Asia Forest Partnership
Record of Second Meeting

Hyatt Regency Hotel, Yogyakarta, 9-10 July 2003

Background to the meeting

Asia Forest Partnership (AFP) - a multi-stakeholder Partnership for Sustainable Development formed to address issues of sustainable forest management in the Asian region - held its second meeting in Yogyakarta, Indonesia from 9-10 July 2003.

A total of 125 delegates and observers representing 13 governments, 10 intergovernmental organizations and 26 entities from civil society participated.

The agenda included the following main topics:

1. Forest and timber certification as a means to verify legality of timber sources
2. Forest fires and trans-boundary haze pollution
3. Reforestation and degraded land rehabilitation

The meeting was chaired by Mr. Susanto Sutoyo, Department of Foreign Affairs, Indonesia

Introductory presentations

The Regional Secretary, representing of the Governor of the Yogyakarta Autonomous Region, welcomed delegates to the city.

Mr. Wahjudi Wardojo, Secretary General of Indonesian Ministry of Forestry, representing Minister of Forestry Mohammed Prakosa, opened the meeting. Mr. Wahjudi emphasised the need in Indonesia to empower local people by providing opportunities to manage the forest on a sustainable basis. Indonesia saw AFP as a regional forum to provide structure and focus, and to set modalities for concrete actions aimed at ensuring an end to forest destruction. He emphasised that workable measures must result from the meeting's deliberations.

Representatives of the four Leading Partners gave their perspectives on the AFP. These included Mr. Paul Hartman of the Nature Conservancy, Dr. Markku Kanninen of CIFOR, HE Yoshiki Mine, Ambassador for Global Environment, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan and Mr. Koes Saparjadi, Director General, Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia. Ambassador Mine presented the G8 countries involvement towards conservation of forests, Japan-Indonesia joint announcement on the cooperation in combating illegal logging and trade of illegal timbers and wood products, 34th ITTC decision to support AFP, etc, in the context of significant progresses which have been made over the past year. He also stressed that the international and regional co-operations are making progress and multifold efforts are indispensable conditions for the success of the exercise. All agreed that the first meeting in Tokyo had set the stage and this meeting now had to make progress in defining AFP's goals and mode of working.

Mr. Mahendra Joshi, Programme Officer of the United Nation Forum on Forests (UNFF) gave a report from the recently held Third Session of the UNFF and outlined future activities. He pointed out that UNFF had recognised AFP's role and encouraged AFP to share its experience.

Mr. Yuji Imaizumi, Assistant Director, International Forestry Cooperation Office, Forestry Agency of Japan drew participants' attention to the papers on proposed steps to enhance AFP circulated before the meeting and presented alternative approaches for continuation of the Partnership, outlining three possible alternatives:

He reiterated that AFP should continue to involve a wide range of stakeholders, especially civil society, it should be action-oriented with a clear idea of direction, and it should add value to existing initiatives. However he also pointed out everything cannot be done at once - resources, time and manpower are limited - so focus should be on a limited set of activities. It was important to make a start and the meeting must decide where and how.

The following key points were made:

The presentations were followed by comments and questions from the floor including:

Presentations on main topics

Forest and timber certification as a means to verify legality

Presentations were made by: Mr. Ahma Bin Buang, Assistant Director, Economic Information & Market Intelligence, ITTO; Dr. Dradjad H. Wibowo, Director Executive, the Indonesia Ecolabelling Institute (LEI); and Mr Nyoto Suhardjojo, Badan Revitalisasi Industri Kehutanan (BRIK).

Mr. Ahma presented the results of a recent study, "Forest Certification: Pending Challenges for Tropical Timber", carried out by ITTO. The report found that developing tropical countries were lagging well behind in achieving certification and listed several important reasons, including difficulty, costs, lack of capacity, and lack of clear incentives. The conclusion was that in most cases certification in one goal was unrealistic and a phased approach was necessary. The element of legality verification should form part of this approach. Various issues cited included the emergence of different requirements and likelihood of confusion, how to communicate results to customers and stakeholders, conflicts between audit and advice, access to schemes by small-scale forest operations and economic feasibility.

Dr. Dradjad presented Indonesia's experience with its LEI system. The particular challenges were the wide gap between current forest management and the goal of sustainable forest management; the failure of the market to provide worthwhile incentives; social, industrial and tenurial conflicts; lack of will from forest managers and lack of capacity. If forest managers were to invest then a price premium of at least 5% would be needed. Indonesia supported the concept of a phased approach to certification but recognised the need to communicate the results clearly and avoid potential conflicts of interest. A final difficulty was the government policy environment and the need for predictability with regard to rules and regulations and issuance of licenses.

