Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a forestry strategy for the European Union'
C 57/96 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 2. 2000 12. 7. The Committee of the Regions believes that good examples must be assessed before they are disseminated. For instance, external factors which might affect the impact of various measures must be carefully identified. The Committee of the Regions calls on the Commission to endeavour to include both practicians and researchers in a Europe-wide network. 12. 8. The Committee of the Regions believes that funding must be more readily available to encourage exchanges between Member State regional and local authorities. Similarly, the funding arrangements for an information centre and a European network must be finalised. The Committee of the Regions calls on the Council and the European Parliament to ensure the budget provides for this. Brussels, 18 November 1999. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a forestry strategy for the European Union’ (2000/C 57/16) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a forestry strategy for the European Union (COM(1998) 649 final); having regard to the Council resolution of 15 December 1998 on a European forestry strategy (1); having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (2); having regard to Regulation (EC) No. 1261/1999 of the European Parliament and Council of 21 June 1999 on the European Regional Development Fund (3); having regard to Regulation (EC) No. 1262/99 of the European Parliament and Council of 21 June 1999 on the European Social Fund (4); having regard to the Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on climate change ‘The European Union approach for Kyoto’ (COM(1998) 353 final); having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 31 January 1997 on the European Union’s forestry strategy (5); (1) OJ C 56, 26. 2. 1999, p. 1. (2) OJ L 160, 26. 6. 1999, p. 80. (3) OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999, p. 43. (4) OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999, p. 48. (5) OJ C 55, 24. 2. 1997, p. 22. 29. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 57/97 having regard to the recommendations of the Committee Opinion on the management, use and protection of forests in the EU (CdR 268/97 fin) (1); having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 24 April 1997 on the situation and problems of forestry in the European Union and potential for developing forestry policies (2); having regard to the decision by the Commission on 23 November 1998, acting under the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community to consult the Committee of the Regions on the matter; having regard to the decision taken by its bureau on 7 May 1999 to instruct Commission 2 for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries to prepare an opinion on the subject; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 184/99 rev. 2) adopted by Commission 2 on 30 September 1999 (rapporteurs: Mr Perkkiö FIN, ELDR and Mr Bertrand F, EPP); unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 31 plenary session on 17 and 18 November 1999 (session of 18 November). 1. Background 2. Introduction 1. 1. On 18 November 1998 the Commission issued a Communication to the Council, Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the European Union’s forestry strategy. 1. 2. The Commission states that the communication has two main tasks. It presents a coherent outline for a forestry strategy for the European Union and it is also the Commission’s response to the European Parliament’s resolution of 31 January 1997 on the EU’s forestry strategy. This calls on the Commis- sion to put forward ‘a legislative proposal on European forestry strategy’ in accordance with a number of considerations and recommendations within two years of the above date. In connection with the debate in Parliament, 1. 3. the Economic and Social Committee adopted an opinion on ‘The situation and problems of forestry in the European Union and potential for developing forestry policies’ on 24 April 1997. On 19 November 1997 the Committee of the Regions 1. 4. adopted an own-initiative opinion on ‘Management, use and protection of forests in the EU’, the aim of which was to demonstrate the importance of forests for regional develop- ment and prosperity. In addition, many opinions of the Committee of the Regions refer to forestry and the sustainable development of forests. 1. 5. On 15 December 1998 the EU Council of Ministers adopted a resolution on the European Union’s forestry strategy which is essentially based on the Commission’s report and guidelines. 2. 1. Within the EU there are about 130 million hectares of forest, in other words 36 % of its surface area. Some 87 million hectares of these are considered to be exploitable forests. European forests are characterised by diverse bioclimates and soils. The ownership conditions for forests differ from region to region. 65 % of forests are privately owned. The average surface area of forest estates is less than 5 hectares. In Greece and Ireland the state owns two thirds of forestland, whereas in Belgium, Spain, Italy, Germany and France local communities are significant forest owners. There are also considerable differences between regions in terms of the use made of forests and the benefits obtained from them. 2. 2. The Commission communication states that the forest strategy should be considered within the context of internatio- nally agreed principles and commitments. At the same time the forestry strategy is based on the recognition of the diversity of Europe’s forests, their multifunctional role and the need for ecological, economic and social sustainability. 2. 3. The Commission communication explains the current situation regarding forestry in the Community, outlines exis- ting Community forestry measures, and more generally exp- lains how forestry matters are being handled in the EU. Forestry issues of special concern are the conservation of the biological diversity of forests, the use of wood as an energy source, the role of forests in slowing down climate change and forestry certification. 2. 4. The main starting points for the communication are: (1) OJ C 64, 27. 2. 