This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected;
however, some errors may remain.
Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest
Management: the Canadian Initiative1
J. Peter Hall 2
Abstract-In 1993, the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers
embarked on an initiative to defme, measure, and report on the
forest values Canadians want to sustain. This initiative, through
multidisciplinary participation resulted in 6 criteria Of sustainable
forest management. Each criterion has several elements to it. Each
element is associated wit one or more indicators that may be used
to track progress towards sustainability. Currently the Canadian
Forest Service is coordinating the development of a major progress
report on these criteria and indicators. This report is slated for
release in the year 2000. In doing this major year 2000 assessment ofthe entire suite of indicators close attention is placed on the
near term viability of reporting via these indicators. Can they be
routinely monitored? How are monitoring needs being changed to
address certain indicators? And which indicators are simply not
viable to measure and monitor in the near term? Throughout this
exercise, a close relationship has been cultivated with the international Montreal Process for Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable
Forest Management of temperate and boreal countries.
Forests are a major consideration in global discussions on
sustainable development. Canada accounts for 10% of the
world's forest land and almost 20% of global trade in forest
products, therefore, decisions and actions with regard to
sustainability can have a major impact on global economic,
social and environmental systems.
The issue and concept of sustainable development have
been popularized globally by the Brundtland Commission's
report, "Our Common Future." Sustainable development is
defined as "economic development that meets the needs of
the present generation without compromising the ability of
the future generations to meet their own needs." The concept
has greatest application in biological systems; particularly
forestry and agriculture. Since the tabling ofthe Brundtland
report, sustainable development has captured the imagination ofthe public as well as ofpolicymakers at local, national
and international levels. Sustainable development is a desirable objective for all individuals, institutions, economic
sectors, societies and indeed for the global community at
large. The term has stimulated much world wide discussion
at the conceptual level, and efforts are now being made to
apply it (Maini 1990). The issue has emerged from a growing
international realization that current levels of resource use
and international inequities were leading to potentially
devastating consequences. Sustainable development is a
Ipaper presented at the North American Science Symposium: Toward a
Unified Framework for Inventorying and Monitoring Forest Ecosystem
Resources, Guadalajara, Mexico, November 1-6, 1998.
2J. Peter Hall is Director, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources
Canada, 580 Booth St., Ottawa, ON, Canada. KIA OE4. Telephone: (613) 9478987, Fax: (613) 947-9090, e-mail: phall@nrcan.gc.ca
394
term reflecting human and societal values and needs, and
not a term intrinsic to forest ecosystems themselves. It is
therefore necessary to identify and define these values
before a structure to assess sustainability can be put in
place by governments or other institutions.
The role of forests in the biodiversity and climate change
conventions negotiated in association with the UNCED
process reflect the importance of sustainable forest management. The increasing commitment to environmental
stewardship also reflects the view that the environment,
including its natural resources, is not an asset inherited
from the past but one held in trust for future generations.
Consequently, forest-related activities must maintain the
productive and renewal capacities offorest ecosystems while
protecting a variety of non-timber forest values; aesthetics,
wildlife and fisheries habitats, watersheds, and cultural
values. Sustainability is supported by a knowledge of the
condition offorest ecosystems, and the ability to understand
this enables the implementation of adaptive forest management methods. This process then enables policymakers
to implement programs to detect the symptoms of damage to
forest ecosystems and take appropriate action (Hall and
Addison 1990). This paper describes the assessment of
sustainability in Canada using two systems of Criteria and
Indicators (C&1) for the sustainable management offorests.
Canadian Processes for Assessing
Sustainable Development
A formal integration of science and policy develops from
necessity. Forest-related issues are growing in number
and complexity, while the means to deal with them is
declining as both private and public sectors are struggling to
reduce expenditures. Furthermore, many global forest issues either have their genesis in scientific discovery or
require scientific knowledge or new technologies for their
resolution. Policy involves defining the issues for the forest
sector, determining what additional knowledge is needed,
and bringing together the best information and resources to
design programs to address issues (Ottens 1997).
Strong links exist between international developments
and science because many global forest policy issues are
science-driven; climate change, ozone depletion, changes in
biodiversity, sustainable forest management, trans-boundary air pollution all have their origin in science. To a large
extent, however, it is not until these issues are perceived by
the public as dangers to health, safety, and market competitiveness or access that they become issues of public
policy. As a consequence these policy issues require sciencebased solutions, especially if regulation and legislation are
the outcomes of the policy resolutions.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
A framework of criteria and indicators of sustainable
forest management is being implemented in many countries as they move from the general goal of sustainable
yields to the broader concept of sustainable development.
