Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on 'The European Union's Forestry Strategy'
23. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 51/97 Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘The European Union’s Forestry Strategy’ (2000/C 51/23) On 29 April 1999 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an additional opinion on ‘The European Union’s Forestry Strategy’. The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 16 November 1999. The rapporteur was Mr Kallio and the co-rapporteur Mr Wilms. At its 368th plenary session on 8 and 9 December 1999 (meeting of 9 December), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 53 votes to seven, with seven abstentions. 1. Introduction On 5 October 1999 the Commission adopted a 1. 1. 6. communication on ‘The state of the competitiveness of the EU forest-based and related industries’. 1. 1. From the own-initiative opinion of the Economic and Social Committee to an EU forestry strategy 1. 1. 1. The European Commission published a communi- cation on EU forestry strategy on 18 November 1998 in response to an own-initiative report by the European Parlia- ment. On 15 December 1998 the Council of Ministers adopted a resolution on EU forestry strategy based on the Commission communication. 1. 1. 2. The European Parliament drafted the so-called Thomas Report of 31 January 1997 on EU forestry strategy, taking advantage for the first time of the right provided by Article 138b of the Treaty to draft own-initiative reports. In its report, the Parliament asked the Commission to draw up a proposal for an EU forestry strategy. 1. 1. 3. On 24 April 1997 the Economic and Social Com- mittee adopted an own-initiative opinion (1) on the situation and problems of forestry in the European Union and the potential for developing forestry policies. On 19 November 1997 the Committee of 1. 1. 4. the Regions adopted an opinion (2) on the management, use and protection of forests in the EU. It The Commission adopted its Agenda 2000 report 1. 1. 5. in July 1997. included comprehensive reforms to the development of EU funding for the years 2000-2006, reform of the agricultural policy, as well as reform of both structural and regional policy. In March 1998 the Commission adopted the draft legislation for Agenda 2000 and the package was approved at the Berlin Summit on 26 March 1999. In this document forests are dealt with under the Regulation on Rural Development. 1. 2. The EU and international forestry policy 1. 2. 1. During the 1990s the European forestry debate has focused mainly on defining and implementing the principles of sustainable forestry. At the 1993 pan-European Ministerial Conference in Helsinki, Resolution H1 defined sustainable forest management as: ‘the stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national and global levels, and that does not cause damage to other systems’. Forestry must be practised in a way which is economically, ecologically and biologically and socially and culturally sustainable. The EU has also been actively involved in developing international forestry policy. The principles of sustainable development and sustainable forestry were established by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development at Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The forestry principles adopted at Rio have proved to be extremely important in recent years, even though they are not legally binding. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) has also proved to be an important forum for international forestry policy. 1. 2. 2. Since Rio, European countries have held three minis- terial conferences on the protection of forests (3) to promote implementation of the documents approved at Rio. This pan-European process is ongoing. Since the Ministerial Confer- ence held in Helsinki, European criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry have been agreed upon which encompass the basic elements of sustainable forestry, including economic, environmental, social and cultural factors. (1) OJ C 206, 7. 7. 1997. (2) OJ C 64, 27. 2. 1998. (3) Ministerial conferences: Strasbourg 1990, Helsinki 1993 and Lisbon 1998. C 51/98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 1. 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). One of the most important tasks of the IFF process is to reach agreement on an international, legally binding instrument. Such an instrument has a key role to play as it does not make sense to resolve sustainable forestry issues, such as trade, the environment and funding, in a separate and fragmented way. The EU’s forestry strategy also states that the Community supports the establish- ment of a global and legally binding instrument, which addresses the management, conservation and sustainable development of every kind of forest. 1. 2. 4. Other imminent challenges for forestry policy at both the European and international level include the role played by forests in controlling climate change and the promotion of credible forest certification systems. During the enlargement negotiations, it must be 1. 2. 5. guaranteed that forestry in the Central and East European Countries (the so-called CEEC countries) is conducted in a long-term economically, environmentally, biologically, socially and culturally sustainable way, and that, in this sense, the EU’s forestry strategy is also implemented by these countries. 2. The European Union’s forestry strategy 2. 