Forest policy in aroused society: Ukrainian post-Orange Revolution challenges

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2007.05.003

Forest Policy and Economics

Volume 10, Issues 1–2, December 2007, Pages 60-69

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2007.05.003 Get rights and content

Abstract

With the collapse of the communist regime the market changes were introduced in Ukraine, as in other Central and Eastern European Countries, including forestry sector. Reform was not as radical as in other sectors of economy, nor in the forestry sector as in some other countries of region. Ukraine is involved in international forest policy dialogue, particularly Intergovernmental and Pan-European processes of the forest sector development on the principles of sustainability, but implementation of international agreements needs to be sounder in practice.

This paper discusses the current situation in forest sector and achievements and failures in economic, environmental, and social aspects of forest sector development. Policy and institutional mechanisms to develop the sustainable forest management (SFM) approaches are discussed. We analyze preconditions for institutional building (legislature, institutions, policy actors) looking at both the existing potential and the constraints in the realization of urgent tasks that arise in the economy in a period of transition. Specific attention is given to the national forest policy conception and forest sector development prospects.

Introduction

In 2004, Ukraine experienced a huge shift after the Orange Revolution and the Presidential elections. This political and social ferment promises to reform national government and extend to democratization, privatization, and reform of Ukraine forest policy as well. However, the forestry sector in Ukraine has changed little since the fall of communism, and the populace and politicians that became aroused by Orange Revolution may seek renewed effort to modernize forest policy to make it more competitive in Eastern Europe.

In recent years the countries with formerly centrally planned economies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have engaged in challenging reforms. Macroeconomic reform from the fully state-dominated systems of the past to a market oriented economies and democracy is a profound change which has many social, cultural, spiritual, political and economic implications. However the consequences of transitions in each country for each sector of economy and in different aspects of societal life varies widely. The countries of region have experienced significant changes regarding forests and forestry. Forestry and forest industries sectors have been reformed based on the frameworks of the wider social reforms, and in different ways, taking in to account historical preconditions, national peculiarities, government's political visions and societal expectations in each of transitional economies. Ukraine is the biggest country in group of CEE countries, (excluding Russia) and has long historical traditions, experiences and capacity in forest management. Now the country is trying to adapt to changing political situation and demands of the market economy. The purpose of the article is to give a descriptive overview of the problematic situation in the Ukrainian forest sector and to identify some policy options that the government and the country's population will have to face in the near future.

Section snippets

The promise of the “Orange Revolution”

The Orange Revolution in Ukraine opened new opportunities for changes toward broader public involvement in sustainable management of natural resources in the country. However, a host of institutional reforms must occur before this promise can be reached.

Pressing current issues include: (1) almost total government ownership, or at least management control of all forests; (2) residual mistrust of government (in some regions and categories of population) after decades of communist regime until

Forest ownership

In Ukraine the state forest ownership still prevails. The same situation exists in Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Moldova, and the Russian Federation, where all the forest area is in public hands. According to the new Land Code (2001) Ukrainian forests may be state owned (now more than 95%), communal (now 4%) and private (now less then 0.1%). Only small parts of forest (up to 5 ha) may be permanently used by private owners. Ukrainian forests are managed by different state organizations — State

Forest utilization

The total forests covered area is 9.4 million ha, or 15.6% of Ukraine's territory. Ukraine is 34th place in Europe in forest area/total area ratio, 9th in total forest area, 7th in forest based employment (Buksha et al., 2003).

Between 1985 and 1990, total wood consumption in Ukraine was 40 million m³ annually. The majority of wood was imported from Belarus and Russia. About 60% of finished wood products have been used internally, 30% has gone to other countries of the Former Soviet Union (FSU),

Environmental problems and forest management

Before gaining independence in 1991 Ukraine was the Soviet Union Republic with the highest level of agriculture and heavy industries, placing great pressure on environment. This caused severe environmental problems of air pollution, water pollution, nuclear contamination (Chernobyl disaster), soil degradation, resources and energy losses and ecosystems unsustainability in many areas. The role of forests is very important for environmental protection, creating more favorable conditions for

Ukrainian forest policy in an international context

Ukraine is an active participant of international environmental and forest policies processes, particularly in the intergovernmental policy dialogue on forests. The UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) 1992 in Rio de Janeiro has set the sustainable forest development (SFM) agenda for the world. Ukraine signed the United Nations Convention on Climate Changes (UNFCCC) in 1992. The Parliament of Ukraine ratified the Convention in 1996 and Ukraine became a Party to the UNFCCC in

