Sistema de control

policy arena and

Caatinga biome, Brazil

the economic, social, and environmental values of forests. In international policy, a unique ‘forest convention’ is absent. Accordingly, SFM is part of several international environmental policies, and each policy emphasises different aspects. These policies guide SFM implementation strategies on the ground. This chapter explores the global-local nexus of SFM by comparing its institutional arrangements in international policy and in the specific social-ecological context of Caatinga biome, Brazil. Through this comparison, the chapter highlights how these institutional arrangements of SFM converge between these levels. The chapter concludes, first, that the most relevant convergences of SFM institutional arrangements are between the ‘Rio Conventions’ and its linked national policy framework. Second, the chapter concludes that although the forest governance is characterised by complexity on the global level, the complexity of SFM institutional arrangements on the domestic level is also shaped by specificities of different social-ecological systems within the national territory. The chapter concludes by highlighting the need to explore the global-local nexus of SFM to understand how SFM is adapted, changed and integrated by actors across different levels of governance from international and national policy to implement strategies and produce beneficial forest outcomes on the ground.

Key-words: International forest policy; Brazilian forest governance; Global-local

nexus of SFM.

Part of this chapter is based on the following publication:

Faggin, J. M., & Offermans, A. (2016). Sustainable Forest Management as a potential integrative

approach in international public policy. In: Ron Cörvers, Joop de Kraker, René Kemp, Pim Martens, Harro van Lente (Eds.). Sustainable Development Research at ICIS - Taking

Deforestation is one of the leading causes of climate change and is closely linked to biodiversity loss, land degradation, desertification, and poverty (Dudley et al. 2014; FAO 2016; UNCCD 2014). The loss of forest cover directly impacts the provision of forest ecosystem services such as wood and non-wood products, water quality, soil fertility, biodiversity, and climate regulation (FAO 2016; Mori et al. 2017; Sarukhán and Whyte 2005). The conversion of forests into other land uses also connects more frequent extreme weather events (such as prolonged droughts and floods), increasing land degradation, poverty, and migration of local populations (Pokorny et al. 2013; UNCCD 2014).

The sustainable use of forest resources is crucial for addressing challenges on biodiversity conservation, climate change, desertification, and poverty, and promoting more sustainable strategies of using forest resources is especially relevant for arid and semi-arid regions (Chenery et al. 2009; FAO 2016; UNCCD 2017), where 20,2% of the global population live (UN-EMG 2011). In this context, sustainable forest management (SFM) appears as a central concept in international policy to balance the environmental, economic, and social values of forest resources through its uses and the continuous provision of forest-related ecosystem services (Arts and Buizer 2009; Gale and Cadman 2014; Hickey 2008). While there are more concepts that refer to the sustainable use of forest resources, including sustainable management of forests (SMF) and forest ecosystem management (FEM), SFM is the most commonly used term in international and national policy frameworks.

The current literature on forest governance shows that forest issues are included in multiple international policies. While many policies include SFM as an implementation strategy, this ‘fragmented’ policy field is also suggested to lead to implementation challenges (Haberl et al. 2013; Hahn and Knoke 2010; Quine et al. 2013). The lack of an international binding instrument, or a ‘forest convention’, leads to complexity: international forest governance is composed of multiple hierarchical and horizontal connections between global governance and local practices (Arts et al. 2016). Hierarchical connections are made via implementing multiple international environmental conventions. Horizontal connections between global and local dimensions, for example, those mediated by actors who

travel between global and local policy arenas, add to this complexity. Accordingly, institutional arrangements on the international level may differ significantly from local institutional arrangements when considering forest policy and SFM.

By exploring institutional arrangements of SFM in the global and a specific level of governance and looking for convergences between them, this chapter provides insight into the global-local nexus of forest governance (Arts and Babili 2013). This global-local nexus is here understood as the amalgam of vertical (or hierarchical) and horizontal connections that captures the complexity of forest governance. By focusing on SFM in forest governance, this complexity can be analysed via the multiple interactions between institutions and actors that surround the concept of SFM (Paavola 2007). Accordingly, this chapter aims to explain how global ideas connect to local needs and interests.

The chapter analyses whether it is possible to identify convergences between institutional arrangements of SFM in international policy and the specific social-ecological context of Caatinga biome, Brazil. Caatinga is in the semi-arid region of northeastern Brazil and is one of the most biodiverse tropical dry forests in the world (Blackie et al. 2014; Brasil 2007b; da Silva et al. 2003). The Brazilian semi-arid region is also the most susceptible region to desertification (IBAMA 2011; Santana 2007), the poorest region within the national territory, and the home of 27 million people (Brasil 2011c). Caatinga biome represents a particularly interesting case through which it is possible to explore the global-local nexus of SFM because the Caatinga forest issues aggregate challenges on biodiversity, climate change, and desertification, just as the forest is part of international policies on the same issues.

This chapter’s analysis is divided into two main parts: one part focuses on the international policy arena, while the other focuses on the specific policy context of Caatinga biome in Brazil. The first part draws on literature analysis and a review of United Nations (UN) documents and reports linked to

2.2. MATERIAL

AND METHODS

SFM. The analysis is focused on exploring institutional arrangements of SFM in international forest policies and involves an examination of SFM in important legally binding instruments – including the conventions on Biological Diversity (CBD), on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). In addition, this second part analyses the role of SFM in international non-legally binding instruments, and trade and market-based instruments.

The second part of the analysis includes a review of the literature, as well as of the Brazilian governmental documents and reports, linked to SFM in Caatinga biome. Accordingly, the analysis describes the institutional arrangement of SFM in Caatinga by exploring how the uses of forest resources are steered by legally binding and non-legally binding instruments, as well as trade- and market-based instruments. The chapter concludes with a discussion on how and where institutional arrangements of SFM in international policy and the social-ecological context of Caatinga biome converge, exploring the global-local nexus of SFM (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. A Global-local nexus of SFM: international policy and Caatinga biome.

The concept of sustainability has been present in forestry debates for more than three centuries (Schmithüsen 2013; Wiersum 1995). The early concept of ‘Sustainable Yield’ introduced the need to balance human needs and the production capacity of forests, mostly focusing on timber production (Hahn and Knoke 2010). Later, the concept of ‘Sustainable Forestry’ included other forest services and non-wood forest products (NWFPs) (Hahn and Knoke 2010), as well as social participation (MacDicken et al. 2015; Schmithüsen 2013). The context of sustainable development also introduced the need to adapt the management of forests to changes in social and economic scenarios over time (Schmithüsen 2013). Therefore, the term ‘Sustainable Forest Management’ (SFM), strongly articulated during the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, introduced the cross-sectoral approach of sustainable development to forestry, including its economic, ecological, and social aspects (Hahn and Knoke 2010; Schmithüsen 2013).

This section explores institutional arrangements of SFM in