1. Sustainable forestry and national forestry policies as a starting point 2. 1. 1. The starting point of the EU’s forestry strategy is the subsidiarity principle. This means that the sustainable management and use of forests are the responsibility of national forestry programmes and policies. The EU does not, therefore, have a common forestry policy along the lines of its common agricultural policy. As the Council of Ministers states in its resolution, forestry and commercial activity related to forests should remain market-based (point 14). It is extremely important that forestry strategy be 2. 1. 2. based on the concept of sustainable forest management as defined in 1993 by the above-mentioned pan-European ministerial conference on the protection of forests. Sustainable forestry consists of a balanced combination of ecological, economic, social and cultural activities. 2. 1. 3. Although the forestry strategy is a very welcome document, it leaves open, inter alia, the question of how the forestry strategy will be implemented in the short- and long-term. The only indication of concrete measures is made in Agenda 2000. In addition, the strategy lacks clear assess- ments and analyses of existing measures as well as any vision for the future. Nor does it propose any concrete measures for solving current problems — instead it does little more than list existing EU forestry sector measures. 2. 1. 4. Some of the proposals made by the Committee in its earlier own-initiative opinion (1) have been incorporated into the forestry strategy. However, the opinion argued that to safeguard the interests of the EU’s forestry sector, it was necessary among other things for all Community policies to take account of their impact on the forestry sector. The EU also needs to substantially improve the coordination of EU forestry-related matters. These proposals have not been taken into account in the forestry strategy. 2. 2. Added value from EU-level measures 2. 2. 1. Although the subsidiarity principle should be retai- ned when forestry issues are being considered, EU-level cooperation can also be of benefit if Community-level action contributes added value to national measures. The involvement the Community in the forestry strategy is viewed as of beneficial to rural development measures, protecting forests from air pollution and forest the development of information and communication systems on forestry, research and development, and development cooperation, inter alia. Subjects of special concern to forestry include maintenance of the biological diversity of forests, promotion of the use of wood as a renewable natural resource and as an environmen- tally friendly energy source, preventing climate change, and forest certification compatible with European circumstances. fires, 2. 2. 2. The participation of the EU in international cooper- level will also ation at both the pan-European and global contribute essential added value by complementing national measures. 2. 2. 3. The EU’s forestry strategy does not address issues concerning the forestry industry , as the Commission’s direc- torate-general for enterprise has issued its own communi- cation (2) on the European forestry industry and on improving its competitiveness. In the Committee’s view it is, however, important for forestry and the forestry industry to coordinate their work in the forestry sector. This is the most effective way of promoting the use of wood and other forestry products, such as cork and resin as renewable and environmentally- friendly natural resources and materials from both the econ- omic and environmental point of view. An example of the added value which could result from such cooperation would be the drawing up of a publicity or information programme, which would enable a wider public to be informed about the use of renewable natural forest resources as a way of enhancing people’s well-being. One possible campaign of this kind would be to organise an EU year of forestry. (1) OJ C 206, 7. 7. 1997. (2) The state of the competitiveness of the EU forest-based and related industries, 5. 10. 1999, COM (1999) 457. 23. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 51/99 2. 2. 4. To ensure that sustainable forestry serves as the basis for a competitive European forestry industry, forestry must also be an economically viable activity. International trade in timber should also respect the principles of sustainable forestry and profitability. 2. 2. 5. The forestry sector is a particularly important source of economic prosperity and employment in the EU. The forestry industry alone employs roughly 5 million people. As a consequence, the EU should seek to improve the general environment in which the forestry sector operates and to ensure that forestry continues to play an important role as an employer in rural areas in the future. The development of forestry sector services and ensuring the right conditions for the development of the industry are therefore of fundamental importance. The significance of forestry as an employer is not limited to the wood-processing sector, but also includes biological production on forested land and the non-wood products of forests. Furthermore, forestry provides work for tree-fellers and other workers. One-sided measures which result in job losses should be avoided. In addition, support should be provided for measures which create new jobs and which also provide retraining for a skilled workforce. 2. 3. Future challenges to forestry in the EU 2. 