Convention on biological diversity
|
|  Yüklə 1.31 Mb.
|
V.Policy developmentsConservation and forest-related policies have, most often, failed to significantly reduce forest decline. This is primarily due to the inability to address the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation. In many countries, the weakness of conservation and sustainable management efforts is largely due to poor governance, lack of political will, lack of clear land tenure and land use rights, lack of adequate valuation of forest biodiversity, lack of appropriate local and global economic environments, insufficient implementation capacity, lack of financial or human resources and of environmentally sound technologies. S
Globalization and the rise of corporate power Global economic systems and policies that fail to value forest biological diversity Human population growth and density ome positive elements are also evident, mostly in the area of forest policies and forest management practices. These have partly resulted from a series of international (IPF, IFF, United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF)) and regional forest processes and initiatives around the world, addressing the development of sustainable forest management. National forest programmes are increasingly being developed as a means to address forest sector issues in a holistic manner, taking into account other relevant sectors which impact on forests. The importance of national forest programmes has been confirmed and stressed by IPF, IFF and UNFF. Due to increasing public awareness of biological diversity issues and of the goods and services forest ecosystems produce, there is increasing support for sustainable forest management among consumers, politicians and industry. A substantial section of the timber trade seems to be prepared to take environmental issues seriously and to make real efforts to change its practices. Although such positive trends do not yet seem to have substantially influenced the loss of forest biological diversity, it is possible to note some of them that may contribute in some way to the maintenance of forest biological diversity: (a) Development of national forest programmes (b) Increased number and area of protected forest areas (c) Development of improved ecological forest management and forestry practices, including landscape ecological planning procedures, identification and preservation of key biotopes and other key elements in the forest landscape, “reduced impact” logging, and “close to nature” forestry (d) Mechanisms to illustrate sustainable forest practices such as demonstration forests (e.g. International Model Forests Network initiatives) (e) Many initiatives on criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry (f) Independent certification of sustainable forest management and related labeling of forest products originating from well-managed forests. There is also an increase in the willingness to accept issues related to the rights, needs and participatory possibilities of indigenous people and local communities in the context of forest conservation and management. This positive development includes donor institutions’ interest in collaborating directly with indigenous and local communities, policy revision by many relevant actors, and increased acceptance of traditional knowledge and collaborative management in forest conservation and management. However, these changes have happened largely at the international level and often have not been sufficiently incorporated into national policies. Difficulties in addressing relevant socio-economic issues in the context of forest biological diversity are also related to poor knowledge. Present knowledge concerning the use and valuation of non-timber forest products and services, the cultural and spiritual values of forests, or the development of the rights, needs and participatory possibilities by indigenous people is sparse or receives inadequate attention. VI.ConclusionsThe Expert Group has drawn a number of key conclusions from the review of information summarized in sections A to E above: (a) Forest issues relate to a range of political, economic, social, cultural, environmental and scientific aspects, which must be dealt with in a coordinated, cross-sectoral and holistic way; (b) Assessing the current global status of forest biological diversity in quantitative as well as qualitative terms is problematic, because of the difficulties quantifying biological diversity. An immediate need exists to categorize and substantially improve the understanding of biological diversity, with a view to measuring trends, particularly on regional scales; (c) The rate of deforestation has been at a high level for many centuries and continues to be at a dramatically high level, with most current deforestation occurring in tropical forests; (d) Large-scale degradation of forest quality occurs in all regions and forest types due to human activities, and this is exacerbated by improved access to intact forests; (e) The number of extinct and endangered forest species, already at historically high levels, can be expected to rise due to an existing “extinction debt” and the continued habitat loss, fragmentation, invasive species and over-exploitation. The evidence also clearly shows that an “extinction debt” exists, i.e. many extinctions will happen in the future as a result of the deforestation and degradation which have already occurred; (f) Plantations have a role to play in conserving and enhancing forest biological diversity, but cannot compensate for deforestation of primary forest and consequent loss of particularly rich biological diversity; (g) There is a clear need to better monitor and report changes in the quality and quantity of the world’s forests, from the national to the global level; (h) Data on rare and threatened forest species alone are insufficient to provide a reliable picture of broader trends in biological diversity. Surrogates for biological diversity, such as umbrella species, indicator species, key habitats and structural indicators, may help to assess and predict