1998, p. 25. (2) OJ C 206 of 7. 7. 1997, p. 128. — the Community’s existing forestry measures C 57/98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 2. 2000 — the Commission proposal for forestry measures within the context of the Agenda 2000 rural development regulation, and — the Commission proposal for Community support for agricultural and rural development in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe which have applied for EU membership. 3. 1. 2. In practice the principles of sustainable management and use of forests are defined and implemented through national or regional forestry programmes or other instruments at Member State level. The aim of the EU’s forestry strategy is to complement national forestry programmes and to ensure that the benefits from Community measures are maximised. Community measures can then support national forestry leaving commitments made in policies by, international agreements to be implemented by Member States. for example, 2. 5. The European Union’s founding treaties do not make legal provision for a common forestry policy. The main objective of the strategy, namely the promotion of sustainable development and management of forests, should therefore be defined and implemented through national or regional forestry programmes or through other similar instruments at Member State level, as well as through action at the European Commu- nity level when, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, this can contribute added value. 2. 6. Within the EU the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests are vital concerns of existing policies like the CAP, rural development, environment, trade, internal market, research, industry, development coope- ration and energy policies. In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, 2. 7. the forestry strategy considers Community action beneficial, among other things, to rural development measures, the protection of forests from air pollution and forest fires, the development of forestry information and communication systems, research and development work, as well as develop- ment cooperation. Local and regional authorities have a twofold role in 2. 8. the debate on European forestry strategy: — firstly, as the authorities responsible for organising life in local communities, especially in rural areas; — secondly, as the managers of forestry estates, making them an integral element in the economics of the forestry sector. 3. 1. 3. issues Even without a common forestry policy, relating to the management and use of forests are vital concerns of existing policies such as regional and environmental policy. As forestry is highly important to the development of rural areas, forestry measures are often incorporated into rural development policy at Community level. The fragmentation of forestry matters at the EU level between different policies and directorates-general depending on the subject matter means that forestry measures and values are not necessarily viewed in an integrated manner in any context at the Community level. 3. 1. 4. The forestry strategy states that international forestry commitments stress the benefits of effective coordination between different regions in terms of their forestry policy. Forestry measures should be coordinated and communication and cooperation between different players should be stepped up. 3. 1. 5. At the Community level there is a Standing Forestry Committee which is comprised of representatives from Mem- ber States and the Commission. There are also two consultative committees. There are very limited resources within the Commission for the coordination of forestry issues, nor does the strategy propose any concrete measures for improving the situation. The Committee of the Regions is of the view that the implementation of the proposed forestry strategy requires greater input by the Commission in the forestry sector. Coordination within the Commission between the relevant and competent units should be organised as effectively as possible. 3. General considerations concerning the EU’s forestry strategy 3. 2. Sustainable forestry 3. 1. Forestry policy is the responsibility of Member States. 3. 1. 1. European forestry policy falls primarily to Member States as the Treaties on European Union make no provision for a common forestry policy. There is a particular desire to retain forestry and commercial activity relating to forests as part of the market economy. 3. 2. 1. The communication states that the forestry strategy is based on the recognition of the diversity, multifunctional use, as well the ecological, economic and social sustainability In view of the regional differences within the of forests. Community in terms of the structure, types of use and ownership of forests, this is the correct starting point. 29. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 57/99 3. 2. 2. The EU has also made some commitments to ecologi- cally, economically and socially sustainable forestry in several international forums. The principles of sustainable develop- ment and sustainable forestry were defined at the UN Conferen- ce on Environment and Development at Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Although the principles adopted there were not legally binding, they have served as the basis for the active, worldwide international negotiations on forestry over the last few years. 3. 2. 3. The international forestry debate continued from 1995 to 1997 in the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF), the work of which will be continued until the year 2000 by the Intergovernmental Forestry Forum (IFF). The aim is to institute a worldwide forestry agreement. The agreement should, as far as possible, be legally binding in order to have impact on the conservation, a sufficiently effective global sustainable use, management and development of forests. In spite of previous agreements and recommendations the pla- net’s forest resources and surface area are continuing to diminish. 3. 2. 