Protection Of Forests In Europe Research Articles

The modern concept of public forest functions

Forest, as one of the most complex and most important natural ecosystems, is characterized by numerous and very important characteristics that have permanently or current significance for human society, for life on earth and therefore we consider forest complexes as spatial functional components. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) have jointly published a report entitled The State of the World’s Forests (SOFO 2020). From the functional aspect, forests have been defined as: areas of certain way and type of use, as well as roles in providing appropriate ecological conditions, primarly that forests supply the planet with water, that they are the key to combating climate change and biodiversity conservation, to provide more than 86 million jobs and support the existence of 880 million people worldwide. The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE), a top-level policy initiative for the development of processes for the protection and sustainable management of forests since 1993, places urgent demands on forestry theory and practice and sector related to forestry planning. The explicit view (MCPFE) was that when planning and setting priorities, imponderable values of forests are given equal importance as values that produce financial effects. Therefore, when adopting planning settings related to forest valuation, cost-benefit analysis is necessary, where the benefits of forest complexes are an important input, especially in the closer zones of urban areas when it comes to social functions. Then in the process of planning forest management as an urban resource, the participation and influence of the local population is very important, because the goal is to recognize their participation and needs as primary, to harmonize with other plans, policies and finally with specific activities in the forest management process. The forest rarely has a single function. There are several, the same or different functional values. In that case, they can be either parallel functions, when the needs are stimulated by the same forest management measures, or opposite fonctions, when different procedures of harmonization with the goals and methods of forest management are required for their performance.

Perché dobbiamo aumentare la quantità di necromassa nelle nostre foreste? Quanta necromassa dobbiamo rilasciare?

Abstract: Deadwood plays a key role in the functioning and productivity of forest ecosystem and it is an important feature for the conservation of the biodiversity. In the past land-use and forest management have dramatically reduced the amount of deadwood in the European forests and only in the last decades the important role of the deadwood has been studied and recognised. At the political/administrative level the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) has recognized the importance of this forest component and the last year Italian Government has requested the regional forest laws and regulations to take into account deadwood and habitat/retention trees in the forest management. It is a current research priority to provide managers of European forests with a baseline of deadwood threshold retention value for decisions for their specific forest type and management target.

Bioeconomy in the National Forest Strategy: A Comparison Study in Germany and the Czech Republic

Background and Objectives: Forest-based bioeconomies have been adopted as the national forest strategies in many European countries. However, in the Czech Republic, the bioeconomy has not been officially included in national policies. The main objective of the paper was to review the current forest policy in the Czech Republic in meeting the purposes of the European forest-based bioeconomy. To better understand the opportunities and shortcomings of the forest strategy and the implementation of a forest-based bioeconomy in the country, a comparison study in the Czech Republic and Germany was also carried out. Methods: A review of the forest strategies was done based on the following research questions: (1) How are the bioeconomy principles and priorities present in the Czech National Forest Programme (NFP) as reflected in the EU Forest Strategy, and how does the Czech forest strategy compare to that in Germany? (2) What is the situation concerning the national wood production and consumption to understand the opportunities and challenges of the bioeconomy implementation in the studied countries? Results: The Czech NFP was approved following the pan-European process for the protection of forests in Europe; therefore, it does not directly reflect the 2012 bioeconomy principles, although most of these approaches have been included in this strategy. Different national measures in two studied countries were revealed to achieve the objectives of the forest bioeconomy. The primary contribution from the Czech forestry to the bioeconomy is sustainable forest-based products. A forest bioeconomy is also targeted at mitigating climate change by providing forest biomass for bioenergy. Conclusions: The Czech Republic is in the midst of the adoption process of the bioeconomy strategy. The main challenges faced by the forest-based sector in the country is to fulfil the demand for sustainable forest biomass and high value-added products. Multisectoral collaboration, business diversification, and education for public consumers are needed to increase the growth and job opportunities of the bioeconomy sector in rural areas.

