The United States’ Implementation of the Montréal Process Indicator of Forest Fragmentation

The United States’ implementation of the Montréal Process indicator of forest fragmentation presents a case study in the development and application of science within a criteria and indicator framework to evaluate forest sustainability. Here, we review the historical evolution and status of the indicator and summarize the latest empirical results. While forest cover fragmentation is increasing, the rate of increase has slowed since 2006. Most of the fragmentation in the western United States is associated with changes in semi-natural land cover (e.g., shrub and grass) while most of the eastern fragmentation is associated with changes in agriculture and developed (including roads) land covers. Research conducted pursuant to indicator implementation exemplifies the role of a criteria and indicator framework in identifying policy-relevant questions and then focusing research on those questions, and subsequent indicator reporting exemplifies the value of a common language and developed set of metrics to help bridge the gaps between science and policy at national and international scales.

The Forest Policies of ASEAN and Montréal Process: Comparing Highly and Weakly Formalized Regional Regimes

Forests are governed by a combination of sub-national and national as well as global and regional regimes. Comparing the institutional variation of regional regimes, including their degrees of formalization, is gaining attention of studies on regionalism in International Relations. This study attempts to analyse the ways in which the selected cases of the forest-related Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and forest-focused Montréal Process (MP) regional regimes may have synergetic overlaps or disparity in their institutional design and forest policy development. For this, we combined IR’s ‘rational institutional design’ theory and a policy analysis approach. Using a qualitative data approach, we analyzed key structure-related historical regime documents (e.g., charters) issued since the inception of both regimes, and their latest forest policy initiatives for the periods 2016–2025 (Strategic Plan of Action for ASEAN Cooperation on Forestry) and 2009–2015 (Conceptual Framework for the Montréal Process Strategic Action Plan) with all relevant policy documents since the adoption of current policies. Based on that, we pose the empirical questions of how both regimes illustrate governance structure (i.e., institutional design), and on the other hand how to explain regime forest policies coherently and consistently in terms of their high versus low degree of formality. The results show that institutional design is highly explanatory based on treaty and non-treaty regime formation as well as forest-related/focused regime formation with the synergistic sustainable forest management (SFM) issue that embraces deforestation and forest degradation, biodiversity, timber certification, and greenhouse gas emission. Additionally, the results suggest that the policy goals adopted by both regimes are coherent and consistent based on the full set of policy elements. Concerning the remedy for fragmented global forest governance arrangements, both regimes would be an example of practicing SFM-focused policies with the incorporation of forest-related policy elements into a larger governance assemblage dealing with issues such as biodiversity conservation or climate change mitigation.

Criteria and Indicators for sustainable forest management: lessons learned in the Southern Cone

The Southern Cone countries of Chile, Argentina and Uruguay have a common background regarding land use and land cover with a total of 46 million ha of forests whose benefits are prospering for the regional framework of the Southern Cone. The three countries do not articulate or interchange on their forest policies beyond circumstantial agreements. In this regard, and as our first research focus, we examined experiences while participating in the international Montréal Process on Criteria and Indicators for the Conservation and Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. Secondly, we focused on the progress these processes have afforded regarding respective national implementation of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management (C&I for SFM) and uptake in forest policy. Thirdly, we examined also the obstacles experienced during participation and implementation. We based our findings on content analysis of key documents and author observations. Albeit the institutional and political frameworks between the countries differ, we found common constraints on budgeting, limited human resources and institutional capacity. Communication to society and policy makers' commitment are also important weaknesses. The engagement of the three countries in the Montréal Process and the application of related national sets of C&I for SFM have provided solutions to recent land use conflicts. This also strengthened the quality and effectiveness of recently approved laws and regimes for a sustainable forest management. In conclusion, the forest dialogues of these countries, within and between each other, were reinforced by participation in C&I for SFM processes, helping to bridge the gap between decision-makers, national forest agencies, academia and other forest-related stakeholders. Common indicators and related national reports facilitated the identification of affinities for regional integration on a common basis and helped to raise the level of national forest policies increasing its strength and commitment to global forest challenges. The lessons learned should be considered to reach progress towards sustainability.