Why Forest Sustainability and Accountability of Its Use Is Challenging

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Principles of Sustainability
Challenges that Affect Forest Sustainability
Accountability Challenges
Recommendations
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Sustainability is an important concept in environmental conservation. Its importance is especially critical in forest management because sustainable forest management is an exclusive discipline of environmental science.

The importance of embracing sustainability in forest management is pivotal to the discipline because reversing the losses in forest cover through the adoption of sustainable practices help to restore, improve, and conserve our environment. Moreover, the conservation of forests is an important tool for reducing the level of greenhouse gas emissions.

Baker (699) says if there is a concerted effort among all stakeholders to protect our forest cover, it is possible to reduce the rate of global deforestation by nearly 50%. By protecting forests, Baker (700) says it is possible to reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 700 million TCO₂e annually.

The conversion of forests to agricultural land has mainly caused the loss of forest cover. This trend has been ongoing for a long time. It is only until recently that there have been increased efforts to reverse, or stop, this trend. Most of these efforts manifest as part of a wider quest by world nations to develop environmental policies that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Baker 701).

As seen from the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which embodies the vision of governments to protect the world’s forest cover, many nations have supported the protection of forests (Kumar 562).

Recent efforts to protect the environment, as seen from the 2007 Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests, which also aimed to preserve the world’s forest cover, support the effort by different governments to conserve forests (Kumar 562).

However, the preservation of forests and the accountability that supports this effort has proved to be a challenge for most countries. Certainly, many factors prevent the achievement of comprehensive forest preservation and accountability.

This paper explores some of the main challenges that prevent the effectiveness of sustainable forest management. Uniquely, this paper explores this issue by understanding what factors prevent the accountability and sustainability of forests around the world.

Since the concept of sustainability is at the centre of this analysis, the understanding of the challenges that prevent the effectiveness of sustainable forest management depends on the grasp of the concept of sustainability. According to ISL (1), there are four main principles of sustainability.

Principles of Sustainability

Environmental Protection

The concept of environmental protection aims to help people to ease their dependence on natural resources. Indeed, if the dependence on natural resources increase to unsustainable levels, it may be extremely difficult to reverse the negative changes that may affect human health or the environment (ISL 1).

The adoption of alternative strategies that help to improve economic activities without relying on natural resources like wood or fossil fuel helps to achieve the reduction of the dependence on natural resources.

Ecosystem Conservation

The principle of ecosystem conservation thrives on the preservation, enhancement, and regeneration of nature through the adoption of eco-friendly practices (ISL 1). Recycling materials that are used is one way of regenerating energy, and possibly supporting the existing ecosystem.

Waste-Free Output

“The health and prosperity of humans, communities, and the Earth depend on nature’s capacity to re-concentrate and restructure wastes into new resources” (ISL 1). From the above statement, the re-concentration and restructuring of wastes into new resources may help to achieve a waste-free output.

Nonetheless, the adoption of a waste-free output in the society depends on the achievement of cradle-to-cradle solutions in the manufacture and consumption of materials. This process aims to prevent the accumulation of harmful substances that may affect nature.

Social Equity

The principle of social equity is the last principle of the four principles that guide sustainability. The principle of social equity aims to empower people to achieve social solutions and activities that allow them to achieve their personal goals through the adherence to the above three principles. Social equity greatly depends on the fair and efficient use of resources to achieve these personal goals.

The adherence to the principles of fairness and equality may also help to achieve social stability and cooperation in the society. However, even as societies strive to adhere to these rules of sustainability (especially in forest management); there are several challenges that prevent the realisation of these goals. One such challenge is the lack of a right model of sustainability

Challenges that Affect Forest Sustainability

The lack of a Right Model of Sustainability

Vogt et al. (8) say that historically, people have been unable to live within their economic, environmental, and social footprints. The influence of economic growth has especially broken the boundaries of environmental sustainability. People have therefore been equally unable to understand what works to improve a country’s environmental record, and what issues affect environmental sustainability in the first place (Vogt et al. 8).

Part of the problem that plagues that quest to find the right model for sustainability is the consistent quest by people and governments to tackle sustainability issues on an individual basis, as opposed to an interconnected series of problems. Therefore, as people solve environmental issues, individually, it becomes difficult to develop a broader understanding of how one environmental action affects another.

This flawed approach is closely associated with the “disciplinary approach” of solving environmental problems, and it is equal to solving a symptom rather than the disease (Vogt et al. 8). Most of the solutions that some experts tout as possible remedies to forest protection therefore manifest as “bandage” solutions that will possibly not solve the problem permanently.

The above intrigues show that the destruction of forests is a deep phenomenon that worsens through the lack of a standardised model for preventing the further destruction of forests.

If a person were to compare this principle to the development of acne in a teenager, the possible solutions that some people tout as possible remedies for the prevention of forest destruction would be similar to the treatment of one pimple (Vogt et al. 8).