3. 1. In the European Union 65 % of forest land is privately owned and there are 12 million individual forest owners. The crucial role of family forestry is not always given sufficient attention in the European debate on forestry. Coordination between individual forest owners is an important instrument for achieving a balance between supply and demand in the timber market. The Committee assumes that the application of EU competition rules will allow such coordination through- out the Member States. Forestry is economically important to many family forest owners. The economic importance of forests and for example, the effectiveness of timber markets have not been emphasised sufficiently in the forestry strategy. In addition, in many EU countries a few large multinational companies dominate the market. It is important to remember that economically viable forestry also helps to maintain diversity, as well as social and cultural sustainability. Suf- ficiently profitable forestry helps to ensure that all aspects of sustainable forestry are taken into account. This means that part of the price of wood as a raw material is redirected back into maintaining the ecological and social balance of forests. Non-wood forest products such as cork, mushrooms and berries are also important sources of revenue. 2. 3. 2. The EU’s forestry strategy should provide more explicit support for the smooth functioning and promotion of trade in wood and processed wood products in line with the principles of sustainable forestry. These basic starting points must be taken into account in the WTO negotiations on world trade which are about to start. The same objectives must also be taken into account in the EU’s development cooperation policy in the forestry sector. 2. 3. 3. The Committee welcomes the fact that the forestry strategy seeks to improve coordination of forestry matters within the Community. However, genuinely concrete pro- posals on improving cooperation are lacking. The resolution of the Council of Ministers also emphasises the benefits which can be gained from effective cooperation. At present the Commission has a number of departments specialising in forestry issues, which means that these are dealt with in a very fragmented way across various Commission directorates- general. In the external relations DG forestry issues are dealt with from the EU’s external relations perspective, in the enterprise DG from the industry perspective, in the compe- tition DG from the competition perspective, in the employ- ment and social affairs DG from the employment perspective, in the agriculture DG from the agricultural and rural develop- ment perspective, in the development cooperation DG from the development cooperation perspective, in the environment DG from the environmental perspective, in the research DG from the research perspective, in the regional policy DG from the regional policy perspective, and in the energy DG from the energy perspective. However, 2. 3. 4. implementation of the forestry strategy alone would require greater involvement in the forestry sector and more effective cooperation between existing players in order to ensure that sustainable development in forestry related matters is managed in an integrated manner. In addition, the number of issues on which the Commission requires forestry expertise has grown considerably during the 1990s. As a result the Rio de Janeiro Conference on Environment and of Development, forestry and environmental policy have taken on a more international dimension than before. This trend is growing as the issues of biodiversity and climate change weigh increasingly heavily in decisions on forestry policy. The Council of Ministers also emphasises 2. 3. 5. the important consultative role played by the Standing Forestry Committee, the consultative committees on forestry and cork production and on Community forest clusters, whose expertise can be used to the benefit of all forestry measures within the framework of the Community’s existing policies. The last two committees can also help to ensure that all viewpoints are heard and incorporated in the decision-making processes. These committees must be given adequate resources. The forestry sectors of 2. 3. 6. the Central and Eastern European applicant countries are in need of Community support to manage, conserve and ensure the long-term sus- tainable development of forestry. Among the matters of concern are ensuring that forestry respects environmental considerations, and developing an ownership structure for forest resources. The Community should provide support for private forest ownership where reasonable, as well as improv- ing the institutional ability of the forestry sector to promote sustainable forestry. Equally, the considerable job creation potential of the forestry sector should be exploited. C 51/100 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 2. 3. 7. In ten of the CEEC countries the forest surface area amounts to approximately 34 million hectares. This would increase the EU’s current forest area by about a quarter. In addition these countries are planning to reforest a total of about 1,5-2 million hectares over an extended time period. Poland and Hungary in particular have ambitious forestry objectives. It is estimated that about a third of the forest surface area in the CEEC countries will be privatised, which would create some 3-4 million new private forest holdings. This would increase the number of private forest holdings in the EU from 12 to 16 million. 