The study by the Science-Policy Programme of the International Union of Forest Research Organizations emphasizes the need for a shift in forest governance policies. It urges policymakers to move away from solely focusing on forests as carbon sinks and to consider their value as complex ecosystems and providers of social welfare benefits. The report highlights the limited success of international forest governance in slowing down deforestation and calls for a more holistic approach that incorporates the social values of forests and prioritizes sustainable management over market-based solutions.
Despite some progress in reducing global rates of tropical deforestation, the study warns of a growing sense of crisis over climate change, biodiversity loss, and social and economic inequalities. The urgency of the climate crisis has resulted in the commodification of forests for their carbon sequestration potential, leading to the emergence of new markets that prioritize short-term economic gains over long-term sustainability and justice. The report criticizes the current international forestry governance system for its focus on pledges and targets related to deforestation rates, which it argues fails to adequately address the diverse needs and demands connected to forests worldwide.
Lead author Professor Daniela Kleinschmit of Freiburg University emphasizes the importance of considering forests as ecosystems and the impact they have on people who live near or depend on them. She stresses the need to assess who benefits and who may lose out from forest governance policies, taking into account the varying needs and priorities of different regions. Professor Kleinschmit rejects the “win-win” marketing narrative that suggests purchasing certain products negates any environmental impact, highlighting the spiritual and cultural significance of forests in some countries. She calls for a more nuanced and culturally sensitive approach to forest governance that considers these aspects.
Another lead author, Professor Constance McDermott from the University of Oxford, highlights the increasing popularity of market-based approaches to forest governance, such as carbon trading and zero deforestation supply chains. However, she warns that these approaches may perpetuate inequalities and have negative effects on sustainable forest management. McDermott advocates for non-market-based mechanisms, such as state regulation and community-led initiatives, as alternative pathways for just forest governance. The report advocates for a more inclusive and just approach to forest governance that considers the diverse social, economic, and cultural dimensions of forests and their importance for human well-being.
The study’s findings align with a separate report by the Arbor Day Foundation, which underscores the health and wellbeing benefits of forests and green spaces. Together, these studies emphasize the multifaceted role of forests beyond their carbon sequestration potential and call for a more holistic approach to forest governance that prioritizes sustainability, social values, and justice. As the global climate crisis escalates, it is crucial for policymakers to consider the diverse needs and demands connected to forests and to develop inclusive and effective governance policies that benefit both ecosystems and the communities that rely on them.