Here, it would be difficult to know where the other pimple would come from, or when it would emerge. Such is the calamity that explains the challenging nature of forest sustainability and accountability. However, the introduction of a right model for sustainability would possibly provide a lasting solution to the sustainability of forests.

Population Growth and Rising per Capita Consumption

While global warming concerns contribute to the push for the formulation of policies that would protect forest cover, the increasing global population, and the rising per capita consumption among most countries, complicate the goal of protecting forests.

The rising global population is increasing the demand for food and fibre around the world. Indeed, Southgate says, “the human population, projected to surge beyond nine billion by 2050, will inevitably place new pressures on tropical forests and on the urban-rural fringe in countries such as the United States” (29).

Experts project that the demand for food may grow to about 99% in 2050 (the demand for food in the year 2000 was only slightly above 58%) (Baker 700). More specifically, the increased demand for meat and grain around the world is increasing the fears among conservationists of a possible rise in deforestation (Baker 700).

Conservationists have also expressed similar concerns from the current nature of bio-energy policies (Baker 700). Current bio-energy policies support the bio-energy expansion because some experts say direct and indirect land use changes may lead to net losses in ecosystems, as opposed to net gains (Baker 700).

Owing to the rising global population and per capita consumption, there is a huge possibility that reducing the level of agricultural cover (to preserve forests) will cause the global prices of food to rise significantly.

From the above understanding, it is correct to say one main challenge that prevents the sustainability of forests is the difficulty in striking a balance between conservation concerns with the growing need to feed the growing global population.

To solve this problem, it is important “To accomplish the policy targets of greater forest protection, restoration, and productivity, economic incentives must alter the market pressures driving land-use trends, particularly as the human population continues to grow” (Baker 699).

Dominance of Market Forces

Albeit most governments still control and preserve most forests, the growth of market forces erodes their influence in forest governance. The strength of the market comes from the power that the law gives to individuals for formal ownership of natural resources.

The dwindling influence of governments in forest management stems from the neo-liberal ideologies of the 1980s, which supported the ownership of property as a fragment of capitalism (Silva 138). Now, in the wake of global climate concerns, the legal provisions that protect private ownership of resources limit the influence of governments in controlling forest management. This problem pits private interests against public interests.

Through the above tussle, the influence of the state in protecting natural resources has diminished as market forces dominate as the stronger socioeconomic power.

From this understanding, critics of the neo-liberal school of thought have not only criticised the role of neo-liberalism in failing to protect public interests in natural resource use, but also criticised the same school of thought for promoting environmental destruction (Silva 138).

Some scholars also share this school of thought because they say governments should not allow people to use natural resources as they wish (Silva 138).

Instead, they propose that the decentralisation of the management of natural resource is the best method for conserving the environment. For example, shifting the management of natural resources from private ownership to state ownership is one example of decentralising the management of natural resources.

Accountability Challenges

Mixed Responsibility

The concept of accountability may sound simple to many people, but it is not. Its complexity is especially profound in forest management because different stakeholders have different interests in the conservation of forests.

Through the mixture of the interests of different stakeholders, it is crucial to mention that the concept of accountability usually raises the issue regarding which institution holds the ultimate responsibility of forest conservation (Irland 2). The level of responsibility usually differs, depending on the structure of the government.

For example, in the US, the responsibility of conserving the environment usually spreads across different levels of government and property owners (Irland 2). Since responsibility is spread across different people, the main question that emerges in such a context is who is mainly responsible for the conservation of forests?

The Aggregation Problem

The world is ecologically diverse. In fact, in one country, there may be so much ecological diversity that “averages” may be insignificant. This statistical flaw often mirrors the flaws in the conservation of forests, because while it may be good to know the percentage of forest cover, or the quantity of forest stock, it may be difficult to interpret this statistic in the context of forest management (Irland 2).

In fact, an attempt to interpret this statistic in the wider context of forest management may be ambiguous and at best, limited. Some countries have different criteria for categorising their forests. For example, Nature Conservancy alone has more than 1500 forest categories (Irland 2).

This situation shows that using the diverse set of forest categories and the ecological diversity that characterises some countries may make it extremely difficult to produce helpful conclusions about the conservation of forests.

Accountability Leakages

Besides analysing the barriers that undermine the sustainability of forest management, a greater problem of accountability plagues forest management efforts. It is difficult to ensure accountability in forest management because of the possibility of leakages when different governments try to perfect their forest management policies in one region.

For example, there is an unclear relationship regarding the extent of prudent forest management in one region and its ability to spur agricultural growth in another region (Baker 700).

Stated differently, if one country improves its conservation efforts, by preventing the conversion of forests to agricultural land, there is a strong possibility that the constrained agricultural activities may emerge elsewhere. This possibility means that there is a leakage in conservation efforts.

