sophia-antipolis, 3 â€“ 4 february 2006

Silva Mediterranea«Mediterranean Forests and Sustainable Development » project

3rd project steering committee meeting, Sophia-Antipolis, 3 - 4 February 2006 1/1

MMEEEETTIINNGG OOFF TTHHEE SSTTEEEERRIINNGG CCOOMMMMIITTTTEEEE

SSOOPPHHIIAA--AANNTTIIPPOOLLIISS,, 33 –– 44 FFEEBBRRUUAARRYY 22000066_______________________________

1. INTRODUCTION :

The recommendations of the regional forum held in Rabat from 24 to 26 November 3005 led to the 3rd meeting of the steering committee for the « Mediterranean forests and sustainable development » project on 3 February 2006 in Sophia-Antipolis (France) on the premises ofPlan Bleu. The conclusions and recommendations of the forum, together with the identifying of intervention actions for the MFSD project for the period 2006-2008 in the framework ofthe new FAO/Plan Bleu partnership made up the major points of the agenda that can befound in Appendix 1. Saturday 4 February was devoted to a field trip organised by theObservatoire de la Forêt Méditerranéenne (OFME) in the Massif des Maures (Appendix 2).

During the meeting the activities carried out by the MFSD project in 2005 were discussed,and more especially the organisation of the regional forum held in Rabat from 24 to 26November 2005 on « Mediterranean forests and sustainable development :challenges,policies and governance ».

2. DEVELOPMENT OF THE MEETING:

Ten representatives from the Mediterranean countries: Albania, Algeria, Bulgaria, Cyprus,Spain, France, Italy, Lebanon, Morocco and Portugal took part in the 3rd meeting of theproject steering committee. As well as Plan Bleu, other international and regionalorganisations also participated in this meeting, including representatives of the EuropeanCommission, of the FAO, of the AIFM, of CIHEAM and of EFI (Medforex). A list of theparticipants is attached in Appendix 7.

Mr Benoît, the director of Plan Bleu, welcomed the participants and reminded them of theassignments and activities carried out by Plan Bleu in the framework of the MediterraneanAction Plan that emerged from the Barcelona Convention. He mentioned the reports thatPlan Bleu has just published, especially the 2nd edition of the Report on the Environment and Development (2005) and the document on the Mediterranean strategy for sustainabledevelopment (MSSD) that has been adopted by the Contracting Parties. The countries areasked to set up their own national strategies in the framework of this Mediterranean strategy. Plan Bleu has also been put in charge of monitoring the implementing of the MSSD bysetting up indicators. Forests and woodlands are thus at the very heart of sustainable ruraldevelopment that forms part of this strategy.

The France’s representative, Mr Chaudron, requested leave to speak and proposed that MrHoumy, chairman of the Silva Mediterranea Committee, chaires the steering committeemeeting. The participants unanimously applauded the proposal. Mr Houmy accepted topreside the session and thanked the participants for their confidence in him. He introducedthe session by evoking the current stakes concerning the preservation of the forests and theprotection of the environment. He went on to remind his audience that : (i) the year 2006 had been chosen as the year of deserts and desertification, (ii) the forest theme cannot bedissociated from other matters concerning sustainable development.



Mr Koyo congratulated the member countries of the Silva Mediterranea Committee on theirparticipation and on the holding of the steering committee meeting just two months after the Rabat forum and the 19th session of the Silva Mediterranea Committee.

Mr Dassonville then presented the agenda for the meeting (3 February 2006) to theparticipants, as well as the programme for the field trip (4 February 2006) organised by theObservatoire de la Forêt Méditerranéenne (OFME).

3. DISCUSSIONS AND RESULTS:

3.1. Overview of the work of the Rabat forum

After individual introductions of themselves by the participants, Mr de Montgolfierpresented the main points of the overview and the lessons learnedfrom the Rabat forum(Appendix 3). Among others, these points included:

- There is now a vision of the Mediterranean woodlands that is shared by a great majority of managers, scientists and specialists both at international and at national levels,concerning the main principles of sustainable development. The situation is more contrasted, however, when concrete policies have to be made. This can be explained by the diversity of the cases encountered and by the social-economic, institutional and cultural contexts of the countries in this region ;

- The many different types of uses and services concerning woodlands are acknowledged by all those concerned. Current work takes into account the economic value of these various uses and services, yet the difficulty resides in the concrete remuneration of services rendered by agro-sylvo-pastoral “good practises” such as protection against erosion, conservation of the biodiversity, reduction of the effects of climate change, and so on ;

- Participation by the local populations governs the success of sustainable development projects. This implies the full support of those concerned and this can only be achieved with in-depth facilitation work. Promising examples were presented during the forum ;

- Integration of sustainable development policies with other policies was also an omnipresent theme during the forum. However, contrasting situations can be observed depending on the country and the field of action. This integration can only be the result of a long process of learning, of mutual understanding and of negotiation. Exchanges among the countries could prove very fruitful here ;

- The financing of these policies or projects is another practical aspect that is particularly crucial for the implementing of the policies and projects. Indeed, very rigid or partitioned financial procedures could prove to be setbacks for integrated actions by the demobilising of the various stakeholders and lead to a loss in the credibility of this participation. For this reason it is essential to introduce procedures that are both innovative and well-structured according to the objectives, the assignments or the projects. This entails setting up assessment procedures and indicators to allow for these assessments, such as indicators for objectives, means, results, efficiency, and so on.

- Training was also widely evoked. This includes the training of forestry personnel, the training of those involved in development, from local elected representatives to farmers and breeders, as well as technicians, professional and trade specialists as well as administrative executives. Targeted training adapted to the audience is essential ;



The presentation of this overview was followed by a discussion. The main points that were raised included:

- The problems of climate change and desertification were not sufficiently dealt with during the forum. These aspects deserve to be taken into account and looked at in depth ;

- It is important to concentrate the activities of the project on the topics that interest all the countries in the region and not merely focus on specific problems that are of interest to one specific party ;

- The need to insist on the assets of the Mediterranean forests which are socially, economically and culturally important.

3.2. Identification of intervention actions

Concerning this point, the participants were encouraged to have recourse to a so-called“H-form” method which is similar to a prospective one and to brain-storming (a methodused by the Turkish team which carried out the case study for Turkey and present it duringthe forum) (Appendix 5).

For this, the participants were asked three questions, i.e.:

�� What strong and what weak points would you attribute to the first phase of theMFSD project?

