Unasylva – No. 214/215 – FOREST MANAGEMENT AT THE XII WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS

---

S.M. Davey,
J.R.L. Hoare and K.E. Rumba

Stuart M. Davey is in the Bureau of Rural Sciences, Kingston,
Australia.
James R.L. Hoare and Karl E. Rumba were also working for the Bureau of
Rural Sciences at the time this article was being conceived. James Hoare is now
with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australia, Canberra,
while Karl Rumba is now with the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources,
Canberra.

Australia has effectively incorporated
the principles and operational guidelines of the ecosystem approach into its
National  Forest Policy Statement, regional forest agreements,
certification standards and other institutional
arrangements for sustainable
forest management.

Around the world, governments are seeking to achieve an optimal balance
between environmental management, economic development and social values to meet
the needs of society on a sustainable basis, and this is particularly true for
forests. Internationally, a balanced approach to forest issues is being
discussed mainly in two United Nations arrangements: the United Nations Forum on
Forests (UNFF) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Sustainable
forest management is an important concept of the first arrangement, while the
ecosystem approach is an important concept of the second.

Australia has effectively incorporated the principles and operational
guidelines of the ecosystem approach into the concept of “ecologically
sustainable forest management” (see Chikumbo et al., 2001) under the
National Forest Policy Statement, and the ecosystem approach now underpins
Australia’s regional forest agreements (Commonwealth of Australia, 2000). This
article explores Australia’s approach to sustainable forest management and
describes how Australia has applied the ecosystem approach systematically to the
management and conservation of its commercial forest regions.

ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN AUSTRALIAN FOREST POLICY

Australia’s National Forest Policy Statement (Commonwealth of Australia,
1992) defines the concept of ecologically sustainable forest management and
provides for ecologically sustainable development of forests based on the
principles of maintaining ecological processes, maintaining biological diversity
and optimizing the benefits to the community from all uses of forests within
ecological constraints. It seeks a balanced return to the community from all
forest uses within a regionally based planning framework that integrates
environmental, commercial, social and heritage objectives so that, as far as
possible, provision is made for sustainable management for all forest values. It
is Australia’s national strategy for the sustainable forest management and use
of forests as envisaged under CBD (Article 6a) and the Forest
Principles¹ agreed at the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED) in 1992.

The ecosystem approach – a strategy for the integrated management of land,
water and living resources that promotes conservation of biological diversity
and sustainable use of resources in an equitable way (CBD, 2001) – is an
important component of the statement and of Australia’s implementation of
sustainable forest management. The Box on p. 4 outlines the principles and
operational guidance of the ecosystem approach. The ecosystem approach can refer
to any functioning unit at any scale (e.g. forest stand, forest, landscape).

The Australian concept of ecologically sustainable forest management can be
defined as “the integration of commercial and non-commercial values of forests
so that the welfare of society (both material and non-material) is improved,
while ensuring that the values of forests, both as a resource for commercial use
and for conservation are not lost or degraded for current and future
generations” (Davey et al., 1997).

Incorporated into ecologically sustainable forest management is the concept
of sustainable use as defined in CBD, meaning “the use of components of
biological diversity in a way and at a rate that does not lead to the long-term
decline of biological diversity, thereby maintaining its potential to meet the
needs and aspirations of present and future generations” (CBD, 2001). The
primary goals of ecologically sustainable forest management are:

 maintaining the vitality of the forest ecosystem (i.e. ecological processes
within forests, including the formation of soil, energy flows and the carbon,
nutrient and water cycles);

maintaining the biological diversity of forests;

managing the net social benefit derived from the mixture of forest uses
within ecological constraints for many years.

IMPLEMENTING THE ECOSYSTEM APPROACH IN REGIONAL FOREST AGREEMENTS

Australia’s regional forest agreements (RFAs) (Australian Government
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2003) are an example of an
ecosystem approach (Commonwealth of Australia, 2000). They provide a mechanism
for achieving an equitable balance between conservation and sustainable use of
forests for natural, cultural, economic and social values in Australia’s
commercial forest regions. Twenty-year agreements are now in place for 11 of the
country’s 12 commercial forest regions (Figure 1). (The forests outside RFA
regions are managed and protected under state and commonwealth legislation.)

