DOCSLIB.ORG

References – for All Case Studies and Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
References – for All Case Studies and Overview Changing Ownership and Management of State Forest Plantations. References References – for all case studies and overview ABARE (2001). Australian Commodity Statistics 2001. Canberra. ACF (1988). The wood and the trees revisited. ACF responds to the forest industries. ACF, Hawthorn, Victoria. Acuiti Legal (2002). Tax concessions reintroduced for plantation forestry industry. www.ptaa.com.au/acuiti.html Accessed 30/04/2002. AFFA (Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry – Australia) (2002). Industry Development and Adjustment. Australia’s Unique Forests. www.affa.gov.au/ Accessed 31/07/2002 Afforestation Proprietary Limited. 1926. Timber wealth, something for all: a large return for a small investment. Afforestation Proprietary Ltd, Melbourne. 22p. Aldwell, P.H.B. 1984. Some social and economic implications of large-scale forestry in Waiapu County. Forest Research Institute, New Zealand Forest Service, Rotorua. 39p. Alexander, F. Brittle, S., Ha, A.G. Leeson, T. and Riley,C. (2000). Landcare and farm forestry: providing a basis for better resource management on Australian farms. ABARE report to the Natural Heritage Trust, Canberra. Anderson, J. (1997). Minister removes export controls on wood sourced from plantations in Western Australia. Media Release Department for Primary Industries and Energy, 22nd September 1997. Anderson, R.S. and W. Huber. 1988. The Hour of the Fox: Tropical Forests, The World Bank and Indigenous People in Central India. New Delhi: Vistaar/Sage. Anon. (2001). Gunns adds North Forest to its trees. The Australian March 20th 2001. Anon. 1996. NZ government rushes to sell forests. Green Left Weekly. URL: www.greenleft.org.au/back/1996/245/245p18.htm Accessed 28/11/2002 Anon. 1998. Job cuts decimate New Zealand forestry industry. Published on the World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org/news/1998/nz-d23.shtml APEC (Albany Plantation Export Company). (2002). Plantation to Port – the dawning of a new era. Advertising feature. Albany Advertiser 07/03/2002 16p Australian Forest Growers. (2000). Submission to the Senate Economics References Committee. Inquiry into Mass Marketed Tax Effective Schemes and Investor Protection. AFG, ACT. www.afg.asn.au Accessed 20/03/2002. Australian Forestry Standard Steering Committee. (2002). An Australian Forestry Standard. http://www.forestrystandard.org.au/index.html Accessed 07/08/2002. Banerjee, A.K. 2000. Devolving forest management in Asia-Pacific countries. In Enters, T., Durst, P.B., and Victor, M. (eds). 2000. Decentralisation and Devolution of Forest management in Asia and the Pacific. RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1. Bangkok, Thailand. Bass, S. and Hearne, R. 1997. Private sector forestry: a review of instruments for ensuring sustainability. Forestry and Land Use Series no.10. International Institute for Environment and Development, London. Bass, S., Dubois, P., Moura-Costa, P., Pinard, M., Tipper, R. and Wilson, C. 2000. Rural livelihoods and carbon management: an issues paper. UK DFID Forestry Research Programme Project R7374. Bass, S., Thornber, K., Markopoulos, M., Roberts, S. and Grieg-Gran, M. 2001 Certification’s impacts on forests, stakeholders and supply chains. IIED. London. Beyer, M. (2002). Barriers cleared. Western Australian Business News. 11th April 2002. www.businessnews.com.au/news.cfm?function=show&NewsID=7884 Accessed 30/04/2002 Bhati, U.N. (2002). ANU Forestry Log Market Report. http://sres.anu.edu.au/associated. Accessed 3/08/02 1 Changing Ownership and Management of State Forest Plantations. References 3/08/02 Binkley, C. (2002). Personal communication. Hancock Natural Resources Group, Boston. Birchfield, R.J. and Grant, I.F. 1993. Out of the Woods: The restructuring and sale of New Zealand’s state forests. GP Publications, Wellington. 250p. Buffier, B. (2002). Environmental and commercial outcomes through agroforestry: policy and investment options. RIRDC Publication 02/057. http://www.rirdc.gov.au/AFT/#Agroforestry___Farm Burns, K., Walker, D., and Hansard, A. (1999). Forest plantations on cleared agricultural land in Australia a regional economic analysis. ABARE Research Report 99.11, Canberra. BWG (Biodiversity Working Group). 1997. Conserving China’s Biodiversity: Report of BWG to the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development (CCICED). Beijing. Byron, R.N. and Douglas, J.J. (1981). Log pricing in Australia. BFE Press, Canberra. 