�� Given the recommendations of the Rabat forum, which activities should beundertaken by the MFSD project during the period 2007-2008?

�� With the priorities issuing from this, which actions should be undertaken by theteam in charge of the project in 2006?

3.3. The strong and weak points of the MFSD project during its first phase

The purpose of this question is to attempt to draw up a balance sheet of the projectin the light of the activities undertaken during the first phase. The project is thusassessed in relation to the expectations of the countries concerned and representedby the steering committee. The assigned objectives for the MFSD project during its first phase were: (i) appraisal by theme, based on case studies to be carried out inseveral countries chosen by the steering committee, (ii) organisation of a regionalforum on the problems of the Mediterranean forests and sustainable developmenton the basis of the results of the case studies and of contributions from specialists in the region.

Concerning the project’s strong points, they were grouped according to 7 themes andclassified according to the number of points collected:

− Opportunity to give more dynamism to the Silva Mediterranea committee (15 points)− Interest of territorial approaches and case studies (15 points)− Forming of a joint vision concerning the Mediterranean woodlands (9 points)− The forum was of great interest and was well organised (6 points)− Respond to a real need for cooperation (experiences exchange network) (5 points)− Method for total economic assessment (3 points)



− Knowledge of local situations (0 point)

Concerning the weak points, 6 themes were distinguished and classified as follows:

− Poor institutional and financial support from the countries (15 points)− Lack of communication (need to communicate the message outside the region) (9 points)− Lack of opportunities and little synergy with the other conventions (8 points)− Shortcomings of case studies to highlight good practices (7 points)− Badly identified priorities and insufficient discussion about the obstacles/tools (5 points)− Lack of materialisation of the projects (3 points)

From this assessment exercise, it can be seen that the project ultimately presents more strongpoints (53 points) than weak ones (47 points). It can be observed that the objectives of theproject are well targeted and in conformity with the expectations of the countries in theregion, even if the means for the MFSD project fall far short of these great expectations.Moreover, some of the weak points, such as lack of institutional and financial support fromthe countries (15 points), are not directly attributable to the project but rather to the countries themselves, with the exception of France which has contributed considerable support via the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of agriculture, and Morocco, through theorganisation of the regional forum.

A discussion followed; the following prominent points sum up the substance of theexchanges quite well:

− The report or inventory made by the case studies does not appear in the strong points

− The « lack of materialisation of the project » weak point has to be nuanced becauseof the lack of visibility and communication around the projects

− Taking into consideration the countries’ expectations, there is great fear of breakingthe dynamic set off by the MFSD project if the latter is not renewed

− Despite the interesting achievements of the MFSD project, the way is still long to set up real cooperation among the countries of the region

3.4. Activities to be carried out in the period 2007 – 2008

The participants adopted a proposal made by Mr Fady Asmar consisting first of all inclassifying the recommendations via votes from the participants and then proposing priorityactions for the period 2007 – 2008. This work was carried out on the basis of a table thatincludes 17 recommendations from the Rabat forum (Appendix 3) among which theparticipants had to choose 5.

The classification, according to a descending order of importance, was as follows:

− Encourage the implementing of integrated sustainable development projects for the Mediterranean sylvo-pastoral areas (Rec. 3) (11 points)

− Reinforce the Mediterranean countries’ financial and political commitment and mobilise the financial mechanisms (Rec. 9) (10 points)

− Generalise the integrated and participative territorial measures ( Rec. 1B) (9 points)



− Exchange of experience and information in terms of indicators, of references for good practices and of tools for better contribution by the forestry sector to sustainable development (Rec. 2A) (9 points)

− Promotion of Mediterranean forestry and its stakes at international level (Rec. 2F)(9 points)

− Cooperation in the field of prevention and the fighting against forest fires (Rec. 2C)(8 points)

− Adaptation of the political strategies and national forestry programmes to the stakes and principles of sustainable development in the Mediterranean (Rec. 1A) (7 points)

The participants were then asked to propose concrete actions (maximum 5) for the period2007-2008 and to classify them according to the forum’s table of recommendations. Thispoint aroused some remarks and questions from the participants, some of which can bementioned:

�� According to the logic of the previous exercise, should open proposals concerning all the recommendations be classified or should the focus be on the points identifiedearlier as being of priority by the participants;

�� Group the actions to be carried out into 3 themes according to the competence of the responsible entity, (i) training and exchange of information (by CIHEAM), (ii)assistance to the countries (by the FAO) and (iii) observatory for the Mediterraneanforests and sustainable development (MFSD project / Plan Bleu) ;

�� The exercise consisted in defining the actions on which Plan Bleu’s activity in theframework of the MFSD project should be focused;

�� The objective is to propose actions to be carried out in the framework of a projectwhich still has to be formulated and for which funding still has to be found;

�� To encourage the involvement of the countries in the project, it is important to arouse their interest and to put forward the benefits that they could obtain (financial or other spin-off) ;

The chairman did, however, propose to the participants to continue the exercise in order tofind proposals for actions to be carried out during the period 2007 – 2008.

The result of this work can be synthesised as follows:

The relevant actions proposed could be classified according to the entity that would beresponsible for implementing them:

i/ Actions to be carried out in the framework of the MFSD project (2nd phase of the project)

− Continue the case studies initiated by the project and extend them to other countriesin the region (and/or to other contexts of the Mediterranean woodlands) ;

− Extend the case studies so as to develop other innovative topics such as : theassessment of non-commercial services, as well as cost/benefits approaches,integration of practices and/or territorial approaches in the management ofwoodlands (with MEDFOREX) ;

− Deepen questions concerning economic and financial tools as well as monitoringtools after the projects via new case studies ;



− Make a synthesis of the case studies carried out in the form of guidebooks/manualsand distribute them to the executives in the field (projects and/or institutions) so as to promote the exchange of experience in good practices;

− Organise a 2nd regional forum in 2008 with a view to assessing the stages crossed and to prospect for future cooperation possibilities;

− Propose ideas for relevant national and/or regional projects on the basis of the results of the case studies carried out in the countries;

− Adopt performance indicators for the forestry sector regarding sustainabledevelopment adapted to the Mediterranean contexts (choose about fifteen or sopriority indicators);

− Build up the 1st phase for an observatory and/or supervision network for the adopting of good management and governance practices