2. 3. 8. The main forestry policy objectives for the CEEC countries at present include forming associations of forest owners, training forest owners and workers and improving their skills, and increasing forestry efficiency. The multipurpose use of forests and in particular improving ecological and biological sustainability are also important aims. In the CEEC countries as much as several tens of per cent of forest have suffered from air pollution. EU programmes can be used to achieve these objectives. The Sapard regulation (1) can be used to provide support for forestry management and afforestation in agricultural regions, investment in private forestry estates, and the processing and marketing of forestry products. 2. 3. 9. The development of forestry and other wood-based business activity will come up against structural problems, as private ownership and related structures still need to be established. In the CEEC countries action plans aimed at the forestry sector have already been drawn up and support funds for promoting private forestry are currently being developed. Reaping the benefits of EU forestry support depends to a large extent on national funding which is very limited in some countries. The rapid economic growth expected in CEEC 2. 3. 10. countries represents both an opportunity and a threat for the current Member States. On the one hand their markets are undergoing rapid growth, but on the other, the new Member States may cause a mild shock in the EU’s wood market and labour-intensive mechanical wood/timber industry as timber prices and labour costs are still low for the time being in the CEEC countries. However, raising the degree of processing of forestry industry products, the standardisation of products and the exploitation of new technology pose considerable challenges for the CEEC countries in the near future. Costs are also expected to rise. Commission’s Agenda 2000 proposal. In Agenda 2000 for- estry is dealt with under the Regulation on Rural Development. Indeed, forests are important to rural areas and this must be taken into account if rural areas are to be developed in a harmonious way. The forestry sector is a particularly important source of employment for rural areas. Forestry and small- and medium-sized forestry industry companies are particularly important for ensuring that rural areas maintain their econ- omic vitality. On questions relating to rural development the Commission’s directorate-general for agriculture is assisted by the Star Committee, in which the Member States’ forestry experts are not represented unless they are invited to meetings individually. This exacerbates the above-mentioned concern about the lack of an integrated approach to forestry issues, as well as the inadequate coordination of forestry matters. 2. 4. 2. The Commission’s forestry support measures have until now lacked comprehensive mechanisms to evaluate how, and how much, Community money has been spent on supporting forestry. Nor is there any precise information on whether this support has helped to promote the stated objectives. Nevertheless, the paragraphs on forestry in Agenda 2000 open up new possibilities for using Community support. 2. 4. 3. The general objective is that support should promote the development of the economic, ecological and social status forestry in rural regions. A significant change is that of forestry on there are now more possibilities to support non-agricultural land. Environmental protection and nature conservation have also been given greater legitimacy as a basis for receiving forestry support. Furthermore, the paragraphs on forestry enable conventional forestry — in other words forest management and felling measures — to receive more explicit support. 2. 4. 4. The potential recipients of forestry support have been increased, and now include both local authorities as well as associations of forest owners. Before the EU enlarges to central and eastern Europe, the EU should work out how the forestry sectors of these countries are to be integrated into EU’s arrangements. 2. 4. Agenda 2000 2. 4. 1. legal The forestry strategy states that the Community’s framework for forestry is based essentially on the (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 of 21 June 1999, OJ L 244, 16. 9. 1999, p. 64. 2. 4. 5. Efforts should be made to use the EU’s common funds as cost effectively as possible. Furthermore, point 14 of the Council resolution on forestry states that forestry and commercial forestry activity should be guided primarily by market forces. The Commission must ensure that the forestry support provided by Agenda 2000 does not distort compe- tition in forestry product markets at either the regional or EU level. 23. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 51/101 3. Kyoto Protocol — Climate change and forests A United Nations climate agreement aimed at pre- 3. 