FIELD ASSESSMENT GUIDE SUSTAINABLE PLANTATION FOREST MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION
1. Introductio In the Sustainable Plantation Forest Management (SPFM) system, field assessments will only be conducted after a management unit passes the screening process by Expert Panel I. Field Assessment is conducted by SPFM certification Field Assessors with the requirements stated within LEI Guide 99-05.
2. Scope This guide provides direction to Field Assessors in gathering data and field information. The result will be a useful material for evaluating the performance of a management unit and SPFM certification decision making by Expert Panel II.
3. Reference a)LEI Standard 5000, Sustainable Production Forest Management (SNFPM) Frame System. b) LEI Standard 5000-2, Sustainable Plant Forest Management (SPFM) System. c) LEI Standard 5005, Terms and Definition Related to Forest Certification. d) LEI Guide 99, Sustainable Production Forest Management (SNFPM) Certification System. e) LEI Guide 99-33, SPFM Certification Screening Guide. f)
LEI-03 Technical Document, Toolbox Verifier and Verification for Criteria and Indicators of Assessment in the Sustainable Plant Forest Management (SPFM) Certification System.
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
4. Stages in the Field Assessment In field assessment, field assessors conducts stages of activities as follows: 4.1 Analysis of Expert Panel I Recommendation and Unit Management Documents To prepare a field assessment working plan, Expert Panel I recommendation and management unit documents are studied, including other available source of information. These can support field assessors in understanding the condition and stay focus on the problems in the field, sharpens field assessment working plan, and determine field assessment implementation strategy. 4.2 Field Assessment Working Plan Arrangement 4.2.1
Management Unit Typology
Sustainable Plant Forest Management (SPFM) assessment conducted at a management unit must restrain any assessment bias caused by biophysical or social environment factors that burden the unit. The typology of a management unit must be determined to classify the assessed management unit according to its regional social and biophysical sensitivity level. The determination is very important to the assessment process, decision making and certificate recommendation formulation. The basis and criteria used to determine the assessed management unit’s typology are as follows: 4.2.1.1 Management Unit Typology According to Ecological/Environmental Aspects Many ecological type and function obtained in the variety of forest ecosystem has their own mechanism in maintaining stability. A loss of one of its ecological function will affect the balance of a whole ecosystem. However, there are several minimum variables that must be recognized to maintain the ideal ecosystem. The ecological variables are parameters for determining change in ecological function caused by interventions of some sort that affects every existing elements of the ecosystem. The development of a plant forest is aimed to produce forest products that have limited variety as to natural forest can produce. Consequently, the selection of forest plant species must correspond to the specified objective of the development. Those species are possible that they are not plants indigenous to the region and can be an LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
exotic type. In the context of stability of the regional ecosystem where the plant forest is developed, the selected plant species and characteristic is one of the most important ecological variables, which can affect the stability of the regional ecosystem. On the other hand, the location and interrelationship between the plant forest area and the surrounding natural ecosystem will also affect the stability of the ecosystem. a) Degree of Habitat Fragmentation Plant forest development in Indonesia is developed in converted natural forest areas or in idle grounds. Therefore, the existence of the plant forest areas within the ecosystem of the region can reduce the existing habitat fragmentation, adds fragmentation or does not have any effect at all. The more fragmented the habitat the heavier the burden of the management unit to maintain ecological/environmental function and the more sensitive is the regional ecosystem. The condition of habitat fragmentation determines the setting of the management unit, which inherently affects the intensity of the plant forest management in accordance to the ecological principles. Fragmentation creates permanent barriers to the movement/flow in three areas: distribution, dispersion, and genetic flow from one subpopulation to another in the surrounding environment. The degree of fragmentation is set according to the following criteria: ยง
Increased fragmentation: if more than or equal to 50% of the plant forest area caused the disconnection of the natural ecosystem.
ยง
Permanent fragmentation: if more than or equal to 50% plant forest area continues the connection of the disconnected natural ecosystem.
ยง
Reduced fragmentation: if more than or equal to 50% plant forest area connects the disconnected natural ecosystem.
Based on the habitat fragmentation and the selected plant species, the management unit is classified according to the three ecosystem sensitivity ordinal scale as follows: LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
Table 1. Sensitivity Scale of Each Degree of Fragmentation Sensitivity Scale Selected Plant Species
Degree of Fragmentation ExoticInvasive
Exotic
Local-Invasive
Local
Increased Fragmentation
6
5
4
3
Permanent Fragmentation
5
4
3
2
Decreased Fragmentation
4
3
2
1
Note: The larger the ordinal scale, the more sensitive the forest ecosystem towards interventions.
b) Location of the Management Unit Area The typology of the management unit is affected by the location of the managed forest area: (i) whether it is located in a biologically safe or unsafe area, such as surrounded or not surrounded by a conservation zone; and (ii) whether it is located in a physically safe or unsafe environment, such as located downstream or upstream, with a high or low soil erodibility, etc. The following are the criteria used to locate a management unit: ยง
Biologically safe: if a forest ecosystem in a management unit is located in unity, ecologically, with other natural ecosystem, especially one that needed to be biologically protected, such as a neighboring conservation region.
