Legal framework and political culture: implications for NFP in Greece National Agricultural Research Foundation Agricultural Research Station of Ioannina Kostas Papageorgiou & Alexandra Vakrou

The state of Greek forestry Forest ownership State communal private Low timber quality (63% firewood) Multiple functions Forest resource Low Standing volume: 154m m % of GNP (1996)

The forest legal framework Main legal instruments Forest Codex and Law 998/79 Regulate land use changes Protect and manage forests Ensure sustainable timber yield Fundamental constitutional articles 24 §1 prohibits changes of land use in forest land 117 §3,4 compulsory land reforestation after fires Strong timber orientation Impedes the pursue of multi-purpose SFM

Forest policy formulating actors Other policy actors Forest industry Forest owners association Forest cooperatives Farmers Limited political power-influence NGOs Main policy actor makes decisions in the interest of public good Forest Service Ministry of Agriculture G.S. of Forests and Natural Environment Prefectural Forest Directorates (12) Forest Directorates/ Forest District Offices (x) Central Regional Provincial governor Top-down decision making system

The state of forest policy planning Forest policy Regional/Provincial forest authorities have executive and management duties Traditional conservatism Timber oriented professional thinking (political culture) Restricts multipurpose objectives Forest policy is neither transparent nor democratic Centrally made by a close circle of forest scientists and experts Interests of forest users and society are not fully considered Instrumental rationalist decision making process (Buttoud) Impeding factor

Influence of public participation There is no legal basis for public participation in planning and implementation of management plans State ownership + legal framework Impedes public involvement Non-state forests State forests Land use timber yield Law 998/79 rules Reasons Forest policy puts more emphasis on productivity and less on forest- rural development relations High % state forests and low economic output (0,22% GNP); there is no structured necessity for democratic decision making process

Influence on inter-sectoral coordination Forest policy is connected to other policy areas Agriculture Environment Regional/Urban Economic Legal overlappingi.e. nature protectionLegal means Impede closer inter- sectoral coordination Different agencies pursue different policies High sectoral protectionism (funds, juristictions, corporate interests) Significant problems are anticipated Historically shaped political culture that favours sectoral isolationism Political culture

Influence on iterative planning Social- environmental objectives Timber objectives Legally binding medium-term action plan, reviewed every 10 years Management plan Timber-oriented management plan impedes SFM realisation Well recognised But not legally binding process for monitoring, evaluation and adaptation Forest strategy Remain a sympolic endeavour

Conclusions Implementing an NFP in Greece would require a legal reform focusing on possibilities for the public to participate in decision making and including a full anticipation of non-timber functions (allowing for the inclusion of all positive forest externalities) State ownership can be a supporting element (state is the strongest actor, harmonising legislation) as well as an impeding factor (slow moving, adopting to new planning requirements, promoting interdisciplinary co- operation) NFP realisation requires transformation of political culture from one based on economic role to one based on environmental and social role of forestry The legal framework exerts dual influence: firstly, it preserves the integrity of the resource (sustainable output), secondly, it does not provide for NFP elements and structural process (unsustainable process)

Thank you