprehensive, adequate and representative, and through the complementary management of forests outside reserves. Secure access to wood resources will be provided through these agreements, enabling continued development of internationally competitive and ecologically sustainable industries. The RFAs cover over 25 million hectares (approximately 16 per cent of the forest estate). To date, all signed RFAs have included references to identification of sustainability indicators based on the regional framework. Considerable progress has been made in New South Wales and Tasmania on identification of indicators for monitoring. Although preliminary resource assessment has been undertaken on private native forests in most RFA areas, only Tasmania has included both the private and the public forest in their final resource analysis.

National Forest Inventory

The National Forest Inventory (NFI) was established in 1988 by the Commonwealth, State and Territory governments to co-ordinate the gathering and use of forest information nationally. Ministerial Councils have tasked the NFI with the production of five-yearly State of the Forest reports based on the regional framework.

State of the Forests and State of the Environment Reporting

Ministerial Councils have also agreed that the preparation of national State of the Forest reports be aligned with all other national and international reporting requirements. This means that the State of the Environment and Montréal Process reporting will be based on data collected for the regional framework.

Greenhouse

As part of Australia's National Greenhouse Strategy, a number of activities are being undertaken that will improve knowledge of the contribution forests make to carbon fluxes and sinks. A Co-operative Research Centre for Greenhouse Accounting was established in 1999 and will undertake research aimed at increasing certainty in measurement and predictions of stocks and fluxes of carbon in Australian vegetation at both continental and project scales. Information gathered will be directly related to Criterion 5 of the regional framework. A National Carbon Accounting System is being developed within the Australian Greenhouse Office that provides a comprehensive framework for reporting storage and emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the Australian landscape. These two initiatives will provide a basis for State and national agencies reporting under Criterion 5.

Certification and Labelling

Australia acknowledges that the Montréal Process criteria and indicators have no automatic link to certification and labelling. Certification and labelling schemes could draw on information and methods employed in this assessment of SFM (including relevant criteria and indicators). An Australian Forestry Standard is being developed, as a basis for voluntary certification, by Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory forestry ministers. The standard will be developed through a process that actively solicits and transparently considers the views of a wide range of stakeholders. Such an approach would seek to combine environmental performance elements that address the Montréal Process criteria and systems elements drawn from ISO 14001. Australia will also be seeking to co-operate with Montréal Process countries and other interested countries to explore an internationally co-operative approach to certification and labelling.

International Reporting

As mentioned previously, data collected for the regional framework will be used for international reporting to the Montréal Process. The criteria are equivalent and the indicators are largely the same. Australia has contributed to the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 Programme by responding to the assessment enquiry in 1998-99 and also by participating in the development of a Global Ecological Zone Map.

International Co-operation

Australia has been active in international co-operation on criteria and indicators. Australia and China have jointly organised two workshops, the first of which was held in Fuzhou, China, in December 1997 and investigated China's national-level indicators. The second was held in Melbourne following the Conference of International Union of Forestry Research Organizations in August 1998 and aimed to accelerate progress on implementation of criteria and indicators through capacity and confidence building.

Highlights of Work being Undertaken at State and Territory Level

In New South Wales, the State Forests Service (NSW SF) commenced implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainability in 1997 prior to completion of the regional framework. The initial 17 indicators selected by NSW SF after extensive consultation fitted under the Montréal Process criteria and were reported on in the first Environmental and Social Values Report of 1997-98. From 1999 onward, the Category A indicators are being incorporated into the State Forests sustainability monitoring process. Discussions are in progress with other agencies to co-ordinate implementation of criteria and indicators on other tenures.

In Victoria, the RFAs specify that a set of sustainability indicators will be established to monitor forest changes and that these will be consistent with the Montréal Process criteria and indicators. Research and development programmes have been reconfigured to address the need to monitor against indicators. With respect to native forests, Victoria has identified a number of Montréal Process indicators considered relevant to its forests, for which information can be provided now and after further research and development. The private forests sector in Victoria is assessing options for implementation.

Queensland expects to utilise indicators in its RFA process. The Department of Natural Resources has undertaken substantial work in developing these indicators and is developing an implementation strategy for Category A indicators. A three-tier monitoring strategy is being advanced which involves long-term reference sites, permanent plots and temporary plots. Queensland has initiated and is further developing research and monitoring projects for Category B and C indicators. Queensland is considering expanding the forest monitoring plots to regions outside the RFA area, and to include privately owned forests and reserve systems.

Western Australia will focus on Category A indicators. Limited data are available for forested lands that are not managed by the Department of Conservation and Land Management, that is, land vested in or owned by other government agencies or local government and private and leasehold land. The initial focus will be on the RFA area. Future work is likely to address the temperate and tropical areas. Partnerships with other agencies and organisations will be required.

Tasmania is unique in that the whole state is an RFA area. Tasmania, together with stakeholders and the Commonwealth, intends to identify a set of indicators that will be used for monitoring the RFA by December 1999.

In those State and Territories where RFAs are not being pursued, the focus on implementation of indicators is variable. The South Australian forest management agency, ForestrySA, manages a sizeable plantation estate with only a relatively small area of multiple use forest. The state has recognised the importance of advancing implementation of indicators for the entire forest sector in South Australia.

