Forest Degradation Is A Serious Problem, Environmentally

Forest Degradation

INTRODUCTION

Rationale and background

Context Forest degradation is a serious problem, environmentally, socially and economically particularly in developing countries. It is estimated that as much as 850 million hectares (ITTO 2002) of forests and forest lands are degraded. Yet it is difficult to quantify the scale of the problem since at national and sub-national levels forest degradation is perceived differently by the various stakeholders who have different objectives.

Forest degradation has adverse impacts on forest ecosystems and on the goods and services they provide. Many of these goods and services are linked to human well-being and some to the global carbon cycle and thus to life on Earth.

Policy makers and forest managers need information on forest degradation. They need to be able to monitor changes happening in forests. They need to know where forest degradation is taking place, what causes it and how serious the impacts are in order to prioritise the allocation of scarce human and financial resources to the prevention of degradation and to the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded forests.

In addition, reporting on forest degradation is required to demonstrate efforts to tackle the problem and meet global objectives and targets. The proposed new Biodiversity Target includes a target on reduction of forest degradation. The agreement to establish a mechanism under the UNFCCC aimed at reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) in developing countries has added a political dimension and the potential availability of substantial funds to reward developing countries that manage to reduce the level of forest degradation.

Approach Under the umbrella of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 (FRA 2010) the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) and other partners, have initiated a special study to identify the different elements of forest degradation and the best practices for assessing them.

This work builds on existing processes and past initiatives that all rely on measurement of forest degradation. These include:  The first of the four global objectives on forests agreed to by members of the UNFF, which includes “increasing efforts to prevent forest degradation”;  The 2010 Target of the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) which includes an indicator on ecosystem fragmentation and connectivity both of which are related to forest degradation;  Nine eco-regional processes on criteria and indicators for SFM that have been operational since 1992;  Three past expert meetings on harmonizing forest related definitions including one in 2002 that made a recommendation for a core definition of forest degradation;  Experiences in other sectors and through the CPF.

The technical work has consisted of two aspects: 1. Providing a clear understanding of the concept of forest degradation. For this readers are referred to the Forest Resources Assessment Working paper number 154, “Towards Defining Forest Degradation” by Markku Simula;

1 2. Identifying and describing appropriate criteria and indicators for measuring forest degradation and from these developing guidelines for measuring forest degradation at local, country and global levels.

In order to achieve these, key components of the study have included: a. Questionnaires to FRA National Correspondents and a survey of existing country practices to establish what is being measured; b. The preparation of an annotated bibliography and an analytical study on definitions which provides a framework for the process; c. A series of case studies describing proven or promising methodologies and tools for assessing different aspects of forest degradation d. Technical meetings and discussions to review the results and recommend actions to improve measurement, assessment and reporting on forest degradation e. The preparation of guidelines on how to measure different aspects of forest degradation.

Purpose of the guidelines The guidelines presented in this document are intended to form the basis, a first go at providing some direction to countries on how they might measure forest degradation. They include a set of criteria and indicators, that can be measured relatively easily and that provide countries with information on the state of forest degradation.

The guidelines have been developed with the intention of helping countries to measure the state of degradation of their forests, both for their own use that they might be in a better position to identify areas for potential restoration and rehabilitation, and in order to report to international processes, which may potentially open the way for financial incentives and carbon credits.

While it is recognized that there are many factors that affect the state of a forest (and forest degradation), some of these, including policy, markets, globalization, institutional settings and land tenure, these remain out of reach in terms of measurability for our purposes.

It is anticipated that these guidelines will be updated in the future.

What is forest degradation? In general terms degradation is a change process within the forest, which negatively affects the characteristics of the forest. The combination of various forest characteristics (forest quality) can be expressed as the structure or function, which determines the capacity to supply forest products and services. Forests may be degraded in terms of loss of any of the goods and services that they provide (wood, food, habitat, water, carbon storage and other protective socio-economic and cultural values). Degradation is typically caused by disturbances, which vary in terms of the extent, severity, quality, origin and frequency. The change process can be natural (caused by fire, storm, drought, pest, disease) or it can be human induced (unsustainable logging, excessive fuelwood collection, shifting cultivation, unsustainable hunting, overgrazing). The latter can be intentional (direct) through for example excessive logging, overgrazing, too short a fallow period or it can be unintentional (indirect) for example through spreading of an invasive alien species or pestilence or road construction that might open a previously inaccessible area for encroachment. (Simula 2009)

A study by ITTO (2002), estimated that up to 850 million hectares of forest and forest lands might be degraded while the Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration (GPFLR) map that was presented in London in November 2009 suggests "there is a total area of lost and degraded forest lands of more than a billion hectares that is suitable and available for restoration".