These agreements apply to all forms of landownership and provide a strategic
plan for the conservation and sustainable use of forest biological diversity as
envisaged under Article 6b of CBD. They strive to achieve balanced and long-term
resolution of government, industry, environment and community interests in
forest management and use based on comprehensive regional assessments while
meeting legally based specifications. Outcomes include a conservation reserve
system whose coverage exceeds that recommended by the World Conservation Union
(IUCN); secure access to forest resources; opportunities for the development of
an internationally competitive forest industry; and a long-term basis for
sustainable management of forest resources.

The National Forest Policy Statement (Commonwealth of Australia, 1992)
provides the principles for assessing the sustainability of forest management in
regard to management practices, resource conservation and management and
industry development through which the principles of the ecosystem approach are
addressed.

Scientific assessments and stakeholder involvement underpinned the
development and negotiation of Australia’s regional forest agreements (Davey,
Hoare and Rumba, 2002). A number of new assessment techniques and negotiation
tools were developed, for example in relation to provision of information to
stakeholders (Pressey, 1998). The negotiation phase often proved to be the most
protracted part of the process of arriving at an agreement, in some cases taking
longer than the phase of scientific, social and economic assessments.
Stakeholder input and involvement in developing agreements varied from state to
state and within regions of a state. How stakeholder views were incorporated in
the finalization of agreements has contributed significantly to their relative
level of success.

Australias forests and woodlands and regions with
signed regional forest agreements
Source: National Forest Inventory, 2001.

Comprehensive regional assessments

In the development of the regional forest agreements, scientifically based
comprehensive regional assessments were carried out in alignment with the
principles and operational guidelines of the ecosystem approach. Regional
assessments addressed the full range of forest values and their functional
relationships (Operational Guideline 1) considered important by society and
involved all relevant sectors of society and scientific disciplines (Principle
12). Engagement of the public in strategic planning was an important element. An
objective of the regional forest agreement process was to increase the net
social benefit derived from the mixture of forest uses and values (Operational
Guideline 2) within ecological constraints, in terms of management of land,
water and biological resources in forest regions (Principle 6), while
maintaining options for the future. Society was involved through comprehensive
arrangements for public participation; the mechanisms for public involvement
varied among regions and included regional stakeholder fora and workshops,
representation on technical and steering committees, and stakeholder involvement
in the integration of information and development of resource planning options
that were released for public comment (Operational Guideline 5). The public and
stakeholders were given the right to comment on the information collated through
the comprehensive regional assessment process and options that were to be
considered in arriving at the regional forest agreements (Principle 1).

Independent scientific assessments of the state’s forest management systems
and processes were carried out to determine the extent to which sustainable
forest management had been achieved for the full range of forest values. State
management systems and processes were benchmarked against the requirements of
the international environmental management system model (AS/NZ ISO 14001)
(Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, 1996), seven criteria for
sustainable forest management from the Montreal Process (1995) and two
overarching principles (see Box above). Where deficiencies were identified,
recommendations for improvement were made and incorporated into the final
agreements. These included a requirement for continuous improvement of forest
management systems and the use of criteria and indicators for assessing progress
towards achieving sustainable forest management. Criteria and indicators were
developed for application at both the national and regional scales.
Environmental management systems that were capable of responding to varying
temporal scales, lag effects and changes of forest ecosystems as a means of
achieving sustainable forest management (Principle 8) were established on public
lands (Operational Guideline 3). Typically the environmental management systems
for production forests had to comply with the ISO 14001 standard (e.g. Resource
Planning and Development Commission, 2002).