Interestingly, it is production forest agencies that have been leading the way on implementation. A continuing effort is required to ensure that all forest management agencies are engaged in the process and that innovative mechanisms for engaging industry, private forest owners and growers, academia, research bodies and the community are developed.

It is essential that the linkages among the above activities are strengthened and duplication avoided, if not eliminated.

Research and Development

As mentioned above, to assist with the implementation of the framework of regional indicators, research is being undertaken into the development and implementation of cost-effective and practical indicators of SFM. The Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation manages the funds on behalf of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia (AFFA). Brief details of the projects are provided in Table 8.

Tables 9 to 13 provide core data on some Category A indicators.

Table 8. Forest sustainability indicator research and development projects

Table 9. Tenure of major native forest types
[Indicator 1.1.a - extent of area by forest type and tenure (incorporates indicator 1.1.c)]

Table 10 Australia - Nature Conservation Reserves, area by forest type and age
[Indicator 1.1.b - Area of forest type by growth stage distribution by tenure (incorporates indicator 1.1.d)]

Table 11 Australia - Multiple-use forests by forest type and age
[Indicator 1.1.b - Area of forest type by growth stage distribution by tenure (incorporates indicator 1.1.d)]

Table 12 Number of species known to occur in Australian forests
[Indicator 1.2.a - A list of forest dwelling species]

Table 13 Area of native forest under multiple-use forest tenure available for harvesting, by State and Territory
[Indicator 2.1.a - Area of forest land and net area of forest land available for timber production]⁽¹⁾

Future Activity

Australia recognises that the implementation of criteria and indicators will require significant effort in the future. The key challenges are to address a number of major impediments, including the following:

• Lack of consistency and different methods of data collection and format among States
• Poor or no data from non-commercial forests on public land and from essentially all forests on privately managed land
• Lack of knowledge and commitment to criteria and indicators by private forest growers and lessees
• Lack of integration of RFA data into indicator format
• Amount of research and development required to implement some of the indicators
• Scarcity of resources for removing these impediments and advancing progressing implementation.

However, even with these impediments, Australia considers that significant progress has been made since 1997. In particular, there is better co-ordination across activities at both the State or Territory and national levels, as well as recognition that duplication needs to be removed.

Australia's regional framework is, and will continue to be, viewed as a dynamic document that can reflect variables such as changes in community expectations and improvement in knowledge. One of the key tasks for the future, in the implementation of indicators at a regional level, is the need to develop objectives, targets and standards in accordance with management requirements and objectives against which trends in indicators can be measured.

In terms of reporting, the following commitments will utilise data collected for the regional framework of indicators:

• Category A indicators (regular national reporting with first scheduled for 2000)
• National State of the Environment Report (2001), supported by State and Territory level reports
• State of the Forests Report (2003)
• Montréal Process Report (2003)

Internationally, Australia continues to participate in the Montréal Process Working Group and its Technical Advisory Committee. We believe opportunities exist for sharing experiences with other countries both within the Montréal Process and more broadly, and will continue to promote such co-operation.

Further information is available at the following web sites:

http://www.affa.gov.au/ffid/sir/criteria/ 
http://www.fwprdc.org.au 

References

• Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1995. Australia Year Book. AGPS, Canberra
• Commonwealth of Australia 1997, Australia's First Approximation Report to the Montréal Process - June 1997, Montréal Process Implementation Group, Australia
• National Forest Inventory 1998, Australia's State of the Forests Report 1998, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra
• National Plantation Inventory 1999, National Plantation Inventory 1999 - The Tabular Report, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra (only available through the website: www.brs.gov.au/nfi/activities/npi/interim.html  )

| Table of Contents | Top |

VIGNETTE ON CANADA

Canada's Forests

Canada is known for the abundance of its natural resources and, in particular, the vastness of its forests-nearly half the nation's land area. Our forests are part of our heritage and national identity, and are viewed as a legacy to be sustained and passed on. These living, life-supporting ecosystems provide Canadians with ecological and environmental services, as well as economic and social benefits ranging from the material to the spiritual.

Canada is unusual among forest nations in that most of its forests are publicly owned and are overseen by governments. Seventy-one per cent of the forests are under provincial jurisdiction, 23 per cent are under federal jurisdiction (some managed by or in co-operation with the territorial governments), and the remaining 6 per cent are in the hands of an estimated 425 000 private landowners.

Under the Canadian Constitution, the provinces retain responsibility for forest management, and each province has its own legislation, regulations, standards and programs through which it allocates harvesting rights and management responsibilities for the public forest. In the Northwest Territories the responsibility for forest management has been transferred from the federal to the territorial governments and a similar transfer is being negotiated with the Yukon Territory. In recognition of the broad spectrum of forest users, governmental agencies seek public views and work closely with forest industries, Aboriginal groups and environmental organisations to incorporate recreational, social, wildlife and economic values into forest management planning and decision-making.

In ecological terms, there are eight forest regions in Canada, ranging from the tall towering coastal rainforests in British Columbia to the sparse, slow-growing forests at the Arctic tree line. Each region has a distinct distribution of plant and animal species; an estimated 180 species of trees occur in different parts of the country. Canada can also be described as having 15 terrestrial ecozones, 194 ecoregions, and more than a thousand ecodistricts.