There is a need to define the key elements or values to be
sustained, and within each of these criteria, measurable
indicators to demonstrate progress toward specific objectives (Anonymous 1995a). This can then provide a focal point
for domestic policy development and program orientation,
and a common language by which to discuss concepts of
sustainable development nationally and internationally.
The Canadian Process
In 1993, the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM)
embarked on an initiative to define, measure and report on
the forest values Canadians want to sustain and enhance.
With the support of technical and scientific advisors, the
CCFM consulted extensively with officials and scientists
from the federal, provincial and territorial governments, as
well as with experts from the academic community, industry, non-governmental organizations, the Aboriginal community and various other interest groups (Anonymous
1995b). The results were reflected in "Defining Sustainable
Forest Management: A Canadian Approach to Criteria and
Indicators" published in March 1995. The development of
these C&I termed here, the Canadian Process, is an important step in meeting Canada's domestic commitments on
sustainable forest management. This commitment to sustainability is supported by a National Forest Strategy endorsed in March 1992 by federal, provincial and territorial
governments and by other interested groups including industry, Aboriginal peoples and environmental associations.
Over the years, governments have been rethinking their
forest policies to better reflect the principles of sustainable
management. Activities range from revising forest legislation to take into account a wide array of forest values, to
developing programs that involve the public in ecosystem
management plans and reso:urce strategies.
The C&I are intended to provide a common understanding
and scientific definition of sustainable forest management.
Together they serve as a framework for describing and
measuring the state of our forests, for implementing adaptive forest management, and assessing progress toward
sustainability. The information is needed to shape forest
management policies and to focus research on areas where
we need to improve our technology and knowledge. The C&I
Table
framework reflects an approach to forest management based
on the recognition that forests ecosystems provide a wide
range of environmental, economic and social benefits to
Canadians and that sustainable forest management demands an informed and participatory public, as well as the
best available information and knowledge.
The six sustainable forest management criteria that
have been identified include traditional concepts, such as
timber values, but go beyond economics to encompassamong others-environmental, social and Aboriginal values
(Table 1). Each criterion is subdivided into a number of
indicators; a total of 83 have been established to help track
progress in achieving sustainable development by balancing
environmental, economic and social objectives. No single
criterion or indicators is a measure of sustainability on its
own, but together they can highlight trends or changes in the
status of forests and forest management over time.
Soon after the release of the C&I framework, the
CCFM created a task force to report on Canada's ability to
measure the various indicators. This task force included
representatives from the federal, provincial and territorial
governments. Teams of experts and a technical committee
representing many forest interests drafted a preliminary on
the C&I using data collected from a wide range of sources.
The report was then reviewed and approved by the cooperators and contributors (Anonymous 1997a).
Montreal Process
The group known as the Montreal Process Criteria and
Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Temperate and boreal forests was established following the endorsement ofa statement of political commitment known as the "Santiago Declaration." The Montreal
Process consists of a set of seven criteria and 67 indicators
applicable to temperate and boreal forests for use by respective policymakers at the national level. The Montreal
Process Working Group includes: Argentina, Australia,
Canada, Chile, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico,
New Zealand, the Russian Federation, the United States of
America and Uruguay. These countries cover five continents
and together represent 90% of the world's temperate and
boreal forests and 60% of all forests. Extensive areas of
tropical forests are also included in many of these countries. The countries account for 45% of world trade in wood
and wood products and 35% of the world's population
(Anonymous 1997b).
1.-Criteria of Canadian and Montreal Processes
Canadian Process (CCFM)
Conservation of Biological diversity
Maintenance and Enhancement of Ecosystem
Condition and Productivity
Conservation of Soil and Water Resources
Forest Ecosystem Contributions to Global Ecological Cycles
Multiple Benefits of Forests to Society
Accepting Society's Responsibility for Sustainable Development
Benefits to Meet the Needs of Societies
Montreal Process
Conservation of Biological Diversity
Maintenance of Productive Capacity of Forest Ecosystems
Maintenance of Forest Ecosystem Health and Vitality
Conservation and Maintenance of Soil and Water Resources
Maintenance of Forest Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Multiple Socioeconomic
Legal, Institutional and Economic Framework for Forest Conservation
and sustainable Management
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
395
The seven criteria included in the Montreal Process framework are each defined by indicators to measure progress
toward the values defined as sustainable for each of the
Criteria (Anonymous 1995a). Six of the criteria and indicators describe forest conditions, attributes, functions or benefits, and strongly resemble the goals, concepts and conditions in the Canadian Process.
