Identifying High Conservation Values

Most use of the HCV concept to date has been identifying values at the level of a forest site or management unit. However there is increasing interest in the use of the concept to identify priority areas of landscapes. This is likely to be the subject of some discussion within the resource network in the future.

National Interpretation:

An important stage in the application of the HCV process is the national interpretation of the six generic values. The six generic values should be interpreted at a national level to provide more specific information and guidance relevant to forest managers in each country.

National interpretation is important for two reasons: Firstly because the generic values include terms like significant, critical and concentration which need to be qualified according to the local context. Secondly because appropriate management of a high conservation value depends on the level of threat to the value, (for example from changing land-use,) which can vary dramatically between countries.

For example: the way the term large landscape level forest (HCV2) is understood and applied will be different in Canada (where the country retains large tracts of undisturbed forest) from the way it will be treated in Ghana, where there are only a few remaining forest blocks, none of which are un-disturbed.

The process of national interpretation is also a useful way to build consensus in the way each value is understood and applied. Ultimately this enables more consistency in the use of the concept within the country.

Part 2 of the Global Toolkit provides guidance on the process of national interpretation, and can be downloaded here.

National interpretation of the values can be undertaken by a technical working group, or a broad based multi-stakeholder group. An ideal team will have:

·          Expertise: the expertise of the members of the group or team needs to cover the full range of topics included in the HCVF definition, including biological, environmental services and social aspects.

·          Range of views: defining HCVF should always be based on the best available scientific information, but deciding on the threshold level at which a ‘value’ becomes a ‘High Conservation Value’ is inevitably a value judgment. The outcome will depend on the membership of the group. As a result, it is important to try to make sure that the membership represents an appropriate range of views and perspectives.

·          Practical experience: it is very important that the group or team includes people with real, current, practical experience to ensure that the interpretation and accompanying guidance are appropriate, implementable and accessible to forest managers.

The process should also make use of the widest possible stakeholder involvement, for example, in reviewing of the outputs from the technical group. Care should be taken to ensure comments received from stakeholders are publicised in a transparent manner.

More on setting up a multi stakeholder working group:

World Bank – WWF Alliance (2002) Capacity Building Toolkit for Working Groups on Forest Certification (website). Available at www.piec.org/mswg_toolkit

ISEAL Alliance Code of Good Practice for Standard Setting (PDF document): http://www.isealalliance.org/documents/pdf/P005_PD4_Jan06.pdf

Deciding when a High Conservation Value is present:

It will be necessary to make an assessment of the land area to determine the presence of attributes consistent with the High Conservation Values. The detail and complexity of such an assessment will depend on the size of the area to be assessed and its significance relative to the wider landscape.

Use of the HCV approach means that the forest manager must justify management decisions based on consideration of each of the six values in turn and the rational application of the precautionary principle.

Where HCVF principles have been used to guide forest management and land use decisions the normal approach has been to use an expert team carry out a specific High Conservation Value assessment. However, there is no prescribed approach for this, and no dedicated methodology for the collection of data. It will be up to the assessors to decide on the most sensible approach.

The means of identifying a High Conservation Value will be different for each value. Some values are readily identifiable from existing information. In other cases, information will be scarce, and the assessment may require expert judgement.

An assessment to identify HCVs will:

·          Make the best possible use of all available information and tools

·          Ensure relevant experts are consulted

The forest manager must decide where additional information may be needed and the best way to collect this. It may be necessary to carry out some field assessments or put in place a data collection programme. Consultation with experts will again be important here.

Part 3 of the HCVF Toolkit is aimed at forest managers who need to understand how to make an assessment of High Conservation Values. The document can be downloaded here.

Carrying out an HCVF assessment in a forest management unit: we will be adding information on methodology for carrying out an assessment.

Within the biological sciences there are many techniques and methods that have been developed for rapid assessments of biodiversity values. More on rapid assessment techniques.

More on sources of information: will be available in the future from the Resource Centre.

More on the precautionary principle: Link to http://www.pprinciple.net/

Where is the High Conservation Value located?

The High Conservation Values reflect different aspects of the things that are important about natural habitats. Each value is different. It is usually possible to identify an area of land where a value is present, but the value and the land are not always the same thing.

To effectively maintain a High Conservation Value, it is important to know as much as possible about where the value is located. Identifying the areas of land where the values occur is an important first step towards effective management of the value.

For example consider HCV 5 (Forest providing basic services of nature in critical situations). If there are communities in the forest area that are critically dependent on the forest in some way, it is then important to ask which products are obtained and which areas of the forest.

HCV 4 includes critical watersheds, or important catchment protection areas. A forest area may cover most of a river catchment, and part of it may play a critical role in regulating water flow within that catchment. It is important to establish the area of forest that is critical to maintaining that catchment function.

Some other values may be present throughout the land area. For example a population of endangered mammals could have a range that extends across and beyond an entire forest management unit. In this case it may not be possible to say one area of the forest has more importance for the value than another.

Using the HCV concept at the landscape scale presents particular challenges to decision makers, particularly when the management area is only a small part of that landscape. A Sourcebook for Landscape Analysis of High Conservation Value Forests, has been prepared to provide guidance on how to achieve this; however, this document needs some revision in order to bring it up to date with the latest thinking. Other tools and approaches exist for assessing what the most important biological, environmental and social values are within a landscape, so the situations when a landscape-level HCVF analysis is likely to be preferred are also clarified.