the effectiveness of conservation and forest management programmes and should be included in sustainable forest management criteria and indicator lists; (i) There is generally less knowledge with respect to forest biological diversity in tropical forests compared to the other two biomes; (j) Adequate attention needs to be given to the principles, methods and ways and means for the potential use of traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities as a valuable tool for forest biodiversity management; (k) Protected forest areas have increased in recent years in both number and area. However, globally, forest types are neither well protected nor well represented in protected areas. The pattern of protected forest areas remains uneven, especially in terms of distribution and the representativeness of many forest types. The effectiveness of the protection provided in protected areas remains a major problem; (l) It should be recognized that the conservation of forest biological diversity should be an overall objective of sustainable management of all types of forests by all countries, and not be limited to protected forest areas; (m) The relationship between biological diversity and ecosystem goods and services is direct, but the exact linkages remain unclear and require research. Critical levels of biological diversity loss and/or change, as well as the human impacts that cause them and which affect forest ecosystem functioning and forest goods and services, are still largely unknown; (n) The implementation of the ecosystem approach should be the overarching framework for sustainably managing forests. In particular, the ecosystem approach requires adaptive management to deal with the complex and dynamic nature of forest ecosystems and the absence of complete knowledge or understanding of their functioning. As a consequence, forest ecosystem managers should consider the effects – actual or potential – of their activities on forest ecosystems and take into account that forest ecosystems should be managed within the limits of their functioning. In this respect, conservation of forest structure and functioning should be a priority target; (o) To help to implement the ecosystem approach, research must address an understanding of the effects of forest management on biological diversity on all scales, from genes to landscapes, to provide a basic understanding of the role of biological diversity in forest functions and processes. Monitoring of forest biological diversity and of the changes caused by forest management is important in order to assess the effectiveness of management strategies and the cumulative change of forest use; (p) Restoration of forest biological diversity in degraded forests and deforested lands is an issue of growing importance in both the developed countries and the developing world. There is a need to focus more on the potential for synergy from combining different forest categories, including primary and secondary natural forests, agro-forests and new forest plantations, to achieve a specified range of forest biological diversity and related goods and services. The means to restore forest biological diversity in different situations are poorly understood and research should be increased in this area; (q) Current economic incentives often encourage forest loss and degradation and are therefore disincentives to sustainable forestry; (r) Sustainable forest management is generally less profitable in monetary terms than ecologically non-sustainable forest practices. Local and indigenous communities and, ultimately, nations are likely to be the major losers from the conversion of forested land to other uses and non-sustainable forest practices; (s) There is a need for more effective participation of the inhabitants of forests, indigenous peoples and local communities in all processes related to forest use and management. A stakeholder analysis at all levels, from local to global, would be a valuable basis for discussions and decisions on forest biological diversity use and its management; (t) Effective action for forest biological diversity needs to address both the direct and the underlying causes of loss, and this requires a more detailed understanding of these causes at both the international and national levels, since each country has different circumstances and will need a specific approach. Many of the issues can only be addressed globally or regionally; (u) The underlying causes of loss of forest biological diversity are very fundamental and complex and they derive from broader macro-economic, political and social causes, such as poverty, rapid population growth, globalization of trade, unsustainable production and consumption patterns, political unrest, lack of good governance, land rights disputes and lack of institutional technical and scientific capacity. Loss of forest biological diversity cannot be stopped and reversed without addressing these and other fundamental problems; as well as improving our knowledge of biological diversity and developing more sustainable forms of forest management; (v) Many of the threats to forest biological diversity emanate from non-forest sectors, such as agriculture, land use, industry, energy and others. The development of cross-sectoral linkages, e.g. through a consistent development of national biodiversity strategies and national forest programmes, possibly within the framework of national sustainable development strategies, is therefore very important; (w) Present knowledge concerning the use and valuation of non-timber forest products, the cultural and spiritual values of forests, or concerning the developments of rights and participatory possibilities by indigenous people is sparse and needs more adequate attention. There are some positive trends and developments upon which to build, mainly in the area of improving forest policies and sustainable forest management practices, which include biological diversity provisions. Public and consumer awareness is leading to the development of a more serious interest in biological diversity and environmental issues by other stakeholders, including politicians and the private sector. The promotion of certification of forest products, when done properly, can also be an encouraging development to provide positive incentives for sustainable forest management. CONTENTS Page