4. At the European ministerial conferences (Strasbourg 1990, Helsinki 1993 and Lisbon 1998) European level com- mitments were made to respect the principles of sustainable management and use of forest resources. In this pan-European process the sustainable management and use of forests has been defined as preserving the diversity, productivity, capacity for renewal and vitality of forests, as well as allowing for important ecological, economic and social action to be taken both now and in the future at the local, national and global level, and ensuring that damage is not inflicted on other ecosystems. 3. 3. The economic significance of the forestry sector 3. 3. 1. The Commission’s communication states that the European Community’s forestry resources do not appear to be very extensive when compared with the boreal and tropical forests of other regions. However, following the accession of Austria, Sweden and Finland, the EU has become the world’s second largest paper and sawnwood producer, its foremost importer of forest products and third largest exporter of forest products. 3. 3. 2. The European Community’s forest resources are, therefore, of considerable economic significance. The current production value of the forestry industry amounts to close to Euro 300 billion and it directly and indirectly employs several million people. Similarly, 3. 3. 4. the strategy overlooks other ways of economically exploiting forests. This applies in particular to the use of forests for tourism and recreation which can both be of considerable importance to regions from the point of view of e. g. employment. The Commission is preparing a communication on 3. 3. 5. the forestry industry and improving its competitiveness. It is a particularly topical and interesting subject. In principle the wood resources of European forests which are now in the process of growing will increase the capacity of the forestry industry. At the same time, by raising the degree of wood-pro- cessing and developing new products, considerable added value will accrue to companies in the forestry sector. However, the market-driven forestry industry and the globalisation of markets are presenting both forestry industry managers and wood producers with a new situation. As stated earlier, the economic significance of the 3. 3. 6. forestry sector at the Community level has increased with the accession of Austria, Sweden and Finland. The link between forestry and the forestry industry now needs to be viewed in a more integrated manner in the EU. Maintaining the competiti- veness of the EU’s forestry industry is fundamental for the economy and for employment. 3. 4. The Agenda 2000 reform 3. 4. 1. The cornerstone of the strategy is the Commission proposal relating to the Agenda 2000 communication on the rural development regulation forestry measures. The rural development regulation was adopted in spring 1999. This comprehensively draws together rural measures so that the social and economic development of rural areas in its entirety, comprising employment, the environment and sustainable development, is treated as a top priority. The forestry measures in the regulation should be viewed as a part of this whole. 3. 4. 2. The rural development regulation includes the conti- nuation of the Community’s existing forestry measures as well as a host of new measures for promoting the sustainable management of forests and for trying to tackle specific problems, such as maintaining biological diversity, preventing climate change, or the use of wood as an energy source. Improving the state of the forest environment is to be one of the criteria for EU support. 3. 3. 3. The Committee of the Regions feels that the econo- mic significance of forests is not given sufficient prominence in the Commission communication on the forestry strategy. The document quite rightly stresses the importance of forests in rural development, preserving biodiversity and environmental considerations. However, too little attention is paid to the importance of wood production and considerations relating to the exploitation of forestry resources. To achieve the objectives of the regulation, technical support must be targeted mainly at groupings of forest owners and local authorities, covering large areas managed in a uniform manner. When both the ecological and regional economic significance of forests is taken into account, out of existing measures, a particularly important one is continued afforesta- tion in areas to be determined by the regions. The cost of C 57/100 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 2. 2000 afforestation, and the fact that the investment can only be recouped over the long-term, supports the case for having support programmes for this purpose. — the distribution and impact of Community measures at the regional level, and — whether they achieved their objectives. The reform will 3. 4. 3. increase the number of forestry measures requiring support. It will give greater autonomy to national policies, which — in view of the subsidiarity principle and the regional differences between forests — is to be welcomed. Member States themselves can, therefore, determine the priorities for support and financial assistance in their own national rural plans. Although in principle, greater support could be given to forestry, this is, however, entirely dependent upon the evolution of national funding. 3. 4. 4. The reform will increase the number of potential beneficiaries as EU support becomes less tied to agriculture. Forest estate owners, owners’ organisations and local authori- ties are all potential beneficiaries. Local authorities are a sizeable group at least in Spain, Germany, France and Portugal. In addition to the support 3. 4. 5. from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund regulated by the rural development regulation, support from the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund can also be used for forestry. The new regulations on these were also approved in June 1999. The Regional Development Fund can be used to support both productive investments and infrastructure projects of benefit to employment and economic development in support regions. Another possible target for support is the construction of adequate road links in remote regions in order to make the exploitation of forest resources viable. The Social Fund can be used, among other things, to support increased training in the forestry sector. 3. 4. 