1. venting climate change was also signed in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Its objective is to stabilise the greenhouse gas content in the atmosphere in order to prevent dangerous disruptions to the weather system as a result of human activity. The agreement entered into force in 1994. The Kyoto Protocol, which builds on the climate agreement, was approved in 1997. The EU signed the protocol in April 1998. The Kyoto Protocol commits industrial and developing countries to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in order to reduce the overall level of emissions by an average of at least 5 % in comparison to 1990 emission levels. The EU’s emission reduction level was set at 8 % compared to the 1990 level. Member States’ environmental ministers (Luxembourg 16-17 June 1998) have reached agreement on a so-called EU bubble, within which Member States decide on how to divide the emissions reductions. The emission reduction commitments must be achieved by 2008-2012, in other words during the first commitment period. According to the European Environmen- tal Agency, present efforts to achieve the emissions reduction commitments are not sufficient, which means that the EU needs to improve the effectiveness of its emissions reduction measures in all relevant areas. 3. 2. Carbon dioxide is the most significant greenhouse gas. Because forests harness carbon as they grow, and therefore function as carbon sinks, forests also play a fundamental role in climate policy. Carbon is contained in the soil as well as in timber. For example in Finland the amount of carbon contained in the soil is estimated to be almost ten times the amount bound in growing stock. As stated in the EU’s forestry strategy, forests can have an impact on the quantity of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by protecting existing carbon stores and carbon sinks, by expanding forest area, by replacing fossil fuels with wood from sustainably managed forests, and by replacing products made from non-renewable raw materials with wood products. Wood products, which harness carbon for long periods, are important for meeting the emission reduction requirements. 3. 3. The way in which the EU wishes to rise to the challenge posed by climate change is by supporting the use of renewable energy sources. The objective is to double renewable energy sources as a share of the total energy produced in the EU from the current 6 per cent to 12 per cent by the year 2010. This requires a considerable increase in the use of biomass in energy production. The proportion of bioenergy in the new, forest-rich Member States (in Austria, Sweden and Finland) is already quite large (12 %, 18 % and 23 %) (1). The European Commission has also drafted a com- 3. 4. munication on implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is restricted to studying carbon 3. 5. sinks, which result from human-related changes in land use and forestry including afforestation, reforestation and (1) Source: COM(97) 599 final, 26. 11. 1997. deforestation. Only action taken since 1990 will be taken into account. These restrictions do not take into account the principles of sustainable forestry nor the long-term time span which is characteristic of forestry. 3. 6. At Kyoto it was decided to exclude the question of harvesting from the study. Other excluded issues include products made from wood, even though they clearly also contribute to long-term carbon storage. When forest owners harvest wood, the Kyoto protocol counts the carbon stored in the forest as being released as soon as a harvest takes place. In practice, however, complying with sustainable forestry principles ensures that the carbon balance in forests remains stable over the long-term. When wood is harvested, the carbon is transferred to forestry industry products. 3. 7. A great deal remains to be done in implementing the Kyoto Protocol. One extremely significant problem concerns the definitions of different concepts. So far the obligations imposed by the protocol on the forestry sector should not, on the whole, present any interpretation problems. current situation, In order to clarify the 3. 8. the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is currently preparing an expert report on issues relating to carbon sinks in the Kyoto Protocol. This report — IPCC special report on land use, land use change and forestry — should be completed by spring 2000. The report is expected to contain a sector-wide overview of carbon sinks and sources. 3. 9. The Kyoto protocol contains three so-called flexibility mechanisms: international emission trading, joint implemen- tation and the clean development mechanism. The emission reduction objectives can be met either by national measures or by exploiting these Kyoto mechanisms. Joint implementation means a situation in which an industrial country invests in a project to reduce emissions in another developed country and then obtains the benefit from this emission reduction. The clean development mechanism allows industry and developing countries to carry out emission reduction projects between them. The details of implementing the flexibility mechanism will be specified more clearly in the expert report of the IPPC. It is not yet clear, for example, whether emission trading should be restricted. It must be ensured that timber plants located by forestry industry companies in developing countries do not, as a result of public or other similar support, distort competition in wood markets in the future. 4. Forest certification 4. 1. Basic principles of forest certification 4. 1. 1. Throughout the 1990s the forestry sector has had to face the shifting challenges posed by the question of sustainable development. Since the beginning of the decade, one response to these challenges has been to set up various kinds of market-based, voluntary certification systems. C 51/102 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 4. 1. 