Review of the status and trends of, and major threats to, the forest biological diversity, prepared by the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Forest Biological Diversity 1 Preface 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 Executive summary: Status and Trends of Forest Biological Diversity and Major Gaps in INformation 4 I.Status and trends of forest biological diversity 4 II.Ecosystem functioning and services 7 III.Valuation of forest products and ecosystem services 9 IV.Causes of loss of forest biological diversity 10 V.Policy developments 11 VI.Conclusions 12 CONTENTS 15 I.Status of forest biological diversity 17 A.Distribution of the world’s forests 17 B.Status of biodiversity in forest biomes 21 i.Boreal forests 21 ii.Temperate forests 23 iii.Tropical forests 26 C.Scientific considerations relating to forest biological diversity 31 I.Genetic diversity 31 II.Species diversity 33 III.Ecosystem and landscape diversity 38 D.Factors limiting the global knowledge of forest biological diversity 41 II.Overview of functioning of forest ecosystems and related goods and services 42 A.Introduction 42 B.Functioning of forest ecosystems and impacts of human activities on related goods and services 42 i.Elements of forest ecosystem functioning, keystones species, functional groups notion of resilience 42 ii.Boreal Forest Biomes 43 iii.Temperate Forest Biomes 46 iv.Tropical Forest Biomes 48 v.Restoration of functioning of forest biological diversity in degraded forests or deforested lands 50 vi.Assessing Status and Trends of forest ecosystem functioning 51 vii.Conclusions concerning ecosystem functioning and human impacts 52 C.The Value of Forest Ecosystems 56 i.Types of forest values 56 ii.Stakeholders and Forest Values 57 iii.Economic values 59 iv.The causes of forest loss 68 III.MAJOR THREATS TO FOREST BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 72 A. Introduction 72 B. An historical and present perspective of forest biological diversity 75 C. Direct causes of loss of forest biodiversity 76 i.Agriculture 76 ii.Unsustainable forest management 77 iii.Infrastructure Development 81 iv.Natural Hazards 84 v.Pollution 85 D. Underlying causes of loss of forest biodiversity 85 I.Broader macroeconomic, political and social causes 85 II.Institutional and social weaknesses 88 III.Market and economic failures 91 IV.Policy failures 91 V.TRENDS IN FOREST BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 94 A. Introduction 94 B. Forest cover 94 C. Forest quality 95 D. Loss of species and genetic diversity 97 E. Forests conserved in protected areas 104 F. Climate change 105 G. The need to develop monitoring programmes 106 H. Current positive trends in forestry and forest policies 108 I. Implications of declining trends in FBD 111 REFERENCES 114 ANNEX II 140 Criteria for selection of vertebrate indicator species for forests in Canada 140 ANNEX III 141 Data management and science research agenda to understand and manage forest biodiversity 141 ANNEX IV 143 Indicative list of major sources of information: 143 ANNEX V 145 Case Study - Developing markets for environmental services to support forest conservation 145
The area1 of the world’s forests (see Annex I for use of terms), including natural forests and forest plantations, was estimated to be 3869 million ha in 2000, equivalent to almost 30% of the ice-free land area of the earth (FAO, 2001a). Loss of natural forests is estimated to be 16.1 million ha annually, with 15.2 million ha of this occurring in the tropics (FAO, 2001a). This loss is not compensated for by regrowth of natural forests or plantations, leading to a net annual loss of 9.4 million ha of forests. The three major forest biomes are boreal, temperate and tropical. In terms of area, the forests are almost equally divided between tropical/sub-tropical forests and temperate/boreal forests (See Map 1). The original and current forest cover of the Earth is given in the map 2. The majority of the forested area consists of natural forests (95%), with commercial plantations comprising 3% and other forest plantations making up the remaining 2% (Carle et al., 2001; FAO, 2001a). Under the FAO (FAO, 1998) definition, natural forests include all forests “composed of indigenous trees, not planted by man or in other words, forests excluding plantations”, while plantations include “forest stands established by planting or/and seeding in the process of afforestation or reforestation. They are either of introduced species (all planted stands) or intensively managed stands of indigenous species, which meet all the following criteria: one or two species at plantation, even age class, regular spacing”. Detailed information on the world’s forests, at regional and national levels, is given in FAO (1997, 1999, 2001a, 2001b). A little over half (55%) of the world’s forests are located in developing countries. Two-thirds are found in only ten developing countries. Brazil has 544 million ha, Indonesia 105 million ha, Democratic Republic of Congo 135 million ha, Peru 65 million ha, India 64 million ha, Mexico 55 million ha, Bolivia 53 million ha, Colombia 50 million ha, Venezuela 50 million ha and Sudan 42 million ha. More than three quarters of the temperate and boreal forests are situated in just four countries: Russian Federation 851 million ha, Canada 245 million ha, USA 226 million ha and China 163 million ha. Global forest cover in 2000 for different regions is given in Table 1 (from FAO, 2001b). Table 1. Regional forest cover (FAO, 2001b)
Table 2. Total forest area by ecological zone and distribution between regions, according to FRA 2000 global ecological zoning and global forest cover map. Distribution of percentages do not exactly tally with other area statistics due to systematic distortions in the remote sensing classification of forests in the global map.
A good overall picture on World’s forests can be obtained on basis of three maps representing various aspects of the global forest cover. Map. 1. Forests 2000 by major ecological domains is published on the web site for the FAO Forest Resources Assessment 2000 (http://www.fao.org/forestry/FO/fra/index.jsp). The map presents the world’s forests according to the main biomes, and classified as a) closed forests, b) open and fragmented forests, and c) other wooded land. Map. 2. Global distribution on current Forests by the UNEP-WCMC (http://www.unep-wcmc.org/forest/global_map.htm) gives the global distribution on 22 main classes of natural forests and 5 classes of plantations. Map. 3. Original and current Forest Cover by the UNEP-WCMC (http://www.unep-wcmc.org/forest/original.htm) shows the estimated situation between the end of the last Ice Age and the expansion of human activities, about 8,000 years ago. This map reveals large losses in the global forest cover since this historic baseline, as well as great regional differences in the deforestation. Protected forested areasAt the global level about 30,350 protected areas have been established, covering 8.8% of land area (IUCN, 1998). Green and Paine (1997) have endeavoured to estimate the extent to which the major biomes, including various categories of forest2, are represented overall in the global protected areas network3 (see Table 3). In this analysis, tropical forest types are better represented in protected areas than temperate forest types, mainly due to more extensive deforestation over a longer period in temperate regions of Eurasia. The overall figures for tropical forests appear satisfactory, approximating the 10% protection target established at the IV Worlds Parks Congress (IUCN, 1993), but in reality overestimate the extent to which forest ecosystems are being properly conserved in protected areas. A recent survey of 10 developing countries with major forest resources found that only 1% of forest protected areas are secure in the long-term, with 60% currently secure but with threats likely in the near future and more than 20% suffering from degradation, (Dudley and Stolton, 1999). An high proportion (59%) of protected areas are less than 1000 ha in size, and their long-term viability for conservation of forest biodiversity is open to question unless they are located near and linked with other forested protected areas and are subjected to comprehensive protection and management regimes. Furthermore, it is readily apparent that data on the extent of conservation of different, very broadly classified, forest types or biomes provide only limited insight into how well forest biological diversity (FBD) is being conserved. Only when vegetation communities (forest associations or types) have been thoroughly surveyed and mapped at a sufficiently detailed resolution, e.g. a minimum mapping unit of less than 100 ha (Jennings, 1994) and at a minimum of 1:50,000 mapping scale, will it be possible to ascertain the extent to which different forest types are represented within the protected areas network, and to ascertain the exact contribution of the protected areas system to the overall conservation of FBD. Table 3. Protected forested area as a percent of the total forest area for various global regions (source: WCMC, 20004;).
The intent of the following sections is not to be exhaustive in the review of knowledge about biological diversity, particularly within biomes. For substantial detail, the “Global Biodiversity Assessment” published by UNEP (1995) is recommended. The intent here is to focus on key issues that lead to a better understanding of the status of forest biological diversity, as well as to identify gaps in knowledge. This approach leads toward recommendations of options to improve the conservation and the sustainable management of forest biological diversity. Forest biological diversity can be quantified at several scales, these include: assessing the genetic diversity within species, counting the number of species per unit area (local, regional, national, continental, global), determining numbers and arrangement of forest types and their age, classifying types of forest ecosystems, determining communities of species associated with forest ecosystems and describing landscape structure. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||