− Establish a monthly or bi-monthly information sheet (2 pages) to inform theMediterranean forestry workers, as well as those of other regions, about the MFSDproject (activities underway, meetings planned, problems and/or challenges raised) to be distributed electronically and to be available on Plan Bleu and SilvaMediterranea web sites;

− Inform others about the project’s objectives and activities during internationalmeetings (e.g. the consultative committee for forests and cork in Brussels) and makethe project known by other institutions and/or countries in the region;

− Assess the adaptability of the national forestry strategies, policies and programmes in the Mediterranean region ;

− Encourage and/or assist the countries with the establishing, updating andimplementing of their national forestry programmes.

iii/ Actions to be carried out in the framework of the Silva Mediterranea committee

− Develop a joint Mediterranean strategy for the prevention and the fight against forest fires based on past experiences through a dynamic approach (not on the basis of aproject) ;

− Develop the relationship between forest fires and energy use (through a regionalworkshop or project);

− Propose a regional project for the sustainable management of cork oak forests in thecountries of the western Mediterranean (Portugal, Spain, Morocco, Algeria, France,Tunisia, Italy);

− Propose a regional project for forest fires in the Mediterranean region by capitalisingpast experience (national and/or regional experiences);

− On the basis of case studies results, develop projects around several problems so asto find funds from the regional and/or international institutions (FAO, EuropeanCommission, GEF, etc.) ;

− Lobby at the European Commission;

− Constitute a bank of territorial projects which are of regional interest that can besubmitted to donors during various meetings;



− Establish a regional partnership framework for consultation among the variouspartners (institutions responsible for forest management, research institutions,training institutions, NGOs and civil society) ;

− Organise a multi-discipline international conference on Mediterranean forests (forestmanagement and economy, forest ecology, forest fires, and so on) ;

− Prospect for a multi-donor regional partnership framework to support the financingof Mediterranean cooperation;

− Prospect for the possibilities to use the European financial instruments (Inter-reg,Forest Technology Platform, Forest cost actions, etc. ;

iv/ Actions to be carried out by all the institutions concerned in this matter : PlanBleu, FAO, CIHEAM, AIFM, IUCN and national institutions

− Identify needs for specific training in terms of sustainable development for forestsand/or woodlands ;

− Adapt the national forestry strategies and policies to the priorities and principles of sustainable development in the Mediterranean ;

− Propose the ways to develop and improve synergy with the other internationalconventions: CBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD ;

− Develop a regional project for climate change and its impact on Mediterraneanforests and/or woodlands ;

− Prepare a regional workshop gathering together training centres with the objectiveof discussing the specificities of the training of the Mediterranean foresttechnicians ;

− Set up a network for educational exchanges with the national and/or regionalpartners (CIHEAM, FAO, IUCN, MEDFOREX, etc.);

− Prospect the financing instruments and channels proposed by the post-Riointernational conventions.

The exercise led to great discussion and remarks from the participants, the prominent pointson which the participants insisted being:

�� Some of the forum’s recommendations go far beyond the framework of the MFSDproject but they are of interest to the countries in the context of the SilvaMediterranea Committee;

�� It is essential to think about the tools to mobilise stakeholders, to make themresponsible and to encourage solidarity, and thus, an economic assessment of non-commercial services of woodlands is all important ;

�� The importance of communication was underscored by the participants whopropose to carry the message to the European level ;

�� With regard to training, it was pointed out that the CIHEAM can play an importantrole given its experience in the region ;

�� Networking (but not research, strictly speaking) is a real stake for sustainabledevelopment.



3.5. Actions to be carried out by the MFSD project during the year 2006

The activities proposed in this paragraph concern the work programme for the MFSD project in the framework of support by France for implementing the Letter of Agreement linking the latter to the FAO (GCP/INT/904/FRA). The main activities proposed are:

− To carry out the case studies planned by the project, especially those concerningthe Souk Ahrass regional park in Algeria, the Polino regional park in Calabria(Italy) with the support of the Region of Calabria and the Italian « Corpo Forestale » as well as the case study in Lebanon concerning integrated ruraldevelopment, peri-urban forests and eco-tourism, at the watershed level.

− To carry out a case study in Albania on overgrazing, degradations, erosion andsustainable sylvo-pastoral management, proposed by the representative of Albania ;

− To analyse the results of the first three case studies carried out (in Morocco, inFrance and in Turkey) and to propose, in consultation with the concerned countries, national or regional project ideas;

− To draw up a synthesis of the communications presented at the Rabat regionalforum and to propose ideas for regional and/or sub-regional projects, the financingof which could be requested in consultation with the countries concerned ;

− To give some presentations to donors during meetings in order to communicate the project’s objectives and activities (European Commission in Brussels, in Cyprusduring the Commission of Forests for the Near East, and so on);

− To prepare, on the basis of the priority actions identified for the period 2007-2008,a project document to be discussed with the project steering committee and, withthe support of the FAO, to submit it for financing by one or several donors.

Other activities were proposed for the year 2006 to be carried out in the framework ofthe Silva Mediterranea Committee, to support the MFSD project. These include:

�� The organising of a workshop for cork oak by Portugal with the support of the AIFM and the MFSD project ;

�� The preparing of a concrete project by Portugal concerning the cork oak network byJune 2006.

4. CONCLUSION :Synthesis of the forum :The overview of the forum presented by Mr J. de Montgolfier was very much appreciated. It helped to point out the main conclusions of this forum.

However, the quantity and quality of the presentations demonstrate that there is still a lot ofwork to be done. An in-depth overview would help, for instance, to bring out ideas forprojects of national and/or regional interest.

Project assessment :An assessment of the 1st phase of the project demonstrates that the project has helped tomake real progress that can be seen in:

i) the interest of territorial approaches and case studies

ii) the development of a common vision of the Mediterranean woodlands



iii) an response to a real need for exchange and cooperation thanks to the organisationof the regional forum of Rabat

The major weak points noted are:

i) poor institutional and financial support from the countries

ii) a lack of communication (need to communicate the message outside the countries

iii) a lack of opportunities and synergy with the other conventions

The first point lies with the countries themselves, because apart from France and Moroccowhich have contributed considerable financial support, the MFSD project has not receivedthe expected support. Nevertheless, some financial interest by the countries in the SilvaMediterranea Committee has been noticed thanks to the project activities. Concerning theother two weak points, the project will have to develop a communications programme tospread the message outside countries and to potential donors .