Mr. Nyoto presented the formation and mode of operation of BRIK - the Forest Industry Revitalisation Body. BRIK was set up on the basis of a joint decree by Ministers of Forestry and Industry to ensure a sustainable future for Indonesia forest industry. Subsequent support from the Ministers of Transportation, the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces and Chief of the National Police had been obtained to provide a harmonised system aimed at ensuring that all wood using industries and transporters had proper legal documentation. This documentation, which is based on a computerised system aims to prevent possession and transport of illegal timber products and detects anomalies such a fraudulent conversion ratios. Thus all shipments with BRIK endorsement were automatically claimed to be legal.

Discussions from the floor following the presentations emphasised the need to build on initiatives with real actions to curtail illegal logging. For example, specific goals for Indonesia should be set, such as: 2004 - no more cross-border trade in illegal logs; 2005 - no more illegal logs imported by Japan; 2006 - no more logs smuggled to China. Other issues focussed on the need to differentiate between forest certification and legality certification - not all certification systems checked legality and problem with assuming legality based on official documents alone when there was strong evidence that stolen timber often carried the necessary documentation. The delegate from WWF-Indonesia outlined his organisation's programme and suggested that similar localised solutions were needed elsewhere. AFP could act to co-ordinate such activities and reconcile differences.

Forest fires and trans-boundary haze pollution

Presentations were made by: Mr Mikihiro Inoue, Chief Advisor, Forest Fire Prevention Management Project Phase 2; Dr. Helmut Dotzauer, Team Leader, Integrated Forest Fire Management (IFFM); and Dr Marc Nicolas, Forest Fire Management Expert, and Mr. Djoko Setijono, Community Development Specialist South Sumatra Forest Fire Management Project.

Mr. Inoue gave a detailed description of the activities of the JICA-supported Forest Fire Prevention Management Project Phase 2. The project focuses on fire prevention in four national parks and includes early warning detection and daily updates of information from NOAA satellites which is posted on the project web site. Increased risks are foreseen as a result of illegal logging and especially in Sumatra, as the result of increasing estate crop plantations. Training and education - both of forestry personnel and local communities - are important and approaches to rehabilitating burnt areas are being developed.

Dr. Dotzauer described the GTZ Integrated Forest Fire Management Project in East Kalimantan. The impacts of fires from the area were felt widely in the region with haze affecting Singapore and Kuala Lumpur. Typical problems that needed to be addressed were: lack of a unified policy; lack of implementing regulations, inadequate institutional structures; and land tenure issues. Of these resolving institutional issues was seen as paramount. The decentralisation policy in Indonesia was one example, requiring development of interim approaches to co-ordinate between different levels of government. In the absence of regulations to implement forest fire laws, Memoranda of Understanding had to be developed to define roles and responsibilities.

Dr. Nicolas and Mr Djoko Setijono described the EC-supported South Sumatra Forest Fire Management Project. The main conclusions on the basis of experience since 1993 are that everyone has a role - the government, companies, communities, NGOs and donors. There is a need to improve capacity in all types of organisation, both by training and the provision of appropriate equipment. Key lessons were: enforce zero burning policies for large estate companies; involve local communities in fire control; use extension and socialisation to get messages across; and involve fire prevention in all agricultural and forest practices.

Reforestation and degraded land rehabilitation

Dr. Simmathiri Appanah, National Forest Programme Adviser Asia-Pacific, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, and Dr. Takeshi TOMA at CIFOR gave a presentation on opportunities for development of approaches to restoration of degraded land in the region. He stressed that understanding of the issues were nothing new and that applicable literature goes back to the 1930s although only recently, for example, with the development of tropical forest action plans, had solutions been seen as tools for development with emphasis shifting from technical solutions to poverty, the role of local communities and the benefits they can receive. The FAO programmes were described, including its network of demonstration sites. Priorities in devising solutions must include: broadening the range of goods and services provided; development of appropriate silvicultural systems for small farms; recognition of indirect services (such as environmental services); making cheaper finance available; adopting best technology; improved communications and market information; and developing and implementing better policies for preventing degradation and supporting rehabilitation.

Mr. Francois Wencelius, Manager, National Forest Programme Facility, Forestry Department, FAO, Rome, provided a background of the NFP facility. This responds to the IPF/IFF/UNFF processes linking the broader agenda of poverty reduction and international commitments through the informed participation of stakeholders. This moves emphasis away from the traditional project approach and helps source funding for country-led initiatives supported by linked "communities of practice". The NFP approach could lend itself to supporting some AFP activities.

Subsequent discussions from the floor covered all three agenda topics ranging from incentives for certified wood (limited premium at present - main argument is market protection), the need for importing countries to pass laws banning imports of illegal timber (Japan is promoting awareness but needs to do more - agreement with Indonesia is a first step), choice of burning for land clearing by poor people because it is cheapest (improved practices can give better fire control), how NFP takes decentralisation into account (facility doesn't provide answers but helps with process), and approaches to combining oil palm with timber trees to rehabilitate degraded land (may be difficulties when trees get bigger).

