70 likes | 144 Views
Family Forestry in Europe – building partnerships on common values ToS to monitor and develop assistance to countries on central and eastern Europe in transition in the forest and forest products sector Warsaw, March 3rd –6th 2004 Natalie Hufnagl CEPF.
E N D
Family Forestry in Europe – building partnerships on common values ToS to monitor and develop assistance to countries on central and eastern Europe in transition in the forest and forest products sector Warsaw, March 3rd –6th 2004 Natalie Hufnagl CEPF
CEPF – the umbrella federation of family forestry in Europe • Characteristics of family forestry in Europe • Threats and weaknesses • Challenges and opportunities • Conclusions
CEPF – the umbrella federation of family forestry in Europe • Current membership assembles national forest owner associations of 23 European countries (CEEC: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia) • Represents the interests and provides the expertise of family forest owners vis-à-vis the European Institutions (in particular the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee) • Active participation in international and global forest policy fora (e.g. MCPFE, UNECE/FAO, UNFF, UNFCCC, WSSD)
Characteristics of family forestry in Europe • 60% of EU 15 forests are owned and managed by families – generation bridging management and experience • 36% estimated share of private forestry in CEEC • Small scale forest holdings (average size: EU15=5 ha; CEEC= 2 ha) • 15 million family forest owners (EU 25) • Multifunctional forest management balancing economic, social, ecological and cultural requirements respecting the diversity across Europe • Local ownership, contributing to economic and social sustainability of communities
Threats and Weaknesses • Weak data on the socio-economic importance of family forestry in rural areas and their role in the social network (GNP is not a good indicator) • Influence of socio-demographic changes on sustainable management of forests • Unbalanced implementation of the acquis communitaire
Challenges and opportunities • Communicate a positive notion on family forest ownership • Communicate the values of continuity and generation bridging responsibility • Communicate an understanding of sustainability as implemented by family forestry (adequate balance between social responsibility and delivery of services to society) • Forest resources are there to be utilised • Develop new service concepts for “urban” forest owners
Conclusions • Strengthen the cooperation between forest owners – partnership approach – there is no “on fits all” solution • => Build on self-responsibility and own initiative • Focus on capacity building (technical level and political level) • Forest owners are partners in the implementation of sustainable forest management • Focus on the use of forest resources for strengthening and developing rural livelihoods • Increase communication on the products deriving from sustainable forest management – building bridges to the consumers needs