The Criteria determined for the two systems reflect similar values desired from forests of the approaches used to
assess sustainability (Table 1). The individual elements
and indicators differ between the processes, but there is
about an 80% overlap. The seventh Criterion in the Montreal
Process is a description of institutional factors to enable
reporting, and the implementation of sustainable forest
management in the various countries (Anonymous 1995a).
Issues Emerging from the C&I
Process
The reports completed to date introduce forest ecosystems
and forest management in Canada, explaining the area of
forest covered, and identify forest-management characteristics affecting sustainability. The C&1 are considered in
the context of providing information on trends in the status
of forests and related values over time, and are based on
monitoring programs currently in place. Much of the data
required for national reporting are provided through current information systems; other data and methods for reporting need to be developed or improved. Some indicators
are expected to evolve as new data, techniques, or research
results become available. Where there are currently no
reasonable quantitative measures; qualitative or descriptive indicators are used to describe the relationship of
indicators to sustainability, or an ability to report on the
indicator.
In order to be effective on an international level, C&I
must be compatible with similar international processes,
while providing detail and precision on national values.
National circumstances differ in economic development,
patterns ofland ownership, population, forms of social and
political organization, and expectations ofhow forests should
contribute or relate to society. C&I facilitate international
reporting, and provide the framework for international
agreements while reflecting national differences in characteristics and descriptions of forests. One result of this
reporting process has been the emergence of a number of
forest management issues that will influence forest science
and forest ecosystem management in the future.
National System of Forest Classification
In Canada, as in most countries, there are systems in
place to classify forest and other terrestrial ecosystems.
These have been developed for various purposes of land!
resource management and have proven generally useful,
but tend to be regional in coverage and based on different
goals and methods. The need for a national system soon
became evident as a result of C&I reporting. The development of a system of classification ofthe Forest Ecosystems of
Canada represents a natural extension of ecological land
classification work conducted over past decades by federal
396
and provincial agencies. This has been identified as a
priority in the National Forest Strategy particularly to
improve reporting capability. A baseline description of
Canada's forest composition will be established that will
provide a fundamental tool for assessing impacts and trends
resulting from timber and fire management practices,
changes in atmospheric and climatic properties, and introduction of exotic pests and diseases. These plot data could
also supplement information from a network of permanent
forest inventory plots being currently developed as a component of a new national forest inventory. An important
objective of the classification of forest ecosystems is to
describe the most common forest ecosystems of Canada and
their associated site conditions across climatic gradients.
Such a standard ecological framework based primarily on
existing vegetation structure and species composition will
be suitable for the reporting and assessment of the C&I
processes.
It is expected that the project will be a cooperative undertaking among the CFS, provincial and territorial governments, and universities. In order to provide a framework for
the discussion of sustainable forest management the concept of forest type based on a forest ecosystem classification
is used. Ideally, forest type can be expanded beyond tree
species groupings to a concept forest ecosystem mapping.
At the point at which ecosystems are mapped, the forest
type mapping becomes a highly effective tracking of the
distribution and abundance of ecosystems and hence, their
diversity (Anonymous 1998). Changes in the diversity of
ecosystems allows some ability to estimate the potential
changes in availability of habitat for species and hence to
estimate potential changes in species diversity. Using
forest type as a surrogate for ecosystem diversity, for example, relies on the ability to track or predict changes in the
nature, extent and distribution of aggregated forest types
at national or regional scales. Some benchmark record or
historical record of forest type must be used against which
to measure the degree of change and repea ted measures over
time can then indicate expansion, contraction, loss and
creation of forest types. The interpretation of changes in
the distribution and abundance of forest types can be used
as a signal that changes may be occurring in species and
genetic diversity of forests. The concept of forest type is
basic to the description of many aspects of the condition of
forest ecosystems.
National System of Forest Inventory
Canada has had a national forest inventory for several
decades based upon the aggregation of the provincial and
territorial inventories. These inventories have served the
purposes of timber management, a primary responsibility of
resource management in provincial governments. In recent decades as forests have become recognized as more
than a resource base with many values of importance; the
need for a different approach to forest inventory has become
apparent. From a national perspective current inventories
suffer from a variety of designs, they cannot track change
over time, and they do not report on new values, particularly
those of socioeconomic significance, non fibre values, etc.
