| |  | |
Commonwealth
Forests | | |
 PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS, AND TECHNICAL JOURNALS
Despite the physical isolation of many foresters as they practise their profession, they have
long exchanged information and experience, either through formal or informal meetings or
through the medium of a journal. The Royal Scottish Forestry Society dates from 1854 for
example, while the Indian Forester was first published in 1875. This section describes the
professional institutions (responsible for accreditation to the profession), and professional
associations, as well as their journals.
Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom have developed professional
institutions, which offer professional accreditation. By this is meant that they, to a greater
or
lesser extent, control admission to the profession, monitor professional practice, lay down
requirements for continuing professional education/development and, as independent bodies,
lobby their national governments on issues concerning the forestry sector. They require
members to hold indemnity insurance thus offering security to those who employ them, and
they control the conduct of members.
The Institute of Foresters of Australia (IFA) http://www.forestry.org.au
has over 1200 members
spread across all States and Territories. The Association of Consulting Foresters of Australia
(ACFA) http://www.australianconsultingforesters.org
is a smaller independent body of
consultant foresters who also are Voting members of the Institute. Negotiations are currently in
train concerning a possible merger of the two bodies. IFA members are bound by a Code of
Ethics to guide professional conduct. Admission to voting membership is not restricted to
persons with forestry degrees. Within the limited resources of an Institute scattered over a
large continent, the IFA plays an active part in policy formation. The impending introduction of
forest certification on a major scale prompted the IFA to launch a Registered Professional
Forester (RPF) program in 1999. In order to achieve government recognition (still under
discussion) and avoid the accusation of restrictive trade practice, membership has to be open
to any person that can prove that they meet prescribed professional standards. The RPF
Registration Committee establishes an applicant’s credentials for the particular specialization
by an appropriate examination or other evidence. Wilkinson (2006) has recently argued for a
change to the title of Registered Forestry Professional because many forestry professionals
(e.g. forest ecologists, forest economists, modelers etc.) may not see themselves as
Professional Foresters. This proposal has yet to be considered by the IFA Board, although
‘general practicing forester’ would clearly have to be retained as one of the specializations.
Canada has around 8 000 registered professional foresters (RPF), grouped within independent
provincial professional organizations in seven of the ten Canadian provinces (Gauthier, 2003). A
list of them is available at the Canadian Federation of Professional Foresters Associations,
which is hosted by the Canadian Institute of Forestry http://www.cif-ifc.org
These provinces
have “right to title” legislation that states that only registered professional foresters have the
right to use the title “forester” or to practice forestry. This can be problematic, as what
constitutes the required training for a forester in one jurisdiction may not count in another.
A typical example is that of the Association of British Columbia Forest Professionals, whose
website http://www.abcfp.ca states that under the BC Foresters Act it is their responsibility to
uphold the public interest respecting the practice of professional forestry by ensuring the
competence, independence, professional conduct and integrity of our members. Standards of
education and qualifications have been established to ensure that foresters are qualified and
remain up-to-date on changes in their field. The Act and the association’s bylaws (including
codes of conduct and standards of practice) govern their members. Furthermore, anyone who
wants to practice professional forestry in British Columbia must be a member of the
Association of BC Forest Professionals. The New Zealand Institute of Forestry http://www.forestry.org.nz/
which has around 740 members was founded in 1927. It aims to
encourage the highest standards of ethical and professional performance amongst its
members through education, accountability and codes of ethics and performance standards.
The professional institution in the UK is the Institute of Chartered Foresters (ICF), the
professional body for foresters and arborists in the United Kingdom (the only one of the
Commonwealth forestry institutes that includes the practice of arboriculture). See
http://www.charteredforesters.org
The ICF has 1,057 members, of whom 777 are Fellows and
Professional members. Its Mission Statement is To lead the profession and promote
excellence amongst foresters and arborists, ensuring the sustainable development of forests,
woodlands and trees throughout the UK. The Institute sets and maintains the standards for
the profession and safeguards the public interest in matters relating to forests, woodlands and
trees, as well as regulating the standards of entry to the profession, offering examinations for
professional qualifications and keeping under review the status of Chartered Foresters and the
profession. All members are bound by a Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.
South Africa offers a different approach. The South African Institute of Forestry was
established in 1968 with the primary aim of registering professional foresters, but it was soon
found that the small number of foresters made this very difficult to achieve. In 1982 therefore
they joined a society of natural scientists and registered as professional natural scientist
consultants in forestry science. Since then 23 have registered; forestry technicians,
possessing a forestry diploma, can also register.
Professional associations provide some of the functions of institutions in that they support the
exchange of information, generally through journals and often newsletters, they provide the
opportunity for networking and often offer in-service training courses or other professional
development. Many of them are involved in public education. They are independent of
governments, and may often lobby on behalf of the forestry sector or even environmental
interests. But they do not control the right to practice as a forester, as the institutes do.
Annex 5.1 lists 33 forestry institutions and associations of the Commonwealth. It covers
associations and societies which deal with the subject of forestry rather than with wood-processing
or other forestry-related subjects but some of the latter associations have been
included where they are of particular interest to foresters. It is undoubtedly an incomplete list,
and it is hoped that readers will provide information on omissions so that any revisions of this
publication may give a more complete picture.
Annex 5.2 lists 29 forestry journals, defined as periodical publications, produced more-or-less
at regular intervals (e.g. quarterly, yearly) devoted mainly to forestry issues. But since the
issues covered by forestry journals may include technical aspects not only of the growing but
also the conversion or utilisation of trees, or research into such topics, the coverage of this
annex is broader than for the forestry associations.
The only countries to practice professional forestry accreditation in the Commonwealth are
Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK, but it is probable that the need for professional
accreditation will grow, as governments become less involved in operational functions and the
private sector’s involvement increases; countries with few foresters may follow South Africa’s
example. All professional associations which are truly independent of governments, whether
offering accreditation or not, could offer mechanisms for improving standards within the
profession, for lobbying, and for public education and information.
|
