Economic Policiesfor Forest ResourcesManagement

Economic Policiesfor Forest ResourcesManagement

SUMMARY OF THE PAPERSAND PROCEEDINGSOF THE SEMINAR- WORKSHOPON ECONOMICPOLICIES FOR FOREST RESOURCESMANAGEMENT

FEBRUARY17-18,1984

WILFRIDO CRUZeditor

PIIlIB_'"'_-INSTITUTEFORDEVELQC_ENT STUDIES

All Rights ReservedbyTHE PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

1985ISBN 971-128-011-6

iv

CONTENTS

PREFACE ......................................... viiPART I. ResearchFramework for Forest

ResourcesManagement .................. 1Overview of the Forest Sector ................ 1

Multiple Use Forestry and LandAllocation ............................ 3

ResourceUseand DifferentForest Uses............................ 5

PART I1. Summary and DiscussionofWorkshop Papers ....................... 11

SessionI - Commercial Forestry .............. 11SessionII - Macroeconomic Policies ........... 16

SessionIII- Upland Development ............. 20SessionIV- Watershed Management ........... 24

PART III. Agendafor Policy Researchon Forestryand Upland Development ................. 29

Long-Term Production and CommercialForestry .............................. 29

Population Pressurein the Uplands ............ 29Assessmentof WatershedManagement

Programs ............................. 30Macroeconomic Policiesand the

Economic DevelopmentContextfor Forestry ........................... 30

REFERENCES ...................................... 32PROGRAMME ...................................... 34LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ............................. 36

PREFACE

in responseto the growing concernthat policy researchshoulddirectly address the problem of over-exploitation of Philippinenatural resources,specifically in the area of upland and forestrydevelopment, the Philippine Institute for Development Studies(PIDS) commissioned several researchers to prepare assessmentpapers for various policy issuesin forestry. Four major topics wereidentified for these papers, namely: (1) land use and commercialforest resource management; (2) macro-economic policiesaffectingforestry; (3) upland development including the shifting cultivationproblem;and (4) soil erosionand watershedmanagement.

These assessmentstudieswere presentedin a PIDS seminar-work-shop, with the theme "Economic Policy for Forest ResourcesMa-nagement", conducted at the Club Solviento, Calamba, Laguna inFebruary, 1984. The main objective of the seminar-workshopwasto discusspolicy issuesand identify researchgapsin forest resourcesmanagement. Participants came from the government researchandadministrative sectors,the forestry-basedindustries,the uplandcon-servationsector, aswell asuniversity researchinstitutions.

This report presentsan overviewof Philippine forestry and intro-ducessome of the key economic conceptsof resourceuse and ma-nagement. The introduction is followed by a summary of each ofthe seminar-workshoppaperstogether with the highlightsof the dis-cussion and open forum for each session.The concluding portionincludesan agenda for policy researchon forestry and upland deve-lopment.

vii

ECONOMIC POLICIES FOR FOREST RESOURCESMANAGEMENT*

by Wilfrido Cruz**

PART I. RESEARCH FRAMEWORK FORFOREST RESOU RCES MANAGEMENT

The study of the forest sector has traditionally concentrated on(a) the significanceof forest products in international trade and (b)forest management as it relatesto regulation of commercial loggingconcerns. While these are certainly important areasof concern, theapproach has meant that there has been little recognition of theother aspectsof the forest sector,specifically the multiple use/usernature of forest resource exploitation and the crucial implicationsof forest management for economic activitiesexternal to the sector.This indicatesthat rationalization of forest policy in the context ofeconomic development is not forthcoming unlessall the importanteconomic actorsand aspectsof the forest sectorareclearly specifiedin a comprehensiveperspectiveon forest resourcemanagement.

In this introduction, the objective is to presentsuchan overviewof Philippine forestry (with an effort at also relating it to Asianforest resources management) to serve as background for the con-ference topics and papers. The conference papers and discussionsare summarized in Part II of this report. The summaries also distillthe research topics that will set the agenda for future PIDS activitiesin this area.

Overview of the Forest Sector

The conventional economic significance of forestry lies in its

importance to Gross National Product (GNP). The whole sector hasconsistently contributed about five percent of net domestic productsince the 1960s (Power and Tumaneng, 1983), with the logging in-dustry accounting for about 12 percent of annual value added inagriculture and wood processing contributing eight percent of totalmanufacturing output (Segura, et al., 1977).

*A report on the proceedings of the Seminar-Workshop on Economic Policies forForest Resources Management, sponsored by the Philippine Institute for Development

Studies, February, 1984.

**Assistant Professor, College of Development Economics and Management, Univer-sity of the Philippines at Los BaEos. The author thanks Marian Segura de los Angeles forhelpful comments and suggestions.

1

In addition to its important contribution to GNP, forestry hasbeen a major foreign exchangeearner, with logsand lumber account-ing for more than one-fifth of the value of the top ten Philippineexports from 1961 up to 1973. The peak for log and lumber exportswas in 1967 when their value reached 32.5 percent of the total topten exports' value, making forestry number one in the list (Segura,etaL, 1977). However, with the inability to keep yields sustainabledue to over-cutting and the subsequent government restrictions onlog exports, the contribution of forestry to economic growth overtime has been declining. The values, for example, of wood productsin proportion to total exports have gone down to 8 percent fin theeighties (Power and Tumaneng, 1983).

Notwithstanding this decline, it is clear that the export orienta-tion of forestry has been of major significance. This role in theexport market, however, has been primarily limited to log produc-tion. It has been reported, for example, that from 1966 to 1975(with the exception of 1974), more than 60 percent of log outputhas been exported (Revilla, et oL, 1977). Thus, it is not unreason-able that concern for forest resource management has been unusuallybiased towards the logging industry. And yet, as has been pointedout, this subsector of forestry is just one component, albeit a veryimportant one, of a much more complicated renewable resourcesystem.

Figure 1 defines the sub-sectors within forestry and representsan attempt to put into a development perspective the policies andissuesthat may be raised in evaluating the condition of Phil|ppineforestry. Two major users of given forest resourcesare the commer-cial sector (composed of logging firms) and the informal forestryusers (made up of households/communities whose livelihood is sig-nificantly dependent in some form on forest exploitation). Whilethe output of commercial forest firms is primarily timber, the in-formal sector's use of the forest is less specialized. There are alsointerdependencies between these two sectors which are recognizedto be important but about which very little information is available.

The non-forest sector focuses on the other usersand usesof land

currently under forest (the most-important of which is the agricul-

tural sector) and the external effects of forest exploitation (whichcenters on watershed management issues). While there are policiesthat addressspecific issuesor components of the forest sector_ e.g.,traditional forest management is concerned only with the commer-cial forest firms, there hasbeen no serious program of evaluating allof the major policies related to the sector. It should be clear ,fromthis perspective of the forest sector, however, that there is in fact a

2

basisfor attempting sucha study.

FIGURE1

TheForestSector TheNon.ForestSector

Resource CommercialLogging InformalUsers AgriculturalSector:User Firms (Communities) CompetingUsesof

ForestLands

Output Timber Timber,Fuelwood ExternalEffectsofAgro-Foresl_/ ForestUseonWater-_Products shedMa_r_agement

Current ForestManagement SocialFores1_/ GeneralPriceInter-Policy LogExport ventionandTradeAffecting Restrictions PoliciesSector

The procedure for differentiating among components of theforest sector follows from the principle of multiple useforestry andits implications for land allocation. This principle is discussedin thenext section, after which focus is givento the specificactors withinthe system -- with respectto the resourcesthey exploit, the tech-niques or managementschemesutilized, and the institutions thatgovernaccessto resources.These actors include not only the formalusersof the forest - the concessionaires- but also the forest com-

munities, an informal sector whose use of and effect on forest re-sources have been increasingly important. The competing uses offorest land for agriculture and watershed protection are also discus-sed.

Multiple UseForestry end Land Allocation

While land allocation for forest use may be based on rules-of-thumb or o priori pronouncements, e.g., "minimum forest landshould at least be 40 percent of total land area", rational decision-making requiresthat the choiceof land usebe basedon the relativevaluesthat the different usesof land can contribute to society. Fol-lowing Clawson (i974), it is important to note that such land usesare of varying compatibilitY. It is often believed,especiallyamongforesters, that the multiple-usechoiceconcernsonly particular forestuses,like for instance, (a) for wood production, includingfuelwoodgathering;(b) for conservationas in watershed management;and (c)

3

tar non-tangible or amenity-related uses. The fundamental choice,however, is whether to keep land under forest or to use it for non-

forest purposes. The problem of compatibility of usesis compoun-ded by this observation.

Even within forest uses, there might be limited compatibility.Consider the following alternatives. If the priority is for wood pro-duction, the extraction of timber generally decreasesthe soil pro-tection and watershed value of the forest. In fact, even with sustain-ed yield harvesting methods, one cannot escapefrom this fundamen-tal trade-off. Of course, it is quite reasonable that one form of sus-tained yield harvesting may lead to lesssoil erosion than others, in-dicating possible opportunities for minimizing the conservation costsof wood production. This means that rational decision-making muststill focus on relative gains and losses of alternative choicesevenwithin each type of use.

The choice problem is made even more difficult when one isforced to move beyond different forest usesand to consider forestvs. non-forest alternatives - particularly with respect to the conver-sion of forest lands to non-forest uses. In this particular choice prob-lem, the process of conversion has to be evaluated in the conte_t of

the over-all process of economic development. It is only within thiscontext that we can appreciate the changing role of given naturalresources.

