ABOUT
01
JANUARY 2014
DEVELOPMENT
Syntheses of AFD studies and research
Since the Rio Earth
Summit in 1992,
sustainable development
goals have sought to
reconcile environmental,
economic and social
challenges. For
this reason, and in
response to the urgent
environmental issues
of deforestation in
tropical countries, SFM
(sustainable forest
management) has
become established as
the prevailing approach
to managing forest
ecosystems.
Complete report can be downloaded at:
http://www.afd.fr/webdav/site/afd/shared/
PUBLICATIONS/RECHERCHE/Scientifiques/
A-savoir/18-A-Savoir.pdf
Over the last twenty years, forests have continued to come under intense
pressure. For the period 2000 to 2010, the average gross rate of global
deforestation is estimated at 13 million hectares (ha) per year for a global
forest area of around 4 billion ha. In the tropical forest basins, the net rate
of deforestation is estimated to be 5.4 million ha/year. Added to this high
level of deforestation is the widespread phenomenon of ecosystem degradation, which exacerbates the erosion of environmental goods and services
and consequently affects all related economic and social services in the
short, medium and long term.
In recent years, the management arrangements promoted under SFM have
diversified and expanded to the point of creating a deep-seated ambiguity
between the practices actually adopted and implemented and the rhetoric
that has developed around this concept. Today, after twenty years of implementation, it seems crucial to clarify what effects these arrangements have
had, and to reconsider the choices made from an ideological, theoretical
but also practical standpoint. This study fits into a stream of critical thinking
on management sciences that questions first of all the nature and purpose
of the management processes and their actual responsibilities, particularly
with respect to their social and environmental dimensions
What types of institutional, economic and social arrangements is SFM now
promoting, and for what environmental results? These are the questions
that this study sets out to answer, based on the analysis of 2,500 references
(academic texts, grey literature and legal texts) as well as some forty semidirective interviews.
EV
E LO P M
EN
T
OUT D
AB
A NECESSARY
BUT PARTIAL
SOLUTION
FOR BIODIVERSITY
Sustainable
forest
management
Changes in the number of forest-related legal texts by year for each tropical region (1907–2008)
15
10
5
ASIA
AFRICA
2010
2008
2005
2002
1999
1996
What differentiates between the various arrangements are
the prime objectives they target.
Improve forest exploitation: these arrangements are centred
on sustainable logging. The concern here is to ensure the
sustainability of timber production by integrating to varying
extents environmental and social concerns into existing
forest management practices. This category typically
includes sustainable forest planning , reduced-impact
logging (RIL) and forest management certification.
E nhance carbon storage: since the emergence of
climate-change-related issues, several arrangements and
mechanisms have been developed to increase or maintain
carbon storage in forest ecosystems. These include: forest
management projects eligible for carbon credits that are
tradable on the compliance market (Clean Development
Mechanism [CDM] under the Kyoto Protocol) or on
voluntary markets (outside the Kyoto Protocol, and thus
non-binding). These projects are based on the principle
that ecosystem services associated with carbon storage
should be remunerated. Carbon credits traded on voluntary markets are certified by standards that differ from
each other according to the place they give to the environmental and social co-benefits of their related projects.
Furthermore, the mechanism for Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), which is
currently being set up, will likely give States back the place
they had lost with the mechanisms operating on markets
outside of their jurisdiction.
Intense regulatory activity: translating
the SFM concept into law
Since the Rio Summit, shaped by numerous multilateral
environmental agreements, the SFM concept has gradually
been incorporated into forest legislation of tropical countries
whose former forest codes no longer matched up to the expectations for sustainable development. Legal and institutional
arrangements, such as tropical forest action plans and then
national forest programmes, have brought about significant
changes in tropical forest legislation, characterised by various
phases alternating between the formulation, adoption, revision and regulation of national forest policies. New legislation
has helped to secure the States’ sovereign rights over forest
ownership by demarcating areas for public management of
forest areas, while restricting usage rights of the associated
resources. However, various changes have also established
the necessary conditions for handing management over to
private or community exploitation of forest resources.
A relatively narrow spectrum of arrangements:
operational variations of SFM
Despite the significant legislative and regulatory activity
introduced over the last twenty years, many actors remain
unconvinced that these reforms provide real opportunities
for change. Given above all the tropical countries’ difficulties
in implementing their forest policies, three main types of
arrangements have developed under the guise of SFM.
Average gross rate of deforestation
Géraldine Derroire
≥
Forest engineer
After three years at AgroParisTech in the training
and research group GEEFT (Gestion Environmentale
des Ecosystèmes et des Forêts Tropicales –
Environmental Management of Ecosystems and
Tropical Forests), she is currently preparing a PhD
in forest ecology at the University of Bangor
in the UK.