The forests were once viewed primarily as sources of timber, and forestry was based on the economics of harvesting. Today, forest management also includes economic, environmental, social and cultural considerations. To find flexible and balanced ways of integrating these factors - a challenging task given the complexity and size of the resource and the diverse interests of the forest community - Canada is continually re-examining and adjusting its policies and engaging its collective ingenuity to sustainably manage its forests. Criteria and indicator (C&I) initiatives, at both the national and international levels, are key components of Canada's efforts to measure and report on sustainable forest management (SFM).

Measuring Sustainable Forest Management at the National Level

With the global shift in approach from sustained yield to SFM, Canada has faced a variety of new demands:

• The need to broaden traditional forest policies and practices to integrate many non-timber, as well as timber, values
• The need to develop a better understanding of how forest systems work from ecological, social and economic perspectives
• The need to encourage co-operation and partnerships among a broad range of forest users
• The need to define a set of forest values for the nation to adopt, sustain and enhance.

In addition to its participation in the Montréal Process, Canada has taken a number of steps domestically to promote SFM. In early 1992 - a few months prior to the UN Conference on Environment and Development and after two years of national consultations - Canada's forest community and the public agreed that science-based C&I were an important tool in achieving SFM. This agreement was subsequently reflected in the National Forest Strategy, Sustainable Forests: A Canadian Commitment (1992-1998), which included 96 action items to guide forest management.

In 1993, the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM) began an initiative to measure and report on forest values that Canadians consider important, and in 1995, after year-long consultations, the council adopted a national framework of C&I. This framework reflects an approach to forest management that recognises forests as ecosystems providing a wide range of environmental, economic and social benefits to Canadians.

CCFM C&I Framework

• Criterion 1: Conservation of Biological Diversity (8 indicators *)
• Criterion 2: Maintenance and Enhancement of Forest Ecosystem Condition and Productivity (12 indicators)
• Criterion 3: Conservation of Soil and Water resources (8 indicators)
• Criterion 4: Forest Ecosystem Contributions to Global Ecological Cycles (20 indicators)
• Criterion 5: Multiple Benefits of Forests to Society (16 indicators)
• Criterion 6: Accepting Society's Responsibility for Sustainable Development (19 indictors)

  * The framework is divided into 22 elements, and from those elements, 83 indicators have been established to measure the nation's progress toward sustainable forest management.

The intention of the CCFM in developing the C&I framework was to:

• Clarify the meaning of SFM and provide a framework for describing and assessing it at a national level
• Provide a reference point for the development of policies on the conservation, management and sustainable development of forests
• Contribute a scientific and policy basis for the clarification of issues related to environment and trade, including product certification
• Provide concepts and terms to facilitate domestic and international dialogue on SFM
• Improve the information available to the public and decision-makers.

An analysis of the CCFM C&I framework and the Montréal Process framework has indicated that the two systems are compatible, with approximately 80 per cent similarity. Although the CCFM indicators reflect the particular features of Canada's forests, the CCFM criteria are consistent with the first six criteria of the Montréal Process. Some of the indicators under criteria 5 and 6 of the CCFM framework are similar to those found under the seventh criterion of the Montréal Process (legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable management).

In 1997, on behalf of the CCFM, a network of forest experts from the provinces and territories, industry organisations, non-governmental organisations, academic institutions and professional forestry associations prepared a detailed document that described Canada's capacity to report on each of the 83 indicators. That document was entitled Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in Canada, Technical Report. To communicate the network's findings to a broader audience, a more concise and less technical version of the report also was released, entitled Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in Canada, Progress to Date. Preparation of these two reports led to a better understanding of Canada's strengths and weaknesses with respect to our capacity to measure forest sustainability.

In 1998, Canada renewed its commitment to sustainable forests in the National Forest Strategy (1998-2003). In particular, the new Strategy addresses the need to develop objective measures for testing and demonstrating sustainability under the national framework of C&I, and it commits to action plans for regular reporting on Canada's progress toward SFM. (Canada will report on its progress in April 2000, at the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development in New York City.)

Implementing Criteria and Indicators at the Sub-national Level

Under the National Forest Strategy, several provinces have adopted provincial sets of C&I, and many are preparing to incorporate them into their forest management planning. In addition, some provinces have taken steps to integrate C&I into their forest legislation, while others are considering that possibility. Quebec, for example, amended its Forest Act to include the six criteria from the CCFM C&I framework and has developed a framework of 60 indicators (many of which are similar to those of the CCFM) which it expects to implement over a three-year period. Ontario, too, has drafted a comprehensive set of indicators for use at the provincial level in evaluating and reporting on forest sustainability. In both of these provinces, the C&I have been integrated into forest legislation and policies.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, the government is drafting a 20-year forestry development plan that will contain specific references to a provincial set of C&I, and it is considering having the indicators integrated into legislation.

In addition, Saskatchewan is developing indicators for forest ecosystem health that are derived mainly from the Montréal Process. And New Brunswick has taken a slightly different approach, developing a vision document for its forests that provides a framework for forest management and sets out policy goals, as well as explicit standards and objectives to be used in the development of forest management plans on Crown Timber Licences.