Forest policy goals in Poland in light of the current forestry aims in Europe Part 1. Forest policy processes in Europe

Abstract The Polish “National Forest Policy” was adopted by the Council of Ministers in April 1997 and since then no revisions of this document have been made. However, over the last two decades policy changes affecting forests and forestry have been implemented worldwide including Europe. Nonetheless, in more recent years, significant changes in social, economic, institutional, and legal aspects of forestry have also occurred in Poland. This paper is the first of a series of five articles, which aim at highlighting necessary changes in the “National Forest Policy” following the achievements of European forest policy processes and trends in forest policy of selected European countries. The focus of the present paper are the most important European processes of forest policy formulation, in particular the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (Forest Europe process) as well as forest-focused and forest-related polices of the European Union. Included in this research are the Forest Europe resolutions as well as decisions and EU policies, strategies and legal acts in terms of the general objectives set for forests and forestry. The analysis focuses on the period 1997–2016, i.e. starting from the year the “National Forest Policy” has been adopted. The conclusions of this first paper are that in recent years, forests and forestry have been increasingly included in various sectoral policies of the European Union (environmental and biodiversity protection, climate, energy, agricultural polices), which requires the member states to revise and adjust their own forest-related regulations and policies.

Evaluating the implementation of the Pan-European Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management – A SWOT analysis

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the notion of Criteria and Indicators (C&I) as a framework for evaluating sustainable forest management (SFM) rapidly gained interest. There have been several international processes and initiatives related to the development of C&I as a tool for defining SFM and measuring its progress. In Europe, a set of criteria and indicators was developed in 1998 by FOREST EUROPE, former Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE). However, until recently, insufficient information has been available on how the pan-European C&I have been used and what their real impact has been. A recent study11EFI (2013). Implementing Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in Europe (ci-sfm.org). (the “CI-SFM” project) conducted by the European Forest Institute (EFI) is the first effort to collect information on the implementation of the pan-European C&I in the 46 signatory states of the FOREST EUROPE process. The study analyzed how and to what extent the pan-European C&I have been used at the pan-European and national levels, investigated challenges and gaps in its implementation, and explored opportunities for further improvement. However, there is need for a prioritization and a more specific query on the factors influencing the implementation of the pan-European C&I in order to identify the major cornerstones for further use and priority areas for action. Thus, building on the findings from the EFI study, the main objective of this article is to analyze the SWOT factors (Strengths (S) – Weaknesses (W) – Opportunities (O) – Threats (T)) of the pan-European C&I in order to determine and prioritize the major constraints and future possibilities of their use and implementation.The results show that in order to consider the pan-European C&I as a powerful tool for promoting sustainable forest management, both at national, sub-national and pan-European levels, a number of factors (e.g. data availability and quality, cross-sectoral communication, conceptual validity, clear objectives, capacity building) that influence the implementation of the indicator set require further research and action by policy makers and relevant stakeholders.

The role of plant sociology in the study and management of European forest ecosystems

Abstract: Forest composition is a faithful indicator of the stressors and disturbances that influence forest ecosystems, and it should be accounted for in Sustainable Forest Management policies. Indeed, the classification of forest ecosystems in forest types is considered as a key tool to improve the assessment and monitoring of forest biological diversity, and for the definition of management guidelines. Accordingly, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe has recognized the need of developing a pan-European forest classification in forest types, and has identified indicators of Sustainable Forest Management that should be applied by forest types. The classification of vegetation has always been among the main aims of the plant sociology. The quantitative and qualitative analysis of plant species composition, performed through the plant sociological approach, condenses compositional and structural information within a hierarchical system, and expresses all historical, sociological and habitat factors that influence the actual and potential vegetation. In a modern perspective the integration of plant sociology and ecological analysis represents a key to a hierarchical land classification and to the understanding of vegetation dynamics; furthermore the long history of plant sociology determined the availability of large datasets of vegetation data throughout Europe. Starting from these considerations, in this paper we briefly describe how plant sociology could represent a tool for the assessment of the indicators of SFM that should be applied by forest types, giving insights on how this discipline could contribute to the assessment of each of these indicators.