Activities to be carried out by the project in 2007 – 2008

The activities proposed in the framework of the MFSD project for the period 2007 – 2008(2nd phase of the project) will focus on three main points:

i) the constitution of a reference book of good practices for the sustainablemanagement of woodlands ;

ii) this point will be developed through the continuation of case studies to cover other important aspects including : the assessment of non-commercial services and thecost/benefits approach, integration of practices and a territorial approach to the managementof woodlands, etc;

iii) the creation of a Mediterranean observation network concerning woodlands goodmanagement practices and governance ;

iv) This point will be developed through the adoption of performance criteria andindicators for the sustainable management of woodlands adapted to the Mediterraneancontext ;

v) Forest actions and sustainable development of the territories : strengthening ofcapacities for strategic planning ;

This point will be developed through the interpretation of the prospective studies carried out in the Mediterranean in terms of regional and national strategic orientation, and theexpression of these orientations in terms of objectives for the national forestry programmesand also through the creation of a Mediterranean forestry prospective network.

On the basis of these identified priorities, prepare a project document that will constitute the2nd phase of the current MFSD project to be submitted for financing, with the support of the FAO and in consultation with France and the concerned countries.

Project activities in 2006

The activities proposed for the year 2006 remain in the same logic as the current project, according to the objectives that were set for it, i.e.:

i) Continue with the planned case studies (in Algeria, in the region of Calabria, and in Lebanon) ;



ii) Carry out a new case study in Albania in consultation with the concerned authorities

iii) Carry out an analysis of the performed case studies and propose , with the concerned countries, project ideas to be submitted for funding ;

iv) On the basis of the priorities identified during the 3rd meeting of the steering committee, prepare, with the support of FAO and in consultation with France, a project document that will make up the 2nd phase of the current MFSD project.

ATTACHMENTS :

Appendix 1: Agenda of the project steering committee meeting

Appendix 2: Programme for the field trip organised by “Observatoire forestier méditerranéen”

Appendix 3: Recommendations of the regional forum of Rabat, 24 - 26 November 2006

Appendix 4: Overview of the forum of Rabat by Jean de Montgolfier, 23 January 2006

Appendix 5: Development of the meeting using the H-Form method

Appendix 6: Restitution of brainstorming on the H-form method

Appendix 7: List and contacts of the participants in the 3rd project steering committee meeting

Silva MediterraneaProject « Mediterranean forests and sustainable development »

33rrdd sstteeeerriinngg ccoommmmiitttteeee mmeeeettiinnggSophia-Antipolis, 3rd – 4th February 2006

Provisional agenda

Thursday 2nd February 2006 - Arrival of the participants at Nice Côte d’Azur Airport

- Welcome to the participants and transfer to the Hotel "Le Meridien"

19H00 Dinner at the Hotel "Le Meridien" (Juan les Pins)

Friday 3rd February 2006

08H30 Departure to Sophia-Antipolis

9H00 - 9H30 - Welcome to the participants by the Plan Bleu - Information to the participants

10H00 – 12H30

- Recall of the recommendations of the regional forum of Rabat

- Discussions about the implementation of these recommendations & the role of the project MFSD

12H30 - 14H00 Lunch in Sophia-Antipolis

14H30 – 17H00 :

- Identification of fields and priority directions of intervention of project MFSD over the period 2006 -2008, within the framework of the new partnership agreement FAO/Plan Bleu

- Expected results 2008

- Means necessary to reach them- Activities of the project MFSD during 2006

17H30 Return to the Hotel "Le Meridien"

19H30 Dinner in the restaurant (Antibes/Juan Les Pins)

Saturday 4th February 2006

Morning: Field visit (coordinator: Observatoire de la Forêt Méditerranéenne, OFME)

13H00 Lunch

15H00 Return to Juan les Pins

17H00 Informal meeting at the initiative of the President of the committee Silva Mediterranea20H00 Dinner in the restaurant (Antibes/Juan Les Pins)

Sunday 5th February 2006

Return of the participants

Silva MediterraneaProjet « Forêts méditerranéennes et développement durable »


Field visit organised by « l’Observatoire de la forêt méditerranéenne »

Samedi 4 février 2006- 8h00 :

- Departure from the Hotel “Le Méridien”

- 9 h 30 :

- Arrival at La Garde - Freinet and welcoming by Doctor André Werpin, Mayor

- 9 h 45 :

- Presentation of the Observatory “OFME” and the actions of the forest communes

- 10 h 00 :

- Presentation of the Forest Charter of the Territory of the Maures

- 10 h 45 :

- Valorisation of forest products by wood energy :

��Visit of the boiler of Ramatuelle in the presence of Mr Noël Arizzi,councillor of the commune and Mr Bruno Quivy, in charge of thepublic relations

- 11 h 30 :

- Defence of forests against fires :

��Cut of the radio beacon on the Gassin and Ramatuelle communes in the presence of Jacques Brun, director of the environment service ofthe SIVOM of the “Pays des Maures” and the Saint-Tropez Gulf

- 12 h 15 :

- Forest resources mobilisation :

��Handing-over in production of the cork branch of the Var department(on the same site of the radio beacon) by re-mobilisating the forestowners,

��Valorisation of the chestnut forest: presentation by Alain Lesturgezand a member of the ASL of cork oak forest of the Var department(to be confirmed)

- 13 h 00 :

- Lunch

- 15 h 00 :

- Return to Juan les Pins

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------06 Janvier 2006 1/3


Forestry sector and sustainable developmentin the Mediterranean :

challenges, policies and governance

Regional forum, Rabat 24 - 26 November 2005

Conclusions & Recommendations

More than a hundred managers, experts and researchers from the Mediterranean countries andinternational and regional organisations met during the regional Forum " Forestry sector and sustainable development in the Mediterranean: challenges, policies and governance " held in Rabat from the 24th to 26th November 2005. This forum was organised by the “Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à laLutte Contre la Desertification” of the Kingdom of Morocco and by the Plan Bleu, within theframework of the partnership established with FAO and with the support of France, following therecommendations of the Committee Silva Mediterranea.

Report and Stakes

The participants:

1. Recalled:- the specificities of the Mediterranean forests and woodlands and their historical link

with people; - their global importance in terms of biodiversity;- their essential role in the hydrological cycle and combating desertification.

2. Underscored :- the social and economic importance of these wooded areas in the livelihood of the rural

populations, in particular in the eastern and southern Mediterranean countries; - the role these resources play in fighting poverty and in enhancing food security; - their current and potential importance in terms of non-wood forest products, goods and

services including the development of a sustainable tourism.