Developing and Testing Criteria and Indicators at the Local Level

Canada's Model Forest programme was established in 1992 by Natural Resources Canada-Canadian Forest Service to develop and demonstrate innovative approaches to SFM. At the core of each model forest is a partnership of people who collaborate in working toward their shared objective of SFM within the social, economic and ecological conditions of their own forest area. (Together, the network of 11 model forests represents the diversity and complexity of the major forest regions of Canada.)

An important focus for each model forest in Phase II of the programme (1997-2002) was the establishment of processes for the development, testing, application and monitoring of local-level indicators of SFM, based on the CCFM C&I framework. The guidelines for the indicators' development required that they be based on appropriate scientific attributes; be easily and readily measured; demonstrate the best management practices available; be adaptive, replicable by others and relevant on a temporal basis (reflecting links between changes in economic, social and environmental circumstances); and be able to show trends in behaviour and attitudes.

The suites of local-level indicators can be used by each of the model forests to describe its progress toward SFM. In addition, a network-wide initiative is enabling the model forests to share their experiences, expertise and information and help each other achieve their own suites of local-level indicators. As of 31 March, 1999, each model forest had developed a set of indicators. Although some sites are in the process of refining their initial master set, several are beginning to develop protocols for monitoring and reporting the indicators.

This approach to developing suites of local-level indicators has been adopted by various industries and provincial governments. Currently, Newfoundland, Manitoba and Alberta are using and supporting the model forest process to develop regional and provincial indicators. Also, partner industries at Manitoba Model Forest, Fundy Model Forest and Foothills Model Forest are adopting these approaches for their forest management planning and are linking the indicators to their certification requirements.

New Rules and Regulations

Across the country, new forest laws based on the principles of sustainability and stricter enforcement of policies and guidelines indicate that steps are being taken by an increasing number of provinces and territories in response to the demands of SFM. For example, in recent years, many provinces have passed legislation or introduced regulations governing forestry operations on Crown land.

British Columbia, for instance, has opted to address most of the aspects covered under the C&I through legislation, administration and research. Alberta has developed a framework that reflects the public's desire to maintain its access to the wide range of benefits provided by sustainable forest ecosystems. In addition, a number of provinces have announced incentives to encourage the sustainability of private woodlots through tax rebates, financing for silvicultural activities and education.

Government agencies across Canada have, without exception, adopted a consultative approach to developing forest policy. They routinely seek public views and work closely with industries, Aboriginal groups and environmental groups to incorporate recreational, social, wildlife and economic values into forest management planning and decision-making.

New Data Collection Systems

In establishing and reporting on the CCFM C&I framework, Canada has faced challenges in developing new approaches to data collection and management (particularly for non-timber values), in developing tools to measure social values and in expanding its knowledge of forest ecosystems. With respect to new approaches to data collection and management, a number of initiatives have evolved in response to C&I demands.

A new National Forest Inventory is being proposed that will be consistent nationally, describe all classes of ownership, provide changes and trend estimates, be compatible with ecological classification and allow spatial and temporal reporting on multiple resource attributes. For the past decade, the forest inventory for Canada has been prepared by rolling up data from provincial inventories, based on definitions that were not always compatible. Approximately 30 per cent of the indicators in the CCFM framework will be addressed in the national inventory. In addition, some non-timber values will be incorporated, such as the number of forest-dependent species.

To complement the new inventory, a National Forest Information System has also been proposed, as a national system for integrating and linking information on Canada's forests. In addition, the Canadian Forest Service is working with the Canadian Space Agency on a joint project called Earth Observation for Sustainable Development (EOSD). The project is designed to monitor the sustainable development of Canada's forests and provide core information requirements. It is estimated that the reporting requirements of 25 of the 83 indicators could potentially be satisfied through this remote sensing project.

Future Reporting

The pursuit of SFM is a dynamic and evolving process. Criteria and indicators are based on the best information available and, as such, they are subject to continual revision and improvement. For example, several years have passed since the CCFM C&I framework was developed, and during that period, the capacities of information systems have increased, the approaches to forest inventories have changed and the availability of data for some indicators has improved. Also, advances in science have increased our understanding of systems and have influenced our concept of SFM and our ability to measure our progress toward that objective.

It is in this light that the CCFM has approved a review of the 83 indicators currently included in the C&I framework. In addition, the Council has used the experience and knowledge gained from the preparation of Canada's first report to develop and approve an implementation plan for reporting in 2000.

The Task Force charged with preparing the implementation plan has identified a core set of 49 indicators, which they derived from the original 83 indicators by conserving those consistent with ones found in other C&I processes, combining similar indicators, and focusing on indicators applicable at the national level. (In fact, close to 70 indicators from the original framework will be reported on in 2000.)

To carry out the implementation plan and facilitate production of the 2000 report, the Task Force established working Internet and FTP sites. By providing templates for data submission and compilation, these sites have served to standardise the submission of data and information. In addition, by linking the 75 technical contacts across the country who provide the information for the report with the 22 writers who compile the national perspectives for the indicators, the sites have also stimulated discussion regarding definitions and reporting strategies, and have promoted the sharing of information and ideas. The working web site also will be used to identify sources of information and to archive information for future reporting.

