China's New Forest Policy
China's New Forest Policy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1126/science.289.5487.2049b
复制
发表时间：
2000-09
期刊：
影响因子：
56.9
通讯作者：
Mingjun Xu;Ye Qi;Peng Gong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mingjun Xu;Ye Qi;Peng Gong
为了应对近期森林政策的生态失败，中国推出了一项名为天然林保护计划（NFCP）的新政策。在“21世纪中国森林政策”政策论坛上进行讨论（《科学指南》，6月23日，第[2135]页）。NFCP重点关注天然林，影响中国三分之二以上的土地面积；因此，它的成功不仅对中国的林业和经济至关重要，对中国文化和全球环境也至关重要。虽然NFCP可能暂时缓解拟议地区的生态退化，但这项新政策似乎存在一些缺陷。首先，NFCP中没有土地所有权改革。目前，中国政府拥有大部分土地，并授权当地人民使用。这种土地所有权和使用权的分离造成了中国近代史上的“公地悲剧”（[1]b[2]）。如果不解决这个问题，当前中央政府拯救国家天然林的努力和投资将不可避免地导致下一个灾难，当重新造林的地区在几十年后产生经济效益时。其次，NFCP的决策过程和实施缺乏灾区人民的民主支持（b[2][3]）。新政策采取了“大刀阔斧”的方式，没有考虑到自然、社会、经济和文化的异质性。教育和与当地人民的沟通应该是NFCP的首要任务。第三，新政策没有采用最科学的森林管理方法；即生态系统管理，强调可持续性、生物多样性、生态系统功能和完整性以及人类与生态系统的相互作用。NFCP更注重保护（自然恢复）而不是管理；生态系统管理的概念从未被提及。当地知识在管理森林生态系统方面也很重要，但在新政策中却被忽视了。最后，NFCP没有考虑到长期的社会和文化影响，而仅仅基于生态和经济方面的考虑。由于居住在偏远森林地区的大多数人是少数民族，因此迁移偏远地区的森林居民可能会引发社会冲突，并加剧文化多样性的丧失。地理上的分离使他们的文化保存了数千年，将他们从森林迁移到城市地区将导致文化同化。在NFCP对其他国家，特别是发展中国家产生影响之前，必须解决这些问题。1. [↵][4]1。S. D. Richardson：《中国森林与林业》，岛屿出版社，华盛顿特区（1990）。2. [↵][5]1。张鹏，2岁。周欣，3岁。王峰。天然林保护工程导论。中国林业出版社，北京，388（1999）。我们同意徐、齐和龚讨论的四个因素的重要性，但我们对中国林业和新政策的看法比他们提出的更广泛。Xu和他的同事们把人们的注意力从NFCP旨在解决的主要目标上引开。在过去的20年里，过度砍伐和旧森林政策的执行不力导致了一个可怕的局面（[1][2]），以中国东北吉林省长白山保护区外的一个研究地点为例。这里的采伐面积不断超过法律允许的5公顷的限制，随后的采伐间隔只有几年，剩余的森林非常薄，空旷的土地连接并主导了景观基质。其结果是以前所未有的速度发生的碎片化。![图][6]在吉林省一个面积为22 × 9公里的地块上，Landsat专题绘图器图像显示了以小叶模式逐步进行的砍伐，平均砍伐面积为15公顷（橙色表示砍伐面积）（[3][7]）。作者：邵志刚和赵志刚。人们已经认识到，需要政府高层作出强有力的政治和经济承诺，才能迅速扭转像吉林省这样的森林砍伐现象，并确保生态条件的改善（b[3]）。森林保护计划是第一个这样的项目，如果它在保护天然林（中国林业的核心组成部分）方面的作用被削弱，它的价值和实质就会丧失。关于Xu等人提出的问题。我们不认为土地所有权和使用权分离会引发另一场灾难。如果将土地所有权和用途分开，就能有效地保护天然林免于破碎化。由于超过80%的天然林归政府所有（[1]b[2]），将所有权移交给当地林农可能会导致部分天然林被砍伐，因为林农的经济困难和对森林生态价值的认识不足。过去的经验教训促使政府寻找更好的方法来重新分配土地使用权。NFCP中概述的强制转换和分享私人所有权计划被认为是在解决土地所有权问题的同时打击森林砍伐的最实际措施。Xu等人。认为受影响地区的人民对NFCP几乎没有民主支持；然而，我们看到了相反的情况。NFCP的发展始于1996年，林业专业人士、学者和当地社区积极参与。中央政府花了两年时间才制定出新的森林政策。几乎所有省份的林业单位都申请参加国家森林计划。在实施过程中，我们在政策论坛上讨论的技术培训和教育项目为成千上万的林业专业人员、非专业人员和农民提供了获得政府支持和指导的机会，并与政策实践者进行了谈判。对于NFCP未纳入当前森林管理方法的批评，生态系统管理和生物多样性原则确实已被纳入森林区域分类，优先考虑NFCP区域，并从一开始就制定新政策。只有成功地保护了剩余的天然林，生态系统管理才有实际意义。中央政府已经指定了我们提到的三个主要研究地点之一，吉林省白河林业局，作为研究森林砍伐和再生以保持生态系统可持续性的试验点。当然，随着政策的实施和森林砍伐趋势的逆转，下一阶段将规定更复杂的生态系统管理实践。至于重新安置森林居民的社会和文化影响，直到20世纪50年代，政府开始将成千上万的人转移到森林地区，才出现了大规模的森林开发。森林地区的原生文化也受到了严重的影响。重新安置非本地林务人员是控制森林地区人口和恢复本地文化和生物多样性的唯一途径。政府提供的教育和财政支持应充分减少安置工作中发生重大社会冲突的可能性。1. [↵][8]1。张鹏，2岁。周欣，3岁。王峰。天然林保护工程导论。中国林业出版社，北京，388（1999）。2. 参见可获得的信息。3. 邵氏和赵氏，在准备中。[1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.288.5474.2135 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref- 1-1 “查看参考文献1中的文本” [5]:#xref-ref-2-1 “查看参考文献2中的文本” [6]:pending:yes [7]: #ref-3 [8]: #xref-ref-3-1 “查看参考文献1中的文本”
In response to the ecological failure of recent forest policies, China has introduced a new policy called the Natural Forest Conservation Program (NFCP), which Zhang et al . discuss in their Policy Forum “China's forest policy for the 21st century” ( Science 's Compass, 23 June, p. [2135][1]). The NFCP focuses on natural forests and affects more than two-thirds of the land area of China; therefore, its success is critical not only to China's forestry and economy, but also to Chinese culture and the global environment. Although the NFCP may temporarily mitigate ecological degradations in proposed areas, there appear to be some flaws in this new policy. First, the reform of land ownership is absent from the NFCP. Currently, the Chinese government owns most of the land and authorizes its use by the local people. This separation of land ownership and use has