ยง
Physically safe: if a forest ecosystem within a management unit is not located in an unsafe macro physical environment, close to interventions, viewed from land and water conservations perspective.
A forest management unit sensitivity scale based on the location is available on Table 2.
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
Table 2. Management Unit Location Sensitivity Scale.
Location
Biologically Unsafe
Biologically Safe
Physically Unsafe
3
2
Physically Safe
2
1
Note: The larger the ordinal scale, the more sensitive the forest ecosystem towards interventions.
Based on the matrix on Table 1 and 2, a management unit typology can be developed according to an ecological/environmental aspect as presented in Table 3. Table 3. Management Unit Typology Based on Ecological/Environmental Aspects Location Biologically-Physically Unsafe
Fragmentation and Plant Species Selection Score 5-6
Score 4
Score 3
Score 2-1
Typology 4
Typology 4
Typology 3
Typology 2
Typology 4
Typology 3
Typology 2
Typology 1
Typology 3
Typology 2
Typology 1
Typology 1
Biologically-Physically Unsafe or Biologically Safe-Physically Unsafe Physically-Biologically Safe
Note: The larger the ordinal scale, the more sensitive the forest ecosystem towards interventions.
4.2.1.2 Management Unit Typology According to Social Economic and Cultural Aspects The social typology variable of the plant forest management consist of social conditions which becomes the setting of the existence of a management unit and cannot be managed for the reason that it was given. The social setting that can still be managed will be reviewed using an assessment standard through criteria and LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
indicator. There are two important variables in the context of plant forest management in Indonesia. The context of “Indonesia� states the importance of the scope legitimacy of the typology that can only be of use in Indonesia with its socioculture, geographic and forest resource management policy perspectives. The intended variables are the level of exposure of a region where a plant forest business unit is located and migration dynamics in the plant forest management unit that implicates the supply of workforce. The area of the development of plant forest is an open estate, in a sense that there have been resource management activities prior to the development. This implies that there has been an intense interaction between social groups in the region. Theorically, the increasing number of group wanting to manage the resource in the region, the more conflict potential tend to increase. In a practical perspective, the potentiality of a conflict is not a problem if there is an agreed procedure on how groups occupying and managing the same resources can interact. Problems will occur eventually if new entrants come into and involved with the resource management. This is what happens when a plant forest unit opens a business in a region that is substantially exposed. In many cases, plant forest development in Indonesia is correlated to policies of workforce and population given by the government. By combining two national programs, plant forest development as an alternative of supply for the wood industry and population migration through transmigration, plant forest management unit in Indonesia faces an unavoidable condition. The unit must accommodate part or the whole of transmigration participants in its plant forest development as work force. On the other hand, issues on prioritizing local work force that has inhabited in the surrounding areas is a common and mutual demand. But the main setback is that it not only involves the management unit with the existing work force but also the emerging competition between local community and newcomers.
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
The criteria used for assessing the level of migration and regional exposure are as follows: a) Migration Level §
High Migration: if the workforce mostly comes from outer region, required on purpose, mass number and specifically programmed to work in a particular plant forest management unit.
§
Mid Migration: if the workforce is evenly divided from two origins, the local community and newcomers (voluntary and involuntary).
§
Low Migration: if the workforce mostly comes from the local community and those who comes in person and voluntary.
b) Level of Regional Exposure §
High Exposure: if there are several entities, local or newcomer groups, involved in the resource management in the plant forest development area.
§
Mid Exposure: if there are social groups or local communities who conducts activity management.
§
Low Exposure: if there is no one who manages the resources.
Typology of management unit based on social variables are presented in Table 4. Table 4. Typology of Management Unit Based on Social and Cultural Variables Exposure
Migration Low
Mid
High
Low
1
2
3
Mid
2
3
4
High
3
4
5
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
Note: 1)
Numbers 1-5 in the typology matrix represents the priority scale that must be provided the certain management unit due to how much attention and effort performed to optimize the activities.