2 Definition of forest degradation Forest degradation is broadly defined as:

The reduction of the capacity of a forest to provide goods and services

Beyond this core definition, perceptions regarding forest degradation are many and varied, depending on the driver of degradation and the main point of interest. In relation to REDD it is likely to entail a reduction in the capacity to sequester carbon, but a forest may also be degraded in terms of loss of biological diversity, forest health, productive or protective potential or aesthetic value.

In the absence of agreed operational definitions and assessment methods few countries have been able to report on the area of degraded forests or the degree of forest degradation.

Lund (2009) found more than 50 different definitions related to forest degradation targeted at different purposes. The FAO review of existing definitions (2009) has shown that many definitions are either very general or their focus is on reduction of productivity, biomass or biological diversity. Definitions that refer to multiple use forests or multiple forest benefits may consider forest values in a comprehensive manner, but are more difficult to use for international purposes in a consistent and transparent manner. From the perspective of international forest-related reporting, it would be desirable to have coherent, comparable and harmonised definitions for such key terms as forest degradation. This continues to be a challenge, not least because national circumstances have implications for how international definitions can be applied.

Purpose of the definition / Uses of information on forest degradation The generic definition of forest degradation provides an adequate umbrella at the international level and a common framework for developing more specific definitions for particular purposes. It is compatible with the ecosystem service approach.

Several purposes of definitions of forest degradation and related terms can be identified:  Monitoring the status and change in the degree of forest degradation including provision of associated goods (wood, fibre, non-wood forest products) and services (such as carbon emissions and sequestration, maintenance of biodiversity, degradation of land, soil and water resources, environmental and socio-economic impacts of forest degradation);  Reporting to international conventions and processes on the status and quality of forest resources in a country and compilation of international and regional level summaries;  Design and implementation of policies, programmes and forest management measures to take preventive and corrective action through restoration of degraded forests, rehabilitation of degraded forest lands and sustainable forest management;  Design and implementation of payment mechanisms or other incentive schemes for forest environmental services such as carbon offsets and conservation easements.

Elements of SFM and Management Objectives The approach draws on the agreed seven thematic elements of SFM1 (United Nations 2007) which have been elaborated in terms of Criteria & Indicators (C&I) under various regional processes2. The SFM elements provide a common framework for identification of forest

1 The elements are (i) extent of forest resources; (ii) forest biological diversity; (iii) forest health and vitality; (iv) productive functions of forest resources; (v) protective functions of forest resources; (vi) socio-economic functions of forests; and (vii) legal, policy and institutional framework. 2 FAO (2003)

3 characteristics and services which may be used in the identification of relevant components of forest degradation. The various C&I sets represent an important forest policy instrument which was developed mainly for monitoring and reporting on the status of forest management and the progress in the achievement of the SFM goal. C&I can be applied at national, sub-national and forest management unit (FMU) levels. Due to their nature and holistic approach, the C&I frameworks provide a useful tool for assessment of forest degradation (FAO 2009).

Using the seven SFM elements as a framework works because the elements describe the functions and state of the resource and thus forest degradation can be assessed in terms of its ability to fulfil these functions. A major difficulty with forest degradation has always been the imprecise and multiple, and often subjective interpretations of the term and the gradation it implies (FAO 2009). Forest degradation cannot be measured only in terms of carbon and that other aspects of forests need to be considered. Any proposed methods need to account for and acknowledge the different perceptions of forest degradation and that it means different things to different people. In addition, there are links between the different aspects of forest degradation. Hence the need for measurements to be undertaken in terms of the management objectives or purpose or the primary designated function of the forest.

Why and how the 5 key criteria were selected After initially considering that the elements of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) could provide an appropriate framework for measuring forest degradation, these were eventually slimed down to 5 criteria for which it was considered that adequate methods for measuring forest degradation and guidelines could be developed.

Initial Criteria and Indicators identified during the technical meeting in Rome 2009: Common indicators for monitoring and assessing forest degradation can be developed for the following key elements to be used in assessing forest degradation:  Biodiversity (e.g. species composition and richness, habitat fragmentation);  Biomass (e.g. growing stock, forest structure);  Forest goods obtained (compared against sustainably managed forests);  Forest health (e.g. fire, pest and diseases, invasive and alien species);  Soil quality (as indicated by cover, depth and fertility).

Final key criteria with associated indicators:

• Biodiversity: Fragmentation, ecosystem diversity and state, functional as well as focus species • Carbon: total biomass, growing stock, Carbon in 5 pools • Health: Areas affected by biotic or abiotic factors or by invasive species • Productive functions in terms of goods and services: timber removal, growing stock (selected species), NWFPs, fuel wood, water quality and quantity • Protective functions: Soil erosion

Relevance rating of the Criteria/Indicators for the various primary designated functions Relevance ratings can be assigned to the criteria and indicators depending on the primary designated functions, as certain ones are more relevant to certain designated functions of forests. In this way, researchers can see that some criteria are more relevant to certain designated functions of the forest than others. Two (++) indicates greater importance than one (+). The different criteria can be measured in terms of what are the primary designated functions of forests. Therefore in a forest primarily designated for production, one would hope and expect to see a high figure for biomass as compared with biodiversity.

4 Primary Designated Function of the Forest

Production Protection Biodiversity Social Multiple Other No/Unkown Services Use C Biomass ++ + + + ++ ++ ++ r i Biodiversity + + ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ t e Health ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ r i Goods and ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ ++ a Services

Soil ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++

[Discuss and explain spider diagrams?]

Limitations and Considerations required when determining the set of Criteria and Indicators – The Core Issues in terms of making assessments of forest degradation From the definitions currently in use, the specific points raised in the analytical study on definitions, and the outputs from the technical meeting, several core issues have emerged that need to be addressed. Therefore, any operational definitions of forest degradation for specific purposes and hence any assessment guidelines should provide responses to the following core issues and questions:

 Flexibility: Scope should be allowed for national interpretation of international definitions of forest degradation to ensure relevance and cost-efficiency, and to harness synergies. Yet for global assessments, comparability across countries is important, so a workable balance needs to be struck.  Spatial scale: Degradation is country and location-specific. For international purposes it is recognised that forest degradation needs to be geographically assessed at a higher than stand or site level with respective implications for international definitions, while stand or site assessment is needed for taking local level corrective action. Upscaling: For local managers, the information at FMU level is valid and useful, however in order to report to international processes it needs to be scaled up to national level.  Temporal Scale: What is the appropriate time scale within which to consider degradation? Degradation is generally considered to be a permanent or long-term reduction of capacity to provide certain goods and services so as to distinguish this from short-term fluctuations caused by natural causes or planned human interventions such as silvicultural treatments. Both spatial and temporal scale may depend on the objectives of management.  Degradation can be considered as both a state (forest is degraded or not degraded) and a process (the process of degradation, where there can be thresholds along a continuum). Although monitoring over time may be able to capture both, different indicators or thresholds might be needed for some aspects. Thresholds or reference states are needed and may differ from country to country and even within countries.  Location specific: Direct comparisons can only really be made between same forest types and possibly only in terms of the function and state of the resource;  Thresholds: Changes can also take place in a non-degraded forest due to natural processes or human intervention. When these changes pass a certain threshold, a forest becomes degraded. These thresholds may vary according to forest types and

5 local conditions. If the negative process continues, the threshold of deforestation may be passed and the area can no longer be classified as forest (even though administratively it may still be considered forest land).  Resilience: Avoiding irreversible change may be more important than striving for sustainability. Irreversible change should be avoided, especially deliberate or inadvertent conversion to non forestland. Given that some change is inevitable, the aim may be to manage for resilience – the capacity of forest composition to change without any radical shift in overall structure and function.  Perceptions differ: “One person’s degraded forest is another person’s livelihood”. There is thus a need to link to objectives of management and use, and the intended functions and state of the resource.  Causes of degradation may be human induced or natural: and it may be necessary to be able to report separately on these.