References

• Buchanan, K., and M. McKennirey. 1996. Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management, Comparison of Montréal Process and CCFM Frameworks. Can. For. Ser., Unpublished Rep. 11 p.
• Goodenough, D. G., A. S. Bhogal, R., R. Fournier, R. J. Hall, J. Iisaka, D. Leckie, J. E. Luther, S. Magnussen, O. Niemann, and W. M. Strome. 1998. Earth Observation for Sustainable Development of Forests (EOSD), Proc. 20th Canadian Symposium on Remote Sensing, Calgary, Alberta. p. 57-60.

| Table of Contents | Top |

VIGNETTE ON CHILE

Introduction

Chile is situated in the southwest part of South America, extending southward to the Antarctic continent and westward as far as Easter Island. On the South American continent, it stretches from 17 degrees 30 minutes latitude south to the Diego Ramirez islands at 56 degrees 30 minutes latitude south. The country has a continental surface area of 75.4 million hectares, of which 15.6 million hectares are classified as forests (20.8 per cent) as recorded in the 1998 Natural Vegetation Survey.

As a result of this geographical scope, there is a wide variety of climatic types, prominent among them desert, steppe, Mediterranean, warm rainy temperate, rainy maritime, cold steppe, tundra and polar climates. With this geographical scope, the variety in latitude and altitude makes it possible to find in Chile a diversity of plant formations. Studies including one by Gajardo in 1994 have determined that there are eight vegetation regions and 21 vegetational subregions.

Chile is divided into 13 political-administrative Regions, nine of which contain temperate forest resources and tree plantations. The four northernmost regions are extremely arid and have scanty woodland areas that do not contain temperate forests.

The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for the development of policies for promotion of the country's agriculture, livestock and forests. The Ministry performs its forest management and conservation functions in accordance with its legal authority and with a number of provisions that enable it to operate through Services or Agencies. These are dependent on the national government, but they are administratively and geographically decentralised. In this respect, the Forest Service (CONAF) is an agency that belongs to the Ministry of Agriculture. Its institutional mission is "To guarantee for society the sustainable use of forest ecosystems and the efficient management of the National System of State-Protected Areas (SNASPE), for the purpose of contributing to the improvement of quality of life for present and future generations."

The forest resources existing in Chile consist of native forests, planted forests and a mixture of both, with a total surface area of 15 647 894 hectares (Natural Vegetation Survey, CONAF-CONAMA, 1998) (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Composition of Chile's forest

National Initiatives that Promote the Montréal Process

National survey of native vegetational resources

Since 1997 Chile has had a National Survey of Native Vegetation Resources and a land use information system, tools that facilitate the monitoring of changes in forest area and the construction of area-based indicators which are present in the Montréal Process.

The instrument makes it possible to do the following:

• Locate, determine dimensions and to a certain degree, characterise the forests and the various natural plant formations existing in the country
• Set up a digital database for expeditious handling and updating of information on the natural plant formations and planted forests existing in the country
• Monitor changes in land use and update the pertinent information.

Inasmuch as the objective of the Survey is an evaluation for environmental and economic purposes, the definitions used pertain to concepts based fundamentally on the structure of ecosystems or communities more than on concepts related to utilisation. This establishes a high degree of compatibility with the Montréal Process, whose Introduction states, in point 1.3, that "The forest management approach reflected in the criteria and indicators is the management of forests as ecosystems." This conceptual approach of both instruments makes it possible to implement the Montréal Process indicators with a high degree of correlation.

It is estimated that 28 of the total of 67 indicators of the Montréal Process can be applied based on the Survey. However, and in line with the "Design of a System for Follow-up and Monitoring of the State of Conservation of Native Formations" project, the development of the indicators listed under Criterion 1 will be given priority (Table 14).

Table 14. Relation of Montréal Criterion 1 to Chile's Survey

The indicators that can be fully measured or calculated on the basis of information contained in the Survey of Native Vegetational Resources will be available in CONAF's Inquiry System, through a subsystem. Thus, for instance, it will be possible to ask for indicator (a) of Criterion 1 Conservation of Biological Diversity - in other words, area by forest type in relation to total forest area at the level of a protected area, a commune, a province, a region or the entire country.

Furthermore, it will be possible to measure the indicators listed under Criterion 2 once the Forest Information System is developed (Table 15). This is a system that will integrate data from CONAF's Survey of Native Vegetation from a National Survey of Planted Forests prepared by the Forestry Institute (INFOR).

Table 15. Relation of Montréal Criterion 2 to Chile`s Survey

At present, changes in land use are monitored and the information is updated. This will make it possible to have a platform upon which to begin to construct the proposed indicators.

Permanent Working Group for Sustainable Management of Chile`s Forests

In 1996, the Permanent Working Group for Sustainable Management of Chile`s Forests (GMS) was formed, as collaboration with a project prepared by the Forestry Institute (INFOR). Also participating, as founding members of the GMS, were the Forest Service (CONAF); the Chilean Wood Manufacturers Association (CORMA), an organisation made up of the country's main forest companies; the National Commission for the Environment (CONAMA); and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At present, the group also includes university representatives, environmental organisations, the forest engineers association and the small farmers association. One of the specifically defined courses of action is the search for consensus regarding sustainable forest management (SFM).