PRACTITIONER'S PERSPECTIVE: Sustainable forest management in a time of ecosystem services frameworks: common ground and consequences

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has stimulated much interest in the linkages between the state of ecosystems and human well-being, and resulted in a number of international and national initiatives. For example, the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UKNEA) is being widely discussed in research and land use policy communities, and has already influenced domestic policy (UK National Ecosystem Assessment 2011). The philosophy of ecosystem services is thought by many ecologists to be a good thing, leading to an expectation that their preferred landscapes or habitats will be conserved and that new resources will emerge to underpin and secure wider environmental benefits. Others are interested in particular markets that might develop the opportunities for new business enterprises and the new funding that might make land management more profitable. Our practitioners’ view stems from involvement in British forestry and in particular in the application of ecological research to the policy, planning and management of woodlands and forests. In the practitioner world, we inhabit, a common question is: How does the framework of ecosystem services compare with the prevailing one of sustainable forest management? Or, more prosaically, as a senior forest manager recently put it: What the heck is it all about? We reflect on the common ground and consider possible consequences for forestry and sustainable forest management of incorporating an ecosystem services approach. Our first perspective is that there is confusion around terminology and concepts. Many discussants appear to miss the subtle differences and use concepts from ecosystem services framework, an ecosystem approach, and sustainable forest management seamlessly and interchangeably. As a basis for our perspective, we start, therefore, with brief definitions. The ecosystem approach is considered to be ‘a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way’ (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2004). The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) adopted a definition for sustainable forest management as ‘The stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality, and their potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national and global levels, and that does not cause damage to other ecosystems’ (Helsinki Ministerial Conference 1993). The UKNEA suggested that ‘Ecosystem services are the benefits provided by ecosystems that contribute to making human life possible and worth living’ and that ‘The adoption of an ecosystems approach yields a requirement for an evidence base on ecosystem change and ecosystem service provision to inform decision-making’. Furthermore, the UKNEA sees change in ecosystems as a result of direct and indirect drivers and that, by understanding the important contribution to human well-being, a variety of societal responses may be adopted which lead to further change and possible improvements in ecosystems and their services. It is this operationalising of ecosystem services through the establishment of values and identification of societal responses which we consider as the ecosystem services framework. As a basis for our perspective, we now summarise sustainable forest management, making selective observations using the language of ecosystem services.

Influences of international forest policy processes on national forest policies in Finland, Norway and Sweden

Several international processes provide recommendations for sustainable forest management, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe and the United Nations Forum on Forests. This paper explores to what degree and how these processes have influenced national forest policies in Finland, Norway and Sweden employing methods developed for studying effectiveness of international agreements. Empirical data on changes in response to the international recommendations were collected, revealing influences on all policy elements in Finland. In Sweden, minor influences were identified on only two out of five investigated elements, while Norway is in an intermediate position. The variations in influences on selected policy elements in rather similar countries indicate different national considerations in response to the international recommendations, signalling challenges in determining effects of the international processes. The assessed influences are next used for an initial investigation of how the international forest policy recommendations influence national policies. Evidence indicates multifaceted and complex ways of influences, and signals of both calculative and normative influences, and their interactions, are found. Elements requiring further investigations are identified, emphasising the casual relationships in determining to what extent and how national policies are affected by international policy processes.

La constitution des indicateurs de gestion forestière durable 2010 : témoignage

L’exercice 2010 de la constitution des indicateurs de gestion forestière durable s’inscrit dans le rapportage quasi concomitant de deux opérations internationales, l’une au bénéfice de la conférence ministérielle sur la protection des forêts en Europe, désormais Forest Europe, l’autre pour le compte de l’Organisation des Nations unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO) dans le processus d’évaluation des ressources forestières mondiales. Ces deux opérations sont fondées sur des concepts et des rythmes désormais largement convergents. Axé sur les spécificités de la forêt métropolitaine, le processus national complète le processus européen au même rythme quinquennal. À la demande du ministère chargé des forêts, l’Inventaire forestier national a conduit l’opération de constitution des indicateurs de gestion forestière directement à partir de ses données propres ou indirectement en collectant les données de quelque vingt fournisseurs. Le document de référence ainsi constitué rassemble trente-cinq indicateurs européens et dix-neuf indicateurs nationaux organisés selon les six critères de la gestion forestière durable, dits critères d’Helsinki. Pour ce faire, un comité de pilotage a été réuni quatre fois entre septembre 2009 et avril 2011. Par rapport à la précédente version (2005) huit indicateurs nationaux n’ont pas été retenus, faute de pertinence ou faute de données, sept autres ont été ajoutés. Le comité a dûment documenté les problèmes rencontrés, les solutions retenues et a émis des recommandations pour le prochain exercice. Par rapport à la version 2005, des ruptures majeures ont été enregistrées chez les deux principaux fournisseurs de données: l’IFN a changé de méthode statistique et a adopté la définition internationale de la forêt, le Service de statistique et de prospective (SSP) a changé l’échantillon national de son enquête Teruti-Lucas. Dans le but de faciliter le prochain exercice semblable en 2015, il est convenu que des travaux d’intersession puissent réunir les parties prenantes et être conduits sous l’égide du ministère chargé des forêts.