In Korea, for example, Park (1983) haspointed out that it ispos-sible to consider the development of forestry in four stages: (a) inthe early subsistence sl_ageof the economy, forests are primarilysources of fuelwood or construction materials; (b) with increasingpressure for productivity, forests are converted to croplands; (¢) ascommercialization proceeds, remaining forests are exploited for com-mercial wood products; and (d) finally, with growing scarcity offorest resources, the trend is toward managed forests with the plant-ing and culture of fast-growing, more valuable species. Indeed, theimportance of conservation and amenity-related usesof forests inthe developed world may be evaluated as a final stage associated withrich countries' higher levels of income and the availability of forestproduct substitutes from local manufacturing or foreign trade sour-ces.

From the above, one can see that the optimal allocation of landdepends on the social valuation of the usefulnessof such land, and inturn, this is affected by the compatibility of specific land uses andthe stage in economic development of a particular society. Two addi-tional valuation aspects need to be considered because of their im-portance to forestry. The first has to do with on-site vs. off-siteeffects of forest uses, and the second concerns the concept of site-

4

value both in the standard optimal forest rotation problem, e.g., in

Howe, 1979; Clark, 1976; and in the alternative land usesense,e.g.,in Panayotou, 1983.

With respect to on-site and off-site aspectsof valuations, therehas been a recent trend toward recognizingand quantifying not onlythebenefits and costs of forest utilization within the sector, e.g.,the revenues and costs of timber harvesting, but also its off-siteeffects, e.g., increasingsedimentation of reservoirsand waterwaysdue to soil erosion. Indeed, there are indicationsthat suchoff-siteeffects are of major significanceso that if they are to be included inthe computation of net benefit streamsover time, the conservationrelated usesmay end up to be as profitable as conventional woodextraction uses. The capability to implement such broad valuationprocedures,however, necessitatesa decision-makingperspectivethattranscends the limited horizon of the private forest users. Conse-quently, an explicit role for public decision-makingis required in themanagementof forest resourceswhere such external effects are im-portant, for example, in the managementof critical watersheds.

Finally, with respect to the site value concept, conventionalforestry theory has emphasizedthe value of land in the growing oftrees. The longer mature and over-mature trees (with their slowgrowth rates) are kept on the land, the greater is the opportunitycost in terms of not beingableto re-stockthe forest with new, fastergrowing trees. (in Philippine forestry, however, this aspect of sitevalue seemsto havebeen underestimatedwith the useof the selective

loggingsystem which will be described in the next section). A se-cond, broader interpretation of site value goesbeyond the optimalforest rotation problem and focuses on the problem of forestdegradation in contrast to deforestation. While there is no a prioriproblem with deforestation, as long asthe land isthereafter usedformore productive social purposes,degradation is clearly socially un-desirable.The reasonis that suchdenuded forest lands not only failto produce forest products but they also fail to produce any alter-nativesociallyvaluableoutput (Panayotou, 1983).

Resource Use and Different Forest Uses

The Commercial Sector

About 16 million hectares(or 56 percent of total land area) havebeen classifiedas forest lands by the Bureau of Forest Development(BFD, 1981), although not all forest lands are actually forested(Talbot and Talbot, 1964; BFD, 1981 ). Of these, about 7.7 millionhectares (close to one-fourth of total land area of the Philippines)

5

was under some form of licenseor concession(BFD, 1981).With respectto forest management,the government approach is

to control exploitation through (a) a system of licensingthat _limitsthe area and duration of concession (50 years including renewals);(b) the collection of fees basedon the volume cut; and (c) the en-forcement of a maximum allowable cut derived from estimatesofsustainable productivity. In addition, the granting of licenseshasbeen tied to a firm's ability to set-up or link with a complementarysawmill or wood processingoperation.

The averagesize of concessionswasabout 30,000 hectaresin theseventies (Segura, et al., 1977) and increasedto 36,000 hectares inthe eighties, in 1982, timber licenseesnumbered about 250_ one-third of whom had 89 percentof total allowablecut. By 1982,_how-ever, there wasan evenningout of allowable cut amongconcession:aires: there were 217 concessionaires,and 86 percent of these had92 percent of allowable cut. As far as employment generation isconcerned, the commercial sector has historically generated manyjobs. Although capital requirements per worker are large (aboutt_50,000 per worker in the mid-1970s), incremental increasesinemployment have neverthelessbeen substantial.From 1961 to 1972,annual incrementsof employment in loggingreached26,000 per yearwhile in the wood industries,it was64,000 per year.

With respectto the technology or resourcemanagementscheme,the commercial sector is required to follow the selective loggingsystem (SLS). This system is designedas a sustainableyield manage-ment system where the logger is required to refrain from cutting acertain proportion of trees in the concessionas designatedby theBFD. The residualstand is then supposedto be managedby the log-ger so that a secondcycle of cutting can be arrangedafter a specificgrowing period. Even if the first cut were to damage50 percent ofthe remainingstand, the initial allocationof allowablecut is still con-servativeenoughas to prevent any significant deforestation (Segura,eta/., 1977).

In fact, however, there has not only been a net drain on thecountry's forest resources;the drain, moreover, hastaken on alarm-ing proportions. Estimates of deforestation differ, but there areindicationsthat this hasled to about 4.5 million hectaresof denudedforest land (Segura,et al., 1977), with the annual rate of forest lossfor the 1970s of about 200,000 hectares (Segura-delosAngeles,1981).

Clearly, there is something wrong with the managementschemethat has been adopted for the country's national forests. It shouldalso be clear that the problem is not merely a technical one, havingto do with the actual setting of cutting goals andtechniquesof tim-ber extraction, but also essentiallyan institutionalone, havingto do6

with the rulesof accessand control that the BFD hasgenerally fol-lowed.

In the first place,all forest landsare under the jurisdiction of theBFD and are merely leasedto loggerswho are supposedto undertakethe selective loggingsystem. It hasbeen shown (C. Cruz, 1982) that,while the first cut cycle of SLS is profitable for the private logger,the timber stand improvement (TSI) phase is not despite low feespaid to government. For example, in 1981, cutting chargesrangedfrom only _ 5 to t=30 per cubic meter of wood while the marketvalue of wood exceeded_600 per cubic meter (Power and Tuma-neng, 1983). HoweVer, the TSI phasefor the secondcyclical cut isnot profitable due to the long time period involved in waiting forthe second cut. Given this particular structure of incentives, it isonly logical that loggerswill attempt to maximize the revenuesfromthe first cut and to forego any TSI phase.Attempts by the BFD tocontrol this can only have limited successsince it isunrealistic toexpect credible enforcement of such a system over more than one-fourth of the total land areaof the Philippines.

In addition to the inherent problem with the SLS within theformal sector, the encroachment on forest lands by shifting cultiva-tors and other "informal" forest usersassoon asloggershaveopenedup the forest make the selectiveloggingschemeunrealistic.

The problem is not isolated in the Philippines.Panayotou (1983)reports annual deforestation in tropical Asia at about 1.8 million hec-tares between 1976-80. The problem of the incentive structure be-hind deforestation has also been cited in Thailand (Tingsabadh,1983) where alternative management schemessuch as clear-cuttingwith immediate re-planting have been suggested.Local efforts toreverse the process of deforestation have similarly met with verylittlesuccess. For example, the reforestation goal is 1.4 million hec-tares by the year 2000, with an annual target for 1978-83 of 150,000hectares per year. From 1962-75, however, actual government re-forestation was only 260,607 hectares. Within concessions,privateloggersare supposedtO undertake reforestation but this is seldomdone. For example, in 1975, only 14 out of 81 concessionshad re-forestation in about 33,000 hectares (Segura, eta/., 1977). Morerecently, reforestation efforts have somewhat improved with thegovernment sector (mostly the BFD) reforesting 33,296 hectaresand the private sector (mostly timber licensees)putting in 31,245hectaresfor a year total of 64,541 (BFD, 1981 ).

The Informal Sector

The problem of managingthe country's forests is compoundedby the presenceof a large "informal" sector of forest users. These

7

are the users who have no legal claim to the resource (or whoseclaim is not recognized by the government). There are two majortypes of informal users. One is the tribal or ethnic minority sub-sector, made up of isolated tribes who have traditionally depe.ndedon the uplands for their subsistence. Lynch (1984) has consistentlyargued that such groups retain valid legal claims on the land thatthey occupy so that their role in the management of such resourcesshould be recognized by the government.

A second group of forest occupants is composed of migrantsfrom lowland communities who have encroached in public forestsor who have moved into concessions once these are logged over. Amajor problem in evaluating the role of this group together withthat of the ethnic minorities is that no one seems to have a clear

idea of their total population. The BFD (1981) places their numberat about 164,635 families (or a population of 799,322) although theuse of NCSO data, together with the BFD listing of upland commu-nities, gives a radically much larger population (M. Cruz, 1984). Thislatter study, in fact, indicates that the official estimate may be inerror by a factor of at least10.

There is substantial agreement, though, on the economiccharac-teristics of this sector. For example, there is very limited capitalavailable to this group sothat their emphasison resourceuseis eitheroh land-usingor on labor-intensivetechnologies. Shifting cultivationis the major type of land-using l_echniquealthough there have beenmany (and spectacular) casesof labor-intensive practices such asexemplified by the rice terraces of the Ifugaos. In addition, many ofthese forest communities remain close to subsistence levels of con-

sumption, and links with lowland markets for their products arequite tenuous.

Government policy has historically viewed these communitiesas "squatters", but while there have been consistent attempts atkeeping them out of the forests,these have largely been unsuccessful.Given the limited administrative resourcesof the BFD, a policy ofexclusion will inevitably be a rule that cannot be enforced. In 1976,for example, there were 780 ill-equipped forest guards who wereexpected to police about 15,000 hectaresof forest land each.