Plenary session on Working Group presentations

WG I: Forest and timber certification as a means to verify legality

Chair: Mr. Paul Hartman, TNC
Rapporteur: Mr. Rony Soerakoesoemah, ASEAN Secretariat

The Working Group identified a common understanding of how AFP could address the problem of illegal logging. A comparative advantage over other initiatives was that it was an equal partnership of government, business and civil society (still in early stages of identification) e.g. Japan-Indonesia linkages.

Possible themes to be considered covered a phased approach to certification, involving legality and sustainability; improving capacity to implement systems; clear consistent information from consumers on minimum requirements in their markets; and adoption of market driven/incentive based approaches.

Actions proposed in the group included:

The following requirements to achieve the stated objectives were identified:

WG II: Forest and timber certification as a means to verify legality

Chair: Dr. Dicky Simorangkir, MoF-Tropenbos Kalimantan Programme
Rapporteur: Mr. Nandang Prihadi, Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia

The meeting agreed that the AFP is a useful and important forum since it is much more informal and wider than ASEAN, and is not political. The AFP can develop partnerships between members and assist each country and also disseminate the results and share information between each other and the media to search funding.

AFP should focus on specific activities:

Forest fire management actions to be taken for each country are:

WG III: Reforestation and degraded land rehabilitation

Chair: Dr. Simmathiri Appanah, FAO
Rapporteur: Dr. Takeshi Toma, CIFOR

The Working Group posed the question: "What do we want through AFP?" The key points of a Type II project are:

It was agreed to start with "Category 2" (active, action-oriented information exchange) and then move to "Category 3" (joint action with commitment of resources, supported by information exchange). This will focus on low-key information sharing with the addition of identification of high-priority issues that merit targeted monitoring, assessment, research and potentially coordinated or joint action by some or all AFP partners.

Identified key issues for reforestation/rehabilitation include: policy, economics/ investment, technology transfer, community involvement, institutions/capacity building

Participants' concerns with each issue included:

The WG Chairman suggested that participants should bring these issues back to their institutions and feedback should be sent to the organizing committee. The participants hoped to share actual proposals for next actions as listed below:

It was identified that many of the above-mentioned activities already had been or are being conducted by partner organisations. Participants have agreed to visit others' web sites for mutual acknowledgement of the common goal.

Participants are encouraged to send their own information on "Who are we?, What have we done in Rehab? What are we doing on Rehab?" to afp@cgiar.org and tabulated information of the potential partners for Rehab will be sent back to those who have sent their information.

Final discussions

The final session focussed on ways to take AFP forward.

The view was expressed that the concept of "partnership", in which like-mined individuals at the level of both policy-making and implementation on the ground shared ideas, was valuable. The partnership had the following comparative advantages:

It was also noted that synergies and hence cost savings between areas were evident - for example illegal logging and forest fires shared many common features.

However it was also acknowledged that there were many other initiatives, often with overlapping goals and that care was necessary to avoid duplication.

A large number of activities had been suggested. Now to move forward some concrete commitments by all partners were needed, but it was still unclear how activities can be transformed into work plan. Some questions were:

The subject of who should do what was raised and the idea for individual volunteers or small groups to take forward some of the ideas was suggested.

CIFOR was available to act as a clearinghouse on land rehabilitation

Mr. Yuji Imaizumi offered to assist with the consolidating voluntary regional UNFF submissions and announced that Japan would host an International Expert Meeting on the Development and Implementation of National Codes of Practice for Forest Harvesting" during the week of November 17, 2003. He noted that inputs were needed from other partners.

It was suggested by the Chairman, and generally agreed, that following the meeting the four leading partners should meet and develop a way forward with some concrete actions.

A "back-to-back" date and venue for the next meeting was suggested with the International Expert Meeting on Forest Harvesting, the week of November 17, 2003 in Kisarazu City, Chiba Prefecture, Japan. This was generally agreed upon.

The meeting was closed by Tatsuya Kajiya, Director-General, Private Forest Department, Forestry Agency of Japan. He noted that the meeting had been a first opportunity for partners to discuss the next steps or concrete actions to be taken. He noted that the exchange of views among participants with a wide range of backgrounds and interests, might have illuminated different views and expectations on AFP; however, he suggested that such diversity of views and expectations could be the strength of this kind of partnership and that understandings and mutual respect among partners should be one of the basic principles for AFP.

Mr Kajiya urged all partners to continue their active support and participation, and to try to expand the partnership to a broader international community. He noted that the partners had reached a consensus that they should move from discussions to addressing concrete actions and although initial steps may be very small due to limited resources, time and manpower available for each partner, he hoped that the initiatives would yield steady progress, and eventually lead to more significant movements.

---

Back to Index