2)
Weighted social typology scale: Typology 1
: Low Priority (Scale 1 – 2)
Typology 2
: Mid Priority (Scale 3)
Typology 3
: High Priority (Scale 4 – 5)
With the above statement, the classification of management unit area sensitivity level based on ecological and social typology is presented in Table 5. Table 5. Typology based on Ecology and Social Procedures SOCIAL TYPOLOGY
ECOLOGICAL TYPOLOGY 1
2
3
4
1
1
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
4
3
3
3
4
4
Note: 1
: Safe condition
2
: Sufficiently safe condition
3
: Socially or environmentally unsafe condition
4
: Socially and environmentally unsafe condition
4.2.1.3 Management Unit Typology According to Production Aspects The more intense the ecological/environmental and social problems in a certain region, the lesser the forest area will be freely treated as a common production forest by the management unit. The production typology is based on the influence of social and biophysical condition of a region, and the determination of the regional dimensional planning. These sources of influence point to the decrease of LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
production and increase of exploitation costs which causes unfeasible business profitability. Therefore, in the aspects of forest production functional sustainability, the management unit needs to give extra attention to technology innovation development and forest management strategy to overcome those problems. In other words, typology based on production aspects are determined to assess performance process in the field and not the result of the task. Technology innovation and field work implementation strategy to obtain production sustainability in plant forest will differ according to the type of staumpage and plant cycle. Table 6 presents the plant forest management unit typology based on work process classification in the field needed to obtain production sustainability.
Table 6. Management Unit Typology based on Production Aspect Plant Cycle TYPE OF STUMPAGE
Short Cycle
Mid Cycle
Long Cycle
(< 10 years)
(10 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 20 years)
(> 20 years)
Wood
Typology 3
Typology 3
Typology 2
Varied
Typology 3
Typology 2
Typology 1
Mixed
Wood
Typology 2
Typology 1
Typology 1
Stumpage
Varied
Typology 2
Typology 1
Typology 1
Homogenous Stumpage
Notes: Typology 1
: Safe condition
Typology 2
: Mid level of difficulty and risk of work process in the field
Typology 3
: High level of difficulty and risk of work process in the field
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
4.2.1.4 Final Typology for Management Unit Based on cross matrix of production and ecological-social procedure typology, final typology for management unit is obtained.
Table 7. Final Typology for Management Unit ECOLOGICAL-SOCIAL PROCEDURE TYPOLOGY
PRODUCTION TYPOLOGY
1
2
3
4
1
1
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
4
3
3
3
4
4
Notes: TYPOLOGY 1
: Safe condition
TYPOLOGY 2
: One out of three aspects (ecology, social or production) is considered unsafe
TYPOLOGY 3
: Two out of three aspects are considered unsafe
TYPOLOGY 4
: All three aspects are considered unsafe
4.2.2
Formulation of Field Verification Method
Referring to the SPFM criteria and indicators, and its collection method (see Technical Document LEI-03), field assessors can formulate verification method which will be carried out as the main reference in field data collection. The verification method must be set clearly for each indicator (name and characteristic of verifier, type of data collected, source of data and sampling method) and accurately considers the representation of samples. To maximize data collection and understanding of the legitimate management unitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s situation, the verification method must be set using triangulation approach (using a minimum of three methods). Therefore, consultation must be conducted with the Regional Communication Forum and other related stakeholders.
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
4.3 Discussion on Field Work Plan The work plan produced by field assessors is discussed together with Expert Panel I. The discussion can be done through presentation and dialogue so that it will enhance the field assessment work plan in an understandable perspective for both field assessors and Expert Panel I. 4.4 Field Assessment Implementation Every indicator in the Technical Document LEI-03 must result in a measurement that holds high accuracy and precision. The accuracy level shows how close the result of measurement or closeness to reality. Precision corresponds to the representation of sampling locations and the number of samples to be measured. The presentation of quantitative data with its standard deviation will represent the level of accuracy and precision conducted by field assessors. The data and information validity must be based on strong and rigorous facts in the field. 4.5 Analysis and Conclusion of Every Indicator Analysis on every indicator must be clearly shown and detailed. Thus, conclusions on each indicator and assessment result (good, sufficient or bad) can be traced and logically understood. 4.6 Field Assessment Report Field assessment result presentation based on its logical model of decision making is required to create effective and efficient decision making process performed by Expert Panel II. Guide on the presentation refers to LEI Guide 99-32 regarding Field Assessment Report.
5. Relations with Certification Decision Making Assessment towards a management unit, used as the basis of decision making by Expert Panel II, is conducted using a transparent and democratic method called Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) or other equivalent methods. This method must be able to simplify and analyze complex LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification
problems and determine a decision based on multi criteria analysis. The method must also integrates panelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perception/knowledge with quantitative or qualitative data resulted from a field assessment to a hierarchical logical frame as presented by SPFM certification criteria and indicators. To understand the decision making process, field assessors can refer to LEI Guide 9934.
LEI Guide 99-31
Field Assessment Guide Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification