PRESS CONFERENCE BY INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS

21 February 1997

Press Briefing

PRESS CONFERENCE BY INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS

19970221 FOR INFORMATION OF UNITED NATIONS SECRETARIAT ONLY

The Co-Chairmen of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Forests, Martin Hodgate and Manuel Rodriguez, whose fourth and final session ended today, told a Headquarters press conference this morning that the Panel should not be judged solely on whether or not it led to the establishment of a new intergovernmental binding legal instrument on forests. The group had arrived at a large number of proposals for action, and the value of its work would be recognized whatever it ultimately recommended on the issue of an international convention. Mr. Hodgate described what had happened as "rather like a pyramid". The process had drawn together a very wide range of views from governments and the non-governmental sector. That, he noted, was "quite apart from whether or not we end up recommending -- as I believe we will -- a continuing dialogue which will address whether there should be movement towards a new legal instrument".

The report of the Panel contained the ingredients of probably the most complete plan of action that had ever been agreed upon for the world's forests, Mr. Hodgate continued. It also included techniques that would improve the assessment of forests on the basis of their sustainable management, their conservation and their sustainable development, as well as recognition of the diversity of the forest knowledge around the world. The Panel also discussed how financial, technical, scientific and other help could be given to countries as they developed their national programmes for sustainable forest management. He pointed out that the Panel had also drawn together in an effective, collaborative task force, United Nations bodies dealing with forests. Further, the Panel had been an invaluable intergovernmental forum for dialogue, and he hoped that dialogue be continued. It was also the wish of many delegations to promote action that would lead, as soon as possible, to the establishment of an intergovernmental negotiating committee on a possible legal instrument. On that point, some countries wanted quick action, while others advised caution.

Mr. Rodriguez said that the challenge before the world today was to implement the many proposals that the Panel had agreed upon, all of them related to diminishing or stopping the enormous scale of deforestation and forest degradation all over the world. He called upon all concerned to summon the political will to implement the proposals, noting that "we are very close to starting the process".

He explained that the Panel's recommendations would now go to the Commission on Sustainable Development, which would then recommend that the

special session of the General Assembly next June adopt the main recommendations. The timing was good, as the Panel was concluding its work before the special session. It was a great opportunity for Member States at the highest level to decide upon the main proposals for action.

How did the Panel break down in terms of those who wanted quick action towards a convention and those who did not? a correspondent asked. Who were the main players? Mr. Hodgate answered that he was not sure that that analysis was "altogether useful". In any case, a lot of countries had shifted positions. The European Union and Canada had been urging rapid movement towards a convention, while some other countries had reservations and doubts. A number of developing countries favoured moving towards such an instrument, while others believed there should be more dialogue to define what it would do, what needs it would meet, and how it would operate. Such countries wanted to make sure that it did not subtract from, rather than add to, the resources available to deal with the imperative questions of sustainable forest management and combating degradation and deforestation.

Continuing, Mr. Hodgate said there was not really a "traditional line-up" on the issue. Many active non-governmental organizations with outstanding track records in conservation had also voiced serious doubts about whether the time was right for a convention. They believed that attention should not be taken away from the many current priorities for action going forward. It was necessary to get the twin-tracks going to complement and reinforce each other. "Like the tracks of a well-laid railroad, you need both rails, so they have to be cross-braced and interlinked if the system is going to work." He urged that those countries and non-governmental organizations raising questions not be criticized, as it was beneficial to have constructive dialogue.

Mr. Rodriguez pointed out that the difference between the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and today's discussions was that in Rio, the issue of a convention was very much a North- South issue -- the North in favour, the South against. Today, the views were much more diversified. Furthermore, the issue of a convention was only one of 12 mandates before the Panel. There were many proposals for action in the report that would engender change, if implemented.

Asked if Israel was involved in the process, in view of that nation's work growing trees and maintaining them, Mr. Hodgate said it had not been involved in the current process, although it certainly had a lot of excellent practical experience planting trees in arid and semi-arid areas. Mr. Rodriguez added that the Panel was an open-ended one and all countries that were members of the Commission on Sustainable Development belonged. At the same time, any country that wanted to participate in its work could do so.

What kind of action would be possible without a convention? a correspondent asked. Mr. Hodgate replied there were hundreds of such actions. Indeed, most of the ideas in the report did not have a convention in mind.

Press Conference on Forests - 3 - 21 February 1997

For example, there had been some fairly advanced development of ideas about a diagnostic tool that would enable countries to identify more clearly the causes of forest degradation and deforestation.

Didn't the Biodiversity Convention cover those grounds? a correspondent asked. Mr. Hodgate said it did not entirely cover them. In any event, he went on, what was required was -- with the encouragement of the Conference of Parties to the Biodiversity Convention, its secretariat and governments -- that much more widespread action on the ground goes forward, particularly community-based action. "You do not deal with the forests of the world and their communities by pontificating here in New York", he added.

Mr. Rodriguez pointed out that it was important to remember that the discussion was about forests under the auspices of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Forests should be considered not as a sectoral issue, he said, but as an issue of sustainable development, recognizing that the forest problem was not an environmental problem, but a problem of development. It was necessary to address key social and economic issues, and many of the proposals had, as a common ground, the understanding that the forest people must be major actors in order to combat deforestation and to have a sustainable use of forests.

In addition, Mr. Rodriguez continued, the Panel had about 10 specialized workshops that contributed to its work. One of them had been on traditional forest management, taking advantage of the contributions of indigenous people and forests. It was clear from the work of the Panel that research on forests needed to be extended, as there were still enormous gaps in knowledge. Another area was the agreement on national forest programmes, which, he said, had been established as a key policy instrument, so that all governments would have comparable strategies.

On agreements or targets relating to the monitoring of the proposals, Mr. Hodgate said the Panel was still agonizing about the final wording of the report. It was likely, however, that there would be a request that the implementation of the proposals for action should be monitored through some continuing forum or mechanism for dialogue. If a convention came into being, one of its tasks would be to receive reports and to monitor the state of the forests, which the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) was currently doing. The question of targets did not feature in the Panel's report at the moment. That would be the next stage in the process.

Governments agreed to a huge package of plans and principles in Rio, a correspondent said. What had changed since then, by way of implementation, that would ensure that a new set of recommendations would have a better chance of implementation? In response, Mr. Rodriguez referred to what he said at the beginning -- the challenge was now to push for the necessary political will. He said that many delegations had been asking each other the same question about implementation.

* *** *