SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst (Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

In my presentation today, I want to talk about the history and evolution of sustainable forest
management and REDD+, and particularly about the linkages and commonalities between the two.
And I would like to demonstrate that – for the most part – sustainable forest management and REDD+
are traveling to the same endpoint.

My presentation today will cover three main topics. First, I’d like to touch on the concept ofsustainable forest management, where the concept came from, how it is defined. I’ll then discusssustainable forest management processes, and briefly describe what has been achieved so far with regard
to SFM. Most importantly, I want to discuss the linkages between SFM and REDD+, how they
complement one another, and to what extent we can enhance the synergies between the two.

1

DAY1
Session 2

Mr. Mansur, in his opening remarks this morning already touched on the fact that we canhardly consider the concept of sustainability new. Last year, we celebrated 300 years of sustainable
forestry, marking the important contribution of Hans Carl von Carlowitz, a German Administrator for
Mining, who was the first to describe and define the concept of sustainability. His seminal work,
published in 1713, is generally accepted as the first publication to articulate the concept of forest
sustainability. It was later very quickly picked up to provide the conceptual framework for all of forest
science and the ideas of forest sustainability that followed.

While the basic concept of sustainability has been with us for a long time, there has been asignificant evolution of the priorities for forestry that have been given over the past 50 years, and anumber of key themes can be tracked. I quite like this very complicated looking chart published in a
publication by IUFRO. It shows some of the discourses that have taken place in forestry over the last
50 years.
‘Discourse’ is a set of concepts and ideas that form our thinking and move us forward on
different issues. The best translation probably is a ‘hot topic.’ We can think about what the hot
topics have been in forestry over the years.

It is quite interesting to see how certain ideas come along

2

SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

and rise up in our attention span and sit there for a while, and we are very preoccupied by these things
and then perhaps drop off to a lower level, mostly superseded by the next hot topic that comes along.
It is interesting to reflect on this as how the forestry debate has shifted over the last half
century. For example, industrial forestry dominated most of the thinking from early times through the
1960’s, based on the idea that the primary role for forests was to provide for economic growth. As
concerns over deforestation and environmental degradation mounted, the industrial forestry paradigm
has given way to social and environmental priorities; and particularly in recent times to focus on theprovision of various ecosystem services of forests.
The focus on biodiversity, for example, has helped to shape international forestry debate fromthe 1980’s and reached a peak at the time of ratification of the Convention on Biological Diversity 1 in
1992. This level of preoccupation and discourse certainly helped to foster the establishment of a great
number of additional national parks and protected areas around the world. This strong conservation
focus has gradually given way to more people-centered approaches, based around what I would consider
more holistic principles of sustainable forest management. Particularly, this has happened in the years
surrounding and following the Rio Earth Summit.

Dialogue on sustainable forest management has generally been carried out under a broader
umbrella of “sustainable development.” In the 1970’s, it was driven by the Club of Rome's “The
Limits to Growth” report. In 1987, the Brundland Report that provided an enduring definition ofsustainability and laid the groundwork for the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Of course, a significant
outcome for forestry from the Earth Summit was the “Forest Principles,” a consensus statement on the
management, conservation and sustainable development of forests.
Following the Earth Summit, the UN established the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests 2

12

http://www.cbd.int/
http://www.un.org/esa/forests/ipf_iff.html

3

DAY1
Session 2
followed by the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests, and then the UN Forum on Forests 3, all of whichwere primarily established to help countries to move forward in the implementation of the Forest
Principles.
More recently, under UNFF 4, countries negotiated The Non-Legally Binding Instrument on
All Types of Forests 5, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007. All of thesenegotiations and background have really helped to frame very strongly the concepts and principles ofsustainable forest management.

It is interesting to note, however, just how difficult it is to define SFM. If you look throughscientific literature, you can find dozens of definitions of sustainable forest management. There iseven a scientific publication called “One hundred faces of sustainable forest management”. For me,
the most interesting and important aspect of this definition, which is probably the most widely agreed
upon definition, is the idea that SFM is an evolving concept, and also that it encompasses the three main
pillars of sustainability, namely economic, social, and environmental.
http://www.un.org/esa/forests/
UN Forum on Forests: http://www.un.org/esa/forests/
5 http://www.un.org/esa/forests/pdf/notes/bali_081207_pc.pdf
344SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

It is all well and good to talk about SFM, but how exactly do we measure it, or measureprogress toward achieving it? One of the big steps in this regard has been the development of criteria
and indicators for sustainable forest management. ITTO pioneered the development of C&I 6 forsustainable management of natural tropical forests in the early 1990’s. This was followed by similar
efforts to establish criteria and indicators for temperate and boreal forests through the Helsinki 7 andMontréal 8 processes. In all, now we have some nine C&I processes that have been established, somearound specific forest types and some around geographic regions. For example, the Tarapoto 9 process
for Amazonian forests, and we have a process for dry forests here in Asia.
The range of criteria and the large number of indicators that have been developed by theseprocesses demonstrate that achieving SFM is neither easy nor straightforward. I often say, if it wasthat easy to do, we would have done it a long time ago. We know that, especially when we are trying toencompass the full aspects of social, economic, and environmental goals simultaneously, we often run
into challenges and conflicts. It certainly creates a lot of challenge for forest managers trying to strikethe right balance and achieve desired outcomes within this overall framework.