3. Emphasized the need to alert the political and economic decision makers of the Mediterranean countries and the European Union on:

- the gravity of degradation of these forests and woodlands on account of neglect andoverexploitation;

- the irremediable loss of biodiversity (ecosystemic, specific, genetic), the increase in fire incidence, the silting of dams and the consequent environmental impacts;

- their increasing effects on the whole of the Mediterranean economies and societies and in the long-term stability of Euro-Mediterranean area.

4. Appreciated the first evaluation of the ecological and economic value of the non-marketedbenefits of the Mediterranean forests highlighting the importance of the multi-functionality ofMediterranean forests and woodlands.

5. Noted the relevance of the many cases demonstrating the possibility of closely associating the populations in the design and implementation of forestry policies and programmes, and theintroduction of a better governance involving all stakeholders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------06 Janvier 2006 2/3


6. Welcomed the recent progress made regarding the integration of the principles of sustainabledevelopment in forest policies, notably by setting up integrated and participative localdevelopment actions, such as elaborated in the various examples and studies presented at theforum.

7. Underscored:

- the growing role that forest managers can and must play in sustainable ruraldevelopment in the Mediterranean,

- the need for reinforcing the human capacities and financial means to reverse theunacceptable current trend from the economic, social and environmental points of view,

- the need for developing and for sharing specific case studies, bearing on problems oflocal or regional importance (natural and/or assisted regeneration, landscaperestorations, ...).

Directions and Proposed Actions

The participants recommend:

1. To continue and accelerate: the adaptation of national forest strategies, policies andprogrammes to the priorities and principles of sustainable development in the Mediterranean by giving emphasis to integrated and participative approaches to contribute to the MillenniumDevelopment Goals and the various conventions of the United Nations (Biodiversity, ClimaticChange and Combating Desertification) and those of the Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development; development of performance indicators and the development and adoption ofcertification.

2. To reinforce Mediterranean cooperation, North-South and South-South, for :

- Developing a platform and network for sharing experience and information as regardsindicators, references of good practices and tools for increasing the contribution of theforestry sector to sustainable development;

- reinforcement of the synergy between the various research and regional training centres aiming at introducing, into their programmes, new tools and integrated and participative development approaches;

- reinforcement of Mediterranean cooperation by developing concrete actions onpreventing and controlling forest fires, addressing climatic change and supporting thesustainable management of the cork forests;

- increase the awareness about Mediterranean forestry and its challenges at theinternational and regional levels, such as the United Nations Forum on Forests and theEuro-Mediterranean conferences on environment and rural development.

3. To encourage the involvement of the local authorities and the civil society organizations,particularly the national, regional and international NGOs, for the implementation of integrated and sustainable projects in the Mediterranean region.

4. To continue and broaden experience associating all stakeholders, particularly the inhabitantsand users, in the design and implementation of conservation and management programmes and projects

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------06 Janvier 2006 3/3


5. To ensure that forest projects take into account the restoration of the functions ofMediterranean forests, to improve their contribution to the economic and social well-being ofthe population and conserve biodiversity.

6. To evaluate and develop a better understanding of the economic, social and ecological impacts of the global challenges on Mediterranean forests, in particular those of climatic changes, andbuild up appropriates strategies.

7. To evaluate the consequences of the national, regional and international processes, such as the bilateral and multilateral agreements on free trade and competitiveness, including access to the Mediterranean forest products markets, and to identify appropriate actions.

8. To take action leading to the establishment of a platform meant for sharing regionalexperiences and to follow up the development of forests and forestry that would help countries in decision-making. This would also help to avoid duplication of efforts, to reinforce synergies between different organizations and to encourage the involvement of existing institutions.

9. To reinforce financial and political commitments of the Mediterranean countries and tomobilize bilateral, multilateral and community mechanisms for financing development in thesedirections, in particular with regard to the link between climate change and the Mediterraneanforest ecosystems.

10. To continue, with the support of France and other countries and donors concerned in the region, the project "Mediterranean forests and sustainable development" carried out by the Plan Bleu, in line with these objectives.

11. To invite the Plan Bleu and FAO to hold the Project Steering committee, within 2 months, tospecify concrete actions to be given to the forum recommendations.

12. To bring the elements of this declaration to the knowledge of national, regional andinternational authorities concerned, and in particular to the next session of the SilvaMediterranea committee.

FAO Silva Mediterranea Plan Bleu Comité de pilotage 03-02-2006 1

FORESTRY SECTOR AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

A REFLECTION AFTER THE RABAT FORUM

Jean de Montgolfier 23 January 2006

The Rabat Forum1 allowed us to situate the progress made in this area via the 48communications and case studies presented and the discussions that followed. Obviously, this point is not exhaustive because not all the countries2, nor all the issues, were represented onequal terms. Nevertheless, some main ideas and questions emerged.

This paper does not pretend to draw up a full overview of the situation, nor to replace the conclusions and recommendations adopted by the participants at the end of the forum: onthe contrary, it is largely based on these recommendations and conclusions. Its aim is merelyto supply the elements to set off the 3rd steering committee meeting of the project “Mediterranean forests and sustainable development” on the 3rd and 4th February 2006 inSophia-Antipolis.

A shared vision

Our first observation is that there is a common vision about the Mediterraneanwoodlands 3 shared by a large number of managers, scientists and specialists bothinternationally and nationally (although all of them do not agree on the terminology“woodlands” or “Mediterranean forests”, especially as translated in French).

This vision is revealed by what can be referred to as paradigmatic statements and iscompressed by key concepts, some of which are already old (such as those describing thespecificity of the various Mediterranean climates, soils, ecosystems, agrarian systems, ways of

1 The « Mediterranean forestry sector and sustainable development regional forum: challenges, policiesand governance » took place in Rabat from 24 to 26 November 2005. It was organised by the “HautCommissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte Contre la Désertification ” in the Kingdom of Morocco and byPlan Bleu, in the framework of the partnership established with the FAO with the support of France, followingthe recommendations of the Silva Mediterranea Committee. It brought together more than one hundredmanagers, specialists and researchers from the Mediterranean countries.

2 Out of the 48 communications presented, there was a strong west-east gradient, no doubt largely dueto the geographic location. 16 were from the host country, Morocco; 6 from international organisations (UNagencies, large NGOs, etc.); 5 from Spain ; 4 from Algeria ; 4 from Tunisia ; 3 from France ; 3 from Italy ; 2from Portugal ; 2 from Lebanon ; 1 from Cyprus ; 1 from Turkey ; 1 from Bulgaria.