created the “tragedy of the commons” in China's recent forestry history ([1][2]). If this problem is not addressed, the current efforts and investments by the central government to save the nation's natural forests will inevitably induce the next disaster when the reforested areas produce economic benefits in a few decades. Second, the decision-making process and implementation of the NFCP lacks democratic support from the people in the affected areas ([2][3]). The new policy has a “broad brush” approach that does not take into consideration the heterogeneity of nature, society, economy, and culture. Education and communication with the local people should be a top priority of the NFCP. Third, the new policy does not use the best scientific approach to forest management; namely, ecosystem management, which emphasizes sustainability, biodiversity, ecosystem functionality and integrity, and human interaction with the ecosystem. The NFCP focuses more on protection (natural restoration) than on management; the concept of ecosystem management is never mentioned. Local knowledge is also important in managing forest ecosystems, but is neglected in the new policy. Finally, the NFCP does not take into account the long-term social and cultural impacts, but is based solely on ecological and economic considerations. Relocating forest dwellers in the remote areas may provoke social conflicts and increase the loss of cultural diversity because most people living in the remote forest areas are minorities. Geographic separation has preserved their cultures for thousands of years, and moving them out of the forests to urban areas will result in cultural assimilation. These issues must be addressed before the NFCP can have relevance to other countries, particularly developing countries. 1. [↵][4]1. S. D. Richardson , Forest and Forestry in China Island Press, Washington, DC, (1990). 2. [↵][5]1. P. Zhang, 2. X. Zhou, 3. F. Wang , Introduction to Natural Forest Conservation Program China's Forestry Publishing House, Beijing, 388 (1999) in Chinese. # Response {#article-title-2} We agree with the importance of the four factors that Xu, Qi, and Gong discuss, but we take a broader view than they present of China's forestry and the new policy. Xu and colleagues draw attention away from the primary targets the NFCP is intended to address. In the last 20 years, excessive logging and poor implementation of the old forest policy have led to a dire situation ([1][2]), illustrated by a study site located outside of Changbai Mountain Reserve, Jilin Province, in northeast China. Here the cutting fields constantly exceeded the legally allowed 5-hectare limit, the subsequent cuttings were only a few years apart, and the remaining forests were so thin that cleared fields connected and dominated the landscape matrix. The result was fragmentation that occurred at unprecedented rates. ![Figure][6] Landsat Thematic Mapper images of a 22- by 9-kilometer site in Jilin Province show progressive clear-cuttings in leaflet patterns, with an average cutting area of 15 hectares (orange represents cutting fields) ([3][7]). Credit: G. SHAO AND G. ZHAO. It has been recognized that a strong political and economic commitments from the top levels of government are needed to rapidly reverse deforestation such as that seen in Jilin Province and ensure an improvement in ecological conditions ([2][3]). NFCP is the first such program, and the value and substance of the NFCP would be lost if its role in protecting natural forests, the core