Figure 1. Forest resilience and tipping points (thresholds)

It is recognised that there is a range of natural variation in forests, that they are not static entities. As such there is a range within which they naturally fluctuate, and within which they may remain resilient, however if they move out of that range, then the forest may become degraded. See figure 1 above.

Natural and human-induced degradation are often dependent on each other as human action can influence the vulnerability of the forest to degradation from natural causes (for example, reduced stocking level due to harvesting can lead to increased sensitivity to wind damage) while natural damage can also lead to increased human induced disturbance (for example, natural forest fire can lead to encroachment by shifting cultivators). Separation of natural and human-induced causes is difficult in situations where abiotic and biotic factors are triggered by extreme weather events and climate change causing a greater frequency, scale and impact of forest degradation. Furthermore, there may be other indirect underlying reasons for degradation such as poverty and lack of alternative economic opportunities, inappropriate policies, lack of clearly established tenure rights, institutional weaknesses and

6 various economic, technological, cultural and demographic factors, and these we cannot measure in the current study.

Forest degradation is usually associated with a reduction of vegetative cover, especially trees with the exceptions of the “empty forest syndrome” caused by excessive hunting and/or creaming of commercially valuable timber species (FAO 2009).

Data limitations generally From referring to FRA 2010 it is clear that not all countries are able to report on and complete all the reporting tables for FRA. It is likely to be the same for the work on forest degradation. In some cases the data has just not been collected, and in others it may not have been processed.

Issues of baseline and reference state Defining forest degradation, especially from an operational perspective is a difficult problem because degradation depends to a large degree on one’s perspective. A forest plantation manager, whose planted forest is producing the amount of wood products that was expected, is unlikely to perceive his forest as degraded. On the other hand, when viewed from the perspective of a fully functioning forest ecosystem, with a complete complement of species for a natural forest on that site, the plantation forest is less capable of providing the multiple goods and services and would, therefore, fit the definition of a degraded forest. Further, a planted forest may have a higher capacity for carbon sequestration and for wood production than a natural forest but in terms of storage, the evidence is fairly clear that primary forests store more carbon and store it for longer periods than do managed forests on the same site types (e.g., Cramer et al. 2004, Bunker et al. 2005, Malhi et al. 2008, Lewis et al. 2009). Hence, the principal difficulty with defining forest degradation is assigning and then determining a baseline condition against which it can be measured for the goods and services of interest. An obvious starting point is to use primary forests, including any primary forest successional stages, as the baseline. However, this seemingly reasonable approach is problematic because even sustainably managed forests may lack some species, process, function, or structure normally seen in the primary condition. Even if we select a sustainably managed natural forest3 as the baseline condition against which to measure degradation, then most plantations would be considered degraded forests based on strict criteria, as would any other forest that is primarily managed for a selected set of goods and/or services.

Management plans, with clearly stated objectives are an important tool for achieving sustainable forest management. FRA 2010 provides information on the area of forest that is covered by a management plan. Globally, 121 countries representing 79.4% (3.2 billion ha) of the global forest area (4 billion ha), reported on the area of forest with a management plan. They indicated that more than 1.6 billion hectares of their forest area (52.3%) had a management plan or the equivalent. A management plan does not necessarily achieve a sustainably managed forest however, and a monitoring program to measure objectives must be in place to ensure the goods and services are supplied over the long term. Any loss of goods and services is the result of degradation. Hence, in order to understand the amount of degradation that may have occurred, certain indicators need to be measured against a baseline value and such a set of objectives. In cases where there is an absence of management objectives, the default can be the ‘natural’ or ‘expected’ state for the forest ecosystem, derived from protected areas or past data if they are available.

In order to understand the amount of degradation that may have occurred, certain indicators need to be measured against a baseline value and a set of objectives. In cases where there is an absence of management objectives, the default can be the ‘natural’ or ‘expected’ state 3 Sustainably managed forests is here referring to forests where all goods and services that are normally expected from the ecosystem are available, where the biodiversity has not markedly changed, and all the processes and functions are occurring at similar rates to those in a primary forest.

7 for the forest ecosystem, derived from protected areas or past data if they are available. The expected state may also be relative to the expected condition for a given successional stage. That is, old forest is not necessarily the only condition against which to measure ecosystem degradation.

We will necessarily require multiple criteria for assessment of degradation, some for which the indicators may be at acceptable levels, while there may be others that are below the standard. Certain indicators will immediately show that degradation has occurred (state), while others will suggest that it is occurring (process). Forest degradation will also have to be assessed in light of management objectives for managed forests, through a matrix of conditions based on multiple indicators. In these cases, while most indicators may suggest the forest is not degraded, some indicators may at the same time be suggestive of some level of degradation. This approach of using multiple indicators, is consistent with the definition referring to the loss of goods and services; forests provide many goods and services and so degradation will have many perspectives.

Because forest degradation is a process leading to various degraded states, a second challenge is determining levels of degradation. However, levels could be quantified based on estimated percent loss or decline of each good or service. For example, we could determine that the forest is producing 20% less wood or that a given species is 30% below normal population levels. We suggest that a decline in a given service that is >1 standard deviation from the mean lowest expected value, should be considered moderately degraded. Measuring indicators can show that degradation is occurring but it will remain a political decision as to how much of a reduction is too much and ultimately when a forest should be defined as degraded.

Bounding the problem: Indicators have to be measured with an understanding that, in forest systems, there is always an inherent range of natural variation that must be expected (e.g., Keane et al. 2009). Degradation occurs when the system production of a good or service consistently falls below a given expected value and is outside a range of variation that would be naturally expected (Figure 2). The expected value might be a management objective, or the known natural level based on experience and/or observation for a particular forest ecosystem. The range of natural variation can only be based on variance established from control areas across years, or from existing research for the ecosystem. An example is the fluctuation (variation) in population (or sampled index) of an animal species over time, caused by inter-annual variations in environmental conditions. Similarly, sampling error will also result in variance among years.

8 Figure 2. Range of natural variation is used to provide a reference level for degradation.

Forest services

naturally fluctuate

or in this range

etc. etc.

, , Measured service

nce declines and the

da forest is degraded

un in this range Ab

Bunker, D.E., F. DeClerck, J.C. Bradford, R.K. Colwell, I. Perfecto, O.L. Phillips, M. Sankaran and S. Naeem. 2005. Species loss and aboveground carbon storage in a tropical forest. Science 310: 1029-1031.

Cramer, W., A. Bondeau, S. Schaphoff, W. Lucht, B Smith and S. Sitch 2004. Tropical forests and the global carbon cycle: impacts of atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate change and rate of deforestation. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 359: 331-343.

ITTO, 2002 “ITTO guidelines for the restoration, management and rehabilitation of degraded and secondary tropical forests” ITTO Policy Development Series No. 13

FAO 2003 Report International Conference on the Contribution of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Way Forward (CICI2003). 3 – 7 February 2003 Guatemala City, Guatemala.

FAO 2009 “Towards Defining Forest Degradation: Comparative Analysis of Existing Definitions” Forest Resources Assessment Working Paper 154, Markku Simula ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/k6217e/k6217e00.pdf

FAO 2010 “Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010: Main Report” FAO Forestry Paper 163

Lewis, S. L., G. Lopez-Gonzalez, B. Sonké, K. Affum-Baffoe, T.R. Baker, L.O. Ojo, O.L. Phillips, J.M. Reitsma, L. White, J.A. Comiskey, K. Djuikouo, C.E.N. Ewango T.R. Feldpausch, A.C. Hamilton, M. Gloor, T. Hart, A. Hladik, J. Lloyd, J.C. Lovett, J.R. Makana,

9 Y. Malhi, F.M. Mbago, H.J. Ndangalasi, J. Peacock, K.S.H. Peh, K. D. Sheil, T. Sunderland, M.D. Swaine, J. Taplin, D. Taylor, S.C. Thomas, R. Votere and W. Hannsjorg. 2009. Increasing carbon storage in intact African tropical forests. Nature 457: 1003-1006.

Malhi, Y., J.T. Roberts, R.A. Betts, T.J. Killeen, W.H. Li and C.A. Nobre. 2008. Climate change, deforestation, and the fate of the Amazon. Science 319: 169-172.

United Nations General Assembly. 2007. Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests. A/C.2/62/L.5. 22 October 2007

10 4 Boxes: Outputs from the work leading up to the development of the guidelines [to be incorporated in the introduction]

Questionnaires Questionnaires on Forest Degradation were sent to 177 FRA National Correspondents resulting in responses from 45 countries.

One third of the respondents had developed a national definition of forest degradation. Typical indicators in definitions include stocking level, productivity, biomass density and species composition while the most common reference level appeared to be what is expected on the site. Some countries have assessed degradation without developing an explicit definition. Half had definitions for related terms.

Two thirds of respondents did not determine degradation according to different purposes of management and did not consider human induced temporary changes as degradation. Most had no assessment methodology and less than half provided an actual or estimated figure of degradation.

The analysis suggests that the majority liked the elements of sustainable forest management (SFM) as providing a potential framework for the analysis of forest degradation.

Causes of degradation were primarily described as: illegal logging, fire, fuelwood collection and shifting cultivation for Africa and Latin America. In Asia, pests, diseases and insect attacks were also on the list. In the Sahel countries, grazing, drought and fuelwood collection were listed as the key factors. In Europe fire, pests and diseases and wind damage were listed, while in the Pacific Islands wind, coastal erosion, fuelwood, development projects, and pests and diseases were reported.

Analytical Study “Towards Defining Degradation” FRA Working Paper 154 A review of the existing international and national definitions for forest degradation, analyzed their elements and parameters and identified commonalities and differences. It was determined that the generic definition of forest degradation (the reduction of the capacity of a forest to provide goods and services) provides a common framework for all the international definitions and is compatible with the ecosystem service approach. The most comprehensive international definitions have been developed by ITTO and CBD covering change in forest structure and dynamics, forest functions, human induced causes and a reference state. In these definitions the spatial scale is stand or site level and the temporal scale usually long-term. The definition used by the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 covers many similar elements but it does not specifically address causes of deforestation. The definition developed by IPCC in the climate change context focuses on human induced changes in the carbon cycle.

11 Case Studies Twenty case studies were collected from across the globe. Assessment methodologies were generally scarce compared with information on causes, drivers and effects of forest degradation with some themes of SFM being studied much more than others as regards forest degradation.

Several case studies considered that the best approach would be combining the use of satellite imagery with supporting ground based inventory, as this would combine the strengths of both methods.

Community based approaches particularly where there was joint management of forests by government and communities together, seemed to also be quite effective, at both locating information and at ensuring better SFM. These included: work in Ghana (WP 160), IUFRO in India (WP 157), Community Carbon forestry work (WP 156), and work undertaken in Niger (WP 168), where the communities identified changes in forests.

Some of the more promising methods identified to monitor and assess forest degradation included: Combination of remote sensing, GIS and field observations; Advanced technologies, such as aerial laser scanning; Community-based assessment.

12 Technical Meeting A series of technical meetings have been undertaken as part of the process of establishing how to measure forest degradation. Early on in the process a technical meeting on “Assessment and Monitoring of Forest Degradation” took place at FAO headquarters in Rome, Italy, from 8 to 10 September 2009. A total of 37 specialists from 15 countries and 12 international forest-related organisations and processes participated in the meeting.

This provided an opportunity to present the analysis of definitions, the case studies, to review the results and recommend actions to improve measurement, assessment and reporting on forest degradation. The meeting brought together the information that had been gathered together so far based on questionnaires, an annotated bibliography, the analysis of definitions and the case studies. It provided an opportunity for participants to discuss technical aspects of methodologies for assessing and monitoring forest degradation.

The main conclusions were: (i) Endorsement of the generic definition of ‘forest degradation’ as a reduction in the capacity of a forest to provide goods and services; (ii) The many different aspects of forest degradation should be communicated better to Parties and relevant stakeholders of forest-related international conventions; (iii) Attention should be focused on harmonization of definitions and methods for monitoring five aspects of forest degradation: stocking level, biological diversity, forest health, forest goods obtained compared with sustainably managed forests, and forest soil; (iv) Methodologies do exist to monitor changes in carbon stocks and therefore to include forest degradation in terms of climate change into the proposed REDD mechanism.

There was a call for the development of tools and guidelines for measuring different aspects of forest degradation. The presentations made at the meeting can be found on the CPF site: http://www.fao.org/forestry/cpf/degradation/en/