6. Some sources estimate that between 1994 and 1999 the EU has supported forestry in the Union to the tune of some 2. 5 billion euros. The support has been channelled mainly into southern Europe, in particular Spain, Germany, France and Ireland. The EU has used about half of the total forestry support to fund forestry programmes on agricultural land. The other half has been directed at improving forestry efficiency, market development and environmental measures, as well as repairing environmental damage. 3. 4. 7. The Agenda 2000 reform will create new opportuni- ties for using EU resources. Indeed, one shortcoming of this forestry strategy may be that the impact of Community measures targeted towards forestry to date has not been comprehensively evaluated. The evaluation of support policy requires knowing: — the total amount of Community resources that have been directed towards forestry measures, 3. 4. 8. A common EU objective should be to use Communi- ty resources as effectively as possible. Closer monitoring of forestry support in the future would make it easier to evaluate the impact of support and to develop the system of support. The Committee of the Regions believes it is important for forestry programme support policies to respect the functioning of the market and to guarantee effective competition policy in forestry product markets. 3. 5. The threats facing forestry 3. 5. 1. Common EU measures are needed in particular to prevent threats to forests, the most serious of which are air pollution and forest fires which spread widely and cross borders. These can have a particularly detrimental impact at the local and regional level. National measures are essential for combating these threats, and the EU will support them through the measures contained in the Agenda 2000 reform. This includes the drive to cut cross-border pollution levels. The Committee of the Regions believes that these EU support measures are extremely important. 3. 5. 2. Forests have a special role to play in slowing down climate change. Climate change is caused by greenhouse gases, of which carbon dioxide is the most significant. Forests harness carbon and therefore function as carbon sinks. Carbon harnessing can be promoted by improving forest conservation and management, by expanding forest area, by replacing fossil fuels with wood from sustainably managed forests, and by replacing products which consume a great deal of energy with wood products. Having approved the so-called Kyoto protocol, the 3. 5. 3. EU has committed itself to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Commission has issued a communication on climate change and the European Union’s strategy on the measures to be taken as follow-up to the Kyoto environmental summit. 3. 6. Wood as an energy source Increasing the use of wood as an energy source will 3. 6. 1. reduce the carbon dioxide emissions generated by energy production, increase the self-sufficiency of energy production, create the conditions for new business activity particularly In addition, the among SMEs, and increase employment. harvesting of wood for combustion has a beneficial impact on forest management and the economy. 3. 6. 2. The EU’s energy policy aims to increase the use of renewable energy sources. This also entails significantly increasing wood-based energy production. The European Commission can promote the development of technological know-how in this field by, for example, supporting research and training. Support from the Structural Funds can be used to promote the emergence of new users and companies in the field. 29. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 57/101 3. 7. Certification 3. 8. Usable and standardised information on Europe’s forests The setting up of an environmental labelling system 3. 7. 1. is the most important topic of the current debate on forestry. Inevitably, the issue of forest certification is also raised in the Commission communication on forestry strategy. Certification is defined as the verification, by an independent third party, that the forests which have been granted the certificate are managed in a sustainable way. Certification can be used to inform consumers and customers whether the products they buy have been produced from wood which comes from sustainably managed and used forests. 3. 7. 2. By international standards, European forest manage- ment is of a particularly high calibre. In the 1990s in particular, the principles of sustainable management and use of forests were supposed to become an essential element of both decision-making in the field of forestry policy and forest planning. Forest certification can serve to demonstrate the positive practical progress made in forestry and thereby to promote trade in wood products. 3. 7. 3. There are two alternative systems of European forest certification available. They are the pan-European PEFC label promoted by forest owners and the forestry industry, and the longer-established FSC system developed by environmental organisations. European forest owners have not generally approved the FSC certification, because it is not in their view suitable for small-scale family forestry in Europe. The FSC is, however, in use in some parts of Europe and it is currently being adapted in order to make it more compatible with European conditions. 3. 7. 4. Pan-European efforts are being made to develop the PEFC label into a type of umbrella arrangement for future national certification systems. This will ensure that the system takes each country’s conditions into account. The reaction to the development of the PEFC system has generally been positive. Howeverit would be good to involve environmental organisations in its development. The Commission communication welcomes the de- 3. 7. 5. velopment of the pan-European certification system. The strategy states that the Commission is considering complemen- tary action, for example, legal instruments for harmonising the basic requirements of voluntary certification and labelling initiatives. Certification is exclusively a matter for market partners. forest certification will be beneficial The Committee of the Regions believes that the 3. 7. 