Aux origines des indicateurs de gestion durable des forêts

L’approche en termes de critères et d’indicateurs a été proposée en 1992 par le Canada comme une démonstration opérationnelle de la capacité intégratrice du terme de gestion durable, que les négociateurs forestiers de la CNUED (Rio de Janeiro, 1992) mettaient en avant pour contrer les ambiguïtés du concept de développement durable appliqué à la forêt. La mise en oeuvre de la résolution H1 (consacrée à la gestion durable) de la seconde conférence ministérielle pour la protection des forêts en Europe (Helsinki, 1993) a été le champ d’expérimentation de cette approche au niveau du continent européen. La liste des critères et indicateurs adoptés par le processus d’Helsinki est un compromis piloté par des forestiers d’État et des scientifiques, reflétant un consensus à l’échelle du continent européen, à un moment donné. Cette approche a inspiré d’autres processus intergouvernementaux régionaux, associant à chaque fois des pays qui avaient la conviction de partager à la fois les mêmes problèmes au regard de la gestion durable des forêts, mais aussi la même culture pour les résoudre, les critères et indicateurs n’ayant pas une valeur en soi, mais pour l’action et dans un contexte sociétal particulier. Les forestiers européens ont affiché dès 1995 un fort scepticisme sur la possibilité de critères et indicateurs de gestion durable transcontinentaux, à plus forte raison mondiaux. Les critères et indicateurs de gestion durable ne traduisent en effet pas une approche objective et désincarnée de ce que sont « la gestion, la conservation et l’exploitation durables de tous les types de forêts ». Ils expriment plutôt la volonté politique des forestiers de sortir d’une revendication d’être seuls légitimes et compétents pour parler des forêts, afin de s’engager, plus ou moins laborieusement, dans la direction d’une « vision partagée » avec d’autres parties prenantes, au moins dans un dialogue, sans sélectionner a priori ses partenaires. Cette dimension d’outil d’une gouvernance rénovée des politiques forestières était à l’origine aussi forte que l’ambition de faire de ces critères et indicateurs des outils de pilotage pour les décideurs forestiers. Mais leur postérité a dépassé ce qu’imaginaient leurs promoteurs, bien que la démonstration de leur opérationnalité et de leurs bénéfices n’aient pas encore été solidement établie.

Indicateurs de gestion durable et enjeux forestiers des politiques publiques

Depuis 1995, dans le cadre du processus paneuropéen des conférences ministérielles pour la protection des forêts en Europe, la France établit tous les cinq ans des indicateurs de gestion durable pour les forêts françaises métropolitaines. Les quatre publications successives actuellement disponibles à ce sujet nous renseignent ainsi, au gré des six critères formulés en 1993 à Helsinki pour la gestion durable des forêts, sur le développement dans le temps de l’état des forêts françaises et des activités qu’elles engendrent. Elles conduisent aussi à s’interroger sur la mesure dans laquelle ce suivi répond aux grands enjeux forestiers des politiques publiques, y compris la lutte contre l’effet de serre et l’adaptation au changement climatique. Elles suggèrent enfin des améliorations à court, moyen ou long terme qui viseraient à renforcer le passage d’une description statistique à une vision stratégique, ainsi que l’harmonisation et la cohérence des informations, et à étendre les cadres juridique, politique, institutionnel et géographique des indicateurs de gestion durable des forêts.

Braucht der Wald in Europa ein verbindliches Abkommen? | Do forests need a binding agreement at European level?

The ministers of the 46 member countries of Forest Europe, as the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) is now called, will decide at the conference in Oslo in June 2011 whether they would like to convert the existing process into a legally binding forest agreement. Switzerland fundamentally supports the establishment of such an agreement and has participated in the corresponding clarification processes. This contribution presents the developments made up to now, and explains the advantages such an agreement would have for Switzerland and the obstacles that remain to be overcome.