Australias reserve system
was designed to protect a range of
biodiversity
conservation values as well as old-growth forests
shown, a
reserved old-growth mountain ash (Eucalyptus regnans) forest
in the Central Highlands Victoria regional forest agreement
region

(Photo: M.F.RYAN)

Conserving biodiversity

Conservation of biological diversity both on and off reserves is a key
element underpinning the ecosystem approach and sustainable forest
management.

In Australia, reserves include protected reserve areas gazetted through
legislation, informal reserves identified for protection in forest management
plans and private forest reserves. A forest reserve system was the prime
instrument for in situ conservation using reserve criteria agreed upon by
commonwealth and state governments (JANIS, 1997). The reserve system was
designed to protect a range of biodiversity conservation values as well as
old-growth forests and wilderness areas based on principles of
comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness. Principles, targets,
standards and guidelines of comprehensiveness (coverage of the full range of
forest communities across the landscape), adequacy (maintenance of ecological
viability and the integrity of populations, species and communities) and
representativeness (biodiversity of reserved forest communities reasonably
reflected across the landscape) were used to design the reserve system outcomes
for the regional forest agreements (Davey, Hoare and Rumba, 2002).

Importantly, the conservation of biodiversity across the landscape has been
achieved under RFAs not only through the establishment of a formal reserve
system, but also through off-reserve management strategies aimed at
complementary management of production forests on public and private lands
(Principle 3). This was achieved through a combination of approved forest
management plans, codes of forest practice and prescriptions for harmonizing
production and the conservation and protection of flora, fauna and their
communities as well as soil and water values, at both the regional and local
scales (Principles 2 and 5 and Operational Guideline 4).

 Forest management plans are developed by forest managers and owners and
entail public comment. The approval process varies across the Australian states,
but typically government environmental organizations look at how conservation
and environmental requirements are incorporated into the plans.

Within Australian RFA areas, the application of codes of forest practice is
mandatory for harvesting in public forests and either mandatory or voluntary for
private forests, depending on the state.

Flora, fauna and species community management and conservation
prescriptions are used to manage species and communities that are rare and
threatened, that are sensitive to forest harvesting operations or fire, or that
require specific management consideration for their conservation management
(e.g. protection of nesting and roosting sites). Forest and wildlife managers
collaboratively develop these prescriptions, which once developed are
incorporated into codes, species recovery plans and/or management plans.
Scientific experts also contribute to the development of prescriptions, which
are reviewed every five to ten years.

Biodiversity conservation is achieved not
only through the formal reserve system, but also through
complementary management of production forests on public and
private lands shown, a spotted gum (Eucalyptus
maculata) production forest in the southern
New South Wales regional forest agreement region

(Photo: M.F.RYAN)

Balancing social and economic values

An integral part of developing regional forest agreements
was the evaluation of economic costs and benefits, regional employment,
trade-off options to compensate communities and the forest industry for loss of
access to forest resources and loss of income, industry initiatives and
restructuring, and improved productivity and economic returns on the sustainable
use of forest resources. Assessments of likely social impacts of decisions over
resource allocation and intensity of forest use within the regions, particularly
in timber-dependent towns, were carried out and used to support final decisions
on the amount of forest resources available to industry and how the resource can
be used. In line with the principles of the ecosystem approach, the regional
forest agreement process arrived at decisions within an economic context
(Principle 4), while recognizing that the objectives of management of land,
water and living resources were a matter of societal choice (Principle 1). In
seeking to achieve a balance between, and integration of, conservation and use
of biological diversity (Principle 10), resource allocations in some regions
reflected society’s priorities for conservation of biological diversity over
economic values, where biological diversity was identified as important,
restricted or at risk. The agreements aim to balance social and economic values
through the establishment of a permanent conservation reserve system protected
by legislation and through the assured availability of the remaining forest
resource to industry for sustainable use and management.