With the aim of attaining this consensus, an instrument was designed which consists of a set of assertions that reflect, to a greater or lesser degree, what the different players think of SFM.

Concepts expressed in various international and national initiatives, both public and private in nature, were used in the preparation of this questionnaire, the Montréal Process being one of the foundations supporting the development of this tool.

The work of this group has not yet finished, but nevertheless the progress attained has already made it possible to approach a level of agreement between the parties.

Application of Criteria and Indicators at the Local Level

CONAF's Environmental Studies Unit is developing a proposed method for the common understanding and evaluation of SFM, backed by the framework of criteria and indicators of the Montréal Process.

The idea is that, based on a criterion, one can arrive at a performance objective or goal which, in accordance with the standard or norm, can be incorporated into the forest management plan for evaluation in the field. In themselves, the criteria and indicators constitute a key component of the cycle of continuous improvement of SFM, inasmuch as they can be converted into practical objectives and means of measuring performance, for the purpose of incorporating them into forest planning, operating decisions and monitoring systems.

The method is designed to facilitate the operational application of SFM concepts, and with this the designing, management and evaluation of the sustainability of plans, programmes and projects at national and sub-national levels (region, province, commune or forest management unit).

At present there are two projects, headed by government agencies with the backing of international co-operation organisations, whose follow-up and monitoring plans include the use of some indicators derived from the Process for the evaluation of SFM at the local level. They are being developed for demonstration purposes, and are:

• Conservation of Chile`s Temperate Natural Forest, Environmental Criteria for Sustainable Management, Application to the Pilot Area: Malleco Forest Reserve, Tolhuaca National Park, and their Peripheral Area (CONAF/National Forest Office of France agreement), this project involves an area of approximately 30 000 hectares
• Management Plan for the Valdivia National Reserve, this is part of a project on the Sustainable Management of Natural Forests (CONAF/German Technical Co-operation Society, GTZ, agreement), and involves an area of approximately 16 000 hectares.

Management of National Forect Reserves

Innovations are being introduced in management and harvesting within the National Reserves. These innovations are in line with the principles that will guide forest development in the 21^st Century, and are based on the criteria of the Montréal Process. They aim to offer present and future generations a forest heritage that is biologically and ecologically stable, highly productive, and of great adaptability in the face of changes in the environment and in social demands. The sustainable utilisation of natural resources is promoted, combining production of goods and services with the needs of the nearby peasant and indigenous communities, as well as the demands of the increasingly urban population of the country.

This new forest management model will have the following fundamental objectives:

• Sustainable production, ensuring the permanent existence of well-managed forests, adapted to the site
• Protection or recovery of the biodiversity
• Social development based on a participatory process including the communities linked with the forest or forest activities
• Appreciation of the natural forest by the national community.

Chiloe Model Forest

Chile, with its "Chiloe Model Forest," has been part of the International Model Forest Network since 1998. The strategic vision of the Chiloe Model Forest proposition is to increase utilisation of the natural resources associated with forest ecosystems, maintaining the ecological characteristics and processes of these systems. Key components are the search for, development, and implementation of, new and innovative approaches, practices and technologies. These would be based on the generation of a solid knowledge base on the dynamics of the ecosystems involved and their characteristics, functions and interrelations, as well as on the participation and recognition of the interests and viewpoints of all the social groups interested in the forests or dependent upon them. Thus, combining scientific knowledge, an ecological approach and a social approach, it is possible to develop and apply a system of integrated management of the natural resources, which is accepted by all stakeholders.

Among the objectives of the Chiloe Model Forest is that of providing support in the development and application of criteria and indicators. To this end, it has incorporated into its negotiation and implementation of SFM, the concepts developed by the Montréal Process.

A first evaluation will be made to determine the degree of fulfilment attained which will make it possible to obtain feedback for the purpose of improving the project.

Forest Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles

Chile is a signatory country to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). There are many commitments that are common to FCCC and the Montréal Process criteria and indicators.

Regarding Criterion 5, it is relevant to mention that there is an important government-funded research project aimed at developing methodologies to determine the carbon status of planted and indigenous forests, considering different species and forest types. The results of this project will enable Chile to report on this criterion by the year 2002-03.

Legal, Institutional and Economic Framework

At present, there are two legal initiatives being discussed in Parliament. The first proposes a new institutional framework, in order to enhance the capacity of the governmental agencies to deal with the development of the forest sector and particularly to promote the sustainable management of indigenous and planted forests. With this new institutional framework the forest sector aims to acquire a higher rank within the Government structure; the bill proposes the creation of an Under-secretary of Forest Development and a Forest Service with new mandates.

The second legal initiative under discussion is aimed at promoting the recovery and management of Chile`s indigenous forests. This Act should be the main mechanism to promote SFM.

Conclusions

The application of the Montréal Process concepts in Chile has not been free of difficulties. Nevertheless, the progress since the signing of the "Santiago Declaration" has been significant. Following dissemination and discussion within the Forest Service and with other players in Chile`s forest sector, this process has served as a conceptual framework for developing initiatives designed to further the sustainable management of temperate forests in Chile.

