FLEG Process and ENPI FLEG Regional Program

1. FLEG Process and ENPI FLEG Regional Program Alexei Slenzak World Bank Budapest November 24 - 25 2010

2. Background Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG) – a multi-stakeholder process in response to widespread failure of forest governance, characterized by illegal logging, associated illegal trade and corruption

3. Ministerial Forest Law Enforcement and Governance Initiatives created the political “space” at national and regional levels to address the complex FLEG issues in partnership with major stakeholders from civil society and the private sector

4. The East Asia Ministerial Conference on FLEG, September 2001, Bali, Indonesia • The Africa FLEG Ministerial Conference, October 2003, Yaoundé, Cameroon • The Europe and North Asia Ministerial Conference on FLEG, November 2005, St Petersburg, Russia www.worldbank.org/fleg

5. St Petersburg Declaration • Indicative List of Actions • Continuing dialogue • EC – Improving Forest Law Enforcement and Governance in the ENPI East Countries and Russia (2008-2011)

6. Full participants (7): • Armenia • Azerbaijan • Belarus • Georgia • Republic of Moldova • Russian Federation • Ukraine • Observers (5+1): • Kazakhstan • Kyrgyz Republic • Tajikistan • Turkmenistan • Uzbekistan • + Turkey

7. Implementing Organizations • World Bank, WWF and IUCN • Support selected pilot activities • active involvement of governments, civil society and the private sector • ~80% of activities at a country level • and strategically targeted sub-regional & regional actions.

8. Overall objective • Tocontribute towards: • legal and sustainable forest management and utilization practices • a strengthened rule of law, and • improved local livelihoods, focusing on environmental sustainability, human right aspects and gender equity

9. Specific Purpose • To: • improve forest governance by implementing some priorities from the ENA-FLEG Ministerial Declaration, through selected pilot activities, with the active involvement of governments, civil society and private sector

10. PROGRESS • Implementing Organizations • World Bank, WWF and IUCN • PMT and PCTs • NPACs, OC and JCT • First year’s activities underway/ completed

11. Operational committee(OC): representatives of participating countries (one from each country), World Bank, IUCN, WWF, European Commission and donors. First OC meeting: September 23, 2009, Kyiv Program Management Team (PMT) World Bank, IUCN, WWF Joint Information-Communications Team World Bank, IUCN, WWF National Program Advisory Committee(NPAC) World Bank, IUCN, WWF, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Russia Country Program Coordination Team(PCT) World Bank, IUCN, WWF, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Russia

12. PROGRESS • Examples: • Substantive analysis • Communications • Website • Newsletters • Workshops and other fora • Surveys • Processes

15. Expected PROGRAM RESULTS • Increased awareness and commitment • Effective national and regional FLEG action processes in place • National ownership and capacity increased • Improved regional collaboration • Engagement of key trading partners • Continuation of the official ENA-FLEG process • SFM practices being implemented

16. First Regional Conference in Chisinau • Brought together delegates from participating and observer nations • FLEG focal points reported progress • Addressed issues on: • constraints to developing partnerships; • the role of training; and • addressing FLEG issues through regional partnerships.

17. Conclusions • ENPI FLEG Program achieving results • Agenda needs to be sustained and mainstreamed • Feeds into and depends on the Forest Policy process

18. FLEG UKRAINE PROGRAM: KEY ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS (September 2009 – November 2010)

19. What are the issues? (analytical work on typology of forest crime and IL) • Analysis of statistics, information from law-enforcement and supervisory authorities, registry of court decisions and media publications • Assessment of volumes of timber of doubtful origin (balance assess. method) • Analysis of practices of planning and organization of forest use • Identification of high risk areas

20. Analysis of legislation and recommendations for improvement • Comparative analysis of legislation (Ukraine – EU policies/regulations/directives) • Corruption risks of forest legislation and specific laws and regulations (Forest Code, Regulation on State Forest Guard Service, Regulation on SFC). • Analysis of legislation regulating forest harvesting/felling • Analysis of legislation on State Forest Guard Service and development of recommendations on its improvement • Analysis of legislation on long-term lease of forest lands

21. Sociological surveys • Expert interviews (local authorities, forest authorities and enterprises, forest guards) - general assessment of the situation, identification of issues and potential solutions • Opinion poll of local population in the three “high-risk” areas of the Carpathian region (assessment of situation in forest sector, access to forest resources and attitude to forest crime) • Sociological survey among SME ( access to forest resources)

22. Support to State Forest Guard Service • Preparation and publishing a manual for forest practitioners “Administrative violations and procedural steps to document illegal logging(forest crime)” • Preparation of a training course “Methods of prevention of illegal harvesting and illegal timber trade”

23. Development of timber tracking system • Learning from experience in other countries on the issues of timber quality classification and accounting • Study tour of forest practitioners to Latvia • Translation of standards and methodologies used in Poland and Latvia • Development of practical recommendations on confirmation of the legality of timber origin

24. Awareness on FLEG issues and consolidation of efforts • Workshops in Kiev and other regions • Press-events • Publications in media and targeted dialogue with journalists • Internet • Participation in international events

25. Thank You! www.enpi-fleg.org