One of the positive outcomes of these processes of C&I was the development of the seventhematic areas that have been widely accepted for sustainable forest management, and have also now
been essentially enshrined in The Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests: namely, theextent of forest resources, forest biological diversity, forest health and vitality, the productive functionsof forest resources, protective functions, socioeconomic functions, legal policy, and institutionalframeworks.

Criteria & Indicators
http://www.iisd.ca/forestry/hel.html
8 http://www.iisd.ca/forestry/mont.html
9 http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5841e/y5841e12.htm
6
7

5

DAY1
Session 2

Another tool that has been developed, that also helps us to get some idea, or a proxy measureof sustainable forest management is forest certification. As you know, there are two major schemes forforest certification: the Forest Stewardship Council 10 supported program 11 and the Programme for theEndorsement of Forest Certification 12.

What does certification tell us about where we stand with SFM?

To date, we have slightly

over 400 million hectares of forests that have been certified by these two major programs, which is theslightly over 10% of the total forest area. This is really not very much when we think of the overall
extent of forests. It is even far less impressive when we realize that only a very small portion, only
about 10% of the total area of certified forests, is in the developing or tropical countries of the world.

https://ic.fsc.org/
https://ic.fsc.org/certification.4.htm
12 http://www.pefc.org/
10
11

6

SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

This slide gives us a more visual idea of where the FSC-certified forests are located. The
darker green shaded countries are those that have a higher percentage of their forests that have beencertified by the Forest Stewardship Council. You can see that most of them have been in Europe andin North America. The countries with the gray shading are those that have no certified forests
whatsoever. There are quite a number of those especially in Africa.

This is another depiction of the FSC 13 certified forests. We see that there is roughly 8% in
Latin America, and less than 5% are located in Asia and Africa respectively, while over 80% are inEurope and North America.

13

Forest Stewardship Council

7

DAY1
Session 2

We can take a little bit of measure of sustainable forest management from the amount offorests that have been certified, but we have to take this also with a grain of salt. For the most part,
certification focuses primarily on forests that are managed for timber production.

As it is amarket-based instrument, the people who are interested in certification tend to be those who are looking
for market access or to ensure the price that they can receive for their products.
There are quite a lot of forests that are managed for other purposes as conservation areas andprotected areas where the managers may not feel that it is really worth the effort to go throughcertification, or the cost may be more than the perceived benefits. Therefore, we should really look at
the level of forests around the world that have been certified as a minimum level of what we can say isreally well-managed forest.
There is also another caveat in that certification tends to validate the forests that were alreadyvery well managed before. Basically, there is a threshold standard for certification and if you meet it,
fine, but there is very little with regard to measuring the progress. Certainly, certification systems
provide very little incentive for those forests that are among the worst or poorest managed forests.
The managers of these forests are likely to say, “Oh, the threshold is so high, we will never reach it
anyway. What is the point of it?”To that extent, certification is kind of like giving an award to the best student in the class
rather than the most improved student. In the case of forest management, what we really need to beconcerned about is how to improve the performance of those that are not yet up to the standards that
we are looking for.

8

SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

With this background, I would now like to turn to REDD+ and how it relates to SFM. This
schematic is intended to show that there is a tremendous amount of overlap between the objectives ofsustainable forest management, forest management for climate change adaptation, and for climatechange mitigation.

It should be clear that in most cases we are not going to achieve our climate change

related forestry objectives without achieving sustainable forest management. At the same time, it isalso clear that in many parts of the world we have a long way to go in our management before we get towhat we can call sustainable forest management.
I want to present two slides that show us some of the attributes of REDD+. We can seethat these link very closely to what I presented earlier about sustainable forest management. These are
the five areas of REDD+ activities that were agreed upon in COP 16, the Cancun Agreements.
REDD+ activities focusing on reducing emissions from deforestation, from forest degradation, theconservation of forest carbon stocks, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest
carbon stocks.

Also coming out of Cancun, we had the safeguards that have been developed for REDD+
focusing on some of the principles to be adhered to in implementation. We can see the similarity and

9

DAY1
Session 2
overlap with the seven thematic areas of SFM presented earlier, including such things as consistency
with national forest programs, focus on governance, respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous
peoples and local communities, full and effective participation of stakeholders, conservation of naturalforests and biological diversity, and enhancement of other social and environmental benefits.