Conclusions

Ukraine has been politically aroused since the Orange Revolution in 2004. This emotion has prompted substantial call for institutional reform throughout the country. The forestry sector has an opportunity to capitalize on this ferment, and reform its policies, which have not been progressive or dynamic even after the fall of communism. Ukraine did pass a new forest policy code in 2006 in response to the calls for reform and movement toward market processes, more private forest ownership, more

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful to the Fulbright Program, which made possible the beginning of Ukrainian–American collaboration in the field of forest policy.

References (40)

Analysis of first activities of new authority— view of ICPS
I. Antonenko
Economic instruments for forest administration at the condition of sustainable development//
Bobko, A., 2003. Forest ecology; myths and reality: Furniture business in GIS 2,...
I. Buksha
Forestry sector in transition to market economy. UNESE/FAO 6-th meeting of the team of specialists on countries in transition
I. Buksha et al.
Forest and forest products country profile
(2003)
Conception of forest sector of Ukraine reforming and development
Derevoobrobnyk
(2006)
F. Cubbage et al.
Forest resources issues and policies: a framework for analysis
Renewable Resources Journal
(1991)
P. Gluk
Criteria of sustainable forest management
European Forest Institute News
(1994)
ICP Forests database,...

Institute of Strategic Researches sociological survey, 2006. Express. August...

N. Kolisnychenko

Forestry in Ukraine: old and new forest management

M. Krott et al.

Policies for Sustainable Forestry in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, Koninklijke Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands

(2000)

L. Maksymiv et al.

SFM in Ukraine: reality and perspective

T. Marghescu

Nature Conservation in Private Forests of Selected CEE Countries: Opportunities and Constraints

(2001)

Y.A. Movchan

Conserving the biodiversity: challenges of transition (agroaspect)

V. Nanivska

One hundred days of the Orange Revolution: The ordeals of a public policy school

International Centre for Policy Studies (on-line library)

(2005)

V. Nepyivoda

Forestry in the Chornobyl exclusion zone: wrestling with an invisible rival

Journal of Forestry

(2005)

Nijnik, M., 2002. To sustainability in forestry: the Ukraine's case. PhD - thesis. Wageningen: Wageningen University....

M. Nijnik et al.

Governance in Ukrainian Forestry: trends, impacts, and remedies

International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology

(2004)

Cited by (19)