Consequently, systems in place for many decades are no
longer sufficient to answer current and projected demands.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
At the same time, the timber management demands have
not disappeared, but rather increased because of the need
to maintain the resource base in the face of the many
demands on it. Consequently, forest management agencies
in Canada are in the process of developing a new plot-based
inventory, designed to report over time, a range of values for
use in reporting for a number of national initiatives, of
which C&I are prominent ones. It is expected that a newly
designed inventory can assist materially in reporting on
approximately one-third of indicators in both process. Other
national reporting requirements are centered on biodiversity, ecosystem preservation and global change, all of which
are to be addressed by a new national forest inventory.
Range of Historic Variation & Baseline
It is necessary to understand the changing nature of
forests, to identify when change is induced by human intervention, and how this change affects sustainability. When
disturbances and stress remain at levels within the range of
natural variation and the biological components and processes of the forest are maintained, then forest health will
also be maintained since forest ecosystems are inherently
dynamic and adapted to stress. Since it is extremely difficult
to manage for all species individually, it is necessary to
maintain the processes that species have evolved with and
are now dependent on. Stresses beyond the limits of tolerance can thus be expected to adversely affect sustainability
(Anonymous 1998).
The impacts of forest management activities might create conditions in forests beyond the limits of tolerance of
species. Prevention of the introduction of exotic insects and
diseases into forests that might cause extensive damage in
the absence of natural controls is a key part of sustainable forest management. Air pollution is another anthropogenic stress that is known to impact negatively on forest
sustaina bili ty.
Several indicators in both processes use the concept of
areas of forest affected by agents beyond the range ofhistoric
variation. It is difficult to define all the interrelationships
and needs of species or processes within an ecosystem, but
recognition of historic disturbance regimes and habitat
conditions is necessary to provide a framework for interpreting current data and information.
The issue for C&I is to determine what baselines against
which assessments can be made. In many areas these are
lacking in whole or in part, and new ones must be used. New
assumptions must be made against which to compare results from past assessments, and interpretations made for
the future. Reporting on C&I will use a mixture of new and
old baselines and this will complicate our application of
adaptive forest management.
Information Sources
This first C&I report described our present ability to
measure the forest values that Canadians want to sustain
and enhance. Generally speaking, the most current data
available describe timber management because values
such as forest type and age, and the incidence of natural
and human disturbances have been measured and moni tored
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
for many years. Economic indicators, such as employment
trends in the forest sector and the value of timber exports,
are also reported at the national level. Some indicators
such as the carbon budget, which is measured through
computer models, also can be reported on nationally.
In other areas, national and/or quantitative data do not
exist. Currently, efforts are underway to determine means
of addressing the lack of information on such topics as
biodiversity at the genetic level and measures of soil and
water quality. Existing data describe the range of disturbances occurring in forests that reflect past, rather than
current, practices. This indicates the need for development
and monitoring of new indicators.
There are also gaps in data for some socioeconomic indicators. We are presently unable to provide national economic analyses of non-timber values such as the recreational subsistence and Aboriginal use offorests; nor can we
fully report on the in-depth public involvement at various
levels in planning and monitoring forest practices. Qualitative descriptions or case studies are used to provide some
level of understanding of the status of indicators that lack
data.
There has been considerable progress in developing
measures of Canada's achievements in sustainable forest
management, but more work remains to be done. Future
efforts will focus on maintaining and expanding current
databases, developing methodologies to collect data for
such areas as the social elements of sustainability, and
improving our understanding of forest ecosystems. The
framework will be updated to include indicators that provide
a comprehensive picture of the sustainability of our forests
and that can be reported on nationally.
Reporting on both processes currently use data from
national and regional databases, from published scientific
literature and reviews of many subject areas. National
government databases include those in Natural Resources
Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Compendium of Canadian Forestry Statistics, Canada's Forest Inventory, and
the Canadian Centre for Geomatics, Canadian Road Networks Database. Databases from Environment Canada, and
other national cooperating agencies are also widely used.
Also included in this category are the periodic assessments
of the state of forest research and forest conditions in
Canada and abroad (Hall et al. 1998).
Data are compiled from geographic information systems
and remote sensing from satellite imagery. For example, a
change in the net area offorest available for timber production that can be obtained from satellite imagery, will be
directly correlated with the availability of timber and other
forest products. Sources of information often include results from operational research studies which may be sitespecific, thus limiting their applicability on a national scale.
Many indicators in one of the processes have an equivalent counterpart, or combination of counterparts in the
other framework. Information or data developed to report
on one process can therefore be used to report on the other
process, so the level of effort required to modify and present
information for the two processes is low. In some cases,
indicators have a comparable indicator, or combination of
indicators, in the other. Information required for one can
then be drawn, in part or in whole, from data or information
developed for the other. The level of effort required to modify
397
and present indicator results is then somewhat greater.
Finally, there are a few indicators that are unique to one of
the processes. The information may exist but in any case
the level of effort required to modify and present information
for one report could be considerable. These issues of data
management and the knowledge infrastructure required to
do assessments are major issues for governments, and are
being addressed through modern knowledge infrastructure
methods.
Assessing Sustainability
As data are analyzed and synthesized, and used to assess
sustainability in C&I reporting, forest managers begin to
look at forests differently. We are beginning to realize, as
the scientific community realized many decades ago, that
everything is related to everything else. This is a new
paradigm emerging for forest managers and policymakers.
The impacts and stresses on forests are a combination of
natural and anthropogenic factors; of insects, diseases, fire,
harvesting, pollution, land use changes all of which act
together. The impacts of these stresses also change in time
and space. At the same time our level of knowledge is
insufficient to take the action necessary to ensure sustainable forest management indicating continued need for research and monitoring. Natural impacts should not affect
sustainability, as defined by not beyond the natural limits of
variability, but since it is difficult to define this baseline, or
often to recognize it, our ability to 'manage' forests is consequently compromised.
Conclusions ------------------------------Northern and temperate forests are generally adapted to
damage by insects, diseases or weather events, and hence
few adverse effects on sustainability are expected. Forest
ecosystems are less well adapted to human-caused stresses
such as air pollution or global warming and exposure to
these adversely affect sustainability. Similarly, combinations of harvesting plus these stresses cause ecosystems to
react in a manner different from completely natural conditions. However, since humans and their activities are part
of these ecosystems, it is necessary to account for all activities and ensure that ecosystem needs are not compromised. Continuous assessments as described in criteria
398
and indicators enable the forest manager and the policymaker
to take remedial action in the face of environmental stress
and so ensure the goals of sustainable forest management.
The boreal and temperate forest countries of which
Canada is a major one, are being required to attain sustainable development to satisfy a combination of national and
international commitments. As· a result of these international agreements, protocols and commercial obligations a
series of Criteria and Indicators for sustainable forest management have been established and reported on. The basis
for the implementation of sustainable development policies
is an awareness of what is going on in our forests, and
maintaining an ability to report intelligently on changes in
our forests. Forests because of their vast areas, limited
populations, lack of accessibility have a number of characteristics that make them particularly challenging to manage. At the same time the new requirements for reporting
have resulted in new indicators and in new ways of expressing them. Canada participates in two systems of Criteria
and Indicators to measure progress in sustainable forest
management.
Literature Cited
Anonymous 1995a. Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation
and Sustainable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests.
The Montreal Process, Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa 27 p.
Anonymous 1995b. Defining Sustainable Forest ManagementA Canadian Approach to Criteria and Indicators, Canadian
Council of Forest Ministers, Ottawa. 22 p.
Anonymous 1997a. Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest
Management in Canada. Technical Report. Canadian Forest
Service, Ottawa, 137 p.
Anonymous 1997b. Canada's report on the Montreal Process
Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. Canadian Forest
Service, Ottawa, Canada (DRAFT) 139 p.
Anonymous 1998. Montreal Process report of the Technical Advisory Comm., June, 1998, 51 p.
Hall, J. Peter and Paul A. Addison. 1990. Response to air pollution: ARNEWS assesses the health of Canada's forests. Inform. Rep. DPC-X-34. 42 p.
Hall, P., W. Bowers, H. Hirvonen, G, Hogan, N. Foster, I. Morrison,
K. Percy, R. Cox, and P. Arp, 1998. Effects of Acidic Deposition on
Canada's Forests. Inform. Rep. ST-X-15, Science Branch, Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa, Canada, 23 p.
Maini, J.S. 1990. Sustainable Development and the Canadian
Forest Sector, The Forest. Chron. Vol:66-4, Aug. 1990. pp. 346-349.
Ottens, H. 1997. Science and Technology Networks: Policy
Framework, Science Branch, CFS Unpublished report. 56 p.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999