14 NE= Near East Process on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable For Finland, the original figure provided was 18.6 million ha Forest Manageme However, a total of 21.9 million ha of forest had been certified TARA Tarapoto Proposal of Criteria and Indicators for as of December 2000. As this implies the existence of a manage- tainability of the Amazon Forest ment regime, the higher figure was used All 29 ITTO producer countries have been involved in the For Italy, only forests with specific management plans were development of the IT TO Criteria and Indicators; however, only included. All other forests in the country are submitted to general those countries implementing the IT TO criteria and indicators as silvicultural prescriptions part of an ITTO project are included in the table. The remaining For Guyana, the figure represents the area under concession ITTO producer countries are also members of other ongoing agreements, as all concessionaires are required to prepare a forest quisite to government app oping and implementing criteria and indicators under separate, Numbers with an asterisk ()represent partial data, as national but linked, initiatives (e.g. Lepaterique, Tarapoto and ATO). figures were not available Bosnia-Herzegovina, Georgia, San Marino and Yugoslavia were invited to join the Pan-European Forest Process as of De- Forest in protected areas cember 2000 and have been included in the table "Forest in protected areas "refers to areas within IUCN Catego- Cuba and the Lao People's Democratic Republic have devel- ries I to VI for nature protection. The " Country report data"col ped national level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest umn gives figures provided in country submissions to FRA 2000 management without being members of any of the above pro- in which the term "protection"was interpreted broadly, particu cesses larly for IUCN Categories v to Vl, which may include areas under general forest management. The"Global map data"col Area under forest management plans umn gives figures derived from an overlay of the FRA 2000 Different definitions for the area of forest under management global maps of forest cover and the FRA 2000 (in partnership plans were used for developing and industrialized countries. with UNEP-WCMC)global mapping of protected areas with a The definition used for developing countries is"The area of legal protection status. Percentages refer to the percentage of forest which is managed for various purposes(conservation, total forest area under protected area status oduction, other) in accordance with a formal, nationally ap- proved management plan over a sufficiently long period (five Forest areas certified years or more). The definition used for industrialized countries The cumulative area of forests certified under the following urope, Cyprus, Turkey, Israel, CIS countries, Japan, Australia, schemes is listed New Zealand, Canada and the United States)also included ar- ATFP= American Tree Farm Program (as of December 2000) eas with a regularly applied informal plan, and areas where a CSA= Canada's National Sustainable Forest Management Sys decision has been made not to manage the forests at all (UN- tem Standard (as of 21 December 2000) ECE/FAO, 2000b). For this reason, regional totals are not pro- FSC= Forest Stewardship Council -Accredited Certification vided in the table Bodies(as of 31 December 2000) The figures for area under forest management plans were GT= Green Tag (United States)(as of 31 December 2000) taken from national reports and calculated as a percentage of the PEFC =Pan-European Forest Certification (national schemes total forest area in 2000. Where national reports indicated that endorsed by the PEFC Council)(as of December 2000 all forests were under management, the percentage was set to SFl Sustainable Forest Initiative Program-American Forest 100 percent. Partial data were obtained from a variety of pub- and Paper Association(for Canada, as of 21 December 2000; for lished sources the United States, as of October 2000) For Georgia, forests classified as"undisturbed"were not in- Although more than 29 million ha of land wereenrolled in SFI For the Philippines, the figure represents the aggregated area independently certified are include those areas that were cluded in the reported figure overed by tenurial agreements for forest land" and includes Areas certified under the ISo 14001 Environmental Manage- areas that were not defined as forests according to the FRA 2000 ment System Standard scheme (e.g. about 30 980 000 ha in definition. A forest management plan is required under these Canada and more than 300 000 ha in New Zealand) are in- agreements, but may not have been formally approved for all cluded only if also certified under specific forest certification areas For Australia, only forests managed for wood supply were Ghana, Malaysia and Indonesia, among others, are develop- included ing national certification schemes under which additional areas144 NE = Near East Process on Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management TARA = Tarapoto Proposal of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainability of the Amazon Forest All 29 ITTO producer countries have been involved in the development of the ITTO Criteria and Indicators; however, only those countries implementing the ITTO criteria and indicators as part of an ITTO project are included in the table. The remaining ITTO producer countries are also members of other ongoing international processes on criteria and indicators and are devel￾oping and implementing criteria and indicators under separate, but linked, initiatives (e.g. Lepaterique, Tarapoto and ATO). Bosnia-Herzegovina, Georgia, San Marino and Yugoslavia were invited to join the Pan-European Forest Process as of De￾cember 2000 and have been included in the table. Cuba and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic have devel￾oped national level criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management without being members of any of the above pro￾cesses. Area under forest management plans Different definitions for the area of forest under management plans were used for developing and industrialized countries. The definition used for developing countries is “The area of forest which is managed for various purposes (conservation, production, other) in accordance with a formal, nationally ap￾proved management plan over a sufficiently long period (five years or more)”. The definition used for industrialized countries (Europe, Cyprus, Turkey, Israel, CIS countries, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States) also included ar￾eas with a regularly applied informal plan, and areas where a decision has been made not to manage the forests at all (UN￾ECE/FAO, 2000b). For this reason, regional totals are not pro￾vided in the table. The figures for area under forest management plans were taken from national reports and calculated as a percentage of the total forest area in 2000. Where national reports indicated that all forests were under management, the percentage was set to 100 percent. Partial data were obtained from a variety of pub￾lished sources. For Georgia, forests classified as “undisturbed” were not in￾cluded in the reported figure. For the Philippines, the figure represents the aggregated area covered by tenurial agreements for “forest land” and includes areas that were not defined as forests according to the FRA 2000 definition. A forest management plan is required under these agreements, but may not have been formally approved for all areas. For Australia, only forests managed for wood supply were included. For Finland, the original figure provided was 18.6 million ha. However, a total of 21.9 million ha of forest had been certified as of December 2000. As this implies the existence of a manage￾ment regime, the higher figure was used. For Italy, only forests with specific management plans were included. All other forests in the country are submitted to general silvicultural prescriptions. For Guyana, the figure represents the area under concession agreements, as all concessionaires are required to prepare a forest management plan as a prerequisite to government approval. Numbers with an asterisk (*) represent partial data, as national figures were not available. Forest in protected areas “Forest in protected areas” refers to areas within IUCN Catego￾ries I to VI for nature protection. The “Country report data” col￾umn gives figures provided in country submissions to FRA 2000 in which the term “protection” was interpreted broadly, particu￾larly for IUCN Categories V to VI, which may include areas under general forest management. The “Global map data” col￾umn gives figures derived from an overlay of the FRA 2000 global maps of forest cover and the FRA 2000 (in partnership with UNEP-WCMC) global mapping of protected areas with a legal protection status. Percentages refer to the percentage of total forest area under protected area status. Forest areas certified The cumulative area of forests certified under the following schemes is listed. ATFP = American Tree Farm Program (as of December 2000) CSA = Canada’s National Sustainable Forest Management Sys￾tem Standard (as of 21 December 2000) FSC = Forest Stewardship Council – Accredited Certification Bodies (as of 31 December 2000) GT = Green Tag (United States) (as of 31 December 2000) PEFC = Pan-European Forest Certification (national schemes endorsed by the PEFC Council) (as of December 2000) SFI = Sustainable Forest Initiative Program – American Forest and Paper Association (for Canada, as of 21 December 2000; for the United States, as of October 2000) Although more than 29 million ha of land were enrolled in SFI in the United States and Canada, only those areas that were independently certified are included. Areas certified under the ISO 14001 Environmental Manage￾ment System Standard scheme (e.g. about 30 980 000 ha in Canada and more than 300 000 ha in New Zealand) are in￾cluded only if also certified under specific forest certification schemes. Ghana, Malaysia and Indonesia, among others, are develop￾ing national certification schemes under which additional areas