The recent shift to a policy of "social forestry" therefore repre-sents an attempt to rationalize the government's approach to forestresourcemanagement. The strategy calls for (a) introducing forms oftenure to upland Communitiesthat recognizetheir rightsof acce_ tothe resource together with (b) the introduction of the appropriate(agro-forestry) technologies for upland resource use. The approachhas only been recently implemented, and consequently, the propermix of technology and forms of tenure together with the coml_ina-

8

tion of government and local resourcesand participation will haveto be determined.

The Non-forest Sector

The non-forest sector that has already been identified as a majorcompetitor for forest lands is agriculture. Increasing population pres-sure on given agricultural lands has led to both an intensification ofagricultural technologies since the 1960s (Crisostomo and Barker,1973) and the conversion of uplands to food crop agriculture. Theformer process (of intensification) has been facilitated by researchinto new technologies and by government support for their adop-tion. However, the process of conversion of forest lands to agricul-ture has been going on independently of public policy. Indeed, inmarly instances, it has been done in spite of existing laws againstoccupying public lands.

From the perspective of land allocation, the problem of conver-sion of forest lands to-agriculture arises when the process involveslands which are physically not suited to the continuous croppingassociated with sedentary agriculture. In this case, while individualfarmer net benefits might be positive (at least in the short term),the social costs of soil erosion might be substantial. The interme-diate conversion from forest to shifting cultivation, however, maybe feasible both from the private and social perspectives and may re-

present a response to population pressure that does not require majorcosts in terms of investment in terracing or other artificial or biolo-gical erosion control methods.

Watershed Protection

A watershed is defined as "... an area of vegetation-covered landwhich accepts and catches the rainfall during the raidy season,absorbs it rather like a sponge, and releases it during the rest of theyear in a relatively even flow of... underground water, springs,streams and rivers" (Talbot and Talbot, 1964, p. 11-7). While water-shed protection might be included under forest uses of land, thecritical importance of the protection aspect renders secondary thestandard forest uses such as timber growing or fuelwood extraction.

Indeed, the nature of the vegetative cover itself (or its substitu-tion with man-made structures) becomes important only in so far asit is efficient from the perspective of catching, absorbing, and even-tually draining rain water. This is especially so where such water-sheds have become part of major investments such as multi-purposedam projects and irrigation systems. In these instances, watershed

9

degradation often leadsto sediment build-up at the dam-site duringthe wet seasonand limited water supply during the dry season,bothof which have very high social costs.

Consider, for example, the Ambuklao dam which ceasedto beoperational much earlier than its initial expected lifespan due toaccelerated sedimentation from its denuded watershed. Inoreased

flood intensity isan additional concern. For example, the 1972 floodwhich inundated much of Central Luzon causedproperty damageofaboutt_1.35 billion and crop damageof anothert_1.5 billion (Segura,et al., 1977).

It is because of these high social costs that up to 334,711 hec-tares have been proclaimed as watershed reserves (BFD, 1981 )..Whilelogging is kept out of such watersheds, in many instances, forestcommunities have settled there. Resettlement of households outside

the watershed area is often not feasible due to its very high costs. At

the same time, resettlement efforts offer no assurance that the prob-lem of new encroachment will not arise in the future. In these cases,the job of watershed management becomes not primarily one offorest protection but of mediation between the needs of the forest

community for a livelihood and the requirements of controlling soilerosion within the watershed.

To summarize, in this section concerned with a research frame-work for forest resource management, the scope for which economicanalysis can have a major contribution to forest management in thecontext of development has been established. This has been shownthrough the argument that, because of the basic characteristic offorestry as a multiple use/user system (where alternative choices

have become increasingly critical with growing resource scarcity),rule-of-thumb decision-making is no longer sufficient. A rationalchoice framework that can encompass valuation problems dealingwith production, on-and off-site effects, and related aspects of equityandaccessto resourceuseneedsto be applied. By presenting an over-

view of the formal and informal forest sectors,including the issueofconversionof forest to agricultural land and the problem of water-shed management, this section has set the perspectivefor such acomprehensiveevaluation of policy for forestry development.

10

PART II. SUMMARYAND DISCUSSIONOFWORKSHOPPAPERS*

SessionI: CommerciolForestry

Two paperspresentedat the workshopdealtdirectlywith com-mercialor formalsectorforestryissues:A, V. Revilla's"Forest LandManagementin the Contextof NationalLandUse"andCerenillaA.Cruz andMarianSegura-delosAngeles'"PolicyIssuesinCommercialForestManagement."

Revilladiscussedthe generalissuesof landusemanagementandmultipleuseforestry and focusedspecificallyon the implicationsofthe recentlyintroducedPeoples'Forestprogram.Thecloserelation-ship betweenmultipleuseforestry managementand landallocationwasemphasizedin the paper.The three major servicesor outputsfrom forestsareproduction (e.g., of wood, fiber, water, food),pro-tection (e.g., from siltation,floods,droughts),and the provisionofomenitles (specificallywith respectto recreation).Theseservicesare"sustainable" inasmuchas the forest resourceis renewablewithproper monogementover time. The society'sdemandor valuationfor the output of forestsmay then be utilizedasthe basisfor landuserequirements.

The land managementprocessitself requires:(a) the classifica-tion of land- in termsof itsinherentbio-physicalcapacityfor pro-duction (land capability)and in terms of the appropriatenessof aparticulararea for specificland use (land usesuitability); and (b)the actual allocationof land into varioususesbasedon identifiedobjectivesand managementstrategies.The history of landclassifi-cationin the Philippinesdatesback to 1919 and hasbeenpreoccu-pied with distinguishingbetweenforest and non-forestlands. TheBFD target isto keepat least40 percentof total area underforest(basedon slopeand vegetativecovercriteria). Theslow processofclassification,however,togetherwith the lackof controloveractualland usehasallowedthe growingpressurefor conversionof forestlandsinto agricultureto biasactuallanduseawayfromforestry.

Consequently,the official estimatesof availableforest landarenot wholly accurate.They are,for the mostpart, basedonsoilcoverand vegetativedataasextrapolatedfrom datageneratedin the 19.S0sand 1960s.Thus,of the 16.6 million hectaresfor forestland,a sig-nificant amount is either unproductiveor still unclassified(PleaseseeFigure2).

*The assistanceof Lota Almira and EdgarJoveroin preparingthis summary is grate-fully acknowledged.

11

FIGURE 2

PHILIPPINE LAND ALLOCATION

Total LandArea

(30 millionhectares)

!. J,Jw,,, •

i iForestLands Alienable & DisposableLands

(16.6 million hectares) (13.4 million hectares)I

'1 I

] IUnclassiMed Timberland

(5.6 millionhectares) (11 million hectares)

]

I I

Productive Unproductive(9.4 million (1.6 millionhectares) hectares)

,I

I :iOld Growth SecondGrowth

Forest Forest(2..7million (3.8 millionhectares) hectares)

Source: A.V. Revilla (1984) basedon BFD estimates.

12

This points to the need for better data on which forest landsareactually forested. Revilla suggestedthat the best current estimatesmay be basedon 1969 BFD information which puts forested forestlands at 10.0 million hectares. If an adjustment for conversion toagriculture (since the estimate was made) is used,this figure wouldbe reducedto 7.8 to 8.3 million hectares.Of this, the remainingoldgrowth forest would only be 2.0 to 2.5 million hectares,and if onepresumes(as is normally done) that only 50 percent of this is acces-sible, then commercial old growth forests wouldonly be 1.2 to 1.5million hectares. This givesa much lessoptimistic view of commer-cial forest resourcesthan the official estimatesin Figure 2.

Beyond these disturbing data on commercial timber resources,Revilla has pointed out a more critical area of concern, related toforest use that is not normally considered part of commerciallogging: the problem of fuelwood supply. With current useof fuel-wood of 26 million cubic meters being more than four times thesustainable production of 4 million cubic meters, intensiveor plan-tation methods for fuelwood production (evenin private lands) maybe required. For this reason, social forestry projects such as thePeople'sForest program may be called for to complement the com-mercial forest sector. A major concern, of course, is that estimatesof the potential contribution to productivity of such programsshouldbe basedon realisticappraisalsof actual growing conditions.Indeed, recent researchindicatesthat ipil-lpil yieldswhich were mea-sured from actualplantation conditions are only 35-50 percent ofearlierofficial estimates(Revilla and Gregorio, 1983).

Turning to management systems in the commercial sector, thefocus of the paper by C. Cruz and Scgura-delosAngeleswas on theassessmentof the selective loggingsystem (SLS) in terms of econo-mic returns to the private loggingfirms. They comparedthis techno-logy with other concessionor plantation systems. The SLS hasalready been describedas the main approach supported by the BFDtoward the sustainedyield managementof natural forests. By defini-tion, it entailsthe "... removalof mature, over-matureand defectivetrees.., to leave an adequate number.., tO assurea future crop oftimber and forest cover." The specific goal is to assurea secondcy-clical cut comparable in volume and quantity to the old growth cut.The three phasesof SLS are tree-marking, residual inventory, andtimberstand improvement (TSI). This means that trees cannot be

cut beyond a maximum annual amount (determined by the BFD),that relogging is prohibited, and that a second cut is allowed onlyafter a givenlapseof time.

Recent assessmentof the system (C. Cruz, 1982) has shown

13

that.(a) SLS is feasible but not optimal, and (b) the first cut led tohigh returns but the second cut itself had a benefit-cost ratiol lessthan one. It is not surprisingtherefore that licenseestend to over-cut since the profitable procedure is to maximize the first harvest,with the economic incentive structure biasedagainstsustainedyieldmanagement.