3 Although the expression itself of woodlands is discussed by some authors who prefer the use ofMediterranean forests. The ones and others agree in principle: it is necessary to include not only the matorrals,maquis, garrigues in the considered areas, but also the rangelands covered with natural vegetation, such as thesteppes with perennial plants. While for the first ones, the word woodlands evokes much more the production of wood, for the seconds the word forests evokes the only large trees. The first expression however has theadvantage of corresponding to English wooded Lands, whose statistics of FAO give a precise definition. Inaddition, the English word landscape, in particular with the meaning used in landscape restoration, is veryinteresting; unfortunately the French word landscape has a visual connotation and badly translates itscomplexity.


life, cultures, and so on) and others which are more recent such as: multiple use, non-commercial use, environmental services, total economic value, multiple players, participation, policy integration, territorial planning, de-concentration, and de-centralisation, globaldevelopment, sustainable development, policy and project assessment, sustainablemanagement or development indicators, to name but a few.

In this vision, the great principles of sustainable development (long term, equity,effectiveness, management) are theoretically well integrated as principles for the policies andprojects intended to implement this vision.

Of course this vision is far from being widespread among the public at large or among stakeholders in the field; considerable awareness-raising and training remains to be carriedout; but this vision is starting to be widely shared by the « decision-makers » in theMediterranean forestry sector. This can be attributed to the work of internationalorganisations, and more especially to that of the FAO.

On the other hand, when the theoretical vision and the general principles have tobecome more concrete in order to set up policies, the situation is far more contrasted. Thisdiversity can be put down to the variety of cases met and the variety of the economic, social,political, institutional and cultural situations in the Mediterranean countries. Of all thecountries and organisations that highlighted the various aspects of the problems, Morocco,with the amount and quality of the communications presented, gave the fullest picture of thesituation in a given country, at national level as well as with regard to territories and projects.

Multiple uses and services

Concerning the economic assessment of non commercial uses and environmentalservices, the work carried out by the MEDFOREX network has demonstrated that there is afairly wide set of methods, the results of which obviously depend on the available data and on some hypothetical models, and that these methods provide with at least scope for the totaleconomic value of woodlands and the ventilation of this scope among the various uses andservices, according to the type of area. This very interesting work deserves to be continuedand dealt with in depth. It could notably supply some important elements that wouldcontribute to the setting of objectives for forestry planning and management at various levels(country, region, county or province, land or territory with a “charter for sustainable forestrydevelopment”).

On the other hand, when passing from the economic level to the financial one, thesituation can fall short of expectations. For instance, the economic value of the“environmental service” represented by protection against erosion ensured by the naturalvegetation in watershed basins can be assessed. But the agro-sylvo-pastoral “good practices” carried out by the inhabitants of upstream basins for the benefit of downstream inhabitants are hard to estimate in terms of remuneration. These good practices often entail additional costs(not necessarily monetary ones, but often in terms of work time) and loss of earnings (at least in the short term) for the upstream populations who are often poor; whereas they are of greatvalue for the downstream populations especially as they slow down the speed of the silting of the dams. But how can part of this value be transformed into remuneration for servicesrendered? There is certainly food for thought here, for experiments and exchanges implyingnumerous dimensions, not only technical and social ones but also social, administrative, legal


ones, or others. Although in contexts that are generally very different, this problem is relatedto issues such as the ecoconditionnality of the European agricultural policy or to someplanning and management schemes for the water per watershed basin that are being put inplace, in France for instance.

Another example: the connection between agro-sylvo-pastoral good practices that canmaintain biodiversity and the income that can be earned from all forms of eco-tourism. How can this income be developed and benefit the populations who are often mountain or pastoraland are likely to act in a positive way by their good practices? Some encouraging cases suchas those in Morocco have been demonstrated.

Such questions are even more important given that once again it has beenacknowledged that wood in the Mediterranean region is not a source of commercial incomethat is sufficient to finance sustainable forest management. As for products other than wood(fruit, mushrooms, aromatic and medicinal plants, honey, and so on), they are sometimes veryinteresting resources as long as there are marketing channels, but they are not sufficientlydeveloped. Then there is cork, an emblematic product of the western Mediterranean, whoseprice fluctuates considerably from high to low in a mysterious way. The repercussions ofglobalisation and of free-trade on these various markets will no doubt be contrasted:favourable for well identified quality products, unfavourable for mass market products.

A point that has practically not been brought up is that of property rights andcustomary rights. Yet it would seem that clarification of these rights is essential if thequestion of remuneration for “environmental services” is to be dealt with: Who has a right towhat? Who has to pay? Who should be remunerated? In cases where there are bad practices,to what extent can the principle of “the polluter has to pay” be applied?

Participation and integration

Concerning participation, an approach which is often emphasised in manyinternational and national declarations, the forum proposed some interesting clarifications:Yes, participation is often the key to success for sustainable development or environmentalmanagement projects, but it should be real participation, not merely one limited to words or to superficial, apparent agreement by the participants. The stakeholders involved should trulyadhere to the projects in question. This generally implies in-depth work by a facilitatingteam that should acquire thorough knowledge of the field and the stakeholders and then gaintheir confidence and undertake a long process of negotiations during which conflict of opinion cannot be avoided.

Some significant examples were referred to in very different contexts: ruraldevelopment (North Africa, Turkey), rehabilitation of territory after fires (Portugal), territorycharters (France). The methods for setting up and facilitating sustainable developmentprojects at territorial level would seem to be one of the topics for which mutual exchange with other Mediterranean countries could be extremely enriching, especially between the countriesof the south and the east, some of which have made considerable progress in this area.Prospective approaches could also be seen as elements of these methods. But it should not be forgotten that more than methods, it is the personal commitment of the actors that conditionsthe success of these actions. It would seem that coordinators from the world of forestry,thanks to their knowledge of the territory and the people who live there, are often in a good


position to carry out these roles. There is here a great opportunity for many forestry workersto widen their classical tasks to involve global rural development.

A question connected with that of participation, the question of carrying out theprojects autonomously was also evoked: it implies using local skills and manpower as muchas possible and minimising recourse to external enterprises. This offers the dual advantage ofreducing costs and, more especially, of promoting the appropriation of the project by the local population.