98 p. Cadman, T. (2002). Australian FSC Stakeholders’ Conference. http://www.certifiedforests.org.au/. Group email 27/03/2002; Site accessed 06/08/2002. CAFLU (Chinese Agriculture and Forestry Labor Union), 1997. Developing Agricultural Economy to Absorb Surplus Labor in Forestry Areas. Forestry Economics, No. 1. Cai, H.H. 1999. Why social forestry in Vietnam? A trainers perspective. Social Forestry Training Network in Vietnam. No1, October 1999. Social Forestry Support Programme. Helvetas.Hanoi. In Enters, T., Durst, P.B., and Victor, M. (eds). 2000. Decentralisation and Devolution of Forest management in Asia and the Pacific. RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1. Bangkok, Thailand. Campbell N., Storey, T. and Taylor, C. 2001. The Forestry Taxation Regime. New Zealand Journal of Forestry ??? ??? ???. Carron, L.T. (1985). A History of Forestry in Australia. The Australian National University Press, Canberra. Carron, L.T. (1990). A history of plantation policy in Australia. Pp. 11-23 in Dargavel, J. and Semple, N. (eds). Prospects for Australian Forest Plantations. Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Canberra. Catterall, C.P. (2000). Wildlife biodiversity challenges for tropical rainforest plantations. In Snell, A. & Vise, S. (eds.) Opportunities for the New Millennium. Proceedings of the Australian Forest Growers Biennial Conference, Cairns. 191-195. CCTV (China Central Television). 2000. Growing forests on report cards. May 30. Chalmers, R. “Innovative restructuring of state’s Eastern Cape forestry assets will help poor – Seeing the wood and the trees” Business Day, August 2001 China Customs Office. 1999, 2000, 2001. China Customs Office Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Customs Office Press. Clark, J. (2002, unpub). Australian production of wood and wood products in 1999/00 and 1989/90 disaggregated by wood source. August 2002. Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University. Clarke, M. 1999. Devolving forest ownership through privatization in New Zealand. Unasylva No. 199 50(4): 35-44. Clarke, M. 2000. Devolving forest ownership in New Zealand: processes, issues and outcomes. In Enters, T., Durst, P.B., and Victor, M. (eds). 2000. Decentralisation and Devolution of Forest management in Asia and the Pacific. RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1. Bangkok, Thailand. Cochrane, P. and Gerritsen, R. (1990). The public policy implications of eucalypt plantation establishment in Australia: an introductory survey. Discussion Paper No. 20, Public Policy Program, Australian National University, Canberra. 2 Changing Ownership and Management of State Forest Plantations. References Cocklin, C. and Wall, M. 1997. Contested Rural Futures: New Zealand’s East Coast Forestry Project. Journal of Rural Studies 13(2): 149-162. Commonwealth of Australia (1992). National Forest Policy Statement. AGPS, Canberra. 52 p. http://www.rfa.gov.au. Accessed 04/08/2002. Commonwealth of Australia (1996). State of the Environment Australia 1996. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. Commonwealth of Australia (1999). Regional Australia Summit. http://www.dotrs.gov.au/regional/summit/ Accessed 04/08/2002 Commonwealth of Australia (2000). Regional Forest Agreements. www.rfa.gov.au Accessed 31/07/2002 Commonwealth of Australia (2001). The Farm Forestry Program (FFP). http://www.affa.gov.au/docs/1_nrm/nht_landcare/nht/ffp-summary.html Accessed 30/07/2002 Commonwealth of Australia (2002). State of the Environment Australia 2001. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Production Forestry. (2002). http://.www.forestry.crc.gov.au. Accessed 29/07/2002 Cox, O., Horgan, G. and Maplesden, F. 1993. The New Zealand Forestry Sector in 1993. FRI Bulletin No. 185, New Zealand Forest Research Institute. 34p. CSE (Centre for Science and Environment). 1982. The State of India’s Environment, 1982: A Citizen’s Report. New Delhi: CSE. Danodoran, A. (n.d.) Tree plantations and Biodiversity in the Indian Context. Bangalore. Indian Institute of Plantation Management. (Mimeo). Dargavel, J. (1995). Fashioning Australia’s forests. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Dargavel, J., Guijt, I., Kanowski, P., Race, D. and Proctor, W. (1998). Australia: settlement, conflicts and agreements. Discussion paper for IIED, London. 71p. DETR (UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions). 2000. Climate Change: The UK Programme. Cm4913. London. DFID Southern Africa. Social Appraisal for project document “Making Forest Markets Work for the Poor”. 2002. Dlomo, M. and Pitcher, M. 2002. Changing Ownership and Management of State Forest Plantations: South Africa’s experience. Draft study submitted to the International Conference, Changing Ownership and Management of State Forest Plantations: Issues, Approaches, Implications. Cape Town, South Africa, 6-8 November 2002 DLWC (2001) Caring for our Natural Resources. Plantations. www.dlwc.nsw.gov.au/care/veg/plantation/ Accessed 29/07/2002 Dogra, B. 1985. The World Bank vs. the people of Bastar. The Ecologist: 15 (1/2), pp. 44-9. Dubey, A.P. 2001. Letter to the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Real Options Approach Using the Binomial Tree Method
    Valuation of Carbon Forestry and the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme: A Real Options Approach Using the Binomial Tree Method James Tee1, Riccardo Scarpa1, Dan Marsh1 and Graeme Guthrie2 1 Department of Economics, University of Waikato, New Zealand. 2 School of Economics and Finance, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Please kindly address all correspondences to [email protected] Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) Triennial Conference, Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, 18-24 August, 2012. Reference number: 16930 Copyright 2012 by James Tee, Riccardo Scarpa, Dan Marsh and Graeme Guthrie. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. Abstract Under the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme, new forests planted on/after 1st January 1990 can earn carbon credits. These credits have to be repaid upon forest harvest. This paper analyses the effects of this carbon scheme on the valuation of bareland, on which radiata pine is to be planted. NPV/LEV and Real Options methods are employed, assuming stochastic timber and carbon prices. Valuation increases significantly and rotation age is likely to be lengthened. We include a scenario analysis of potential implications of rotation age lengthening on carbon stock management in New Zealand. 1 Introduction In order to meet New Zealand’s Kyoto Protocol commitments, its government passed cap-and-trade legislation, called the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZETS), to create a carbon price and put in place incentives for businesses and consumers to change their behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • A Report of the International Workshop on India's Forest
    . , . r& 085448 18 -0CiiASIONAL PAPER,NO. 3 Sept 1994 : * CENTER .F&‘hTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH : . .I : . * ., . _. ‘, . * ; . 1 . ENVIRONlSiENT, DEVELOFMENT AND.POVEiiTY: * . , ~ . 1 CENTER FbR,lNTERNATlONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH . \ office &dress:. Jalan Gunung Batu 5 Bogor 16001 !ndonesia . ,mai/hg address: P-0,. Box 6596, JKPWB Jakarta 1006hdo.~esia ’ .. : . tel.: .+62 (251) 34-3652 fax: +62 (251) 32-6433 e-mail: cifor @cgnet.com . .’ . ’ . T.he$GIAR System The Consultative Grotip on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is an informal association of 41 ‘public and private sector donors that supports a network of sixteen international agricultural research centers, CIFOR being the newest of these centers. The Group was established in 197 1. The CGIAR centers are part of a global agricultural research system which endeavor to apply international scientific capacity to solution of the problems of the world’s disadyantaged people. CIFOR CIFOR was established under the CGIAR system in response to global concerns about the social, environmental and ec&omic consequences of loss and degradation of. forests. It operates, through a series of highly decentralized partnerships with key institutions and/or individuals throughout the developing and industrialized worlds. The nature and duration of the& partnerships are determined by the specific research problems b&g addressed. This research agenda is under constant review and is subject to change as the partners recognize new opportunities and problems. FOREWORD CIFOR is very pleased that one of our first Occasional Papers is India’s Forest Management and Ecological revival. It is one output of a very comprehensive and ambitious program which included a year of research, eighteen commissioned papers, and a workshop in New Delhi.
    [Show full text]
  • Forestry in New Zealand: the Role of Japanese Companies Introduction: Business Field
    43rd Joint Meeting of the Japan New Zealand Business Council on 23 Nov. 2016 Forestry in New Zealand: The Role of Japanese Companies Introduction: Business Field Upstream Midstream Downstream 1691 1950～ 1960～ 1970～ Domestic Forestry & Wooden building Wooden building Housing-related environment business materials distribution materials manufacturing business business business Custom-built home construction & sales business Domestic forestry Domestic Remodeling, leasing, business manufacturing other housing-related Distribution of timber business business and building materials in Japan and overseas Overseas tree planting Overseas business manufacturing business Overseas housing business Overseas SUMITOMO FORESTRY CO., LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 1 Introduction: Our Forest Company-owned forests in Japan Owned or managed overseas plantations 46,443 ha As of March 31, 2016 Approx. 230,000 ha As of June 30, 2016 Natural Plantations Other forest =500 ha =3,000 ha Hokkaido Indonesia 18,199 ha 160,000 ha Honshu 4,280 ha Papua New Guinea 31,000 ha Kyushu Shikoku 9,181 ha 14,783 ha New Zealand 36,000 ha SUMITOMO FORESTRY CO., LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 General Information of NZ’s Forests 6% • Land area: 27.1M ha 24% 43% (Japan: 37.8M ha) 26% • Forest area: 10.1M ha (Japan: 25.1M ha) Pasture/arable Other (non-forest) • Forest cover: Naturan Forest Plantation Source: NZFOA (2013) / Dana (2014) 38.6% (Japan: 66.4%) • Forest owner: Public 60% Private 40% SUMITOMO FORESTRY CO., LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 3 Plantation Forest in NZ • Almost all logs are produced from plantations。 • There were 3 plantation booms which occurred: in the 1930’s, from the late 1960’s and early 1980’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Gets President's Ear New Forestry' Guru Gunman Kills 8 in San Francisco
    The administrations first priority is _iv to get federal timber sales released from MICHAEL LLOYD/The Oregonian court injunctions that have been in 9 Monte Dahlstrom (left) and his brother, Kirk, timber workers from Hoquiam, Wash., respond to President eves forest decision place since 1991 and return forest man- Thursday, "Were so sit.k of the government. All theyve done is talk. Is this Just more talk? I dont know,," Mirk Dahlstrom said. agement to the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, he said. ease timber communities through a Earlier Thursday a somber Clinton, tough transition. flanked by Vice President Al Gore and "The plan is more difficult than I four Cabinet members at a Washington, thought it would be in terms of the sizes D.C., news conference, called his plan of the timber cuts. in no small mea- Q: DOES THE CLINTON PLAN PROTECT OLD-GROWTH FORESTS? Q: HOW MANY JOBS WILL BE LOST? "a departure from the failed policies of A: the past." He said it will protect the en- Please turn to Yes. It protects 3.67 million forested acres in a system of A: By 1994, when the plan is in effect, timber jobs in the owl vironment, break legal gridlock and PLAN, Page A14 reserves stretching over 8.6 million acres from the Canadian region are expected to decline by an additional 6,000 from the border to Northern California. About 80 percent of the 1992 employment level of 125,400. Most job losses already Northwests remaining old-growth forests will be included in have occurred.
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Research on Farm Adld Village Forestry
    Collaborative Research on Farm aDLd Village Forestry Organizers: ForestryIFuelwood Research and Development (FIFRED) Project International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development The Forestry IFuelwood Research and Development (FI FRED) Project is designed to help scientists aLlLlress the neeLls of small-scale farmers in the L1e.eloping world for fuel wood and other tree products. Funded by the U.S. Agency !I)r Interna­ tional Development. the project provides a network through which scientists exchange research plans. methods. and resuits. Research and development activities center on the production and use of trees that meet the several household needs of small farmers. FIFRED is implemented by the Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development. a private. non-profit U.S. organization working in agricultural development around th'~ worlLl. It was established in 1985 through the merging of the Agricultural Development Council. the International Agricultural Development Servile. and the Winrock International Livestock Research and Training Center. Winrock's mission is to reduce hunger and poverty in the world through sustainable agricultural and rural development. Winrock helps ~cople of developing areas to strengthen their agricultural research anLl extension systems. develop their human resources. institute appropriate food and agricultUi al policies. manage their renewahle resources. and improve their agricultural production systems. .. Collaborative Research on Farm and Village Forestry Report of a workshop held April 23-25, 1988 in Kathmandu, Nepal Editors: David A. Taylor and Charles B. Mehl Workshop co-sponsors: Forestry/Fuelwood Research and Development (FIFRED) Project International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development .. International Development Research Centre Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science, Nepal 1988 Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development ...
    [Show full text]
  • How to Transform Your Yard Into a Food Forest
    edible Landscaping: How to transform your yard into a food forest. a manualfesto jayme margaret melrose: garden doula participating members of a comprehensive earth community spectrum of (forest) gardening ecological organic gardening forest ecoforestry Cultivated...landscaping farming gardening ...wildernesSparks hands on hands off 6 easy edible landscaping tips 1. use formal designs filled with vegetables. 2. plant kale & chard as ornamental annuals. 3. Grow edible flowers. 4. Trellis with climbing beans or peas. Chives Red clover Borage Lilac Lavender Roses Daylillies Tulips Dandelions Nasturiums Pansies Violets Carnations Stocks Bachelor buttons Dahlias Bee balm California poppy Calendula Daisy Phlox Hosta Hosta fortunei Snapdragon Fuschia Columbines 5. use highbush blueberries as ornamental shrubs. 2 varieties to polinate! 6. plant fruit trees. Espallier, container, or standard trees. apples. pears. cherries. peaches. plums. apricots. persimmons. quince. Perennial food plants: Perennial food plants: Asparagus Chives Walking onions Rhubarb Stinging nettle Sorrel Jerusalem artichokes Fiddleheads Mushrooms Nuts Fruit Berries Seakale - Crambe maritima Tea herbs Culinary herbs Medicinal herbs native food plants: native food plants: Oak - acorns Beech - nut Sugar maple - syrup Butternut - nut Beaked hazelnut Serviceberry Chokecherry Chokeberry Cranberry Huckleberry Blueberry Blackberry Bunchberry Highbush cranberry - Viburnum opulus Wild raisin - Viburnum nudum Ostrich fern - fiddleheads Indian potato - tuber Sweetfern - tea leaves Labrador tea - tea leaves Bog rosemary - tea & seasoning circa 1850 View from Dartmouth Common Watercolors by Mercer View from halifax Common towards NorthWest arm black walnut beech butternut hickory chestnut beaked hazelnut pecan New England nut trees Indian Potato: Apios americana edible forest gardening is: - an edible ecosystem: a consciously designed community of mutually beneficial plants and animals intended for human food production.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Social Forest: Proportions and Groups
    || Volume 6 || Issue 1 || January 2021 || ISO 3297:2007 Certified ISSN (Online) 2456-3293 INDIAN SOCIAL FOREST: PROPORTIONS AND GROUPS Dr. Mohd Sadiq Ali Khan Principal, School Education, Sanskriti University, Mathura, India ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Abstract: The forests are a highly appreciated ecological commodity that, under proper governance, can be fruitful and beneficial. The biggest, more diverse and self-generating forests of all ecosystems. Forests affect diverse factors including the climate, flora, fauna and civilization directly and effectively. They serve as buffer states among habitats created by natural or human beings. Forests also helped the human race over the years. The growing population of humans and animals has, however, resulted in unconscious agricultural use of forestry. This has contributed to a dramatic reduction in forest wealth in India in the last few years. The forest logging proceeded unregulated until the mid-1970s, contributing to the detrimental consequences of deforestation. This included soil erosion, flickering storms, lack of water, timber and fodder, the disappearance of important flora and fauna and global warming. The Indian government Launched a social forest project in 1976 to eliminate the pressure on current forestry by plants in all vacancies and fallow lands. This project was introduced in 1976 by the National Commission on Agriculture. The goal of this paper is to gain insight into the significance and components of Indian social forestry. It also aims to define social forestry forms and advantages and to evaluate some research studies in order to encourage social forestry in India. Keywords: Forest, India, Environment, Social, Agriculture, government -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I INTRODUCTION vegetation. Owing to the overgrazing of cattle, community pastures are worsening.
    [Show full text]
  • Observe and Interact Obtain a Yield Redundancy Catch and Store Energy
    1 THE PERMACULTURE ETHICS ● Care of Earth ● Care of Humans ● Share the Surplus ● Respect Intrinsic Value THE PRINCIPLES OF PERMACULTURE from Bill Mollison & David Holmgren Observe and Interact The primary design tool is the designer. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. ​ Observation is a short way of saying, “Noticing the information coming from all your senses as they experience and interact with your environment, both inner and outer.” OBSERVATION PRACTICES: sit spot, meditation, breathing awareness, journaling, Nature Walks [learning about the ​ flora and fauna that live around you], Herb Walks [learning about wild edibles and medicinals], learning tracking/hunting skills, learning about the movement of the constellations and the moon. You can’t work on an empty stomach. [and neither can anyone else] Obtain a Yield ​ ​ As PC designers, we are creating “cultivated​ ecosystems” – cultivated to produce a yield of food, shelter, fiber, medicine, or other product/service useful to humans. Therefore, for each element we consider, we must design to obtain a yield. Redundancy Have a backup plan. Be prepared! For every critical need, provide for multiple ways of meeting that need. Critical needs are water, food, money, heating, toilet, congeniality, social/political power. USE IN DESIGN: ● Food: Design to have fresh food all year long, and preserve as much as you can. ​ ​ ● Water: Cisterns, public utility, and pond. ​ ​ ● Electricity: Photovoltaics, and grid, or PV and wind/hydro power. [and non-electric tools!] ​ ​ ​ ​ ● Polycrop to provide plants with many avenues for pollination, pest protection, nutrients. ● Design or do other creative work with a team – have more than one mind, more than one person holding the skills and information.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Exotic Plantation Forestry in 1920S New Zealand
    (RE)INTERPRETING EXOTIC PLANTATION FORESTRY IN 1920S NEW ZEALAND MICHAEL ROCHE School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University, Private Bag 11-222, Palmerston North. [email protected] Abstract Environmental historians who have contributed to the understanding of ‘eco- nationalism’ in New Zealand and within the sub-area of forest history have shown how deforestation produced a preservationist impulse and an exotic afforestation response to timber famine. My own work, in partial contrast, has tended to explore the largely unsuccessful efforts at indigenous forest management for production in the nineteenth century as well as suggesting that the large-scale afforestation boom of the 1920s and 1930s was a departure from the anticipated direction of state efforts when the Forests Department was established in 1919. Previously I have argued that the New Zealand State Forest Service under its first director L. M. Ellis initially favoured an orthodox state forestry model anchored on sustained-yield management of indigenous forests, and only later turned to large-scale exotic plantations, in order to forestall a projected timber famine by 1965, and to buy time to enable the mechanisms for regenerating indigenous forests to be understood. This paper looks more closely at Ellis’ initial statements about the role of plantation forestry and suggests that a partial change of interpretation is needed. Keywords: state forestry, historical geography, environmental history, afforestation, New Zealand. Introduction This article grows out of some of the differences in, emphasis on, and interpretations of New Zealand’s forest history that exist in the publications of New Zealand historians and my own writing as an historical geographer working in the field typically labelled ‘environmental history’.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Zealand Beeches : Establishment, Growth and Management / Mark Smale, David Bergin and Greg Steward, Photography by Ian Platt
    Mark Smale, David K ....,.,. and Greg ~t:~·wa11.r Photography by lan P Reproduction of material in this Bulletin for non-commercial purposes is welcomed, providing there is appropriate acknowledgment of its source. To obtain further copies of this publication, or for information about other publications, please contact: Publications Officer Private Bag 3020 Rotorua New Zealand Telephone: +64 7 343 5899 Fac.rimile: +64 7 348 0952 E-nraif. publications@scionresearch .com !Pebsite: www.scionresearch.com National Library of New Zealand Cataloguing-in-Publication data The New Zealand beeches : establishment, growth and management / Mark Smale, David Bergin and Greg Steward, Photography by Ian Platt. (New Zealand Indigenous Tree Bulletin, 1176-2632; no.6) Includes bibliographic references. 978-0-478-11018-0 1. trees. 2. Forest management-New Zealand. 3. Forests and forestry-New Zealand. 1. Smale, Mark, 1954- ll. Bergin, David, 1954- ill. Steward, Greg, 1961- IV. Series. V. New Zealand Forese Research Institute. 634.90993-dc 22 lSSN 1176-2632 ISBN 978-0-478-11038-3 ©New Zealand Forest Research Institute Limited 2012 Production Team Teresa McConcbie, Natural Talent Design - design and layout Ian Platt- photography Sarah Davies, Richard Moberly, Scion - printing and production Paul Charters - editing DISCLAIMER In producing this Bulletin reasonable care has been taAren lo mmre tbat all statements represent the best infornJation available. Ht~~vever, tbe contents of this pt1blicatio11 are not i11tended to be a substitute for s,Pecific specialist advice on at!} matter and should not be relied on for that pury~ose. NEW ZEALAND FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE L!JWJTED mtd its emplqyees shall not be liable on at.ry ground for a'!)l lost, damage, or liabili!J inrorred as a direct or indirect result of at!J reliance l{y a'!)l person upon informatiou contained or opinions expressed in this tvork.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Issues in Forest Science
    Folia Forestalia Polonica, series A, 2011, Vol. 53 (1), 52–63 REVIEW ARTICLE Emerging issues in forest science Don K. Lee¹, Niels E. Koch² , John Innes3 and Peter Mayer4 1 Seoul National University, Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul 151-921, Republic of Korea ² University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Life Sciences, Rolighedsvej 23, DK-1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark, phone: +45 353 31515, fax: +45 3533 1508, e-mail: [email protected] ³ University of British Columbia, Faculty of Forestry, 2424 Main Mall Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4 4 Federal Research and Training Centre for Forests, Natural Hazards and Landscape, Seckendorff-Gudent-Weg8, A-1131 Vienna, Austria AbstrAct Major issues in forest science, such as climate change, bio-energy, biodiversity, and water, were assessed by IUFRO responsive to the broader scientific and policy communities to tackle more complex global environmental, social, and economic issues impacting forests. Other issues highlighted in this paper are forest health and forest genet- ics; forest modeling and operations engineering; challenges for mitigation and adaptation; public participation on decisions, research, and distribution of benefits; estimating ecosystem services, biofuels and biodiversity; societal issues, including health, food, poverty, urbanization, and lifestyle; educational change in structure and topics; and information and research administration. As forest science faced various challenges in the last few years, there is a need for interdisciplinary approaches and cross-sectoral collaboration. These interrelated and emerging key-issues, particularly climate change, biodiversity, bio-energy and water, are of strong interest to policy makers and groups inside and outside the forest sector. These will all be of high relevance to forest science and to IUFRO in the coming years, primarily for global collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Forest Management Developments in New Zealand Seen Through the Lens of the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators (C&I) Framework
    XIV WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS, Durban, South Africa, 7-11 September 2015 Sustainable Forest Management Developments in New Zealand seen through the lens of the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators (C&I) framework Tim Payn*1, Tim Barnard1, Steven Cox2, Liam Millard1, John Novis2, Alan Reid2 1 [email protected]; Scion (New Zealand Forest Research Institute), Rotorua, New Zealand 2 Ministry for Primary Industries, Wellington, New Zealand Abstract New Zealand has recently completed its third national „state of the forests‟ report using the framework of the Montréal Process Criteria and Indicators. These reports (2003, 2008, and 2015) give a very valuable picture of the forestry environment over a period when much change occurred. This paper presents some of the key changes in Sustainable Forest Management in New Zealand over that period in the context of global and national drivers such as international climate change initiatives and the global economic environment, changes in national policies, and a greater market need for information on forestry‟s social license to operate. The value and utility of C&I frameworks for monitoring assessment and reporting of forest information and the effectiveness of the C&I as a communication tool is presented with examples of tools developed to both communicate data and facilitate dialogue. New developments using the C&I framework for „futures analysis‟ is also presented and discussed. Overall, C&I have proved to be a very significant foundation in providing a common language for dialogue around the meaning of sustainable forest management. They have contributed to a range of forest related activities in New Zealand including structuring and focussing research programmes, organising Forest Company monitoring programmes in support of third party certification, teaching SFM, and providing a national picture of the state of New Zealand‟s forests over time.
    [Show full text]