The co-chairman of the Fourth Session of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF), Bagher Asadi of Iran, said that significant progress had been achieved during the final session, which ended on February 11. According to Jagmohan Maini, a coordinator of the IFF Secretariat, the gap between the North and the South, particularly on many forest-related issues, had been, for the most part, covered.

Among the major issues under discussion were implementation and monitoring of an IFF programme for action; questions relating to financial resources; trade and environment; science and technology; the establishment of a global legally binding instrument, such as a convention, to guide and regulate forest management; and the establishment of a permanent intergovernmental forum to deal with policy issues.

Most participants agreed that a permanent body, which could be called the United Nations Forum on Forests, should be established within the United Nations system to continue the work at an intergovernmental level. The body would fulfil a number of functions: policy development, coordination, implementation, monitoring and the initiation of a proper tool for the formulation of a legally binding instrument on all types of forests. ``We're hopeful that we'll arrive at a consensus text that will bring all the elements under the umbrella structure of a United Nations Forum on Forests,'' said Asadi.

The NGO coalition was, however, against a new convention on forests. Instead, they emanded that the existing programmes be enforced more sincerely by national governments.

Hohnen said the key dilemma of the forum was whether governments would continue down a `business as usual' road, or take a new political departure for action to implement agreements that had already been negotiated. Simon Lovera of Friends of the Earth International called the forum `the United Nations talk shop', saying that UN policy debate could lead to action if there were enough stakeholders, particularly people from the capitals of countries where the forests were, like Africa and South Africa.

According to Lovera, there had been no noteworthy progress, particularly on substantive issues such as finance, technology transfer and trade. In fact, there was an apparent backlash. Poor people in developing countries were being blamed for deforestation, while the wasteful consumption of paper and other forest products in the industrialised countries was completely ignored, she maintained. ``In this Forum, the wolves are herding the sheep,'' Lovera said.

Lambert Okrah of the Institute of Cultural Affairs of Ghana observed that the UN system did not acknowledge indigenous people, unless they came under the auspices of an organisation of indigenous people. That limited their participation. He added that governments were not amenable to giving property rights to indigenous knowledge, as they did to other inventions.

Said Okrah, ``What was needed was sacrifice and money. No developed country was willing to put money into sustainable forest management. The forum might arrive at an agreement that would then be put on the shelf, because there was no money to implement it. On the other hand, if there was money, what was the guarantee that the money would be put to the cause for which it was allocated?''

``The conservation of forests and the protection of our environment are closely linked with efforts at achieving social equity and economic growth. We must cut the vicious cycle of poverty, drought, energy deficiency and deforestation,'' rounded up UNEP executive director Klaus Toepfer.