Integration of policies for sustainable development and for the environment with theother policies is also an omnipresent topic of debate at least theoretically at both State andregional levels. In reality the situations vary according to the country and the field of action.The case of Spain is very interesting: in this country which is very much decentralisednowadays the forestry policy is the responsibility of the regions or autonomias. It would seem that some regions have been successful in the integration of their forestry policy with theother policies for land use planning, whereas others have been much less successful. Thedevelopment of national or regional forestry plans could be an ideal opportunity for all of thecountries to carry out policy integration. But then again, the success of the integration is notautomatic; it is the result of a long process of learning, of mutual knowledge, of negotiationsand resolutions of conflicts between various authorities at various levels. Exchanges amongthe Mediterranean countries could prove very fruitful in this area too, although more difficultdue to the very political nature of some stakes.

A major problem is that of the landscape integration throughout the Mediterraneanregion of sustainable development concerns in the planning of town growth and that ofinfrastructure networks such as transport. This type of planning is often neglected orineffective. This question goes far beyond the forestry sector and was relatively littlementioned at the forum. It could, however, be considered as a crucial stake and the forests and other natural areas could have a place as essential structuring spaces. Forest workers should,therefore, take a place as the unavoidable partners for the planning and management of theMediterranean greater city and coastal areas.

Conditions for implementation

A particularly crucial aspect is that of the financing of the policies and projects.Financial procedures which are too rigid or too partitioned could be formidable obstacles forthe programming and carrying out of integrated actions. Delays in the deployment of fundsare often a reason for the demobilising of those concerned and for the loss of participationcredibility. This is true not only for the implementation of State or other institutional budgets, but also for bank loans or those from donors. A whole range of exchange and reflection about financial structures and procedures needs to be carried out.

Changing from classical budget procedures that are partitioned according to the nature of the expenditure to innovative procedures that are based on objectives, missions or projectsimplies moving from “a priori” control to “a posteriori” control. This signifies the setting upof assessment procedures and of indicators that make these evaluations possible: objectives,means and results indicators from which effectiveness indicators can be calculated(results/objectives ratios) and efficiency indicators (results/means ratios). These assessmentindicators cannot be confused with sustainable development indicators that are beginning to


be set up in some countries or around the Mediterranean (Mediterranean Commission forSustainable Development and Plan Bleu), but it is clear that the latter will contributeconsiderably to the former. Progress in the certification or labelling of products, or even ofservices (tourism), is also very much dependent on the availability of good indicators. Thequestion of indicators and their use is a subject that is very promising for exchange andcooperation.

From a technical point of view, the forum insisted especially on the necessity ofreplacing the interventions in relation to their social and economic objectives, and on theinterest of a global, ecosystem approach of the “landscape restoration” type. Contributionsfrom ecology engineers were also emphasised. These techniques have been developedespecially in mountainous or temperate regions and at present they are being adapted to theMediterranean conditions. Here too, exchange could quickly prove to be fruitful.

Questions about training also had an important position during the forum. On onehand the training of forestry staff to get them ready for the new tasks ahead. On the other hand the training of those called on to participate in development tasks involving forestry aspects,from local government officials to farmers and breeders, as well as technicians, professionalsin the field, administrative executives, and so on. It was especially pointed out that training is even more effective if it is “at ground level” and is based on real problems encountered by the people to be trained. This puts into perspective the interest of “standard” training and justifies targeted training that is fine-tuned to meet the needs of those involved. Such trainingobviously requires considerable preparatory work and thus costs more, but the effectivenessand especially the long-term effects on the future behaviour of those benefiting from thetraining depend on it. Training could be integrated in “capacity-building” processes, thenecessity of which has been emphasised, that could encourage profitable exchange. As forresearch, this is an area where cooperation has been well established for a long time;exchange has to be continued, sometimes intensified or to be restarted or even set up for some innovative topics.

How can the forum be followed up?

The list of points above attempts to synthesise the progress made, but also theshortfalls that were observed during the forum. The list could seem long, but it should not beforgotten that all these aspects are included in a coherent vision shared by the participants.Moreover, this list does not pretend to be exhaustive. Its aim is to help the Steering committee with its work to determine the continuation of the project in the context of SilvaMediterranea. Thus, during the Steering committee meeting, it would be appropriate tocomplete the list and to put the topics in their order of importance.

In order to do that, the committee’s reflections should be based on the conclusionsand recommendations text that was adopted by the forum . The directions and actionsproposed in this text are of a varied nature: at one extreme some of them bear on theimplementing of principles, whereas at the other concrete actions can be found (including theholding of this meeting, etc.). They are also intended for a large range of actors (international bodies, local governments, people in the field, researchers, instructors, and so on). It istherefore essential for our Steering committee to work on them again in order to obtain a work schedule that can be carried out in the framework of the Mediterranean forests andsustainable development project.


Besides this, several of the directions and assignments proposed by the forum bear on topics such as the prevention of forest fires, sustainable cork management, synergy betweenresearch centres, etc. which are at the heart of other issues dealt with by other SilvaMediterranea topic groups. A more precise discussion of these points is to take place duringthe informal meeting held the next day at the initiative of the chairman of Silva Mediterranea committee. Naturally, close coordination of these groups with the MFSD project is obviouslyessential.

Close coordination is also necessary between the MFSD project and other projects ledby Plan Bleu in the framework of the Mediterranean Commission for SustainableDevelopment 4 (MCSD), especially the project for sustainable rural development plannedfor 2007-2008. This could be done by looking more deeply into the relationships betweenforest areas, good agro-sylvo-pastoral practices, the production of environmental services andpublic assets. Case studies could help progress especially by emphasising i) new integratedand participative territorial approaches, ii) the fight against desertification and againstpoverty, iii) the obstacles to cross and the instruments to be put in place, especially providewith financial flexible tools, “a posteriori” control, indicators, and so on.

4 MAP (Mediterranean Action Plan ) and the Plan Bleu produced for the MCSD a reference document : The Mediterranean Strategy of Sustainable Development, which was adopted by the countries of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership at their meeting in Barcelona, November 25th , 2005.



Proposed working method

Question n°1: Which strong points and weak points do you grant the first phase of the MFSD project (period 2003 - 2005)?

�� A 2 columns table is placed in front of the participants.

�� Each participant has 4 post-it on which he/she writes down 2 strong points and 2 weak points and hands them over to the facilitator.