component in China's forestry, were diminished. Regarding the issues raised by Xu et al ., we disagree that the separation of land ownership and use will induce another disaster. Natural forests can be effectively protected from fragmentation if land ownership is separated from use. Because more than 80% of natural forests is owned by the government ([1][2]), turning over ownership to local foresters would likely lead to partial removal of natural forests because of the foresters' economic difficulties and lack of recognition of ecological values of the forests. Lessons learned in the past drove the government to search for a better approach for redistributing land tenure. The mandatory conversion and share in private ownership programs outlined in the NFCP were determined to be the most practical measures to combat deforestation while encompassing the land ownership issue. Xu et al . contend that there is little democratic support for the NFCP from the people in the affected areas; however, we see the opposite. Development of the NFCP started in 1996 with the active involvement of forestry professionals, scholars, and local communities. It took 2 years for the central government to formulate the new forest policy. Forestry units from almost all provinces applied to participate in the NFCP. During implementation, the technical training and education program we discussed in our Policy Forum has been offering opportunities to hundreds and thousands of forestry professionals, nonprofessionals, and farmers to acquire government support and guidance and to negotiate with the policy practitioners. Regarding the criticism that the NFCP does not incorporate current forest management approaches, ecosystem management and biodiversity principles have indeed been incorporated into classifying forest regions, prioritizing NFCP zones, and developing the new policy since it began. Only when the remaining natural forests are successfully protected can ecosystem management become practically meaningful. The central government has assigned one of the three major research sites we mentioned, Baihe Forestry Bureau in Jilin province, as a test site where forest cutting and regeneration for maintaining ecosystem sustainability are being studied. Certainly, as the policy is implemented and the trend in deforestation reversed, more sophisticated practices of ecosystem management will be specified for the next stage. And as for the social and cultural impacts of relocating forest dwellers, extensive forest exploitation did not occur until the 1950s, when the government started to move thousands of people to forested areas. The native culture in forested areas has been severely affected along with forest. Relocating foresters who are non-natives is the only way to control human populations in forested areas and restore native culture and biodiversity. Educational and financial support provided by the government should adequately minimize the chances of major social conflicts during resettlement operation. 1. [↵][8]1. P. Zhang, 2. X. Zhou, 3. F. Wang , Introduction to Natural Forest Conservation Program China's Forestry Publishing House, Beijing, 388 (1999) (in Chinese). 2. See information available at . 3. G. Shao and G. Zhao, in preparation. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.288.5474.2135 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 "View reference 1 in text" [5]: #xref-ref-2-1 "View reference 2 in text" [6]: pending:yes [7]: #ref-3 [8]: #xref-ref-3-1 "View reference 1 in text"