6. development of for Europe’s forestry and forestry industry. Certification can act as an effective tool for communicating the high standard of European forestry management. The certification system should be able to take account of the small-scale nature of European forestry as well as regional differences in the structure, ownership conditions and forms of use of forests. The debate on certification will probably extend to other natural resources in the future, whereupon the experience gained from forest certification can be put to good use. 3. 8. 1. The introduction of the forestry information and communication system (Efics) is one aspect of the forestry strategy. The aim is to obtain comparable and objective data on the Community’s forestry sector. The system is intended to contain relevant information about Community measures relating to forestry as well as basic information on Member States’ national or regional forest policies and programmes. In addition it will gather information and analyse the future development of the forestry sector with respect to trade, industry, employment and environmental issues. These are ambitious objectives. At the same time, 3. 8. 2. there is an ever-growing need for standardised data, whether it be for the introduction of pan-European criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry management, the monitoring of data on threats to forests, the development of certification systems, and the evaluation or monitoring of Community measures. The Committee of the Regions welcomes action 3. 8. 3. intended to improve the accessibility and quality of data. This also provides opportunities for developing communication systems at different levels, which can be used to improve cooperation between players in the forestry sector and to provide better basic information on forestry measures to a wider public. 4. Conclusions 4. 1. The Committee of the Regions believes that sustainabi- lity should become the principle for the management and use of forests. This should encompass ecological, economic and social sustainability. The Committee of the Regions stresses that the signifi- 4. 2. cance and conditions of forestry and the forestry industry, as well as patterns of forest use, vary considerably from region to region. It is, therefore, sensible for decision-making in this area to respect the subsidiarity principle — in other words each Member State should draw up its own forestry policy. 4. 3. The Committee of the Regions believes it is important that, in addition to national forestry policies, the EU should draw up a common forestry strategy, as in any case forestry comes up in many aspects of the Community’s work. In order to implement the common strategy the Commission needs to step up its involvement in the forestry sector and increase coordination between different players, for example by strengt- hening the role of the Standing Forestry Committee. C 57/102 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 2. 2000 4. 4. The Committee of the Regions considers that the forestry strategy has quite rightly stressed the importance of forests for rural development, the conservation of biodiversity and environmental considerations. Too little attention has been paid to the economic exploitation of forests. However, in extensive forest regions, the exploitation of the wood resources and other products is the main form of forest use, and this means that it is certain that forestry will remain a source of economic prosperity and employment in Europe. Forests are also of considerable economic importance for tourism and recreation in some regions. The economic importance of forestry must also be reflected in the EU’s support for forestry research. Among other things, future R&D work should take account of the ‘forestry-wood chain’ which was set up and implemented under the FAIR programme. 4. 5. The growing use of wood as an energy source — which helps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — is increasing the economic and employment significance of forests. The Commission should contribute to technical expertise in this area by supporting research and training. The Committee of the Regions feels it is important for 4. 6. the Commission to evaluate more carefully the effectiveness of the Community’s forestry measures and their regional impact to date. Efforts to achieve the objectives of the forestry measures linked to the Agenda 2000 reform should also be actively monitored. The Committee of the Regions believes that only limited in order to avoid support should be given to forestry, Brussels, 18 November 1999. distortions of competition and ensure that market forces are respected. In this connection it should be remembered that forestry cannot always be measured by economic yardsticks, since there are certain mountain and geomorphologically sensitive regions where the most important function of forests is to protect the soil and the surrounding areas from land-slides, avalanches and flooding. 4. 7. Taking into account the EU’s considerable role in directing and resolving international forestry issues, the Com- mittee of the Regions believes that the EU should make it an explicit objective to achieve the same level of sustainable forestry management worldwide as that which exists within the EU. 4. 8. The Committee of the Regions supports the develop- ment of voluntary certification systems, as certification can be used to demonstrate the high level of forestry management in Europe and to promote the trade and competitiveness of wood products. The certification system should be able to take account of the small-scale nature of European forestry, as well as the regional differences in the structure, ownership conditions and forms of use of forests. The Committee of the Regions stresses that Commission measures to harmonise forestry certification systems should take account of the fact that these systems are market-directed, voluntary instruments in which the main players are producers, industry and the purchasers of wood products. 4. 9. The Committee of the Regions stresses that the Euro- pean forestry information and communication system (Efics) should be developed in order to obtain comprehensive and harmonised data on the European forestry sector. This will also create better conditions for communication and information in general. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER