Joint meeting of the EU Standing Forestry Committee and the EU Advisory Group on Forestry and Cork For the discussed report, read here: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/fore/publi/sfc_wg7_2012_full_en.pdf

1. NEW FOREST STRATEGY
A STEP BACKWARD OR A STEP FORWARD?
Dr. Peri Kourakli
Forest Task Force Coordinator
Birdlife Europe
Joint meeting of the EU Standing Forestry Committee and
the EU Advisory Group on Forestry and Cork
For the discussed report, read here:
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/fore/publi/sfc_wg7_2012_full_en.pdf

2. Who we are
BirdLife International
Largest global 90-year old partnership of
conservation organisations
Conserve birds, their habitats and global
biodiversity, working with people towards
sustainability in the use of natural resources
Hellenic Ornithological Society is the Greek
partner; established in 1982

4. Good elements of the Report
The Strategy is entitled as “Forest Strategy”
instead of “Forestry Strategy”
The long- vision is in the right direction;
connecting this Strategy to other EU Strategies,
while the multifunctional role of forests is
highlighted (although it is strange that the vision in
under bullets, as if the vision has no link)
It is discussing in a logical order almost all of the
strategic priorities and objectives for social,
environmental & economic aspects of the forests

5. We are concern since:
 Although multifuctionality within
forests has stated as a
prerequisite, it does not describe
how this can be achieved
 The Report does not include, or
make provision for the evaluation
of the previous Forest Action Plan

6. Connection to EU Strategies:
 2020 Strategy: Although the
principle of “growth” is included,
the principles of “reduce
consumption” or “resource’s
efficiency” is lacking
 It does not effectively analyse the
existing EU Strategies related to
forests. This is more obvious in the
case of 2020 Biodiversity Strategy
We are concern since:

7. We are concern since:
It doesn’t provide any analysis on the EU Funds
allocated for forests , therefore not enough
information on the budget spend for all forest
services. Is subsidiary already included in the EU
Budget? (This is more obvious in the chapter “Resources
for implementation”)
 Statements regarding biodiversity or other
ecosystem services had references, while
several statements for other forest services
were unsupported

8. We are concern since:
Sustainable Forest Management/ SFM
 It does not provide any tools,
guidelines or suggestions on this
concept (only links with FOREST
EUROPE’s decisions)
 It is not delegating responsibility for
this to the new Forest Action Plan
Example:
It does not determine how the basic levels of
SFM will be determined or how they are
going to be monitored afterwards 8//19

9. We are concern since:
Forest Package
 Forest Strategy
 Forest Action Plan
 Communication on the wood-processing
industry and related value chains which
aims to address the challenges and
opportunities of different value chains that
have wood, wholly or partially, as a raw
material, including construction.

10. We are concern since:
Social function: missing the concept of “civil
protection”; both as a tool of supporting local
societies and as following of the EU Decisions on
establishing mechanisms to facilitate reinforced cooperation in
civil protection assistance interventions (2001/792/EC & 2007/779/EC)
Forest Information:
 It states that there is common info system in EU
 The role-contribution of EUROSTAT &ICP Forests in
forest info is missing
 It includes recommendations but there are no final
decisions from EU & MS

11. We are concern since:
Coherence and Coordination:
 It is rather conservative and general on
recommendations among EU & national policies.
If analyses on EU forest related Strategies, EU
forest funds allocation and previous Forest
Action Plan were included, it could be more
specific and effective.
HOW: Possible options & instruments/Policy options:
 The suggestions of this chapter are arbitrary and
need to be supported by strong arguments.

12. We are concern since:
Monitoring and Evaluation”:
 It doesn’t provide measureable
targets or indicators. It delegates to
the new Forest Action Plan them
 Strategy must stated clearly that
Action Plan will include well-
defined and measurable indicators
 Places mid evaluation on 2020,
which gives no time for
correctional actions

13. THANK YOU
PKOURAKLI@ORNITHOLOGIKI.GR
READ OUR OTHER ACTIONS
IN
WWW.BIRDLIFE.ORG
HTTP://WWW.BIRDLIFE.ORG/COMMUNITY
WWW.ORNITHOLOGIKI.GR