2. Forest certification is defined as a procedure in which an independent third party awards a certificate attesting that a forest is being managed and used sustainably in accordance with agreed standards. Forestry certification will help to inform consumers and customers whether the products they buy have been produced from wood which comes from sustainably managed and used forests. Certification is a market-based way of promoting sustainable forestry as well as a way of satisfying the needs of customers. When forest certification systems are set up, the principles of voluntariness, credibility, openness, cost-effectiveness and non-discrimination must be respected. 4. 1. 3. The sustainable use of forests has a long tradition in Europe. A stringent legislative framework and a very wide range of forestry policy tools are the best way of ensuring the sustainable management and use of forests in different countries. In Europe, forest certification can at most enable consumers to be active in demanding that the market provide products made from wood emanating from sustainably man- aged forests. Certification therefore promotes sustainable for- estry and, as a corollary, the marketing of wood products. 4. 1. 4. The EU has an important role to play in promoting the use of wood and other forestry products over other competing materials. Sustainable forestry will help to prevent wood products from being substituted with less environmen- tally friendly materials such as aluminium or plastic. Many consumers do not associate the use of plastic with oil drilling or with mining for the steel industry, which means that their environmental impact is not necessarily appreciated. 4. 2. Existing forest certification systems 4. 2. 1. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an inter- national body set up by environmental organisations in 1993 in Mexico. The FSC is comprised of three chambers representing economic, social and environmental interests. The FSC does not issue certificates itself, instead it promotes the sustainable principles and criteria defined by the FSC and the use of local forestry standards. It also accredits certification bodies and monitors their work as well as use of the FSC mark. The FSC has played a key role in the worldwide development of forestry certification. In addition, the pan-European forest certification 4. 2. 2. project (PEFC) was set up in August 1998, based on the resolutions of the Helsinki 1993 and Lisbon 1998 meetings of European forestry ministers. The objective of the PEFC is to establish an internationally credible forest certification system for the certification systems of different countries and their mutual recognition. The PEFC defines and lays down the basic requirements and working methods which must be achieved through the standards of each country’s certification system in order to be included in the PEFC system. The certification system seeks to establish a system which is suitable for small- and medium-sized family forestry. Representatives of family forestry, 4. 2. 3. local authority and state forestry, the forestry industry and trade drawn from 17 countries have all been involved in developing the system. The USA, Canada, Malaysia and Australia have also participated in the process as observers. Environmental and consumer organisations as well as trade unions have been invited to take part in an open discussion with PEFC representatives. The PEFC system started operation in June 1999. It also seeks to improve the contribution of the forestry sector to employment. 4. 3. The role of the EU in forest certification 4. 3. 1. Forest certification is also mentioned in the EU’s forestry strategy as one of the specific themes with regard to forests. The forestry strategy states, for example, that the Commission supports the above- mentioned pan-European forest certification system. the development of 4. 3. 2. Cooperation on forest certification can also be undertaken at EU level if desired by the Member States. The rapid progress of the pan-European forest certification system the European forestry sector is keen to has shown that undertake cooperation to promote sustainable forestry and the marketing of wood products. The EU should ensure that the certification systems in use within the EU comply with the principles of free trade and that they are transparent and impartial. Forestry certification systems will only have a realistic chance of market success if they win the approval of consumers and other interested parties. 5. Conclusions 5. 1. The Committee regrets that the EU’s forestry strategy does not contain sufficient concrete assessments and analyses of the existing Community measures and problems in the forestry sector. The Committee also calls for clearer objectives for the future which take into account the EU’s eastward enlargement and other developments affecting the forestry sector. 5. 2. The Committee welcomes the fact that the forestry strategy is based on the subsidiarity principle as well as the concept of economically, ecologically and biologically, and socially and culturally sustainable forestry. 23. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 51/103 5. 3. The Committee recalls that the forestry sector is an important source of employment in the EU. Indeed, the EU should promote both the implementation of the forestry strategy and the use of wood and other forestry products as a renewable and environmentally friendly material in order to improve the employment situation in the EU. The development of forestry sector services and ensuring the right conditions for the development of the industry are particularly important. 