The experience arising from these and other initiatives consistent with the Montréal Process will serve to strengthen a harmonious development, which will contribute to the sustainability of the country.

| Table of Contents | Top |

VIGNETTE ON CHINA

Summary

The status quo of development and implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in China has been reviewed. China is one of the 12 member countries of the Montréal process and has been participating in other international initiatives. The Chinese Government has taken a series of significant measures in promoting sustainable forest management (SFM). The Forestry Action Plan for China's Agenda 21, the Outline of China's Ecological Development Programme, and the Action Plan of Protection of Biodiversity in China have been worked out, and relevant researches, capacity building and extension have been carried out.

In order to effectively implement SFM in China, a research group to develop the criteria and indicators for such management has been established. Research in experiment and demonstration regions has been initiated to test and further develop the criteria and indicators and final versions will be formulated which could be operational and meet the need at the various levels.

The development of criteria and indicators for SFM is an important step in implementing the Forestry Action Plan for China's Agenda 21. The criteria and indicators will be formulated on the basis of specific Chinese conditions, and fully standarlized components will be drawn from relevant criteria and indicators, designed to be in line with those adopted internationally, especially in the Montréal Process. There are many constraints existing in the formulation of criteria and indicators for SFM, and arduous tasks will be faced to implement them in China.

Forests in China

The largest forests are in the northeast and inner Mongolian provinces, the 10 southern provinces, and Sichuan and Yunnan provinces. The Chinese Government attaches great importance to forestry development. China has the world's most extensive plantation estate, in excess of 20 million hectares.

China is one of the most species-diverse countries in the world. There are about 32 800 flowering plant species, of which 9 410 are woody species, comprising 40 per cent of the world total. The forests and other vegetation are home to about 499 species of mammals, 1 244 species of birds, 391 species of reptiles, 280 species of amphibians and millions of invertebrates. Furthermore, this country is one of the three major centres of origin of cultivated plants in the world, with a number of related wild species. There are approximately 870 nature reserves covering more than 6 per cent of the country's land area.

In China, about 58.2 million hectares or 45.3 per cent of the total forest cover are State owned and administered by the State Forestry Administration, and 70.3 million hectares or 54.7 per cent are owned by collectives, although managed under the authority of forest laws and monitored by the State Forestry Administration. However, the growing stock of the collective-owned forest resources is only 32.2 million cubic metres or 30 per cent of the total growing stock in China, compared with 70 per cent from State forest lands. Forestry activities are labour intensive and the sector is a large employer of both men and women, with more than 2.5 million employees.

China is a developing country with a population of more than 1.26 billion, which accounts for about 20 per cent of the world population. The country lacks forest resources, with only 13.92 per cent forest cover and 3 to 4 per cent of the world's forest area. China's forests can hardly meet the basic living needs of its population, environmental conservation and improvement. The pressure will be more and more intense with successive increases in an already huge population and an increasing standard of consumption per capita.

Criteria and Indicators at the National Level in China

Sustainable forest management had been developing as an important issue of common concern when it emerged at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992. As a follow-up action to UNCED, China's Agenda 21 - A White Paper on China's Population, Environment and Development into the 21st Century was drafted by the Chinese Government as one of the key documents to guide the country's long-term plan of social and economic development. Sustainable forest management gained great attention in terms of realising sustainable development. Under the guidance of the principle of sustainable development, the Forestry Action Plan for China's Agenda 21 was worked out, and priority project items of the Forestry Action Plan were formulated by the former Ministry of Forestry. These were highlighted as major documents presenting the components and the objectives in the national Ninth Five-Year Plan and the Plan for the year up to 2010. Recently, in 1999, China's national program for ecological environment improvement was worked out by the Chinese Government, which is for long-term guidance and alignment with the national economic and social development plan.

An important aspect of implementing sustainable forest management in China is to improve environmental services and supplies of products of the forest ecosystems. This is being done through the establishment of high yield plantations, an ecological protection forest system and restoration of degraded forest ecosystems. Achieving this will require an increase in forest resources and a reduced consumption from the natural forests. Since 1978, large-scale protection forest programmes have been implemented including the Three-North (namely Northwest, Central-north, and Northeast) Shelterbelt System, the Soil and Water Conservation Forests Along the Upper and Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River, the Coastal Shelterbelt System, the Taihang Mountain Afforestation, the Farmland Shelterbelt Network in Plains Areas, and the National Combat against Desertification. So far, approximately 21.86 million hectares of protection forests have been established. Remarkable achievements have been made in these programmes, but there is a wide gap remaining to be closed for the completion and full functioning of the ecological protection forest system and the realisation of SFM across China. Therefore, as well as continuously implementing the above-mentioned forestry programme, the following new programme was started in early 1998, that is, the Soil and Water Conservation Programme Along the Upper Reaches of Yangtze River, the Soil and Water Conservation Programme Along the Middle and Upper Reaches of the Yellow River, and the Natural Forest Conservation Programme in Key Natural Forest Areas. These programmes are intended to improve the ecological environment in these regions, better distribute China's system of ecological forestry programme and strengthen the capacity for implementing SFM.