Regional forest agreements (RFAs) aim to balance social and economic values through the assured availability
of the non-reserved forest resource to industry for sustainable use and management
shown,
harvesting of messmate (Eucalyptus obliqua) in the Central Highlands RFA region

(Photo: M.F.RYAN)

MONITORING OF FOREST SUSTAINABILITY AND DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST STANDARDS FOR
CERTIFICATION

The development and implementation of national and subnational (regional)
criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management, drawing on the work of
the Montreal Process Working Group (officially, the Montreal Process Working
Group on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management
of Temperate and Boreal Forests), is a significant achievement in sustainable
forest management in Australia (Montreal Process Implementation Group,
Australia, 1998). Indicators were designed to be practical and cost effective
and to measure changes in forest values over different spatial and time scales,
including lag effects. This approach permits a wide range of ecosystem values
that are characterized by dynamic changes to be managed on a spatial and
temporal basis (Principles 7, 8 and 9). Indicators apply to all forest areas and
are used to monitor and report on trends in forest use and values (e.g. amount
of forest, distribution by ownership, forest health and condition, biodiversity
and water) and forest management outcomes (e.g. employment, forest
industry statistics, forest resource use), including those outcomes achieved
under RFAs (Operational Guideline 3). RFA performance is assessed through
monitoring of sustainability indicators together with formal review of
commitments every five years (see Resource Planning and Development
Commission, 2002). Trends of change in indicators are used to determine
long-term policy formulation and continuous improvement in forest management
(Figure 2).

Establishing linkages between crite-ria and indicators of sustainable forest
management and environmental management systems at the forest management unit
level (Principle 2) is another step towards achieving sustainable forest
management not only for environmental values, but also for social and economic
objectives (Rumba et al., 2001). This approach lays the foundations for
adaptive management, i.e. the evolution of management based on experiences and
research findings (CBD, 2001), and the development of forest certification
schemes. Such schemes provide additional market-based incentives for ongoing
improvement in sustainable forest management by permitting forest managers to
demonstrate their environmental credentials in such a way that retailers and
consumers can evaluate them objectively and independently and favour their
products over others.

There is growing recognition of the complementary nature of performance-based
and process-based standards. Performance-based standards provide an objective
basis against which managers can check and improve management performance.
Process-based standards enable managers to address environmental aspects and
impacts of management systematically within a process of continual improvement,
such as that provided by environmental management systems. Both standards
provide a framework for assessing and demonstrating progress towards sustainable
forest management (Kanowski et al., 2000).

The Australian Forestry Standard (see www.forestrystandard.org.au) is a
voluntary standard for independent, third-party certification that integrates
both types of standard. Performance requirements are based on criteria and
indicators from the Montreal Process considered important to society (Montreal
Pro-cess Implementation Group, Australia 1998). The process requirements are
based on an ISO 14001 environmental management systems approach (Standards
Australia/Standards New Zealand, 1996). The standard was developed by a
broad-based stakeholder group working towards a consensus view of performance
measures. It is a logical extension of the advances made towards sustainable
forest management in Australia under regional forest agreements. The standard
will be a useful tool for providing technical rigour and promoting “best
practice” sustainable forest management.

Source: Adapted from Rumba et al. ,
2001. 

Australias approach to
sustainable forest outcomes within a cycle of continuous improvement of forest
and environmental management systems, processes
and practices

CONCLUSIONS

The principles and operational guidelines of the ecosystem approach to
sustainable forest management have been effectively implemented in Australia
through the comprehensive regional assessment and regional forest agreement
processes in the commercial forest regions of Australia. In effect, in
Australia, ecologically sustainable forest management is considered the
equivalent of the ecosystem approach, which provides guidelines to support the
conservation and sustainable use of natural resources in an equitable way across
human generations.

The application of the ecosystem approach to forest policy development under
regional forest agreements now provides a benchmark for the allocation and
sustainable use of forest resources, based on detailed scientific and community
assessments of forest values of importance to the community that included
processes of stakeholder and public consultation. The National Forest Policy
Statement, criteria for assessing and determining forest reserves, regional
forest agreements, sustainability indicators and the Australian Forestry
Standard for voluntary certification are key elements in the Australian approach
to sustainable forest management practice, and ensure that the ecosystem
approach is implemented within secure institutional arrangements.