Other forms of forest management were also discussed.Privateplantation schemeswhich involve individual farmers in tree-farming,such as in the Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines(PICOP) model, were cited in the paper as possiblesolutions to theover-exploitation problem. However, these schemesalso suffer fromdelayed pay-offs similar to TSI sothat an agro-forestry componentis often required to bring some net returns closer to the present.Another limitation of this model is that the reliable market for out-

put (as supplied by PICOP) is often not available in other commu-nities. Becauseof the constraintsof such an approach, the govern-ment isalso investigatingalternative approachessuchasthe establish-

ment of industrialtree plantations and agro-forestryfarms.A common problem in the managementof both natural and plan-

tation forests isthe direct inclusionin the assessmentnot only of theprivate costs and benefits of the activity but also of the externalcosts of deforestation and degradation. In addition, the evalu_ionshould include the assessmentof attempts at controlling externalitiesthrough alternative techniques like (a) continuing SLS, (b) reforesta-tion by concessionaires,and (c) the involvement of forest occu-pants.

Discussion aqd Open Forum Issues

1. On the size of concessions and the role of forest occupantsIn commercial logging. Patrick Dugan, the discussantfor sessionI,pointed out that government policy has been biasedtoward largemanagementunits in concessionsfor forest lands. Such a bias mayhave been justified in the past when the price of oil and capital in-puts were substantially lower. Becausepolicies are formulated forlarge concessions,smaller forest users(mostly forest occupants) arepenalized, forcing them to engage in illegal and oftentimes destruc-tive activities.

He also pointed out that TSI which may be uneconomic forlarge firms is profitable for small userswho haveexcesslabor avail-able for harvestingthe residualsof logging and who use these forboth home consumptionand for sale. This view challengesthe tra-ditional belief that capital-intensive methods are best for the com-

14

mercial exploitation of forests.During the open forum, the issue of whether or not loggers

should be requiredto engagein the processingof logswasalsoraised.Current policy which requires this may, in fact, be creating ineffi-ciency in the industry and, most probably, hasbiasedentry into thesectortoward big loggingconcerns.

2. On the Impact of government administrative procedures onforestry projects. Dugan also brought up the negative effect ofgeneral administrative policy o.n projects such as reforestration.Since allocations for reforestation are only made annually from thenational budget, the scheduling of reforestation activities is hinderedbecause it often cannot be synchronized with the budgeting system.For example, he cited the government's policy of reverting back tothe national budget unused funds for a particular fiscal year. How-ever, this may adversely affect the sector since many programsare dependent on rainfall patterns or growing seasons that do notcoincide with the fiscal year.

On a related matter, he pointed out that the private sector hasshown willingness to cooperate with the government in reforesta-tion, such as in contributing to a forest development fund that thegovernment has set up. However, the special deposits that weresupposed to go to reforestation and similar forest development acti-vities have not been clearly utilized for such programs so that con-cessionaires have become hesitant when similar projects are sug-gested. During the open forum, a representative from the privatesector contended that the problem was not so much governmentrefusal to utilize the fund for reforestation but the inability of manyconcessionaires to prove that they had undertaken reforestationactivities worthy of funding. A related point which was raised fo-cused on the need to perhaps put more emphasis on funding forestrehabilitation instead of (ineffective) regulatory functions.

3. On trade and the export of forest products. Dugan suggestedthat instead of imposing an export quota on logs, it might be betterto have a price floor on the kind of logs being exported. In thisprocedure, only high-quality logs with prices above the minimumprice will be allowed for export. Low quality logs would then beprocessed locally, following the principle that it will be more effi-cient to transport the higher quality output.

In the open forum, however, it was pointed out that the more

important problem is the presence of illegal exports. If this persists,then an efficient system of log exportation cannot be successfully

15

implemented.

4. On the demand for fuelwood. The emphasisplaced byRevilla on the forthcoming excessdemand for fuelwood was notedduring the open forum. One observationwas that a major contri-butor to the increase in demand (aside from the growth in hOuse-hold requirement with increasing population) would be industry -for energy production and for small-scaleuse in bakeries, tobaccodrying, and the like. Such a trend will continueevenwith the grow-ing scarcity of fuelwood because the potential for substitution(especially of petroleum-based products) is still quite limited. Oneparticipant ventured an estimate that the difference in cost between

petroleum and fuelwood for each unit of energy was in the orderof four to one.

Session I1: Macroeconomic Policies

Session II focused on the role of macroeconomic and tradepolicy in forest management and upland development. A paperby Gerald C. Nelson on "The Impact of Government Policy onForest Resource Utilization" as well as a paper by John H. Powerand Tessie Tumaneng on "Comparative Advantage and Govern-ment Price Intervention Policies in Forestry" were presented. Thelatter paper had been prepared for a previous PIDS project and wassummarized by Cristina C. David for the conference.

Nelson's paper was concerned with relating national policy toeffects on forest management. The task of forest resourcemanage-ment is considerablycomplicated by the major role of environmentalexternalities associatedwith rates of resourceexploitation, leadingto over-exploitation from the social decision-making point ofview.

In forestry, the sourcesof depletion are two-fold: logging (pri-marily for the export market) and informal use (for construction,fuel, and conversionto agriculture) - with the former driven pri-marily by price incentives and the latter affected mostly by popu-lation pressure. The growing concern about this trend for over-exploitation hasarisen from the changingperspectiveon goalsw,hichgovernment hasheld for the forest sector.

From the initial emphasis on increased foreign exchange andemployment, two additional goalshave gained importance in recentyears: (a) the reduction in environmental degradation, especiallyas this affects e,osion and sedimentation, and (b) the improvementof the welfare of upland communities. It waspointed out that there

16

are two ways of viewinghowgovernment policy canaffect the forestsector. The first is to find out the impact of government on thedirect determinants of forest depletion; the other is to evaluategovernment policiesasthey affect the allocationand useof land.

On the one hand, policy may be sector specific, e.g., the logexport ban a logging ban, harvest charges or taxation, long-termleases,investment incentivesfor wood industries,and socialforestry.On the other hand, it may be in the form of general macroeconomicpolicy, e.g., monetary and fiscal, exchange rate, and investmentincentivespolicies. Any change in economic policy implies a subse-quent change in current or future prices of outputs, intermediateinputs, or primary factors of production. For example, taxes andsubsidiesrepresent direct price changes while institutional change(such as an increasein the length of a lease) may be equivalent irleffect to a decreasein the discount rate (or marginal rate of timepreference) of the lessee.

In general, most sector specific policies are geared towardsreducing depletion rates by decreasing output prices. However,with respect to macroeconomicpolicy effects, there is inadequateunderstanding of the links between such policy changes and thepricing of outputs and inputs in the forest sector. Such links areimportant since they show how national government policies affectresourcedepletion even in an indirect manner. An example of thelatter is government emphasison researchthat pushesthe intensivemargin of land use upward as in the caseof researchon rice tech-nology. Such researchmay lead to technology that increaseslaborabsorption in the lowlands thereby reducing somewhat populationpressureon the extensivemarginof land use,the uplands.

Power'and Tumaneng (1983) have presentedan analysisof theforestry sector utilizing such a macroeconomic perspective. Theypointed out the problem of stagnation of the industry, and theyidentified the basic goalsfor forestry to include the capture of eco-nomic rent, the promotion of foreign exchange earnings,and thegenerationof revenuesfor forest administration.

The main concern of their study is the evaluationof comparativeadvantage of the forest industry and the role of price interventionpoliciesbeing followed by the government. Asthe indicator of com-parative advantage, they used the concept of domestic resourcecost or DRC - "the rate at which an activity can convert domesticresourcesmeasuredin peso social value into foreign exchangeeither

by exporting or substituting for imports" (Power and Tumaneng,1983, p. 33).

However, to carry out this investigation, the authors were

17

constrained to assumethat sector specific policies on optimal (andsustainable)resourcemanagement have been identified and are ope-rational. With this assumption, they evaluatedthe effect of differenttrade policies on forestry output, foreign exchangeearnings, rentand government revenue,and consumervs. producersurpluses.

The major distinction among the policies was with respect tousing limits or quotas vs. taxation or fees. Direct controlson forestexploitation may thus be basedon cutting limits vs. cutting charges.With respect to output changes,both limits and chargeswill decreaseoutput, thus being consistent with conservation goals. There willalso be lower foreign exchangeearningswith either policy. However,the major advantage of cutting chargesvs. limits is that, with theformer, government will earn revenuesand will be able to captureeconomic rentson marginaloutput.

In the export sector, both export taxes and quotas may be used.While both controls will limit output and tend to reduce foreignexchangeearnings,export taxes are better becausethey allow govern-ment to appropriate some resource rents and generate revenue.Both controls, however, entail substantiallossesin producers'surplusso that it is to be expected that the commercial sector will opposesuch policies (if such are being proposed) or will avoid compliance(if the controls are already in effect).

In the area of trade, the study reported that forestry offersan opportunity for the country to have additional efficient meansof earning and saving foreign exchange. Effort should focus on thepromotion of domestic processingof wood, together with reforesta-tion and forest protection, to enhance forestry's long-run capacity toearn and save foreign exchange. In the area of conservation, thepaper noted that because of externalities and the need to meetboth the qualitative and quantitative aspects of conservation,direct controls and regulations are needed. For example, forestcharges by themselves could meet the requirement of limiting out-put (assuming they are effective), however, it is not clear that theycan meet the qualitative requirementsof conservationpolicy.