The development of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management is an important step in implementing the UNCED "Forest Principle", Agenda 21 and the Forestry Action Plan for China's Agenda 21, which is relevant to the protection of biological diversity, climate change and prevention of desertification. Criteria and indicators are the basis for constructing the evaluation system for sustainable forest development, and the standard and basis for evaluating and judging forestry economic activities within the range of forestry development. Formulating the standardized and operational criteria and indicators for SFM is essential to improve the application of sustainable forestry development in China.

Under the unified leadership of the State Forestry Administration, formulation of criteria and indicators was put into effect by Sustainable Forestry Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Forestry. With involvement of experts from various fields, a provisional Framework of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in China has been worked out (Table 16), and it is now under testing and further development. There are 8 criteria and 80 indicators in the set of China's national-level criteria and indicators, of which 11 indicators are ready to be implemented, 55 require some Research and Development, 9 require long-term Research and Development and 5 are uncertain.

Table 16. Framework of National Level Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in China

*Indicator type: A-implementation now; B-requiring some R&D; C-requiring long-term R&D; D-uncertain

Criteria and Indicators at the Sub-national Level in China

China has developed its criteria and indicators at two sub-national levels, the regional level and the forest management unit (FMU) level. As China is a country with vast territory and a rich diversity of forest types, the sub-national criteria and indicators should be more specific to the local situations, with appropriate deletion or addition of indicators within the national framework. Indicators that are not measurable at sub-national levels should be not considered, although they are important at the national level. Furthermore, to make an effective evaluation at the national level, it is necessary to weight each indicator at the sub-national level according to the local objectives of forest management.

Since 1997, the identification and testing of regional criteria and indicators have been conducted in three representative forest zones. The Yichun in Heilongjiang Province, Fenyi in Jiangxi Province and Zhangye in Gansu Province are representatives of the Northeast State Owned Forest Zone, South Collective Owned Forest Zone, and Northwest Dry Land Forest Zone, respectively. The development and testing of criteria and indicators in these three sites were funded by the UNDP, called CPR/96/109 Project Capacity Building, Research and Extension for Sustainable Forest Management. A number of experts, both national and international, have been involved in this project.

The draft sets of regional criteria and indicators, each with eight criteria similar to the national level, have been developed for the three representative forest zones in China (Table 17). In total, the 60 indicators for Fenyi in the Southeast of China are mainly related to forest ownership, plantations, and cash tree plantations. The 68 indicators for Zhangye in the Northwest concentrate environmental and social issues (water resource conservation forest, shelterbelt, and cash tree plantations). The 77 indicators defined for Yichun in the Northeast focus mainly on the maintenance of forest productivity.

Table 17. Indicators at the regional (sub-national) level in three typical forest zones of China

Also, the criteria and indicators have been developed and tested at the forest management unit level in the three representative sites, including selection of the indicators, a feasibility study for data collection and the process for reporting of criteria and indicators. Most of the indicators at this level are developed from criteria 1 to 4 (Table 18).

Table 18. Criteria and number of possible indicators at the forest management unit level in three representative forest zones of China

Experiment and Demonstration Network for Sustainable Forestry Development in China

China's experiment and demonstration areas

In order to examine the approach to sustainable forestry development and to implement a plan based on the Forestry Action Plan for China's Agenda 21, the Chinese Government initiated the establishment of an experiment and demonstration area on sustainable forestry development. One of main objectives is to give support to China's practice and international discussion on SFM. Since 1997, eight experiment and demonstration areas on sustainable forestry development have been selected across the ecozones of China (Table 19).

Table 19. Demonstration forest network for sustainable forest management in China

Join in activities of the International Model Forest Network

In 1996, China`s Forestry Department agreed to join in the activities of the International Model Forest Network at the invitation of Department of Natural Resources of Canada. The construction of China`s Model Forest Network was documented in a memorandum on forestry co-operation between China and Canada.

China's Model Forest Network has been established on the basis of areas for National experiment and demonstration on sustainable forestry development. Linan County in Zhejiang Province was selected as the first model forest in China. An international workshop on China's model forests jointly supported by IMFNS, the Canadian Forest Service and the Chinese Academy of Forestry, was held in Linan from 29 March to 2 April 1999. The workshop dealt with how to implement the Chinese Model Forest Network, especially in the Linan Model Forest. Some pioneer activities such as potential partnership identification, farmers' training, and eco-tourism planning and implementation have been conducted.

China's Model Forest Network is participating in a series of four regional workshops, held in Tokyo, Mie Prefecture and Gunma Prefecture, on Model Forests for Field-level Application of Sustainable Forest Management. In this project, supported by Japan, Chinese experiences on SFM at the operational level and on model forest building were introduced at the workshop.

China is one of the member countries of the Japan/FAO trust funding project known as The Regional Project on Assistance for the Implementation of the Model Forest Approach for Sustainable Forest Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. The project, which has been conducted since January 2000 with China and three other countries (Thailand, Myanmar and Philippines) as members, will promote the model forest establishment in the Asia - Pacific region.

Major Constraints for Implementing Sustainable Forest Management in China

China also faces many constraints for implementing criteria and indicators. Generally speaking, the main constraints are a shortage of forest resources, serious ecological and environmental degradation, high pressure from