5. 4. The Committee feels that it is essential for the European Commission to play a greater role in the forestry sector in areas where Community-level action can contribute added value by reinforcing national measures. 5. 5. The Committee feels it is essential for the Commission to substantially improve the coordination of forestry issues between the different directorates-general so that sustainable development in forestry-related matters is managed in an integrated manner. The new Commission must substantially reinforce and activate the management and coordination of forestry matters, taking into account the rapidly growing importance of forests as one of the key areas for sustainable development. The forestry sector is of critical importance to the economic, social and environmental development of the EU. The Committee stresses the beneficial employment 5. 6. effects of the forestry sector, particularly for rural regions. Sustainable forestry also contributes to the balanced develop- ment of rural regions. 5. 7. The Committee feels that the European Commission must ensure that the new support provided for forestry by Agenda 2000 does not distort competition in regional or EU-level wood and other forestry product markets. The Committee calls for the use of this support to be monitored and for the use of Community funds to be evaluated on a continuous basis. The Committee feels that it is important that the 5. 8. communication issued by the Commission’s enterprise direc- torate-general on the EU’s forestry industry and its competi- tiveness is compatible with the forestry strategy. For the forest industry to be competitive, it must be based on profitable and sustainable forestry. Brussels, 9 December 1999. 5. 9. The Committee reiterates that the EU must respond to the climate change requirements at both the national and Community level, by promoting, for example, the use of renewable energy sources as well as wood and other forestry products. 5. 10. The EU must ensure that the principles of sustainable forestry are complied with when implementing the Kyoto Protocol. The Committee points out that forestry industry products function as long-term carbon sinks. The EU should also inform Member States more effectively about the possi- bilities for using the flexibility mechanisms. 5. 11. The Committee points out that forest certification is just one of many ways of achieving sustainable forestry and thereby promoting the marketing of wood products. The EU must ensure that the certification systems in use within the EU respect the principles of free trade and that they are voluntary, transparent, balanced and cost effective. 5. 12. The Committee calls on the EU to monitor carefully developments in the forestry industry and related activities in the CEEC countries and to undertake timely analyses of the opportunities, threats and challenges which the accession of the new Member States will bring for the EU. These analyses must be based on the conclusions of the Helsinki pan-European Ministerial Conference on the practice of sustainable forestry. The Committee feels that the EU should provide 5. 13. strong support legally for the establishment of a global, binding instrument for the management, conservation and sustainable development of every kind of forest, which com- plies with the forestry principles agreed at Rio. 5. 14. The Committee calls on the EU to participate actively in the international forestry policy debate and in decision- making in the IFF negotiations and in FAO. 5. 15. The Committee considers it important for the forth- coming WTO negotiations to take account of the principles of sustainable forestry in discussions on international trade in the forestry sector. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI C 51/104 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 APPENDIX to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee The following amendments, which received more than a quarter of the votes cast, were defeated in the course of the debate: Point 2. 2. 1 Amend the first sentence as follows: Although the subsidiarity principle should be retained when forestry issues are being considered, the Committee nonetheless urges that there be EU-level cooperation to ensure that Community-level action contributes added value to national measures. Reason It is very important that there be as much EU-level cooperation as possible in forestry and this should be expressed in the text. Result of the vote For: 29, against: 30, abstentions: 3. Point 2. 3. 7 Delete the third sentence, beginning ‘The Community should provide support. ’ and replace it with the following text: It is very important that there be on-going incentives for sustainable forestry. Given that the management of forests is in the hands of private individuals, government and other nature protection organisations, it is important to set up a framework within the EU for discussion of responsible forestry management. It would be more appropriate for the final sentence of point 2. 3. 7 to be made a separate point. Reason It is not for the EU to say that private forest ownership should be supported. There is a place for other organisations concerned with responsible forest management alongside the private sector. Result of the vote For: 27, against: 35, abstentions: 2