Probability- and model-based approaches to inference for proportion forest using satellite imagery as ancillary data

Estimates of forest area are among the most common and useful information provided by national forest inventories. The estimates are used for local and national purposes and for reporting to international agreements such as the Montréal Process, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, and the Kyoto Protocol. The estimates are usually based on sample plot data and are calculated using probability-based estimators. These estimators are familiar, generally unbiased, and entail only limited computational complexity, but they do not produce the maps that users are increasingly requesting, and they generally do not produce sufficiently precise estimates for small areas. Model-based estimators overcome these disadvantages, but they may be biased and estimation of variances may be computationally intensive. The study objective was to compare probability- and model-based estimators of mean proportion forest using maps based on a logistic regression model, forest inventory data, and Landsat imagery. For model-based estimators, methods for evaluating bias and reducing the computational intensity were also investigated. Four conclusions were drawn: the logistic regression model exhibited no serious lack of fit to the data; all the estimators produced comparable estimates for mean proportion forest, except for small areas; probability-based inferences enhanced using maps produced increased precision; and the computational intensity associated with estimating variances for model-based estimators can be greatly reduced with no detrimental effects.

Assessing national compliance with international forest policy processes – the role of subjective judgments

Several international policy processes with sustainable forest management (SFM) as a common goal have emerged during the past two decades. Based on an empirical study from Norway, this paper analyses the role of subjective judgments in assessing national compliance with three international forest policy processes, and the implications for determination of the effects of these processes. The Expanded Programme of Work on Forest Biological Diversity, the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe and the United Nations Forum on Forests, including its predecessors, collectively provide more than 600 recommendations for SFM. While it is nothing new that SFM encompasses value questions, this paper is a systematic review of where in a process of assessing national compliance the role of judgments is most profound. The paper shows that the multiple objectives of the forest recommendations, references to national circumstances and provisions for stakeholder involvement lead to differing opinions about the degree of conformity between international recommendations and national situation, i.e. compliance. These differing opinions mean different prospects for the international processes to have effects, because only implementation, or active responses to international recommendations, constitutes effects. The roles of judgments and values are recommended topics for further investigation. Factors influencing how compliance is assessed, and consequently the degree to which implementation is deemed necessary, require specific attention. Due consideration to substantive and methodological choices in determining national changes and in separation of other sources of influence will provide a better basis for informed discussion of compliance with and effects of international forest-related policy processes.

Il legno morto nei boschi italiani secondo l’Inventario Forestale Nazionale

Deadwood plays a key role in the functioning and productivity of forest ecosystem and it is an important feature for assessing and monitoring biodiversity. The third Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) has recognized the importance of this forest component at the European level. More recently the national forest inventories have tried to harmonize the procedures including the quantitative and qualitative measurements of deadwood. This paper reports on the methods and results of Italian National Inventory of Forests and Forest Carbon Sinks (INFC) and compares the deadwood data with the results of other main European inventories and some local studies. In Italy the volume of deadwood (logs, snags and stumps) is on average 8.8 m3 ha-1.

Background, main results and conclusions from a test phase for biodiversity assessments on intensive forest monitoring plots in Europe

Abstract: The Forest Biodiversity Test phase Assessments (ForestBIOTA) project was carried out on 97 intensive monitoring plots located in 12 European countries. It aimed at the development and test implementation of monitoring methods for forest biodiversity across Europe. More specifically it covered the fields of (i) stand structure, (ii) forest deadwood, (iii) ground vegetation and (iv) epiphytic lichens. A forest type classification was applied in addition. The project took into account policy requirements stated by a number of political processes and institutions including the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ministerial Conference for the Protection of Forests in Europe, the Environment for Europe Ministerial Conference and the European Union. Whereas detailed results of the assessments are presented in additional publications (Stofer et al. 2007, in prep, Meyer et al. 2007, submitted), this paper draws a number of general conclusions and gives recommendations for future development of forest biodiversity monitoring in Europe.

