Back to the future – where are we heading?

2. Back to the future – where are we heading? EESC seminar, 27 – 2 – 2007 These views expressed are purely those of the speaker and may not in any circumstances be regarded at stating an official position of the European Commission ! EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

3. Current EU Framework • Member States’ Forest Policies • EU Forest Strategy + Action Plan • Standing Forestry Committee, Council Working Group, Advisory Committees • Scope of actions occur within the margins of a number of Community policies EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

4. “Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards” (Vernon Sanders) One must give credit to the serious efforts being made by foresters to breathe life into forest policies and meeting the growing demands of our urbanised Societies EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

5. “Nothing endures but change”(Heraclitus) • The basics of EU forest framework is relatively static since 1998 • The impact of the EU Forest Strategy mainly remains confined to a circle of forestry specialists • The debate is stagnating on governance questions and focusing on a cliché confrontation of environment versus economic interests EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

6. “Change your thoughts and you change your world” (N.V. Peale) • New trends in land use, climate change, energy market, • Global economic playing field, new market-based initiatives, increasing interferences between policy domains Question:How to be at the right time, at the right place, where forest relevant policy decisions are taken ? EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

7. What approach (not) to take?(1) “Wait and see” Risk: forest policy decisions will be taken more and more by other policy areas “the perfect bureaucrat everywhere is the man who manages to make no decisions and escape all responsibility” (Brooks Atkinson) EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

8. What approach (not) to take?(2) “Debate on a future EU Constitution” To introduce the forest policy coordination issue in the text of a future Treaty Risks: • If successful, potential impact unknown, • Current discussions not favourable EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

9. What approach (not) to take(3) “ a EU legal framework on forestry” Risks: • No agreement on which policy area such an initiative should be based • Multilevel governance problem (subsidiarity, sharing responsibilities..) EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

10. What approach to take ?(4) “Open Method of Coordination” (see Forest Action Plan) Positive experiences exist: ex. Council Working Group, allows “de-politisation” Limits: “talking shop”, proved only to work where there is common interest in acting, lack of commitment, link to political decision-makers relatively weak EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

11. Pragmatic approach ! • To implement the Forest Action Plan; • To forget about ever-lasting ideological debates on theoretical institutional and governance responsibilities which do not lead to any tangible outcome; • Within the given EU policy competences, to launch a few feasible, impact relevant policy initiatives of crucial interest for forest policies; EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

12. “Strong reasons make strong actions” (W. Shakespeare) • Global policy processes: climate change • Market for forest products: certification • Rural Development, Regional Policies: how to integrate forestry in the post 2013 strategies ? EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

13. Global policy processes We have the choice: UNFF, CBD, UNFCCC, ITTA, FAO, MCPFE…. EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

14. UNFF • Important discussion forum for foresters • Clear objectives for the future? • Global values and public goods such as climate, biodiversity and trade have already institutions governing them (UNFCCC, CBD, WTO respectively) • Council Working Group on Forestry leading the policy debate; EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

15. CBD • CBD COP-9 agenda 2008: revision of the CBD forest programme • Good cooperation between forest policy makers and environmental ministries EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

16. Climate Change(1) • Implementation of the existing framework • Negotiations of the post-2012 arrangements have started The most prominent challenge for forestry! EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

17. Climate change (2) • Adaptation discussion: monitoring • Carbon mitigation; policy priority on reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries • Substitution possibilities (industrial raw material, bio-energy) ACTION NEEDED: ex. COM foresees in 2008 a Communication on deforestation EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

18. Markets for Forest Products“Drive the business or it will drive you” • International timber trade: $ 140 billion (FAO, 2005) • Trade liberalisation • Technical and plant health specifications • Hot environmental issues: illegal logging and certification EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

19. Markets for Forest Products • Research & Education (tech. platform) • FLEGT Action Plan is implemented • Certification has developed from a fringe activity looked upon suspiciously by mainstream forestry and timber professionals to a generally accepted practice that is believed to improve the sector’s image EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

20. Certification(1) • Worldwide certified forest area now nearly 200 million ha (5%) • Europe and North America: 95% • Relevant to several EU measures: public procurement, eco-labelling, EMAS, FLEGT, climate change mitigation, bio-energy supply, state aids.. EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

21. Certification(2) • Certification system supporters concentrated on dispute and argument about the features, assets and shortcomings of each other’s preferred scheme, hence creating more confusion vis-à-vis customers and consumers rather than promoting SFM • Action to envisage: to elaborate COM guidelines on baseline criteria for credible forest certification systems EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

22. From political strategies to territorial reality • Employment, bio-energies, climate change, biodiversity, … broad policy challenges are becoming important land use policy issues when it comes to the transposition into practice in the Member States; • We are leaving theory land and moving into the messy world of practice, with all its complexities and contradictions; • Multilevel governance: coordination EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

23. Future policy changes may be expected • CAP reform, future implementation of Natura 2000 and Water FD, budgetary discussions for the period after 2013… • Drivers of integration include environmental priorities, employment, new focus on bio-energy… • Positive message needed; not “damage limitation” or avoiding anything that looks like a real commitment to which one would be held accountable, especially if it costs money EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

24. Our ecosystems are the productive engines of the planet • Healthy ecosystems provide society with a huge array of material benefits • Important natural heritage to protect and we should be proud of it • Natura 2000 not opposed to economic activity; site management tailored to local circumstances, taking into account nature conservation and economic development EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

25. “No problem can be solved from the same consciousness that created it” (Albert Einstein) • Reactionary, remedial approach in waiting for proposals from other policy sectors and try then to integrate forestry? EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

26. Active participation in the policy design process • Foresters need to start now to develop innovative ideas on their contribution to economic welfare and life quality in their regions • Win-win situations, highlighting major conflict areas… • Action: creation of a kind of independent think tank policy network (COM + EP, EESC, C o R..) EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

27. I hope I was able to pass my message ! “There is nothing a politician likes so little as to be well informed. It makes decision-making so complex and difficult.” (John Maynard Keynes) EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF

28. Thank youfor your attention EUCommissionDGEnvironmentRF