Through the analysis of the above situation, there is a huge possibility that the benefits accruing from improved forest conservation efforts in one region may offset through a resultant degradation of forests in another region.

Researchers have usually understood the presence of leakages in the conservation of forests to be common in the production of bio-fuel, but recent studies have refuted this fact by saying, leakages may lead to indirect land use changes in other sectors of land use (Irland 2).

Some researchers show that forest conservation and other forest mitigation efforts may lead to the increase of food prices and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions in another region (Baker 700). The variability of the leakages may vary significantly because Baker (700) says that the leakages may range between 10% and 90% of the total efforts aimed at conserving forests.

If the above situation emerged from a practical point of view, it is important to include the example of the effect of greenhouse gas mitigation that the government introduced in America in 2010. Through the introduction of this policy, forest mitigation measures increased, thereby decreasing the rate of conversion of forests to agricultural land. Consequently, there was a shortfall of agricultural produce in the market.

The level of agricultural imports consequently increased. This development also led to an increase in the price of agricultural products. More specifically, the level of US agricultural exports also significantly declined.

Baker (700) says that the reduction in the level of agricultural exports from the US led to international leakages where other countries used their agricultural land to increase agricultural output. This way, they were able to fill the market gap created by the reduction of agricultural produce from the US.

Recommendations

There needs to be a careful balance between developmental needs and natural resource needs. Historically, developmental needs have maintained a balance with natural resources through preservation. This measure has protected forests and other natural resources from serious encroachment.

Based on the flaws of forest management described above, there needs to be a more serious approach for conserving the environment. Introducing country parks provide one such approach. A few countries have realised significant progress in forest sustainability because their governments have strived to protect their environments through the introduction of country parks.

A few countries and cities that have witnessed these successes include New Zealand and Hong Kong (Winstanley 323). Hong Kong has done a commendable job in this regard because the government has gazetted about 40% of its land as country parks (thereby free from human encroachment) (Winstanley 323).

New Zealand has also shown the same success because the government has gazetted about 24% of its land as protected (Winstanley 323). This result explains the reason New Zealand has a good record of forest conservation. Its success is evident because the world’s average of protected forest cover is about 10% (Winstanley 323).

Despite the positive progress made in Hong Kong and New Zealand in preserving its forest cover, some analysts still express their pessimism regarding the potential for such progress to sustain natural ecosystems in the end (Winstanley 323).

Therefore, a more comprehensive understanding of forest management needs to demonstrate the protection of the natural ecosystem. Stated differently, there needs to be a significant commitment by governments to dictate how people interact with their environment, outside protected areas.

Conclusion

After weighing the findings of this paper, it is correct to say that forest management is a complex issue. The main issue that arises in this context is the difficulty in striking a balance between developmental needs and conservation needs. Throughout history, developmental needs have largely dictated the intensity or effectiveness of conservation efforts.

This has been a real danger to sustainability. The growing global population and the rising costs of food prices also seem to complicate this issue because they put enormous pressure on the environment to sustain this demand. Consequently, conservation efforts have taken a back seat as more pertinent and important issues of meeting immediate human needs take centre stage.

The dominance of market forces in dictating the use of natural resource also complicates the quest for the adoption of sustainable practices in forest management because it has created a situation where private interests dominate public interests. Most governments have therefore lost control of conservation efforts, as private landowners wield most of the power.

For the few regions that strive to practice effective forest management, accountability issues still emerge as great deterrents of their efforts. The lack of a proper model of accountability, ecological diversity, the aggregation effect, and leakage effects highlight some issues that undermine the accountability of forest sustainability.

There needs to be a concerted effort among all stakeholders to mitigate the effects of these challenges in proper forest management because comprehensive sustainable efforts may not thrive under current conditions that favour short-term human developmental needs at the expense of long-term developmental needs.

Works Cited

Baker, Justin. “Opportunities and Constraints for Forest Climate Mitigation.” BioScience 60.9 (2010): 698-707. Print.

Irland, Lloyd 2005, Forest Inventory: Role in Accountability for Sustainable Forest Management. Web.

ISL 2013, 4 Principles Guiding Sustainability. Web.

Kumar, Madan. Natural and Anthropogenic Disasters: Vulnerability, Preparedness and Mitigation, New York: Springer, 2010. Print.

Silva, Eduardo. Challenging Neoliberalism in Latin America, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Print.

Southgate, Douglas. “Population growth, increases in agricultural production and trends in food prices.” Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development 1.4 (2009): 29-35. Print.

Vogt, Kristiina, Patel-Weynand Toral, Shelton Maura, Vogt Daniel, Gordon John, Mukumoto Cal, Suntana Asep and Roads Patricia. Sustainability Unpacked: Food, Energy and Water for Resilient Environments and Societies. London: Routledge, 2012. Print.

Winstanley, Tesse. “HKSAR’s nature conservation policy – a new formulation for an old problem?” Property Management 24.3 (2006): 322 – 341. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!