Stakeholder analysis in sustainable forest management: An application in the Yavoriv region (Ukraine)
2021, Forest Policy and Economics
Citation Excerpt :
b). The main obstacles to implement SFM in Ukraine are institutional failures, lack of reforms in the forestry sector and corruption (Soloviy and Cubbage, 2007; Yaroshenko, 2018). Other obstacles are the incomplete understanding of SFM principles among state forest enterprises, harvesting and wood processing companies, forest-related non-governmental organizations (NGOs), academics, researchers and students (Melnykovych et al., 2018), and the competing interests pursued by different forest stakeholders (Pelyukh and Paletto, 2019).
In Ukraine, the timber volume harvested from sanitary cuttings is increasing, while the state of national forests is decreasing. These trends have focused the attention of public authorities and increased public debate on the role of forests for society. A forest policy reform process needs to build on a sound understanding of the relevant stakeholders, their mutual relationships and interests in the forestry sector. In this paper, a stakeholder analysis based on a network theoretical approach was implemented in a case study in Ukraine (Yavoriv region) to support the forest policy reform process. The study is based on experts' opinions and was structured in three stages: identification of the experts; questionnaire survey and identification of local stakeholders; classification of stakeholders. The results identified 15 stakeholders thus distributed: (1) eight stakeholders belong to the ecological coalition and seven to the economic coalition; (2) three are key stakeholders, four primary stakeholders, and eight secondary stakeholders. The proposed method of stakeholder analysis is aimed to balance the number of stakeholders from each coalition to include all interests at stake in the participatory process. The stakeholder analysis marks the first step in the implementation of sustainable forest management in the Yavoriv region and could serve as a model for the other Ukrainian regions.
Exceptional bureaucratic rivalry in mangrove forest policy: Explanations from the Sundarbans, Bangladesh
2021, Ocean and Coastal Management
Citation Excerpt :
Anderson (2014:20) defined policy as a “purposive course of action or inaction undertaken by an actor or set of actors in managing a problem or matter of concern.” According to Soloviy and Cubbage (2007), the forest policy of a state fully depends on the general state policy; resources; and the economical, ecological, and social aspects of the state's activity. Regarding “policy,” Markard et al. (2016) denoted it as a political system to resolve societal problems and claimed that objectives, programs, laws, regulations, and funding scopes are the content of policy formulation in this perspective.
Bearing diversified natural resources, the Sundarbans mangrove forests (SMF) are, to a large extent, considered a thrust area of ecological and economic importance to which a number of public bureaucracies in Bangladesh give due attention to managing its resources. This paper analyses the extensive policy conflicts of different bureaucracies that prevail for the Sundarbans management practices on emerging issues. All the mangrove forest policies—both directives and projects pursued by multiple administrations in the Sundarbans—are scrutinized taking off in bureaucratic theory. The empirical relevance of this policy development concept is demonstrated based on data from the Government of Bangladesh. As empirical methods, first, the content analyses of various acts, rules, policy documents, missions, mandates, and development initiatives of relevant ministries and public agencies were conducted to distinguish the activities linked with actors’ interests in present practices. Subsequently, the presumed bureaucratic competition was critically analyzed deploying exchange on participating observation. The study observes that being the officially responsible bureaucracy for the Sundarbans, the Bangladesh Forest Department has the leading approach to managing the SMF while receiving guidance from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The position of the Forest Department is empowered by the existing laws and rules, although the observed approach has been integrated because of multiple bureaucracies being involved in different sectors of Sundarbans for their due interests. Other bureaucracies use their institutional expertise in respective sectors, resulting in an exceptionally high degree of bureaucratic rivalry. Mangrove forest bureaucracy is currently facing challenges in technical capacities, financial resources, and institutional arrangements addressing the effective management of the Sundarbans. Administrative structures for complex landscapes, such as mangrove forests, pose substantial challenges to common bureaucratic structures, which recommends establishing integrated approach, for sharing equitable responsibilities and benefits. Still, the underlying conflicts of interests would prevail, but they can be proactively addressed through rules and procedures within the integration.
Governance of non-wood forest products in Russia and Ukraine: Institutional rules, stakeholder arrangements, and decision-making processes
2020, Land Use Policy
Citation Excerpt :
The collapse of the Soviet regime led to the restructuring of all economic sectors, and bankruptcies of many state organisations, which caused a high level of unemployment in rural areas (Matilainen, 2013; Nordberg et al., 2013; Ryabchuk, 1996; Soloviy and Cubbage, 2007). As a consequence, many rural households became dependent on subsistence food production from their farms/gardens and from consuming and trading NWFPs (Elbakidze and Angelstam, 2007; Matilainen, 2013; Nijnik and Oskam, 2004; Soloviy and Cubbage, 2007; Stryamets et al., 2012). Therefore, additional research is necessary on legal rights and their implementation for NWFP access, use, and trade in East European countries in transition (Wiersum et al., 2018).
Aspects of governance of non-wood forest products (NWFPs) include institutional rules, stakeholder arrangements, and decision-making processes that govern production systems from access to resources, their use, and to markets. Compared with other forest products, few studies have investigated the governance of NWFPs in European post-socialistic countries transitioning from a planned to a market economy. This study compares institutional frameworks and stakeholder arrangements related to NWFPs in Russia and Ukraine using a case study approach. Both countries have a legacy of top-down forest government, state-owned forests, and rural communities with a long dependence on plant- and animal-based NWFPs. We analysed legal documents for NWFPs in each country and conducted expert interviews with stakeholders from the public, private, and civil sectors involved in the decision-making process of NWFPs. Institutional frameworks for NWFPs in both countries are complex, unclear, and overlap. Multiple legal documents contain restrictions regarding the extraction and sustainability of NWFPs. However, no special laws or policies are solely for NWFPs; all measures are included in legislation that regulates nature conservation and forest management. The government of both countries tends to overlook non-industrial forest use undertaken by marginal local communities, even if economic, social, and cultural values of NWFPs are relatively high for local and regional development. A misfit is observed between legal frameworks and forest companies’ business policies with customary rights. This phenomenon caused a shift to introduce new stakeholder arrangements related to NWFPs as a special type of resource in areas where NWFPs are heavily used both for subsistence and for generating household income by local communities. Landscape approach initiatives such as model forests and biosphere reserves may empower local communities to find means to protect their rights, needs, interests, and values related to NWFPs.
Social-ecological innovation in remote mountain areas: Adaptive responses of forest-dependent communities to the challenges of a changing world
2018, Science of the Total Environment
Citation Excerpt :
The forestry sector is very conservative and reforms proceed slowly (Nijnik and van Kooten, 2000, 2006). Therefore, changes are not as radical as, for example, in the agricultural sector (Soloviy and Cubbage, 2007). Also verified and illustrated by our findings was the second major problem for sustainable governance of FSES – that local people either had no rights (or were not aware of the rights that they formally have) to access the forest resources (such as timber or fuelwood) which are deemed to be crucial for sustainable livelihoods.
To better understand how constantly changing human-environment interactions could be better organized to respond to current challenges, we examined the Ukrainian Carpathians as an example case of complex forest social-ecological systems (FSES). We did it by interviewing diverse and relevant local stakeholder (N = 450). In particular, we strived to: i) outline how people and nature are linked and interact in coupled FSES; ii) examine the preferences of stakeholders on the forests and associated ecosystem services (ES); iii) map key drivers threatening well-being of FSES and iv) identify potential responses to address the challenges at a local scale. To answer these questions we followed a mixed method route by integrating qualitative (participatory) and quantitative data collection and analyses, with further application of a Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework in combination with the ES approach in order to assess benefits, threats to these benefits, and responses regarding the studied FSES. We found that the key benefit from FSES is timber and non-wood forest products (like berries and mushrooms), but also various regulating services were ranked highly by respondents. To explore social-ecological innovation, with potential responses of forest-dependent communities to challenges they face, we employed a commonly used assumption that governance must fit to the particular characteristics of FSES in order to enable sustainability. For the particular case of the Ukrainian Carpathians, we identified and discussed the following five nonconformities or “misfits” threatening sustainability: 1) Spatial misfit in legislation; 2) Poor contextualization; 3) Trap of the single ES; 4) Participatory misfit; and 5) Robbing the commons. By conceptualizing those key threats, we proposed responses for sustainability. The findings contributed to an advanced understanding of complex FSES, their key challenges and potential solutions in order to secure well-being of people and nature in coupled social-ecological systems, in the conditions of a changing world.
Forest cover change and illegal logging in the Ukrainian Carpathians in the transition period from 1988 to 2007
2009, Remote Sensing of Environment
Illegal logging is a major environmental and economic problem, and exceeds in some countries the amounts of legally harvested timber. In Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, illegal logging increased and reforestation on abandoned farmland was widespread after the breakdown of socialism, and the region's forest cover trends remain overall largely unclear. Our goal here was to map forest cover change and to assess the extent of illegal logging and reforestation in the Ukrainian Carpathians. We used Landsat TM/ETM+ images and Support Vector Machines (SVM) to derive forest change trajectories between 1988 and 2007 for the entire Ukrainian Carpathians. We calculated logging and reforestation rates, and compared Landsat-based forest trends to official statistics and inventory maps. Our classification resulted in reliable forest/non-forest maps (overall accuracies between 97.1%–98.01%) and high clear cut detection rates (on average 89.4%). Forest cover change was widespread in the Ukrainian Carpathians between 1988 and 2007. We found forest cover increase in peripheral areas, forest loss in the interior Carpathians, and increased logging in remote areas. Overall, our results suggest that unsustainable forest use from socialist times likely persisted in the post-socialist period, resulting in a continued loss of older forests and forest fragmentation. Landsat-based forest trends differed substantially from official forest resource statistics. Illegal logging appears to have been at least as extensive as documented logging during the early 1990s and so-called sanitary clear-cuts represent a major loophole for overharvesting and logging in restricted areas. Reforestation and illegal logging are frequently not accounted for in forest resource statistics, highlighting limitations of these data. Combating illegal logging and transitioning towards sustainable forestry requires better monitoring and up-to-date accounting of forest resources, in the Carpathians and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, and remote sensing can be a key technology to achieve these goals.
An institutional analysis and reconfiguration framework for sustainability research on post-transition forestry—a focus on Ukraine
2021, Sustainability (Switzerland)

View all citing articles on Scopus

¹: Tel.: +1 919 515 7789.

View full text