International Collaboration to Assess, Improve and Monitor the Quality of Forest Governance

1. International Collaboration to Assess, Improve and Monitor the Quality of Forest Governance World Bank presentation at the 20th COFO Meeting, Oct., 6, 2010, Rome.

2. The PROFOR Program • PROFOR is a multi-donor partnership program supported by 8 donors (EU, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland and UK) • Characterized by a tightly focused program strongly aligned with its four core themes; • Highly cost-effective mechanism for mobilizing leading edge analysis; • Well-networked into global, regional and national fora; • Flexible and able to respond quickly as new themes emerge.

3. PROFOR Knowledge Products

4. Costs of Poor Forest Governance • Ecological: Unplanned and inappropriate deforestation, depletion of resources important to rural livelihoods and loss of ecosystem services • Economic: Loss of billions of dollars annually in evaded taxes, illegal logging and other forest crimes • Social: Human displacement, conflicts and violence and compromising the traditional rights and beliefs of forest dependent communities • Political: Corruption contagion and loss of credibility of governments

5. Foreign middle man: $160 Local logger: $2.20 Local broker: $20 Exporter of sawn timber: $800 US trader: $1,000 Foreign lumber processor: $710 The Life of a Log: Alchemy of Illegal to Legal From illegal to legal

6. The Life of a Log: Preventing the Undesirable Alchemy Satellite monitoring Local communities/ third party monitor Log Tracking system: timber cut for export vs. exported lumber IKEA Model: Procurement policy International codes of conduct Increase supply thru fast growing trees

7. Putting Forest Governance, Corruption and Illegal Logging Centre Stage • 1998 — G8: Glen Eagles Summit • FLEG Ministerial Conferences • 2001—Bali • 2003—Yaounde • 2005—St. Petersburg triggered initiatives to control illegal logging and improve forest governance • EU FLEGT action plan (2003)

8. New Demands and Opportunities to Address Forest Governance (1) • REDD • good governance essential precondition for success • permanence of emission reductions • equitable distribution of benefits and costs • indigenous peoples rights • Legality concerns • VPA, timber regulation (EU) • amended Lacey Act (USA) • emerging legislation (Australia) • China, Russia • FIP • good governance critical to bringing about transformational changes

9. New Demands and Opportunities to Address Forest Governance (2) • Increasing stakeholder demand for good governance • Increasing political will to tackle forest governance issues

10. Where Are we Now…10+ Years Hence • Chatham House Report (2010): • significant reduction in illegal logging in Brazil, Cameroon and Indonesia. • consuming countries were consuming 26% less than they were at their peak in 2004 • several successes but much remains to be done • Recognition of the need for a systematic approach to forest governance reforms based on diagnosis, monitoring, assessment and reporting

11. Approaches to Forest Governance Assessments and Indicators • Systematic approaches are being developed by: Chatham House, Global Witness, World Resources Institute, Transparency International, FAO-FRA and PROFOR/World Bank, Chatham House-UNREDD. • Each designed with different objectives, users and applications in mind. • Yet, they have a healthy commonality.

12. Example of similarities

13. Example of similarities cont…

14. FAO-PROFOR Symposium: Overall Objectives • Share experiences across initiatives developing practical and feasible frameworks for assessing and monitoring the quality of forest governance. • Foster collaboration to avoid overlap and duplication of effort and explore the possibility of developing a common framework of monitoring forest governance. • Initiate dialogue with client countries regarding their needs and requirements.

15. Emerging Consensus (1): International and National Requirements • International requirements • legality, REDD, etc. • Domestic governance reform pressures • decentralization • land tenure • accountable and responsive government • Foreseeable national level diagnostic and monitoring needs differ

16. Emerging Consensus (2): Different Applications • Diagnostics vs. tracking/monitoring: different degrees of engagement, scales of ambition and time needed • Tracking trends within countries (not comparing countries) • Content applications (certification, legality, REDD, etc.): performance measures • Different stakeholder and countries have different needs • Keep it simple – a very few basic indicators, ‘good enough’

17. Emerging Consensus (3): Coherence • Useful to increase efficiency and avoid duplication of efforts • Core sets of common principles and criteria useful to link indicators with outcomes and increase transparency • Coherence on terminology • Specific indicators should be developed at the country level to measure progress

18. Way Forward • FAO and WB to lead a core group of experts to develop a common framework of principles and criteria for forest governance. Stocktaking of progress envisaged for Spring 2011. • Continue engagement and promote dialogue on governance issues in FLEGT-VPA, REDD+ and FIP activities. • Strengthen the demand for good governance as essential to SFM, especially in countries not targeted by REDD+, FIP and VPAs (Europe and Central Asia).

19. THANK YOU www.profor.info