These elements, within a framework of adaptive management that leads to
continual improvement, can provide an enduring approach to achieving forest
sustainability under ever-changing environmental, social and economic
conditions. If the approach is properly implemented, adverse environmental
impacts from forestry are expected to diminish. Voluntary certification and
product labelling are expected to enhance marketplace and public acceptance that
forest management is sustainable. Wider community and market confidence in
sustainable forest management should result, as should improved market access
and the protection and maintenance of the full range of forest values for
current and future generations. Australia’s approach may be useful as a model
for other countries to consider.

Bibliography

Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 2003. Regional forest agreements (RFA). Internet document: www.rfa.gov.au

Chikumbo, O., Spencer, R., Turner, B.J. & Davey, S.M. 2001. Planning and monitoring forest sustainability: an Australian perspective. Australian Forestry, 64(1): 1-7.

Commonwealth of Australia. 1992. National Forest Policy Statement: a new focus for Australia’s forests. Perth, Australia.

Commonwealth of Australia. 2000. Ecosystem approach to sustainable forest management practices – regional forest agreements. Case study for Australia.
Montreal, Canada, Convention on Biological Diversity. Internet document: www.biodiv.org/doc/case-studies/cs-ecofor-au-management.pdf

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2001. Handbook of the Convention on Biological Diversity. London,

Earthscan.

Davey, S., Hoare, J., Binning, C. & Bright, C. 1997. Assessment of ecologically sustainable forest management for regional forest agreements. In E.P. Bachelard & A.G. Brown, eds. Preparing for the 21st century, p. 235-246. Canberra, Australia, Institute of Foresters of Australia Inc.

Davey, S.M, Hoare, J.R.L. & Rumba, K.E. 2002. Science and its role in Australian regional forest agreements. International Forestry Review, 4(1): 39-55.

JANIS (Joint ANZECC/MCFFA National Forest Policy Statement Implementation Sub-committee). 1997. Nationally agreed criteria for the establishment of a comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system for forests in Australia. Canberra, Australia, Commonwealth of Australia.

Kanowski, P., Sinclair, D., Freeman, B. & Bass, S. 2000. Critical elements for the assessment of schemes: establishing comparability and equivalence amongst forest management certification systems. Canberra, Australia, Canberra Publishing and Printing.

Montreal Process. 1995. “Santiago Declaration” – Statement on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. Quebec, Canada, Canadian Forest Service.

Montreal Process Implementation Group, Australia. 1998. A framework of regional (sub-national) level criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management in Australia. Canberra, Australia, Commonwealth of Australia.

National Forest Inventory. 2001. Map of forests woodlands and regional forest agreement areas as at August 2001. Canberra, Australia, Bureau of Rural Sciences.

Pressey, R.L. 1998. Algorithms, politics and timber; an example of the role of science in a public political negotiation process over new conservation areas in production forests. In R.T. Wills & R.J. Hobbs, eds. Ecology for everyone: communicating ecology to scientists, the public and the politicians, p. 73-87. Sydney, Australia, Surrey Beatty & Sons.

Resource Planning and Development Commission. 2002. Inquiry on the progress with implementation of the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement (1997). Final Recommendations Report. Hobart, Australia. Available on the
Internet: www.rpdc.tas.gov.au/public_land_use/plu_dwnl/RPDC_RFA_Final_Complete.pdf

Rumba, K.E., Hoare, J.R.L., Davey, S.M., Ryan, M.W. & Stephens, M. 2001. The achievement cycle – integrating management systems, criteria and indicators and forest certification standards for achieving sustainable outcomes. In Forests in a changing landscape, p. 365-73. Fremantle, Australia, Commonwealth Forestry and Institute of Foresters of Australia Conference.

Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand. 1996. AS/NZ ISO 14001. Environmental management systems – specification with guidance for use. Sydney, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand.

¹The full title of the UNCED Forest Principles is Non-Legally
Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the
Management, Conservation, and Sustainable Development of All Types of
Forests.

---