I would contend that shat was good forestry before in the past, i.e. sustainable forest
management, would undoubtedly serve very well in achieving the new objectives and meeting the new
expectations that we have of forests and forestry in the 21st century, including those related to climatechange.
If we look at some of these commonalities, we see that SFM and REDD+ both very muchgive very high importance on sustaining the forest base and recognizing that forests really do matter.
They both give high importance to tackling the issues of deforestation and degradation; a lot ofemphasis on ecosystem integrity and the multiple functions of forests; recognizing the importance ofpolicies and governance; and most importantly, in many aspects of tying this all together, they require
the support of local people and engagement of local people for success.

10SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

Getting to the heart of the theme of this seminar: how can SFM enhance REDD+ goals?
Clearly we can look at the things that SFM can deliver: increase in carbon sequestration. By managing
our forests sustainably, we certainly increase their ability to sequester carbon.

Sustainable forest

management practices address a lot of the issues of forest degradation. Just as one example, we canthink about reduced impact logging and how it can significantly reduce the damage that is done toforests as we are utilizing them. As foresters, we know this very well, but in the overall concept of
REDD+, we are struggling very much with how to measure and validate this. Wood products fromsustainable forest management can substitute for a lot of the fossil fuels and more carbon intensive
products. Finally, the experience that we have gained in implementing sustainable forest management,
or working toward it, will serve extremely well and be very important in the implementation of
REDD+.

Going beyond the question of that slide, in my opinion, an even more important question
than what SFM can do for REDD+ is what REDD+ can do to advance the goals of SFM, consideringthat SFM is actually a broader concept? While it seems apparent that on-the-ground management offorests will not substantially alter under REDD+ compared with what we would consider best practicesof sustainable forest management, there are nonetheless significant changes in process that are being
driven by REDD+ and the broader climate change programs. Positively, I think these changes in process
and approach are helping already to accelerate the progress toward sustainable forest management.
These are quite important to take note of.
First of all, the increased amount of funding flows that are coming and anticipated through
REDD+ are bringing forestry back to the center of attention internationally and in most of thecountries where forests are important. Secondly, REDD+ is driving considerable investment in MRV
and forest monitoring and assessment to the point where we now already have more and better
information about forests and forest resources than ever before. This is also a very important tool tohelp us improve forest management more generally.

11

DAY1
Session 2
In looking more carefully under REDD+ at the real drivers of deforestation, we are engaging
with a much wider range of sectors that have influence on the forests than we have in the past. We
have talked for a long time about these other influences from sectors outside forestry, but we havealways struggled with how to engage them. I think we are still struggling with how to engage themunder REDD+, but we are giving more attention to it and making more effort todo it.
We are giving renewed emphasis to forest governance, in particular tenure issues that are so
critical for success in forest management. REDD+ is also providing more opportunities for theengagement of local communities and indigenous peoples. There is more emphasis being given under
REDD+ to FPIC 14 and gender perspectives than we have in the past under sustainable forest
management approaches.
In total, we can see already that REDD+ is pushing us and accelerating the pace of what wehave been trying to do under SFM for a long time. One of the major remaining challenges though is
still in moving REDD+ beyond a forest protection or preservation mentality to fully embrace the soundmanagement, utilization, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. To date, most REDD+ attention
and funding has focused on reducing deforestation, and considerably less on the second “D” and the “+”in REDD+. For us to really tie to the concepts of sustainable forest management and REDD+
together, we need to see more attention on that second “D” and on the “+”.
I think we have some opportunities with this through increased attention to green economy,
the whole concept around green building, and green jobs. We can also learn considerably from thepast with respect to what has been achieved in Japan and Korea, in particular the experience here in Asia,with trying to tie together these concepts of green economy and using these to push the agenda further.

14

Free, Prior, and Informed Consent

12SFM and REDD+: Two Discourses – One Ultimate Goal
Dr. Patrick Durst(Senior Forestry Officer, Asia Pacific Representative Office, FAO)

DAY1
Session 2

To conclude, I want to come back to this confusing slide that I had at the beginning andrevisit this chart. Let us extend the timeframe beyond 2005 that is here, and ask ourselves what major
new strands in the forestry dialogue have emerged. Without a doubt, we can say that since the
UNFCCC COP meeting in Bali in 2007, REDD+ has become the dominant theme in the forestry
discourse.
The question we have to ask ourselves is just how this REDD+ theme will evolve in the
future. Is it going to remain at a high level with things like sustainable forest management andbiodiversity, or will it drop down and be overshadowed by the next hot topic that comes along in thenext few years?
For now, it certainly seems that REDD+ is serving the forestry community quite well in many
respects. But we also have to recognize that it also has the potential to draw attention and resourcesaway from broader SFM interests and needs. We already see that happening in some countries.
It is interesting for me to reflect, for example, in going to meetings, there is almost never ameeting these days on a topic that is not related to climate change or REDD+ in forestry.

There isnothing wrong with that because REDD+ has actually grown and expanded and embraces virtually thesame concepts that we have had for a long time in sustainable forest management.

13

DAY1
Session 2
Of course, what we would all like to see is that these synergies continue and that the sharedgoals of sustainable forest management and REDD+ prevail for the benefit of both in the years tocome.

14