�� The facilitator skims through them and place them on the table (on the right: strong points, on the left: weak points) making groups up.

�� Then each participant has 5 discs and place them according to the groups he/she considers as important (possibility of placing several discs on the same group).

�� Comments on the diagnosis elements this way highlighted.

Question n°2: According to the recommendations of the forum of Rabat, which activities are to be carried out by the project MFSD for the 2006 – 2008 period?

�� The table of the recommendations is placed in front of the participants.

�� Each participant has 5 post-it and writes down on each one a proposal that he/she places facing the selected recommendation.

�� The facilitator read them and makes groups up.

�� Then each participant has 5 discs and places according to the groups he/she considers as important (possibility of placing several discs on the same group).

�� The participants comment on the emerging priorities , in particular as for their implementation methods.

Question n°3: Given the determined priorities, which actions are to be carried out by the project team in 2006?

�� The table of the priorities is placed in front of the participants.

�� Then idem as question 2.

NB : This approach is derived from the H-form method that FAO regularly uses to assess forest projects. The same approach was used for the case study presented by Turkey.

1

3EME REUNION DU COMITE DE PILOTAGE DU PROJET FMDD - SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS, 3 ET 4 FEVRIER 20063RD STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE PROJECT MFSD - SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS, 3RD & 4TH FEBRUARY 2006

LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS / LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

M. Fady ASMARHead of Service Rangelands, Public Gardens and ReservesMinistry of AgricultureBd. Galerie SemaanChyiad, BeirutLibanTél : +961 3 25 98 18 - Fax: +961 (5) 45 56 22E-mail : [email protected]

M. Mohammed BENEMBAREKExpert FAO au projet FMDDPlan Bleu15, rue Beethoven06560 ValbonneFranceTél: +33 4 92 38 86 13 - Fax: +33 4 92 38 71 31E-mail : [email protected]

Guillaume BENOITDirecteurPlan Bleu15, rue Beethoven06560 ValbonneFranceTél: +33 4 92 38 71 41 - Fax: +33 4 92 38 71 31E-mail : [email protected]

M. Mohamed Larbi CHAKROUNPrésident - Association Internationale Forêts MéditerranéennesIngénieur général des forêts, consultant60 avenue du Golfe Arabe2037 EL MENZAH 8TunisieTél : +216 (71) 714 119 - Fax: +216 (71) 714 119E-mail : [email protected]

M. Alain CHAUDRONChargé de mission pour les affairesinternationales forestièresMinistère de l'agriculture, de l'alimentation, de la pêche et des affaires rurales19, avenue du Maine75732 PARIS Cedex 15FranceTél: +33 1 49 55 42 32 - Fax: +33 1 49 55 51 12E-mail : [email protected]

Mr. Alexandros CHRISTODOULOUChief Conservator of ForestsMinistry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment Department of ForestsDepartment of ForestsLouki Akrita 261414 NICOSIEChypreTél: +357 22 80 5503 - Fax: +357 22 781419E-mail : [email protected]

Mrs Lorenza COLLETTIDetached National ExpertEuropean CommissionEnvironment Directorate-GeneralAvenue de Beaulieu 9B-1160 BRUXELLESBelgiqueTél: +32 (2) 2990412 - Fax: +32 (2) 2990895E-mail : [email protected]

M. Luc DASSONVILLEDirecteur-AdjointPlan Bleu15, rue Beethoven06560 ValbonneFranceTél: +33 4 92 38 86 12 - Fax: +33 4 92 38 71 31E-mail : [email protected]

M. Jean De MONTGOLFIERICGREFENGEES et PLAN BLEU3 rue des Pucelles67000 STRASBOURGFranceTél: +33 3 88 24 82 44 - Fax: +33 3 88 24 82 84E-mail : [email protected]

M. Abderrahim HOUMYDirecteur de la Planification du Système d’Information et de la CoopérationHCEFLCDQuartier AdministratifB.P. 605RABAT-CHELLAHMarocTél: +212 37 66 09 85Fax: +212 37 76 00 22E-mail : [email protected]

2

M. Jean Prosper KOYOChef du Service de la Conservation des Forêts (FORC)FAOViale delle Terme di Caracalla00100 ROMEItalieTél: + 39 06 57 05 40 85E-mail : [email protected]

M. Joaquin Carril MARTINEZMinisterio de medio ambienteJefe del Servicio de Planificacion y Fomento de la ProductionGran Vía de San Francisco, 4.28005 MADRIDEspagneTél: +34 91 59 64 676/79Fax: +34 91 59 64 877E-mail : [email protected]

Dr. Marc PALAHIMEDFOREXForest Technology Centre of CataloniaFundacio Catalana per la Recerca, Pg. Lluis Companys, 2308010 BARCELONAEspagneTél: +34 93 268 77 00Fax: +34 93 268 37 68E-mail : [email protected]

M. Placido PLAZAAdministrateur PrincipalCIHEAM11, rue Newton75116 PARISFranceTél: +33 (1) 53 23 91 00Fax: +33 (1) 53 23 91 01 / 02E-mail : [email protected]

Mme Zhaneta PRIFTIDirector of Human Resources ForestDirectorate General of ForestRruga Sami Frasheri, 4TIRANAAlbanieTél: +355 42 56 785 - Fax: +355 42 56 785E-mail : [email protected]

M. Francisco REGODirecção-Geral dos Recursos FlorestaisAv. João Crisóstomo, 28P-1069-040 LISBONNEPortugalTél: +351-21-312 48 00 - ext- 33121Fax: +351-21-312 49 83E-mail : [email protected]

M. Abdelmalek TITAHInspecteur GénéralDirection Générale des ForêtsBP N 232- Ben AknounALGERAlgérieTél: +213 21 91 53 09Fax: +213 21 91 53 09E-mail : [email protected]

M. Spas TODOROVHead Expert, Forest and Environmentally Engineer, MScMinistry of Agriculture and ForestsForest Management and Protection of Forests Department55, Hristo Botev blv.,1040 SOFIABulgarieTél: +359 2 987 49 90/985 11 556Fax: +359 2 981 37 36E-mail : [email protected]

M. Paolo VICENTINIFonctionnaire principalDivision III, Relations InternationalesVia Carducci, 500187 ROMEItalieTél: +39 (06) 48 18 972Fax: +39 (06) 48 17 690E-mail : [email protected]

sophia-antipolis, 3 â€“ 4 february 2006

Documents