The Sustainable Management and Protection of Forests: Analysis of the Current Position Globally

The loss of forest area globally due to change of land use, the importance of forests in the conservation of biodiversity and in carbon and other biogeochemical cycles, together with the threat to forests from pollution and from the impacts of climate change, place forestry policy and practice at the center of global environmental and sustainability strategy. Forests provide important economic, environmental, social, and cultural benefits, so that in forestry, as in other areas of environmental policy and management, there are tensions between economic development and environmental protection. In this article we review the current information on global forest cover and condition, examine the international processes that relate to forest protection and to sustainable forest management, and look at the main forest certification schemes. We consider the link between the international processes and certification schemes and also their combined effectiveness. We conclude that in some regions of the world neither mechanism is achieving forest protection, while in others local or regional implementation is occurring and is having a significant impact. Choice of certification scheme and implementation of management standards are often influenced by a consideration of the associated costs, and there are some major issues over the monitoring of agreed actions and of the criteria and indicators of sustainability. There are currently a number of initiatives seeking to improve the operation of the international forestry framework (e.g., The Montreal Process, the Ministerial Convention of the Protection of Forests in Europe and European Union actions in Europe, the African Timber Organisation and International Tropical Timber Organisation initiative for African tropical forest, and the development of a worldwide voluntary agreement on forestry in the United Nations Forum on Forests). We suggest that there is a need to improve the connections between scientific understanding, policy development, and forestry practice, and also the cooperation between the various international initiatives and processes, so that the international framework is more effective and its influence is extended geographically.

A European Network in Support of Sustainable Forest Management

Summary Today, sustainability is a political priority at the regional, national, and international levels. It is thought to be attained by political instruments and adequate management. The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) is the European forum and reference for sustainable forest management (SFM). The MCPFE has developed criteria and indicators for implementing SFM in Europe. However, there is a gap between policy makers, stakeholders, and researchers with regard to the implementation of the criteria and indicators. A research strategy is proposed by the COST Action E25-European Network for Long-Term Ecosystem and Landscape Research, whereby these gaps are identified, and means for bridging these gaps are suggested. For example, economic and social-cultural criteria and indicators are poorly developed or missing-there is a need for disciplinary and multidisciplinary research. Furthermore, the knowledge base of forests and forestry is well developed in Europe, but could be better communicated to parties involved. Decision-support systems and “landscape laboratories” are suggested as tools for bridging this gap. Furthermore, resources are scarce, so new approaches should be developed that take advantage of existing resources and experiences. Information systems for maintaining and developing long-term information, and increased European collaboration are needed to harmonize existing and future initiatives.

A forest typology for monitoring sustainable forest management: The case of European Forest Types

Sustainable forest management (SFM) is presently widely accepted as the overriding objective for forest policy and practice. Regional processes are in progress all over the world to develop and implement criteria and indicators of SFM. In continental Europe, a set of 35 Pan-European indicators has been endorsed under the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) to measure progress towards SFM in the 44 countries of the region. The formulation of seven indicators (forest area, growing stock, age structure/diameter distribution, deadwood, tree species composition, damaging agents, naturalness) requires national data to be reported by forest types. Within the vast European forest area the values taken by these indicators show a considerable range of variation, due to variable natural conditions and anthropogenic influences. Given this variability, it is very difficult to grasp the meaning of these indicators when taken out of their ecological background. The paper discusses the concepts behind, and the requirements of, a classification more soundly ecologically framed and suitable for MCPFE reporting than the three (un-informative) classes adopted so far: broadleaved forest, coniferous forest, mixed broadleaved and coniferous forest. We propose a European Forest Types scheme structured into a reasonably higher number of classes, that would improve the specificity of the indicators reported under the MCPFE process and its understanding.

SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE ON THE PROTECTION OF FORESTS IN EUROPE PROCESS

The aim of this study is review of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) concept in the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE). In the concept of sustainability, United Nation Conference on Environment and Devolopment (UNCED) is held in Rio de Janerio in 1992, caused to begin a lot of regional interferences amongs to MCPFE. MCPFE is a high-level political initiative for co-operation involving around 40 European countries for the purpose of addressing common opportunities and threats related to forest and forestry. Process of MCPFE is important to national and regional level, for Turkey. Therefore, in light of various studies and published reports of European Commission and European Union, SFM approach at pan-European level in process of MCPFE was evaluated in this study. Keywords: The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE), Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), European Union Forestry Strategy.