![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() | ||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Everything? Think about air pollution in Scandinavia, forest fires in the
Mediterranean, soil erosion, or forest species becoming extinct because
of damaging forestry practices. In Europe, it is the quality of the forests
that causes concern, not their quantity.
Over centuries, forests have been profoundly changed by humans.
Old-growth forests only remain in isolated patches, amounting to less
than 2% of all forests in Western Europe.
The biological values of the other 98% have fallen dramatically. Forest
managers tend to be tidier than nature likes, removing dead and hollow
trees and fallen branches, and replacing natural forest with plantations,
one and the same tree species in rank and file. In doing so, they condemn
many forest-dwelling animals and plants to homelessness.
But forests do not just supply wood: they provide clean freshwater and
act as water reservoirs; they protect against erosion and avalanches;
they offer relaxation and inspiration; they even contribute gastronomic
delights like deer, berries and mushrooms. And they play host to an
amazing variety of animals and plants.
World leaders recognized the multiple functions of forests when they
signed a forest protocol at the UN Conference for Environment and
Development (UNCED) in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro. A year later, forest
ministers from 34 countries met in Helsinki to kick-start the *pan-European'
or 'Helsinki' process on forest policy.
The Helsinki process laid down four resolutions on forests, including a
definition of the desired future forest management, the so-called
'sustainable forest management'. Six criteria, with roughly 100 indicators,
were established in order to measure status and trends in forest
condition in Europe.
The fundamental flaw of this process is that many of the targets for
forest management are so vague that it is impossible to understand what
they actually mean. It is like having a superb compass but no idea where
to go.
To repair this flaw, WWF created the European Forest Scorecards. They
should be seen as an analytical tool that measures progress towards
ecological, social and economic sustainability in Europe's forests.
The Scorecards are based on the Helsinki resolutions and the forest
principles of UNCED, and the objectives for future forest management are
clarified. The Scorecards should be developed further in cooperation with
all stakeholders, starting with the development of common clear
objectives for forestry in Europe. All countries should realize that they still
have a lot to improve in their forests.
The European Forest Scorecards 1998
The WWF European Forest Scorecards are a new, cutting-edge tool for
judging forest quality, mainly using current forestry statistics produced by
individual countries.
In the Scorecards, WWF has chosen 91 indicators in five categories -
environment, production, social & cultural aspects, protected areas and
pollution. The emphasis is on quantitative and descriptive indicators and
on data quality: insufficient data will lower a country's score.
WWF experts evaluated each indicator and allocated a score. The
scores were merged into one final, comparative value per country which
rates the way in which nations (or regions) treat their forests. The final
scores are an indicator of a country's performance but not an exact
measurement.
The Scorecards are much more than just a ranking: the detailed analysis
in the main report will help all countries to identify where best to direct
their efforts and resources towards improving their forests - and hence
their future scores.
WWF intends to publish the next scorecards in 1999.
|