Myths and problems of forestry reform in Russia
Е. А. Шварц
Abstract
Е. А. Шварц
Abstract
Situation analysis demonstrates that several forest management models coexist in Russia. One of them is the model set by the Russian Forest Code (2006), it is likely to sustain at areas leased for large logging companies for the long term. Some initial signs of more intensified forest management are visible there. Another model is typical extensive model – ‘wood mining’. This system evolves back to the one used to exist in Soviet times. There is an ambition to revitalize state-owned forest management enterprises or / and the state-owned all Russia wide corporation responsible for reforestation and logging at areas which are not leased for private companies. Forest data is largely absent and existing one is unavailable for state or public control. Funds available for forest management are misused. Federal forest management bodies ignore the fact that lack of available timber resources is due to lack of effective reforestation. Reforestation methods in use and those used in the past do not ensure establishment of economically valuable forest stands to replace those logged or burned. Reforestation is focused on production of plantlets and planting with no weeding and thinning of planted or natural young stands. Criteria to assess success of reforestation based on species composition are not developed and not established. Imitation of reforestation does not help to solve the problem of economical values degradation of secondary forests, including those on the most productive zone – Central European Russia. Authorities ignore exceptional values of intact forest landscapes for preservation of biodiversity and global climate change prevention. In 7 years since the Russian Forest Policy has been approved not a single National Forest heritage site has been established to contribute to development of the fund of forests to be preserved from economic development. Authors conclude that despite strategic documents approved in 2013–2018 forest management authorities continue supporting extensive forest management and make no substantial steps towards transition to more intensified forest management. One of the first steps should be calculation of rent fee based on rented area, but not on a volume of logged timber
OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Situation analysis demonstrates that several forest management models coexist in Russia. One of them is the model set by the Russian Forest Code (2006), it is likely to sustain at areas leased for large logging companies for the long term. Some initial signs of more intensified forest management are visible there. Another model is typical extensive model – ‘wood mining’. This system evolves back to the one used to exist in Soviet times. There is an ambition to revitalize state-owned forest management enterprises or / and the state-owned all Russia wide corporation responsible for reforestation and logging at areas which are not leased for private companies. Forest data is largely absent and existing one is unavailable for state or public control. Funds available for forest management are misused. Federal forest management bodies ignore the fact that lack of available timber resources is due to lack of effective reforestation. Reforestation methods in use and those used in the past do not ensure establishment of economically valuable forest stands to replace those logged or burned. Reforestation is focused on production of plantlets and planting with no weeding and thinning of planted or natural young stands. Criteria to assess success of reforestation based on species composition are not developed and not established. Imitation of reforestation does not help to solve the problem of economical values degradation of secondary forests, including those on the most productive zone – Central European Russia. Authorities ignore exceptional values of intact forest landscapes for preservation of biodiversity and global climate change prevention. In 7 years since the Russian Forest Policy has been approved not a single National Forest heritage site has been established to contribute to development of the fund of forests to be preserved from economic development. Authors conclude that despite strategic documents approved in 2013–2018 forest management authorities continue supporting extensive forest management and make no substantial steps towards transition to more intensified forest management. One of the first steps should be calculation of rent fee based on rented area, but not on a volume of logged timber
Key concepts: Reforestation, Forest management, Logging, Business, Agroforestry, State forest, Forestry, Illegal logging