13 4
OUT of
million
hectares
per year
billion
in the
world
DEVEL
O
PM
ENT
ABOU
SOURCE: Leroy et al., 2012.
Central and South America
Results and lessons learnt
T
1993
1987
1983
1980
1977
1973
1968
1964
1961
1945
1907
0
NUMbER
01
January 2014
THE THREE MAIN CATEGORIES OF SFM ARRANGEMENTS
+
State’s
role
-
Improve
forest
exploitation
Enhance
Carbon
Storage
Deepen
the participation
of local communities
• Forest planning
• Certification
• Forestry CDM
• REDD
• Voluntary market
• Participatory management
• Joint forest management
• Community management
SOURCE: Leroy et al., 2012. Note: CDM: Clean Development Mechanism; REDD: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation.
lation, the complexity of the forestry sector’s institutional
system and the limited resources allocated to the services
in charge of forest affairs. Ultimately, regulation encourages
the development of new arrangements but at the same time
fails to fulfil its supervisory role. This means little store is set
on the fact that, if these “market” arrangements are to be
successful, it is vital to have binding regulations and ensure
monitoring by the authorities.
D
eepen the participation of local communities: decentralised decision-making and greater participation of local
populations have been present in development projects for
many years now. As regards forest ecosystem management,
this move has given rise to various management arrangements that consider SFM to be achievable only if there is
maximum participation of the local communities concerned.
The most cited examples of these management methods
are joint forest management, community forestry and
communal forests.
As regards management arrangements, analysis shows that
these overwhelmingly focus on the economic development
of the forestry sector.
Arrangements designed to improve logging are the most
explicit. The loggers’ main argument is that SFM is the only
way to maintain profitability and thus avoid converting
forests to other uses. However, many actors point out the
environmental shortcomings of such arrangements, supported by the simple fact that logging activities inevitably
change a forest’s ecological balance.
Arrangements aimed at enhancing carbon storage certainly
have a clear-cut environmental goal focussed on climate
change but for those operators who invest in carbon credits
the purpose is above all economic. Whereas some consider
carbon as an ”umbrella” theme that should make it possible – or even easier – to address broader environmental
issues, others remain sceptical. Clearly, the environmental effectiveness of forest management methods related
to the carbon market has yet to be proven. The environmental quality of forest areas that are either created or
maintained by these mechanisms may ultimately fall far
short of the ecological characteristics of a natural forest
ecosystem.
In practice, the SFM concept is thus limited to a relatively
limited number of management arrangements, which can also
spawn hybrids. A good many of them rely on the rationale of
market regulation facilitated by the introduction of economic
instruments and contracting between stakeholders. Overall,
they tend to reduce the State’s role in management systems
to one of legislative oversight.
Does SFM, as now implemented, effectively integrate
environmental issues?
This is doubtful. In fact, the state of tropical forests has
become no less worrisome despite the emergence of the
SFM concept, substantial legal activity to incorporate it into
the government policies of many States, and the setting
up of different implementation mechanisms (FAO, 2011).
How is this to be explained?
From a legal and institutional standpoint, the few environmental improvements due to revisions of the tropical
countries’ forest policies nonetheless come up against the
same constraints: the lack of regulations to back new legis-
Director of the GEEFT research and training group
she heads the Master’s program of the same name.
She is also co-chair of the group “Critical approaches
in Management, Globalisation and Ecology” –
Montpellier Research in Management (MRM).
Tiphaine Leménager
Jeremy Vendé
Agricultural engineer and Doctor
of Environmental Management Sciences
Consultant specialising in sustainable
development issues
She is in charge of the biodiversity research
programme in the AFD Research Department.
http://www.afd.fr/tiphaine-lemenager
He regularly participates in diverse educational
and research projects in collaboration
with the GEEFT research and training group.
EV
JANUARY 2014
T
01
E LO P M
EN
NUMBER
OUT D
AB
Maya Leroy
Senior professor at AgroParistech
ABOUT
DEVELOPMENT
As for the arrangements geared at increasing local community participation, one line of rhetoric suggests that
local traditional knowledge and practices, based on customary social norms, significantly help to preserve natural
resources even if this is not a stated objective. However, the
multitude of situations and local contexts does not lend
itself to hasty generalisations about the environmental
effectiveness of participative forest management methods.
None of the management arrangements promoted under
SFM focuses specifically on biodiversity issues. The related
literature addresses conservation and biodiversity issues from
a very specific standpoint, mainly targeting the conservation
of forest cover and commercial tree species in logged forest
areas. As a result, biodiversity conservation themes and practices remain on the losing end of SFM, even though they are
at the heart of the issues faced by tropical forest ecosystems.
FOREST SECTOR
Environmental assessment
of SFM arrangements
The scant publications that address the question
of environmental impact studies in the forest sector
focus solely on the management of industrial
and health risks of infrastructures in the forestry
and timber production sector. Ex post environmental
assessments of SFM projects tend to remain
unpublished. The few assessments that exist are more
concerned with the implementation of procedures
and the mobilisation of resources than with results.
In fact, SFM arrangements are often seen as
inherently “sustainable” and “green”, which thus
precludes the idea of assessing them environmentally.
Moreover, the subject is too often equated
with a problem of forest sector governance rather
than a problem stemming from the nature of these
arrangements and their environmental performance.
Given that environmental criteria are not made
explicit from the outset, it is hardly surprising
that few measures are taken to verify the
environmental effectiveness of such arrangements.
Conclusion and recommendations
The often implicit theories underpinning the three main
types of SFM arrangements combine market-based management methods and contracting between stakeholders.
From an environmental standpoint, they mostly seek to
correct negative environmental externalities by attempting
to integrate some of the concerns affecting economic
activities whilst at the same time promoting the wider participation of (mostly private) operators. In the case of SFM,
environmental and social objectives are still broadly perceived
as costs and constraints weighing on logging activities rather
than strategic challenges for innovative management
of ecosystems and protection of their environmental assets.
Moreover, tensions persist between SFM, which is primarily
focused on logging, and the environmental conservation
sector, viewed as a potential obstacle to the development
of the logging industry. In addition, the “spontaneous” environmental management, which is expected to kick in as
soon as SFM arrangements are implemented, gives a certain
autonomy to these arrangements, which tends to distance
the actors involved from their responsibility for the effects
they produce and the way they steer operations. As a result,
consideration of environmental issues is dealt with only
marginally.
The situation could undoubtedly be much improved by
(i) better co-ordinating forestry sector and conservation
sector knowledge, (ii) clearly defining an ecological benchmark as well as driving strategic environmental assessment
for the forest sector and (iii) establishing a systematic crosssector dialogue between the forestry sector and other sectors
that exert pressure on forests (agriculture, mining, infrastructure), in order to identify the constraints and margins or
manoeuvre that need to be considered if arrangements for
environmental forest management are to be improved.
Certainly, it would be unrealistic to believe that the forestry
sector alone is able to ensure sustainable forest management
that is environmentally effective.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
BRAY, D.B., L. MERINO-PEREZ, P. NEGREROS-CASTILLO, G. SEGURA-WARNHOLTZ, J.M. TORRES-ROJO
and H.F.M. VESTER (2003),“Mexico’s Community-Managed Forests as a Global Model for Sustainable
Landscapes”, Conservation Biology, 17(3), pp. 672–677.
FAO (2011), Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010: Main Report, FAO, Rome.
GUÉNEAU, S. (2011), Vers une évaluation des dispositifs de prise en charge du problème du déclin
des forêts tropicales humides, doctoral thesis, specialisation: environmental science, management stream,
AgroParisTech, Paris.
KARSENTY, A., G. LESCUYER and R. NASI (2004), « Est-il possible de déterminer des critères
et indicateurs de gestion durable des forêts tropicales ? », Revue Forestière Française, 56(5), pp. 457–472.
MERMET, L., R. BILLÉ and M. LEROY (2010), “Concern-Focused Evaluation for Ambiguous and Conflicting
Policies: An Approach From the Environmental Field”, American Journal of Evaluation, 31(2), pp. 180–198.
WALKER, R. and T.E. SMITH (1993),“Tropical Deforestation and Forest Management under the System
of Concession Logging: a Decision-Theoretic Analysis”, Journal of Regional Science, 33 (3), pp. 387–419.
About development is an AFD Research Department publication which presents syntheses of studies and research initiated or supported by the AFD. This series aims to summarize the questioning, the
approach, the lessons and the prospects of the study presented. Thus, it intends to open new avenues for action and thinking. The analyses and conclusions of this document are formulated under the
responsibility of its author(s). They do not necessarily reflect the point of view of the AFD or its partner institutions •
Publication director: Anne PAUGAM • Editorial director: Alain HENRY • Agence Française de Développement: 5, rue Roland Barthes - 75598 Paris Cedex 12 •
Copyright: January 2014 • ISSN: 2271-7404 • Conception:
Layout: Ferrari / Coquelicot