Power and Tumaneng proposed a package of controls whichthey consider practicable in the present context of forest manage-ment and trade. Sucha rational pricingand taxation packageshouldinclude: (a) removing the export tax on processedwood; (b) res-cinding the log export quota and imposing, instead, higher exporttaxes on logs; and (c) assessingforest concessioncharges,including

more local government participation in taxation. They emphasized,however, that this package pre-supposesthat the conservationgoalwill be addressedseparately by sector specific policies on sustain-

18

able yield forest management.

Discussion and Open Forum

1. On export controls and the domestic processing of logs.The first discussant was Ramon Saraos. He commented on the re-

commendation of Power and Tumaneng regarding the removalof the export banon logsandthe imposition of export taxes instead.His concern was that such a program may only serve to increasethe lucrativenessof exporting, leading to a higher propensity forsmuggling, and consequent domestic shortagesof wood products.With respect to the domestic processingof logs, Saraos suggestedthat this has led to the closing up of many firms which could notafford the expensivetechnology for processing. Cristina C. David,however, suggestedthat the main reason for the failure of theselocal firms was not the requirement to engage in processingbutthe undervaluation of forest products.

2. On recognizing conservation and equity issues in edditlonto the concern for efficiency. The second discussantwas PercySajise. Sajise noted Nelson's presentation of the economic factorsaffecting optimal exploitation of forest resources, and proposedcooperation between economistsand natural scientiststo determinea more comprehensiveset of factors that govern the optimal yieldof forestswithout sacrificingtheir socialvalue.

In addition to the efficiency issues,Sajiseemphasizedthe needfor equity considerations in the area of upland development. Forexample, from preliminary results of a survey in Palawan, it wasfound that forest products (such as honey, rattan, wild pigs, andalmaciga) constitute about 31 percent of the income of farmers.On the other hand, these farmers do not receiveany income fromtimber. Sajisethen reiterated a comment made by C. David duringher presentation to the effect that decisionscannot be left alone toprice and market mechanisms.Other factors are neededas far as theformulation of economic policies is concerned, and these otherfactors include the regenerativecapacity of forestsand the equitabledistribution of income.

3. On the opproprioteness of policies end their implementa-tion. During the open forum, it was brought out that even before

considering an integrated or comprehensive package of policies,there should be immediate evaluation of specific rules that are pa-

tently inappropriate in the context of current goals for forestry, in

19

particular, and for economic development, in general. For instance,the policy granting duty-free importation of tractors for loggingtends to encouragethe greater useof machinesratherthan of labor,thereby increasingthe drain on foreign exchange.

In addition, it was pointed out that if a policy cannot be im-plemented, then it is not a good policy. The implementation Ofpolicies should be made part of the policy-making process. O_neexample of an un-implementable policy is the requirement forloggersto plant five treesfor every tree felled.

Session II1: Uplond Development

Session III expanded the framework for viewing forest resourcemanagement by explicitly considering upland development issuesin general and the role of informal resource users. As has beenpointed out earlier, it has long been recognizedthat a major actorin resourceexploitation hasbeenthe uplandcommunities - both in-digenous (ethnic minorities) and migrants from the lowlands. Thepaper by Ma. ConcepcionCruz focusedon the specificissueof popu-lation pressurein the uplandsand the factors leadingto this. DorisCapistrano and Sam Fujisaka's paper, on the other hand, cataloguedsome of the agro-forestry technologiesavailable to uplanddwellersand their implicationsfor resourceuseand conservation.

M. Cruz, in her paper "Population Pressure, Migration, andMarkets: Implications for Upland Development," surveyed theapproaches taken to analyze the role of population pressure intechnical change. One view holds that an optimal level of popula-tion based on some maximum per capita productivity, givenresources and technology, can be determined (Grigg, 1976). Onthe other hand, it has been argued that optimal population andtherefore the carrying capacity of land is constantly changing dueto changesin behavior patterns and technical change. For example,the continuous trend for a decrease in fallow period or a changeinthe manner of cultivating a given crop has definitely led to signi-ficant multiples of population density. Thus, a decreasein fallowperiod from 24 to 9 years has allowed population to increasefrom 12 to 30 persons per square kilometer in tropical shiftingcultivation (Gronou, 1966) while a change from shifting cultivation

to rice and subsequently to transplanted rice has led, respectively.,to population densities from 12, 98, and 381 persons per squa_

kilometer in Southeast Asian rice-growing communities (Hanks_1972).

The trend for increasing population pressure in the uplands isdue to what M. Cruz calls "frontier" migration. Using National

20

Census and Statistics Office (NCSO) data for 1960 and 1970,together with the listing of upland communities based on BFDIntegrated Social Forestry communities (which constitutes approx-imately 71 percent of the entire social forestry program), Ms. Cruzestimated that upland residentsnumbered about 11 million in 1970or about 30 percent of total population. This is a much largerpopulation than what previous "guesstimates" have given. Moreimportantly, more than half (or 56 percent) of the total migrantpopulation are to be found in the uplands, indicating the need toexamine this pattern of frontier migration at least with the sameinterest shownto the pattern of urban migration.

Finally, the inclusion of two very relevant factors - increasinggovernment intervention and the greater role of markets - expandsthe original population pressuremodels (such as that of Boserup,1965) and directly addressescurrent policy issues. For instance,population growth during the land surplus stage in Philippine eco-nomic development was largely influenced by government resettle-ment. At the same time, the growing importance of production formarket (vs. production for household subsistence)is increasingthedemand for more intensive exploitation of forest and other uplandresources.

The paper by Capistrano and Fujisaka on "Tenure, Technology,and Productivity of Agro-Forestry Schemes" reviewed the literatureon some of the agro-forestry based technology currently beingdisseminated. Since many upland areas currently provide openaccess resourcesto present occupants, the authors found that en-vironmental degradation represents a "tragedy of the commons"problem in which resourcesare over-utilized by upland dwellers.

The government, through the BFD, tries to avert ongoing over-exploitation by granting upland cultivators certain rights over theirfarms. These rights include two-year renewable leasesgranted toForest Occupancy Management Program participants, 25-yearrenewable leases to Communal Tree Farming communities andlegally incorporated organizations,and 25-year renewablesteward-ship contracts to Integrated Social Forestry program participants.As of the end of 1981,255 social forestry projects had beenstarted,covering 500,000 hectares (or about 2.7 percent of the public do-main).

Information on technical and economicproductivity of differentupland agro.forestry systems are few and where available are: (a)usually based on controlled experimentation, (b) limited to shortterm (one seasonor one year) estimates, and (c) usually basedoncombinations of ipil-ipil and other crops. (This last aspect reflects

21

the predominance of ipi/-ip//based technologies in upland develop-ment projects). The literature also tends to overestimate pro-ductivity and profitability of agro-forestry systems.The discrepancybetween projected estimates and actual figures derives from dif-ferences in resource quality and availability in ideal, experimentalconditions and in farmers' fields. Constraints to high agro-forestryyield include the lack of capital and labor inputs, the problem ofstray Gr wild animals,and pest infestation.

In addition to the technical factors constraining agro-forestryyields, small size of landholdings and insecurity of tenure on theland are two often cited obstaclesto the adoption of agro-forestrytechnology. Tenure insecurity is generally thought of as a land usepractice biased in favor of crops'that yield immediate returns butcause environmental degradation. There are, however, no studiesthat investigate the direct quantitative effects of tenure on the in-tensification of upland cultivation and on the environmental exter-nalities involved. With respect to participatory development issues,many programs havebeen describedas "participatory" in approach.However, real participation remains to be defined and operation-alized. For the most part, participation in programs has meant,for the upland farmer, contributing labor and attending seminarsand meetings. Upland communities have not had much say inproject decision-making.

Discussion and Open Forum

1. On upland migration and its determinants. Mahar Man@has,the discussantfor Session III, pointed out that the main empiricalcontribution of M. Cruz's paper is the computation of migrationrates in upland communities, particularly for the Integrated SocialF'oresty (ISF) communities. Becauseof its importance, he recom-mended that this aspect of the study be amplified since such in-formation cannot be found in other studies.

During the open forum, it was suggestedthat another importantresult of the paper was that it debunks the myth that the uplandsare inhabited primarily by cultural minorities. Programson uplanddevelopment and strategies will substantially differ depending onwhether the prime beneficiaries are cultural minorities or migrantsfrom the lowlands.

On the factors affecting migration, Man@has indicated thatfuture studies should focus on the specific circumstance of themigrants in their place of origin and their expectationswhen theyreach their destinations. For example, it would not be sufficientto look at averagesat the placeof origin (suchasthe averageincome)22

since those who migrate are probably those who are not averagebut those who are quite worseoff. On the other hand, it might besufficient to use average income at the destination to evaluate the"pull" factors affecting migration.

2. On conflict.oriented vs. evolutionary change. Mangahasquestioned the implication of M. Cruz's characterization on thepenetration of markets and commercialization into upland commu-nities, in his view, commercialization should be seen as a naturaloutcome of progressand not as an intrusion into the livelihood ofupland communities. In this sense, it would not be fruitful toevaluate the role of middlemen and traders as explorative unlessit can be shownthat they indeed possessmonopsonisticpower.

M. Cruz replied that increasedcommercialization (as observedin the increasing proportion of production going to sales ratherthan to home consumption) has been treated as an indicator ofpopulation pressurerather than the causethereof. Moreover, theliterature indicates that monopsonistic control in the hands oftraders does exist, and in some instances,the commodity markethasbeenshownto be tied up with the credit market.

3. On the importance of historical end institutional factorsin migration. Mangahas observed that a major factor affectingmigration has to do with historical events and institutional changessuch as government initiated resettlement schemes or radical changesin the political or peace and order situation. Further research shouldthus pay more attention to the way people perceive their presentcondition and what changesin the environment motivate them tomove. He cited, as an example, the resettlement program in the1950s which can be closelyassociatedwith agrarianunrest in CentralLuzon at that time.

In addition, he pointed out that carrying capacity (asa measureof environmental change) should also include the institutionalsetting and not just the limited biological or technical conceptof the man.land ratio. Other factors should be included such asthe system of justice, the protection of people's rights, and the wayconflicts are resolved. In reality, one does not wait for the man-land ratio to increase in order to move if the situation is chaoticand threatening.

4. On institutional arrangements and participatory change.During the open forum, it was observed that while there are nostudies documenting the effects of tenure and productivity onconservation, informal observations on the various forms of tenurialarrangements in the uplands can already provide some preliminary

23

hypotheses. For example, in a study on the Pantabanganarea,it was found that there were ten different informal tenurial arrange-ments which can be studied for their implications on resourcemanagement.

With respect to the issueof participatory development, the needfor dialogue between project implementors and beneficiaries wasemphasized. The _current project preparation schemes of manyagencies seek to please funding agencies or government officialsrather than the beneficiaries themselves. Dialogue, in the interestof genuine participatory development, should leadto a more rationalproject preparationphase.

5. On appropriete technology for the uplands. During the openforum, it was pointed out that in the development of the uplands,the goal should not only be the increase of production but also theconcern for conservation. Hence, the most appropriate technologyfor the uplands should suit the limitations of topology and theenvironment. The criteria that should be considered in choosingappropriate technology for the uplands should thus include notonly potential productivity but also social acceptability and environ-mental soundness.

Session IV: Watershed Management

Two papers were presented on watershed management. Thefirst, by Wilfredo P. David, was on "The Environmental Effects ofWatershed Modifications_', and the second was by jose A. Galvezon the "Management and Costs of Watershed Reforestation".David's paper was concerned with a general evaluation of the roleof watersheds and different watershed covers in controlling waterrun-off and soil erosion. Galvez, on the other hand, discussedindeta.ilthe specific watershed managementprogram beingundertakenfor two major projects in the Philippines - the PantabanganandMagat watershed reforestation programs.

According to W. Dayid, the more significant environmentalimpacts of watershed modifications are hydrologic in nature -indicating changes in some of the interactions in the water cycle.There are four of types of land usesthat have distinctly differentimplications for watershed behavior: forests, grasslands,arable lands,and urbanization or industrialization. For conservation purposes,aforest coverprovidesthe best protection on the land.

24

With respectto water flows, the infiltration rate of soil in forestlands, for instance, isgreaterthan any other type of land use(exceptfor deep tillage with contour ridges and mulching). Also, waterrun-off throughout the year is quite smooth becauseof good waterabsorption. In general, water absorption is best with hardwoodforest, followed by permanent managed pasture, wheat crop, asecond year meadow, corn with improved practices, corn withprevailing practices, and, finally, roads. It therefore follows that,with respect to water flows, the removal of forests increasesfloodflows, reducesthe baseor low flows of rivers, increasesthe watertable, and leadsto higherstreamtemperatures.

With respect to controlling soil erosion, forest cover is similarlybeneficial. Soil erosion has already been identified by NationalEnvironmental Protection Council asthe mostseriousenvironmental

problem. Erosion is closely related to water flows since the sus-pended sedimentcarrying capacity of a river isdirectly proportionalto its dischargeraisedto the power of 1.4 to 2.0. Thus, for example,if river discharge doubles, .then its sediment carrying capacity in-creases2.6 to 4 times. Aside from averagestreamflow, the intensityof water flow at the upper extreme is a major determinant of soilerosion. In the Philippines, most of the sedimenttransported (about40 percent) isattributed to the extreme 5 percentof flows.

Aside from forest, other land usesare obtained in watersheds.While grasslandsare in general inferior to forests for protection pur-poses, under managed conditions, their conservation value canapproximate that of forests. The lossof soil protection when land isconverted to crop use may be controlled with proper land manage-ment, such as bench terracing. Such controls, however, are quitecostly, and in the United States, it has been found that even with a50 percent government subsidyon land modification costs,the pay-back period for such investments is still in the order of 30 years.Finally, urbanization or industrialization in a given area leadsto thelowest water absorption ratesand introduces (in addition to the soilerosion problem) an entirely new problem - the deterioration ofwater quality. With respectto the actual measurementof the erosionpotential of different land uses, W. David has suggestedthat it isalready feasible to make approximations of erosion ratesfor variouscover, slope, soil, and rainfall conditions in the Philippineswith theuseof a modified soil lossequation.

Becauseactual land use is substantiallyaffected by human popu-lation, the human influence may also be seen as a major issueinwatershed management. Population pressure often leads to themanipulation of watershedswith no due regard for environmentalconsequences beyond the short-term or beyond the immediate

25

boundariesof farm plots. The key therefore to watershedmanage-ment is to control the problem of population pressureby integratingeffective livelihood programs with the vegetative or engineeringmodifications that are necessaryfor watershedconservation.

To focus the discussionon particular instancesof watershedmanagement, the second paper (by Galvez) presentedthe caseofPantabanganand Magat. The Pantabanganwatershed,which include_part of Nueva Ecija, Nueva Viscaya, and Aurora, encompasses82,900 hectares (excluding the reservoirof 8,000 hectares). Themajor problem in the area issoil erosionwhich is found in 46 percentof the watershed. (The author could not determinethe actual rates.)

The population in the area is 23,200 or 3830 households,basedon a 1979 National Irrigation Administration (NIA) survey. Forty-four percent of these households derived income primarily fromfarming and fishing while 35 percent were employed by governmentagencies,suchasthe NIA and the BFD.

The reforestation programs for the watershed consistedof thefollowing:

(a) The Republicof the Philippines-JapanTechnicalCooperationProject, which was started in 1979, was supposedto cover 8,000hectares. Between 1977 and 1987, 4,500 hectareshadbeen planted,and the restof the project will be completed in 1986.

(b) The BFD Carranglan Forest District had replanted 2,200hectaressince 1973.

(c) The BFD Pantabangan District replanted 6,800 hectares.With respect to conditions in the Magat watershed, the area (whichincludes part of Nueva Viscaya, Ifugao, and Isabela) is 414,300hectares,excluding 4,900 hectaresin the reservoir. Erosion is severeto excessive in 83 percent of the watershed with sediment yield atthe dam site estimated to be 8.5 million tons per year (based onthe planning studies of the dam). The BFD had reforested 11,000hectares,but this area had been reducedby fire damage.

To ensure the proper coordination of reforestation work, theNIA organized the Watershed Management and Erosion ControlProject in June 1980. The project had three components. First ,the Magat Watershed Feasibility Study had the goal of formulatingan integrated development plan for the various critical sub-catch-ments of the watershed. Second, the Forest Protection Pilot Pro-gram was set up to integrate forest occupancy management,forest

guarding, fire control, and watershed rehabilitation. Finally, theReforestation Component had the goal of rehabilitation of thePantabangan watershed and parts of Magat by reforesting some32,000 hectaresof open grasslands.

26

By September i983, the project had planted 28 million seed-lings, established agro.forestry plantations on 10,700 hectares inPantabanganand on 3,800 hectares in Magat (which was45 percentof the total goal). Road construction reached 320 kilometers (60percent of the goal) with 250 kilometers constructed in Pantabanganand70 in Magat. A network of nurserieswasalsoset up in the area.

By September 1983, 45 percent of the reforestation goal hadbeen met, but Galvez reported that serious problems were still en-countered. The list of problems included non-availability of seedand propagation, excessiveweed growth in reforestation sites, pestand disease,forest fires, and continuing destructive practices (suchas logging,hillside farming, and grazing). The crucial lessonslearnedin the project, according to Galvez, was the importance of trans-portation and accessroads, the proper selection of speciesfor thedifferent sites, fire prevention and protection, and the proper timingof outplanting.

Discussion and Open Forum

1. On the importance of economic assessment of reforestationefforts. The first discussant, Marietta Adriano, emphasized the im-portance of evaluating the benefits and costs in watershed projects.The investigation should include not only the direct benefits (suchas revenue from trees planted) but also secondary and off-site effects.It is also important to directly consider the impact of watershedprojects on income distribution especially since such projects nor-mally utilize public funds.

In addition to the benefit-cost analysis of on-site and off-siteeffects of watershed programs, it was pointed out that pre-invest-ment calculations must be evaluated with respect to actual levels ofinvestment. Such appraisal estimates can be useful in decision-makingfor future projects and for redesigning possible implementationapproaches.

2. On government agency participation in watershed develop-ment. The usual problem associated with inter-agency coordinationinvolving resource development is present in the management ofwatersheds. Agencies involved are the National Irrigation Admi-nistration (NIA) for the downstream, dam-siltation effects, theBureau of Forest .Development (BFD) for the control of soil erosionin the upstream, and the National Power Corporation (NPC) forthe hydroelectric component of the multipurpose dam facility.The issue of identifying primary and secondary responsibilities inthe actual management of the watershed will have to be resolved.This was cited, for example, in the World Bank recommendation

27

of creating a lead agency which has as its primary function themanagementof the country's watersheds.

3. On using actual benefit_ost estimates of completed water-shed management studies. It was suggested that agencies concernedwith watershed management make use of existing estimates of bene-fits and costs derived from an appraisal of post-investment operationsof particular watershed projects. The experiences of the Panta-bangan and Magat watershed projects were cited as relevant casestudies for periodic appraisal of expected and ex post benefit-costestimates.

4. On the need to devise useful indices of soil erosion for bene-

fit-cost calculations. It was pointed out that indices of projectedrates of erosion for different types of vegetative cover in watershedsshould be made using Philippine conditions and experiences. Forexample, certain types of vegetation in watersheds may be projectedto increase or decrease the life of reservoirs, which can then be usedas a guideline in the benefit-cost evaluation of the dam.

28

PART III. AGENDA FOR POLICY RESEARCH ONFORESTRY AND UPLAND DEVELOPMENT

In this concluding portion of the report, a researchagendathathas been derived from the presentationsand discussionsduring theseminar-workshopis presented. This agenda representsa more fo-cused sub-set of the general policy issuesidentified in an earlierPIDS assessmentof the forestry sector (in Segura-delosAngeles,1982), and outlines the major emphasis for researchthat PIDSwill be undertaking in the future.

Long-term Production and Commercial Forestry

There is a need to look at the long-term potentials for forestryoutput in relation to the changing structure of demand for forestproducts. While the sustainability of timber output will be of in-creasingconcern in the next two to three decades,the major problemfor the future will be fuelwood supply. For example, projected re-quirements of both domestic and industrial users have been esti-mated at 63 and 106 million cubic meters in 1990 and 2000, res-pectively. Current efforts at promoting ipll-ipil based agro-forestrytechnologiesas potential sourcesof fuelwood need to be evaluatedsince recent researchfindings indicate that ipil-ipil yields measuredfrom actual plantation conditions are only 35 to 50 percent of earlierestimates.

With respect to the management of commercial concessionsfor logging purposes, it has been shown that current chargesforforest exploitation are too low and the effort to test the stumpageappraisalsystem should be intensified. There is, in addition, a clearneed to evaluate the selectiveloggingsystem of timber exploitationand to study alternative systemsof management.

Population Pressurein the Uplands

The importance of surveying the options for managementprograms for upland communities and available agro-forestry tech-nologiesis also recognized. A more comprehensiveandquantitativeevaluation should be made to allow one to movebeyond the simplecommunity casestudiesthat characterizecurrent research.

In addition_ it was emphasizedthat a formal study of populationpressure, in terms of lowland to upland migration and scientificestimates of upland population, is required. At present, there islimited basis for development planning for programsthat address

29

the problemsof livelihoodfor uplanddwellers. Not enoughinforma-tion is available on their numbers nor on the patterns of migrationand growth of these communities. This meansthat agro-forestrydevelopment projects, being in responseonly to specific and imme-diate instancesof upland resourceover-exploitation, cannot addressthe long-termproblem of population pressure.

Assessmentof WatershedManegemerlt Progroms

One very useful manner of studyingthe uplandresourcemanage-ment problem is with the framework of watershed planning. Thisis especiallyvaluable for policy in caseswhere the watershed is alsothe site of on-going government projects, such as major water-impoundingactivitiesfor hydro-electricity or irrigation.

There are already two important sourcesof information aboutthe resource management issuesin watershed management: (a)Lpri-mary data collection on agro-forestry potentials; and (b) soil con-servation as part of primarily technical studies and benefit-Costanalysis as part of standard project appraisalfor externally fundedprojects. What remains to be done is to consolidate these informa-tion in an integrated study of the effectsof watershedmodifications- in terms of implications for the communities within the site,soil erosion problems for the reservoir, and effects on the off,site"social" benefitsof the project. This will entail an explicit economicvaluation study of the major components of the watershed manage-ment program.

Mocroeconomic Policies and the Economic Development Contextfor Forestry

While the previous topics focused on studies specific to theforest .sector, the seminar-workshopalso suggestedthe importanceof moving beyond solely micro-oriented approachesor case.studies.There is a need to relate the pattern of upland exploitation to na-tional economic policies and to the general economic developmentcontext of the forest sector.

National economic policies refer primarilY/ to forestry policiesthat are sector-specificsuch as the Control of timber trade and in-centives for the wood-based industries. Completed studies havealready addressedthe most important of these, and the recent workof Power and Tumaneng (1983) has integrated much of this litera-ture.

Other economic policies, however, arise from the general eco-nomic development context of the country, and these may have

30

significanteffectson the trend for forestexploitationand uplandresourceuse. For example, during the postwarperiod of fasteconomicgrowth,forestry wasseenessentiallyasa sourceof foreignexchangeearningsfrom timber exports. In that kindof econOmiccontextand giventhe relativeabundanceof old growthforestsatthat time, the forest wasusedprimarilyasa resourceto be mined.It should come as no surprisethen that, notwithstandingpoliciesfor conservation,the eventualresultwasa pattern of exploitationthat effectivelyreducedtheextentof productiveforestlands.

The past two decades,however,havewitnessedthe closingofmuchof thecountry'sagriculturalfrontier. This, togetherwith therecognitionof the limitsof the country'sforestsin relationto thenew demandsbeing placedon it by populationpressure,has ledto attemptsto alter the trend of forestusefrom over-exploitationto conservation. This relationshipbetween general economicdevelopmentconsiderationsand the prospectsfor forestry hasnotbeenadequatelystudied. Thishasnow becomeespeciallysignificantsincethe current economiccrisis requiresa generalre-definitionof the role that different resourcesectorsshouldplay in economicdevelopment.

31

REFERENCES

BONITA, M. L. and A. V. REVILLA, JR. 1977. Philippine Forest ResourCes:19762026. in PREPF (Popul_lon, Resources,Environment and the Philip-pine Future: Scenarios for the Year 2000). A researchconsortiumof theDevelopmentAcademyof the Philippines,the U.P. Schoolof Economics,andthe U.P. PopulationInstitute. Vol. 11-3A.PhilippineForest Resources.

BOSERUP, ESTER. 1965. The Conditions of Agricultural Growth. London:Allenand Unwin.

BUREAU OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT (BFD). 1981. Philippine ForestryS_tlstlcs, QuezonCity: Bureauof ForestDevelopment,Ministry of NaturalResources.

CLARK, COLIN W. 1976. Mathematical Bloeconomics: The Optical Manage-ment of Renewable Resources.New York: JohnWiley andSons.

CLAWSON, MARION (ed.) 1974. "Forest Policy for the Future," Resourcesfor the Future, Inc., WorkingPaperLW-1, June.

CRISOSTOMO, CRISTINA and RANDOLPH BARKER. 1973. "Growth Ratesof PhilippineAgriculture, 1948-1971." Honolulu: Conferenceon Agri_ul,tural Growth in Japan,Korea,andthe Philippines.

CRUZ, MA. CONCEPCION. 1984. "Population Pressure,Migration andMarkets:Implicationsfor Upland Development," PaperPresentedat the Workshopon EconomicPoliciesfor Forest ResourcesManagement,Club Solviento,Calamba,Laguna,February,sponsoredby the PhilippineInstitute for Deve-lopmentStudies.

CRUZ, C. A. 1982. "Economic Analysisof the SelectiveLoggingSystemin Se-lectedAreasin the Philippines." UnpublishedPh.D.dissertation,CollegeofForestry,Universityof the Philippines,LosBaffos,Laguna.

HOWE, CHARLES W. 1979. Natural ResourceEconomics: Issues,Analysis, andPolicy. New York: John WileyandSons.

LYNCH, OWEN J. 1984. "Natural ResourceDispositionin the PhilippineUp-lands:A Searchfor EquitablePoliciesandPractices,"Paperpresentedat theWorkshopon Policy-OrientedResearchon Equity in Natural ResourceDe-velopment: Issuesand Data Needs,TagaytayCity: DevelopmentAcademyof the Philippines.

PANAYOTOU, THEODORE. 1983. "Present Status of Asian Tropical Forestand NeededMeasures:An Overview," Paperpresentedat the SeminaronManagementof Forest Resources,Los Ba_os, Laguna,Philippines,July,sponsoredby the AgriculturalDevelopmentCounciland the japan Centerfor InternationalExchange.

PARK, JIN H. 1983. "Forest ResourceDevelopmentin A GrowingEconomyinI_orea",Paperpresentedat the Seminaron Managementof ForestResourc-es: Issueson ForestPolicy in the DevelopingCountriesof Asia,LosBa_os,Laguna, Philippines, July, sponsoredby the Agricultural DevelopmentCounciland the JapanCenterfor InternationalExchange.

POWER, JOHN and TESSIE TUMANENG. 1983. "ComparativeAdvantageandGovernmentPoliciesin Forestry", Paperpresentedat the Workshopon theImpact of EconomicPolicieson AgriculturalDevelopment,Tagaytay City,

32

March 25-26, jointly sponsoredby the Philippine Institute for Develop-ment Studies(PIDS) and the PCARRD, (PIDSWorkingPaper8305).

PREPF. 1977. Population, Resources,Environment and the Philippine Future,(PREPF): Scenarios for the Year 2000. A researchconsortiumof the Deve-

lopment Academy of the Philippines,the U.P. Schoolof Economics,andthe U.P. PopulationInstitute. Vol. 11-3A,PhilippineForestResources.

REVILLA, A. V. JR.; M. L. BONITA; and M. SEGURA. 1977. "Evaluation ofCertain Policiesand ProgramsAffecting ForestryProductionThrough2000A-D." in Population, R_ources_ Environment and the Philippine Future(PREPF).

REVILLA, A- V. JR. and MYRNA C. GREGORIO, 1983. "Predicted WoodYield for LeucaenaPlantations in the Philippines." Policy PaperNo. 10,Forestry Development Center, University of the Philippines_Los Banes,Laguna.

SEGURA, MARIAN; A- V. REVILLA, JR., and M.L. BONITA. 1977. "A His-torical Perspectiveof the Philippine Forest Resources,"in Populotion,Resources,Environment and the Philippine Future (PREPF).

SEGURA-DELOS ANGELES, MARIAN. 1982. "Research on Forest Policiesfor PhilippineDevelopmentPlanning:A Survey" in Survey of PhilippineDevelopment Research II. Manila: Philippine Institute for DevelopmentStudies.

TALBOT, LEE M. and MARTHA H. TALBOT. 1964. RenewableNatural Re-sources in the Philippines - Status, Problems and Recommend_lons.Manila: South East Asia Project of the International Commission onNational Parksand the International Union for Conservationof Nature andNatural Resources.

TINGSABADH, C. 1983. "Issuesin ForestryManagementin Thailand," Paperpresentedat the Seminaron Managementin Forest Resources,Los Ba_os,Laguna, July, sponsoredby the Agricuitural Development Council andthe JapanCenterfor InternationalExchange.

33

SEMINAR PROGRAMME

Day 1 February 17, 1984

8:30- 9:00 Arrival and Registration9:00- 9:15 Opening Remarks and Organizational Matters

(Dr. Filologo Pante jr., President, PIDS)9:15- 9:45 Overview and Workshop Objectives

(Dr. Wilfrido Cruz, UPLB-CDEM)

SESSION I: COMMERCIAL FORESTRYModerator: Dr. M. Eusebio, FORI

9:45-10:15 "Forest Land Management in the Context of NatiOnalLand Use" (Dr. A. V. Revilla, Jr., UPLB-CF)

10:15-10:30 Coffee Break

10:30-I I :15 "Policy Issueson Commercial Forest Managemenl_"(Dr. C. A. Cruz, UPLB-CF and Ms. M. S. de losAngeles, PI DS)

11:15-11:30 Discussion by Mr. P. Dugan, USAI D11:30-12:30 Open Forum1:2:30- 2:30 Lunch Break

SESSION II: FOREST POLICY AND DEVELC!PMENT

Moderator: Dr. W. T. James, ADB

2:30- 3:00 "Trade and Fiscal Policies for Forest-Based Commer-

cial Sector" (Dr. C. David, IRRI)3:00- 3:30 "Economic Policies and Pressureon Forest

Resources" (Dr. G. C. Nelson, ADC)3:30- 3:45 Coffee Break

3:45- 4:00 Discussion by Engr. R. Saraos, PCWID4:00- 4:15 Discussion by Dr. P. E. Sajise, UPLB-PESAM4:15- 5:15 Open Forum6:30 Cocktails and Dinner

Day 2 February 18, 1984

SESSION III: UPLAND DEVELOPMENT

Moderator: Mr. Edwin Payuan, BFD

8:30- 9:00 "Population Pressure, Migration and Markets:

Implications for Upland Development" (Dr. M. C. Cruz,UPLB-CDEM)

34

9:00- 9:30 "Tenure, Technology, and Productivity in theUplands" (Dr. S. Fujisaka, ADC and Ms. A. D.Capistrano, UPLB-CDEM)

9:30- 9:45 Discussion by Dr. M. Mangahas, DAP9:45-10:00 Coffee Break

10:00-11:15 Open Forum

SESSION IV: WATERSHED MANAGEMENTModerator: Dr. S. Saplaco

11:15-11:45 "Assessment of Environmental Effects of Watershed

Management" (Dr. W. P. David, UPLB-CEAT)11:45-12:15 "Management and Costs of Watershed Reforestation"

(Dr. J. Galvez, N IA; paper read by Mr. Alexander G.Coloma, NIA)

12:15- 1:30 Lunch Break

1:30- 1:45 Discussion By Dr. M. Adriano, NEDA1:45- 2:00 Discussion By Dr. I. Esteban, BFD2:00- 3:00 Open Forum3:00- 3:15 Coffee Break

3:15- 3:45 Summary3:45- 4:45 Open Forum5:00 Departu re

35

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

1. Dr. Marietta AdrianoDirector, Agriculture StaffNational Economic and Development

Authority (NEDA)NEDA-Pasig Building, Amber AvenuePasig,Metro Manila

2. Mr. David AlversonConsuItant

United States Agency forInternational Development (USA ID)

Ramon MagsaysayCenterRoxas Blvd., Manila

3. Mr. RogelioBaggayanChief, Planning and Evaluation DivisionBureauof Forest DevelopmentMinistry of Natural ResourcesVisayasAvenue, Quezon City

4. Mr. Emmanuel Buenaventura

Policy Coordination staffNational Economic and Development

Authority (NEDA)NEDA-Pasig Bldg., Amber AvenuePasig,Metro Manila

5. Ms. Ana Doris CapistranoInstructor

College of Development Economicsand Management (CDEM)

University of the Philippinesat LosBafios,College, Laguna

6. Mr. Alexander G. Coloma

ResidentManager, WatershedManagementand Erosion Control

National Irrigation AdministrationEDSA, Quezon City

7. Dr. Cerenilla A. CruzAssistantProfessor

36

Collegeof ForestryUniversity of the Philippines

at Los Banos,College, Laguna

8. Dr. Wilfrido CruzAssistantProfessor

Collegeof Development Economicsand Management(CDEM)

Universityof the Philippinesat Los BaEos,College,Laguna

9. Dr. Cristina C. DavidAgricultural EconomistDepartment of Agricultural EconomicsInternational Rice ResearchInstitute

Los Bafos, Laguna

10. Dr. Wilfrcdo DavidProfessor

Collegeof Engineeringand Agricultural Technology

Universityof the Philippinesat Los Ba_os,College, laguna

11. Mr. Patrick DuganConsultant

Hodam and AssociatesIncorporation4th Floor, D & E RestaurantQuezon Blvd., QuezonCity

12. Dr. Felix EslavaChairman

Department of Social ForestryCollege of ForestryUniversity of'the Philippines

at Los Ba_os,College, Laguna

13. Dr. Isidro EstebanChief, Afforestation and ReforestationBureauof Forest Development (BFD)Ministry of Natural ResourcesVisayasAvenue, Diliman, QuezonCity

14. Mr. Mario C. Feranil

Project Director (UNDP Project)37

L

PIDS, NEDA sa Makati Bldg., Amorsolo St.Legaspi Village, Makati, Metro Manila

15. Mr. Gabriel FormosoPresidentNational Industrial Tree Corporation6th Floor Vernida IV Bldg.,SalcedoVillage, Makati, Metro Manila

16. Dr. William T. JamesStaff EconomistEconomics Office

Asian Development Bank7th Floor, Mondragon Bldg.,BuendiaAvenue Extension, Makati,Metro Manila

17. Dr. Aida LibreroDirectorSocioeconomic DepartmentPhilippine Council for Agricultural

ResourcesResearchand Development (PCARRD)Los Ba_os,Laguna

18. Mr. Camilo JoseLira, Jr.Economic Planning and ResearchStaffNational Economic and Development AuthorityNEDA-PasigBldg.,Amber AvenuePasig,Metro Manila

19. Dr. Mahar MangahasVice-Presidentfor Researchfor

DevelopmentDevelopment Academy of the PhilippinesSan MiguelAvenue, Pasig,Metro Manila

20. Dr. GeraldC. NelsonSpecialistAgricultural Development Council

and College of Development Economicsand Management

University of the Philippinesat Los BaSos,College, Laguna

38

21. Dr. Filologo Pante, Jr.PresidentPhilippine Institute for

DevelopmentStudies(PIDS)NEDA-Makati Bldg.,Amorsolo St.,LegaspiVillage, MakatiMetro Manila

22. Mr. Edwin PayuanChief

Social Forestry DivisionBureau of Forest DevelopmentMinistry of Natural ResourcesVisayas Avenue, Quezon City

23. Dr. Mario EusebioAssistant DirectorForest Research Institute (FOP,I)Forestry Campus, University of the Philippines

at Los Ba_os,College, Laguna

24. Dr. Josefina RamosDirector, Regional Development StaffNational Economic and Development AuthorityNEDA-PasigBldg., Amber AvenuePasig,Metro Manila

25. Dr. Adolfo V. Revilla, Jr.DirectorForestry DevelopmantCenterCollegeof Forestry,University of the Philippines

at Los Ba5os,College,Laguna

26. Dr. PercySajiseDean

Collegeof Humanitiesand SciencesUniversityof the Philippines

at LosBa_os,College,Laguna

27. Dr. SeveroSaplacoChairman

Department of Forest ResourcesManagementCollegeof Forestry,

39

University of the Philippinesat Los Bal_os,College, Laguna

28. Engr. Ramon SaraosOfficer-in-ChargePresidential Committee on Wood

Industries DevelopmentQuezon City

29. Ms. Marian Segura-delos AngelesResearchFellow

Philippine Institute for DevelopmentStudies (PIDS)NEDA-Makati Bldg., Amorsolo St.LegaspiVillage, MakatiMetro Manila

30. Mr. Aniceto Sobrepe6aDirector, Policy Coordination StaffNational Economicand DevelopmentAuthority (NEDA)NEDA-Pasig Bldg., Amber AvenuePasig,Metro Manila

31. Dr. Florentino TesoroCommissionerForest ProductsIndustriesDevelopmentCommissionForestry Campus,University of the Philippines

at Los Ba_os,College, Laguna

Observer:

1. Dr. Andrew P. VaydaProfessor of AnthropologyRutgers University

4O