25 Years of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: How Intergovernmental C&amp;I Processes Have Made a Difference

Steven Johnson,Guy Robertson,Stefanie Linser,David Gritten,Simon Bridge,Kit Prins,Rastislav Raši,Bernhard Wolfslehner,Tim Payn

doi:10.3390/f9090578

Abstract

Growing concern about forest degradation and loss, combined with the political impetus supplied by the Earth Summit in 1992, led to the establishment of eleven intergovernmental, regional, and international forest-related processes focused on the use of criteria and indicators (C&I) for sustainable forest management (SFM). Up to 171 countries have participated in these processes to apply C&I frameworks as a tool for data collection, monitoring, assessment, and reporting on SFM and on achieving various forest-related UN Sustainable Development Goals. Based on an expert survey and literature analysis we identify six interlinked impact domains of C&I efforts: (1) enhanced discourse and understanding of SFM; (2) shaped and focused engagement of science in SFM; (3) improved monitoring and reporting on SFM to facilitate transparency and evidence-based decision-making; (4) strengthened forest management practices; (5) facilitated assessment of progress towards SFM goals; and (6) improved forest-related dialog and communication. We conclude that the 25-year history of C&I work in forestry has had significant positive impacts, though challenges do remain for the implementation of C&I and progress towards SFM. The work should be continued and carried over to other sectors to advance sustainability goals more broadly.

Highlights

For more than 25 years, numerous actors have been involved in the development of criteria and indicators (C&I) to conceptualize, monitor, assess, and report on sustainable forest management (SFM)at the international, regional, and national levels.We use the definition adopted by the United Nations, which describes SFM as “a dynamic and evolving concept [that aims] to maintain and enhance the economic, social and environmental values of all types of forests, for the benefit of present and future generations” [1]
The understanding of sustainability and the responsibility to maintain forests has changed considerably in recent decades, especially since the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992 and initiation of the C&I for SFM processes mainly based on a call for the development of C&I for sustainable development at multiple levels made in Chapter 40.4 of Agenda 21 (“Indicators of sustainable development need to be developed to provide solid bases for decision-making at all levels and to contribute to a self-regulating sustainability of integrated environmental and development systems.”), which was agreed at UNCED [20]
C&I provide a tacit definition of SFM, and they contributed to a paradigm shift in forestry away from a focus on sustained timber yield towards a broader, more holistic view of forest management [15]

Summary

Introduction

For more than 25 years, numerous actors have been involved in the development of criteria and indicators (C&I) to conceptualize, monitor, assess, and report on sustainable forest management (SFM)at the international, regional, and national levels.We use the definition adopted by the United Nations, which describes SFM as “a dynamic and evolving concept [that aims] to maintain and enhance the economic, social and environmental values of all types of forests, for the benefit of present and future generations” [1]. For more than 25 years, numerous actors have been involved in the development of criteria and indicators (C&I) to conceptualize, monitor, assess, and report on sustainable forest management (SFM). “C RITERIA define the essential elements against which sustainability is assessed, with due consideration paid to the productive, protective and social roles of forests and forest ecosystems”; and “I NDICATORS are parameters which can be measured and correspond to a particular criterion. They measure and help monitor the status and changes of forests in quantitative, qualitative and descriptive terms that reflect forest values as seen by those who defined each criterion”.

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion