EVALUATION OF FOREST 
MANAGEMENT IN KOSOVO’S 
PUBLICLY OWNED FORESTS 
KOSOVO CLUSTER AND BUSINESS SUPPORT PROJECT 
January 2007 
This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. 
It was prepared by the KCBS project team of Chemonics International Inc. based on a Final Report 
prepared by Short Term Technical Advisor, Liviu Amariei. 
 
EVALUATION OF FOREST 
MANAGEMENT IN KOSOVO’S 
PUBLICLY OWNED FORESTS 
 
THIS REPORT PROVIDES AN EVALUATION OF FOREST 
MANAGEMENT IN KOSOVO’S PUBLICLY OWNED FORESTS FROM 
THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE INTERNATIONAL FOREST 
MANAGEMENT STANDARD OF THE FOREST STEWARDSHIP 
COUNCIL (FSC) 
Kosovo Cluster and Business Support Project, Contract No. AFP-I-00-03-00030-00, TO #800 
This report submitted by Chemonics International Inc. / 31 January 2007 
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency 
for International Development or the United States Government. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
PURPOSE OF ASSIGNMENT............................................. 1
BACKGROUND ................................................................... 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................... 1
FIELD ACTIVITIES TO ACHIEVE PURPOSES .................. 4
TASK FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................. 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 
FUTURE ACTIVITY ........................................................... 11
ANNEXES.......................................................................... 13
 
PURPOSE OF ASSIGNMENT 
KCBS is providing technical assistance to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural 
Development, and specifically to its Kosovo Forests Agency [KFA], in preparing for the 
sustained yield management of Kosovo’s forests and eventually forest and chain-of-custody 
certifications. KCBS has identified activities that need to be accomplished to pave the way 
for forest certification. Some of these activities, which will be performed over the next two 
years, require expert specialist advice from a consultant familiar with the process and 
experienced in implementing the process, particularly in Eastern European countries. 
The purpose of this assignment was to carry out the initial activities foreseen as necessary 
during the October 2006 to January 2007 time period. 
BACKGROUND 
Like most of its neighbors in the Balkans, Kosovo and enjoys hardwood forests with 
merchantable volumes, low stumpage prices and relatively low labor prices for conversion. 
Its focus has always been on timber as a commodity. However, unless steps are taken to 
have these forests certified to international standards Kosovo will be unable to participate in 
European and North American wood product markets. 
Kosovo lags behind all of its neighbors, with the exception of Albania and Bosnia, in 
developing capacity to understand and apply international verification standards and 
practices. The most significant obstacles to a viable forest products sector in Kosovo is 
inadequate forest planning and management, which undermines needed investment in 
conversion technology. 
Kosovo’s forest management suffers from obsolete and incomplete forest inventories 
necessary to determine sustained yield; weak forest management planning capacity and 
multiple use orientation; an inability to identify, set aside and protect high conservation value 
forests; outdated harvest techniques and technologies; and harvesting practices which 
unnecessarily threaten groundwater resources. A major concern in Kosovo where irregular 
power supply is a common feature, and most households are not equipped for oil heating, is 
inadequate protection from illicit cutting. 
A benchmark study was rapidly conducted on two forests during this assignment, which 
theoretically are typical of operations across Kosovo. The study observed significant 
nonconformities with current sustainable forest management requirements and identified 
areas requiring improvement in order to achieve certification. These need to be prioritized for 
action over the next two years. It is our opinion that certification of the better-managed public 
forests can be achieved within 2-3 years by developing a four prong approach. The 
approach involves creating a national certification working group; obtaining buy in and direct 
support from leading forest enterprises; improving certification incentives; and demonstrating 
applied success on two, or perhaps three, of the best managed forests. It is important to 
emphasize that this approach will surely fail without total, committed support from the 
Kosovo government and leadership from forest industry. 
KCBS has already formed a Certification Task Group, which will be charged with fulfilling 
commitments and taking action prescribed for certification. Members of the Task Group 
include officials from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Rural Development [MAFRD], 
representatives of the public and private forest owners, and representatives of the private 
secondary wood processing industry. KCBS has engaged a full-time local Forest 
Certification Specialist to plan, direct, coordinate and monitor the activities of the Task 
Group. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 1 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
In September 2006, KCBS asked the consultant to evaluate the management of three forest 
management units in Kosovo (Deqan, Ferizaj and Leposovic), from the perspective of the 
FSC certification standard, and to prepare a roadmap for certification to be implemented 
during 2007. 
This report presents the findings of the field assignments carried out within the framework of 
this consultancy work in Croatia (study tour for key individuals in the Kosovo forestry sector 
in November 2006), and in Kosovo (10-16 December 2006, and 14-20 January 2007). 
The findings presented reflect the situation in Kosovo in January 2007, where a number of 
issues still have to be solved in order to start the certification process. These issues include 
a clarification of the status of Kosovo, eliminating illegal activities in forestry, and securing 
funding for the development of forest management plans for the areas foreseen for 
certification. 
Recommendations presented in this report refer to activities that should be implemented by 
KFA/MAFRD and/or KCBS in order to improve forest management and achieve certification 
of the proposed forest areas. 
Certification in Kosovo will be possible if some political and technical aspects are addressed. 
Recommendations that refer to political aspects include: 
a) Seek synergies with other donors that are present in Kosovo in order to obtain a 
public commitment to reducing illegal activities in forestry from the highest level 
possible (e.g. Prime Minister) 
b) Review engagement in the forestry sector in the absence of a clear commitment 
and demonstrated implementation of concrete actions at the level of the Kosovo 
Government 
c) Seek funding for the development of forest management plans for forests 
managed by KFA (in the first phase for forests eligible for the certification project, 
in a subsequent phase for all publicly owned forests). Funding should be sought 
both within the country (as an expression of commitment to the improved 
management of the forest resources) and also at donor level. 
At technical level the following recommendations should be considered in order to achieve 
forest certification and promote certification in Kosovo within a reasonable time-frame: 
a) Develop and implement an initiative aimed at eradicating or significantly reducing 
illegal activities through a wide set of measures (improving controls, improving 
relationships with local population, collaboration with the judiciary, eliminating 
corruption, etc.) 
b) Elaborate forest management plans for the areas to be certified and also for other 
areas managed by KFA. 
c) Solve issues relating to the work performed by contractors in the forest (legal 
conditions of employment for contractors’ employees, fulfillment of contractual 
obligations, transparency in awarding harvesting contracts, training, etc). 
d) Solve other social issues (health and safety, relationship with local communities 
and customary rights, etc). 
e) Incorporate management principles relating to evaluation of social and 
environmental impacts into forest management practiced at KFA. 
f) Develop a group certification scheme at KFA in order to allow the inclusion of 
new forest areas into the certified area later on. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 2 
g) Train and build additional capacity for conducting internal audits (KFA), 
independent auditing (find one or two experts to train as auditors who would work 
with the certification body in the country), train one staff person at KCBS to 
develop a local working group on forest certification and a local forest 
stewardship standard 
h) Promote certification and chain of custody at the level of the forest-based 
industry. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 3 
FIELD ACTIVITIES TO ACHIEVE PURPOSES 
Field trip to Croatia 
During the week from 20-24 November 2006, 8 forestry officials from Kosovo (Ministry for 
Agriculture, Forestry and Water Resources, Forest Agency, Private Forest Owners’ 
Association and KCBS) had the opportunity to learn from the experience of the Croatian 
State Forestry company (Hrvatske Sume), and several private processing companies in 
forest certification over the last 5 years. See brief trip report in Annex 1. 
Field assignment in Kosovo (10-16 December 2006) 
Field visits were conducted at the Deqan forest management unit (FMU) and the Ferizaj 
FMU, both including a review of available management documentation and field visits in the 
forest. Additionally meetings were organized with an NGO, USAID and also another aid 
agency (Scanagri/SIDA). (See report on preliminary findings in Annex 3 and separate 
PowerPoint presentation prepared for USAID/KCBS). 
Field assignment in Kosovo (14-20 January 2007) 
The field assignment in Kosovo from the 14th to the 20th of January included a field visit to 
the forest district of Leposovic, a two-day training course on certification, additional work with 
forest managers from the Ferizaj aimed at identifying concrete actions to be implemented 
during 2007 in order to upgrade the current management according to the requirements of 
the certification standard. 
The two-day certification training addressed major issues relating to the understanding of the 
forest certification concept at global level, explained the certification standard requirements 
for forest management and also for chain of custody. The course was implemented through 
a combination of presentations/lecture and participatory techniques, such as brainstorming 
and group work followed by presentation by group representatives and discussions in a 
workshop setting. The agenda of the training course is presented in a separate file, attached 
to this report. The responses and analysis of the participants regarding the questions that 
were raised and discussed are presented in Annex 4. The course managed to address most 
expectations of the participants as stated at the beginning of the two-day course. 
On the 18th and 19th of January, special attention was dedicated to the Ferizaj district This 
followed a strategic decision at KCBS to focus on a smaller forest area for which funding 
could be secured in order to develop a management plan, an area that could achieve 
certification within a reasonable timeframe. However, this must be seen in the context of the 
wider forest management practices implemented by the Kosovo Forest Agency, and, based 
on the recommendations included in this report and the evolution during the coming months, 
this approach should be reviewed carefully during 2007, as other areas might also be eligible 
for the first phase of the certification process. 
A detailed presentation of actions to be undertaken by the managers at Ferizaj in order to 
improve forest management is included in Annex 5. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 4 
TASK FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The “political” level
Findings 
Besides USAID/KCBS, there are many other donors in Kosovo interested in improving forest 
management practices on the ground, in order to fulfill their own aid objectives. During 
several meetings with KCBS and Scanagri (SIDA), and considering the magnitude and 
seriousness of the issues to solve (e.g. illegal activities, and forest management plans), it 
became evident that there is a need for more donor coordination in Kosovo in order to 
generate synergies, reach “critical mass” and induce change in the forestry sector from the 
highest level possible in the Kosovo Government. USAID has taken the lead on this issue 
and has planned meetings to address this during January 2007. 
Based on the participation of staff from the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Rural 
Development (MAFRD), and the Head Office of the Kosovo Forestry Agency (KFA) in 
activities organized within the framework of this consultancy, there are some serious 
reasons to doubt about these organizations’s commitment to the certification initiative KCBS 
is promoting. 
Additionally, considering the high level of illegal activity in Kosovo’s forestry sector and the 
way the Ministry is setting budgetary priorities, (MAFRD has requested funding from the 
central budget for 2007 in order to conduct reforestation activities at a time when all forest 
management plans have expired) there are several serious reasons for concern about the 
viability of the certification process in Kosovo. The lack of updated and precise qualitative 
and quantitative information about the forest resource is a serious obstacle to the eradication 
(or at least minimization) of illegal activities. 
However, Government officials at higher level (MAFRD and KFA Head Office) have 
repeatedly expressed their commitment to improving forest management in order to initiate 
the certification process. 
Similarly, there seems to be commitment from forest managers at local level in the three 
regions visited (Deqan, Ferizaj and Leposovic), even if the high level of illegal activity in 
Deqan, associated with a poor management performance in the field, is casting doubts over 
the ability of the current management to engage in a certification process. From the 
perspective of illegal activities in forestry, based on the information provided by local 
managers, the situation at Ferizaj and Leposovic seems to be better than at Deqan. 
(However, the accuracy of the information provided by local foresters was not further 
evaluated through inspection of records, stakeholder consultation or other means, as this 
would go beyond the scope of the present assignment). 
Recommendations 
a) Seek synergies with other donors that are present in Kosovo in order to obtain a 
public commitment to reducing illegal activities in forestry from the highest level 
possible (e.g. Prime Minister) 
b) Review engagement in the forestry sector in the absence of a clear commitment 
and demonstrated implementation of concrete actions at the level of the Kosovo 
Government 
c) Seek funding for the development of forest management plans for forests 
managed by KFA (in the first phase for forests eligible for the certification project, 
in a subsequent phase for all publicly owned forests). Funding should be sought 
both within the country (as an expression of commitment to improved 
management of forest resources) and also at donor level.
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 5 
The technical level 
Major gaps in forest management according to FSC standard requirements 
a) Legal compliance (FSC Principle 1)
During the field visits at Deqan, Leposovic and Ferizaj, several serious instances of non￾compliance with legal requirements were either observed directly (e.g. illegal loggers and 
inappropriate marking of trees at Deqan) or they became evident as a result of interviews 
conducted with local KFA staff and other stakeholders. A list of widespread illegal acts 
that are currently common in Kosovo’s forestry sector is presented in Annex 2. According 
to some estimates, based on official harvesting data, the consumption of forest products 
in Kosovo, and the trade balance, the volume of illegal harvesting is similar or even 
larger than the volume harvested legally in Kosovo. 
An additional problem relating to legislation at Leposovic is the fact that in this area the 
Kosovo legislation is not used as a legal basis for forest management. Forest managers 
at Leposovic are using the Serbian legislation for planning and implementation of forestry 
activities. This raises the question of the validity of the legal framework in all considered 
cases, taking into account the fact that even if at Deqan and Ferizaj Kosovo legislation is 
applied, the status of Kosovo has not been clarified yet. This is both a technical and a 
political issue that cannot be solved until decisions are taken with regards to the status of 
the province and the situation of the Serb population. 
It is hoped that decisions on Kosovo’s status will help clarify this issue, and that all 
management units considered for certification will act according to one legal framework. 
However, under the present conditions, certification of forest management does not yet 
seem to be feasible. If KFA will develop a group certification scheme, as recommended, 
all members will have to follow the same legal requirements. 
b) Lack of valid management plans (FSC Principle 7)
In all three visited areas (the situation is similar for all forest areas managed by KFA), 
forest management plans have expired during the last two to three years, and they have 
not been updated by the competent authorities (KFA). In addition to a major obstacle to 
improved forest management, the lack of updated management plans is favoring illegal 
activities, as the knowledge base about the forest resources is out of date, making a 
precise accounting of forest product volumes and volumes of residual stands difficult. 
The existence of updated forest management plans is a prerequisite for the certification 
of forest management in Kosovo. The available information is not adequate for 
management purposes, and cannot ensure long term, sustainable forest management. 
c) Worker’s rights (FSC Principle 4)
Current management practices lack essential elements relating to health and safety; 
contractors and their workers do not use appropriate protection equipment, contractors 
are hiring workers without following current regulations, there are no appropriate written 
mechanisms and procedures for resolving complaints and disputes within the 
organization, and training offered to workers is not sufficient to ensure a proper 
performance in the field. 
While some training has been offered in the past, the current performance in managing 
the forests reflects a need of more training. This is particularly important if the 
management is to be upgraded to respond to the requirements of the certification 
standard. 
d) Utilization of forest products (FSC Principle 5)
Forest products are not properly valued, in some cases (Deqan) standing timber is being 
sold to contractors at excessively low prices without a reasonable justification. 
Additionally, there is a certain level of illegal hunting and commercial harvesting of 
berries in all visited areas, which is also illegal. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 6 
e) Environmental and social impact (FSC Principles 4 and 6)
Some of the observed forest management practices (e.g. selection of trees for 
harvesting at Deqan, road building and maintenance in all three visited areas, lack of 
legal access to firewood for the local population) have a serious environmental and 
social impact. Very few forest managers are aware of the concept of environmental and 
social impact evaluation relating to forestry activities, and these concepts are not 
sufficiently internalized by current forest management in the areas that have been 
visited. 
f) Monitoring (FSC Principle 8)
Forest management is monitoring a series of indicators, but since management plans 
have not been updated, the results of such monitoring are not used properly. Monitoring 
needs to be upgraded and its results should flow into management planning. 
g) Ownership to the land (FSC Principle 2)
During the December field assignment, the issue of ownership and use rights was 
raised. While this seems to be clear to KFA and MAFRD, (use rights are currently based 
on written agreements between the Kosovo Trust Agency and KFA), special attention 
should be given to how ownership and use rights are regulated in the context of Kosovo 
receiving official status. Unclear legal ownership titles and/or use rights can be a serious 
obstacle to certification. 
h) High conservation value forests (FSC Principle 9)
High conservation value forests are not an issue per se in the evaluated areas, because 
KFA is only starting to prepare for certification, but in order to achieve certification, the 
forest management in Kosovo has to develop the concept, identify potential high 
conservation values, consult stakeholders and define whether any such values are 
present in the forest. 
Recommendations: The recommendations mentioned in this section are resulting from the 
evaluation of forest management performance at the three evaluated forest management 
units. 
a) Legal compliance: While legal compliance in forestry in Kosovo is a difficult issue, at 
operational level, it seems that more could be done to reduce illegal activities. This is 
the case for all three visited areas, but the situation seems to be extremely critical at 
Deqan. Some simple measures, such as functional check points on key forest roads, 
seem not to be sufficiently effective the way they are currently set up. The set up of 
the checkpoints and the implementation of surveillance activities should be reviewed 
by KFA at central and at local level. 
It is important to highlight in this context the fact that even if only a small area will 
apply for certification in a first stage, it is essential to reduce illegal logging in all 
forests that KFA is managing. Due to the FSC partial certification policy, and the fact 
that KFA would apply for certification and a certificate would be issued to this 
institution, if widespread illegal activities persist on areas managed by KFA, it will not 
be possible to have any forest certified to FSC standards. 
Another aspect that relates to legal compliance is the relationship with local 
communities. A social communication plan of the individual forest management units, 
that is properly implemented, could help minimize illegal activities. To some extent 
this is being practiced at Ferizaj, but it should become formally included in forest 
management planning and proper records should show clearly the contacts with the 
local population and the issues addressed. 
Transparency in awarding harvesting contracts is also an issue that needs to be 
addressed. The current practice of establishing agreements between KFA and 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 7 
socially owned enterprises covering harvesting activities, without following legal 
requirements for public procurement should be reviewed, as the current practice 
seems to indicate that KFA is not implementing properly existing legal requirements. 
A further issue is the legal framework for applying penalties relating to illegal 
activities. The current regulations are not being applied properly; there are different 
penalties depending on the amount of damage, which results in arbitrary 
implementation of such penalties. KFA and the Ministry should evaluate whether the 
current requirements need to be changed in order to minimize illegal activities. KFA 
should establish a closer relationship with the judiciary sector in order to collaborate 
on tackling illegal activities. Currently, judges seem to be lenient with illegal loggers, 
applying the minimum penalty which is ineffective. Additionally, cumulative penalties 
do not seem to be considered in all cases, and the damages are not being paid back 
by perpetrators of illegal activities. 
b) Forest management plans: The elaboration of forest management plans is a 
precondition for certification. In addition to local legislation, forest management plans 
should be developed following the requirements included in the certification standard 
(FSC Principle 7). 
It is important to highlight the fact that the Leposovic region declared it would have a 
forest management plan in place within a few months. However, the difficulty here 
seems to be the legal basis for forestry activities, which in this case is the Serb 
legislation, and not the Kosovo legislation as in the other areas. Forest managers at 
Leposovic have stated their intention to follow both legislations in the future (Serb 
and Kosovo). However, it should be clarified whether this is possible. In case 
management plans can be developed to comply with both sets of regulations, 
Leposovic could also be eligible for certification once the legal situation is clarified. 
Similarly, the area for which forest management plans are currently being developed 
in the Deqan region, could also be considered for certification. 
c) Contractors: Considering the current practice of managing and harvesting Kosovo’s 
forests, there are several important issues that need to be solved in relation to how 
contractors work in the forest, including: 
• Contractual relationship to be reformulated in order to comply with standard 
requirements. 
• Contracts to be awarded according to current legislation, and in a transparent 
way 
• KFA must develop its capacity to verify compliance by contractors with their 
contractual requirements and take appropriate action in case contractors do 
not fulfill their obligations (e.g. it seems to be common practice that the selling 
price for standing timber is lowered to take account of contractor’s road 
maintenance work, but roads are not being maintained and are in a terrible 
shape in all visited management units) 
• Contractors must fulfill local legal requirements when hiring workers, this is 
not happening at this time. 
• Workers of the contractors must be trained to implement standard 
requirements that relate to their work, (such as health and safety regulations, 
forest protection, road maintenance, etc.). 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 8 
The aspects mentioned above relate to different standard Principles, such as 1, 2, 4, 
6, and 8. 
d) Social and environmental impacts: Social and environmental impacts should be 
properly evaluated and their evaluation and monitoring should become an integral 
part of the forest management. New forest management plans should reflect the fact 
that social and environmental impacts evaluation is an integral part of forest 
management planning and implementation. 
e) Other social issues: Formal complaints and dispute resolution mechanisms must be 
developed and implemented. This refers both to the relationship with local 
communities, and to the relationship between KFA as an employer and its 
employees. 
A further issue is the relationship with local communities. While at Ferizaj it seems 
that this relationship is good, and the local population collaborates with the forest 
managers, reporting observed illegal acts to the foresters, it is not clear how this 
relationship is in the case of Decan and Leposavic. KFA should develop a social 
communication plan, should promote it and formalize the relationship with its 
stakeholders (communities, NGOs, unions, etc). 
According to forest managers at Ferizaj, current legislation does not allow the sale of 
firewood to the local population, which generates pressure on the forest resources, 
and more illegal activities. According to some of the interviewed forest managers, 
about 50-60% of the illegal acts could be avoided if villagers had the right to gather 
firewood or to buy it at a convenient price. The solution to this problem is either to 
change the current legislation, giving to the local population the right to harvest 
firewood, or to use existing loopholes in legislation to achieve this objective. 
f) Group scheme: In case certification is sought for more than one forest management 
unit (as initially proposed), KFA would have to develop a system for the operation of 
a group scheme, according to current certification requirements for group schemes. 
This issue was addressed during the course offered by the author of this report in 
Pristina on the 16th and 17th of January 2007. Unfortunately, the person designated 
by KFA for this task, Mr. Ergin Hajredini, could not participate in the course. 
A group scheme would allow KFA to manage forest districts/management units that 
wish to adhere to the certification scheme in the future, and manage the FSC 
certificate as such. In case of group schemes, responsibilities are split between 
individual group members and the group entity. 
g) Training and capacity building: Forest management staff at KFA should be further 
trained on the implementation of the certification standard, and also on quality 
management. Some of the individuals met are interested in the certification process, 
and, based on their current roles and their background, could become key staff in the 
implementation of certification requirements. 
Mr. Bronimir Popovic, from the Leposovic district, Mr. Bekim Topalli, from the Ferizaj 
district, and Mr. Ergin Hajredini, Chief of the Division of Forest Inventory & 
Management Planning at KFA, in charge of following up on certification issues at 
KFA, should be trained as internal auditors in order to improve their understanding of 
the certification standard, and their ability to conduct self evaluations according to 
certification requirements. (This training should be a combination of ISO quality 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 9 
management and FSC requirements. In case this recommendation is to be 
implemented, more detailed content requirements could be elaborated to meet the 
specific needs of these individuals and the KFA). 
Another aspect that relates to the development of local capacity is the preparation of 
potential local auditors. FSC-accredited certification bodies work with local forestry 
experts. If a certification process starts in Kosovo, it would be very important to have 
at least one auditor prepared for forest management and one for chain of custody (or 
one person prepared for doing both). 
Similarly, Mr. Hysen Shabanaj, from KCBS should be trained on the development of 
a national working group on forest certification, on the development of national forest 
stewardship standards and also in auditing to FSC standards (forest management 
and chain of custody). Developing a national working group on forest certification is 
an important aspect of certification, as a standard setting process in Kosovo would 
help aggregate all interests linked to forestry around the issue of standard setting, 
with positive effects in terms of pressure for good forest management. The Kosovo 
Government should participate in such a working group, but should not lead or 
dominate it. 
In relation to standards development, KCBS should consider a regional approach, as 
similar standards setting initiatives are active in Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, 
and Croatia. 
h) Chain of custody: Even if certification in Kosovo cannot be achieved within a short 
period of time (not less than one year), it is important to promote the concept of 
certification at the level of the forest-based industry as well. Since there is demand 
for certified products that could be produced in Kosovo using local wood supply, for 
the time until forests will be certified in Kosovo, certified forest products suppliers 
could try to find certified raw material supply in the wider region (two forests have 
been recently certified in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Croatian State Forests 
enterprise Hrvatske Sume is certified in Croatia). It is recommended to start 
certification on the chain of custody side, in order not to lose potential clients. 
Certified operations, in order to minimize costs, would put more pressure on the local 
government in order to ensure that forests in Kosovo achieve certification soon. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 10 
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
FOR FUTURE ACTIVITY 
The roadmap towards certification in Kosovo involves the following issues to initiate the 
certification process: 
• eradicate or, at least, significantly reduce illegal activities 
• develop forest management plans for the areas considered for certification, taking 
into account the certification standard 
• ownership/use rights of KFA to be clarified in the context of Kosovo receiving official 
status (or any other form of autonomy). 
Other important technical issues to solve during the process are: 
• upgrade management systems according to detailed recommendations in Annex 5 
• implement management systems to respond to standard requirements 
• review legal requirements and revise if needed 
• sort out contractor issue (from a legal, contractual, monitoring and performance 
perspective, as well as transparency in contract award, train contractors in harvesting 
according to certification requirements) 
• develop the management system for the operation of a group scheme at KFA 
• train key staff to become internal auditors 
• train a person to take the lead in the development of a national/regional certification 
initiative and a forest stewardship standard 
• formally launch a national working group for certification, and formulate a firs draft 
standard for Kosovo, building upon work done in other countries in the region, such 
as Croatia and Montenegro; seek synergies with similar working groups; integrate 
into FSC’s European network. 
The Table below incorporates a proposed timeframe for the preparation of KFA for forest 
certification, indicating also the responsible body for each of the activities considered. 
Table 1:
Roadmap for certification: tasks for the parties involved 
Nr. Activity Time Responsible 
1. Eradicate/significantly reduce illegal activity 
prepare action plan 28.02.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
implement action plan/campaign 30.06.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
monitor progress and report 30-09.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
Forest Management plans and related documentation and 
implementation 
2. 
MAFRD/KFA/KCBS/USAID clarify funding 15.02.2007 Other potential donors 
prepare new forest management plans 30.11.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
prepare additional documentation/management 
system update (see annex 5) 30.11.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
3. Review legal requirements with regards to access of local 
population to firewood, or find solution based on current 
requirements 
MAFRD/KFA with support 
from KCBS if needed 30.04.2007 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 11 
4. Address contractor issues 30.11.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
5. Develop group scheme at KFA 30.11.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
Training and capacity building KCBS/ MAFRD/KFA 6. 
staff at KFA for internal auditing 30.06.2007 KCBS/ MAFRD/KFA 
potential auditors in Kosovo for FM and COC 30.11.2007 KCBS 
one individual (Hysen) for working group and 
standard development, potentially also as FSC 
auditor (FM and COC) 
30.06.2007 KCBS 
7. Clarify ownership/use rights for KFA according to Kosovo 
status 30.11.2007 MAFRD/KFA 
National Working Group on forest certification 8. 
Launch working group 01.04.2007 KCBS 
Produce first draft standard 30.09.2007 KCBS 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 12 
ANNEXES 
Annex I Travel Report: Croatia November 2006 
Annex II Illegal Activities in Kosovo forestry as observed or reported by different parties 
during the field assignments 
Annex III Evaluation of Forest Management Practices at the KFA (Decan and Ferizaj) 
Annex IV Responses from Course Participants 
Annex V Second Evaluation of Ferizaj District and Recommendations for Further Activity 
Annex VI PowerPoint: Working towards Forest Certification in Kosovo 
Annex VII PowerPoint: Introduction to Forest Certification according to the standards of 
the Forest Stewardship Council 
 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 Page 13 
ANNEX I
Travel report 
Croatia 19-24 November 2006 
Liviu Amariei 
Consultant to the KCBS project 
27 November 2006 
The study trip of 8 individuals from Kosovo, representing the Ministry for Agriculture, 
Forestry and Water Resources, the Kosovo Forest Agency and the Private Forest Owners 
Association (participants list available at KCBS), followed the schedule prepared together 
with Ms. Zelika Ivanovic and Ms. Danijela Novota from Croatia (agenda available at KCBS). 
th The study trip benefited during the morning of November 20 and the afternoon of 
November 23rd from the presence of high-level government officials such as Mr. Herman 
Susnik, State Secretary at the Croatian Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Water 
Resources, as well as from the presence of Mr. Miroljub Stojanovic, Assistant Minister at the 
same ministry. 
Additionally, the participants had the opportunity to: 
ƒ Learn about the activities of the Croatian state forests, certified to FSC standards 
since 2002, (the Croatian certification history explained by the person who was 
most involved during the certification process, Mr. Ratko Matosevic). 
ƒ visit two of the most successful Croatian companies producing and exporting a 
wide variety of certified products, such as wood flooring, veneers, doors, furniture 
and chairs. 
ƒ have a presentation of the FSC National Initiative in Croatia by the FSC Contact 
Person in Croatia, Ms, Danijela Novota 
ƒ meet the representatives of an FSC-accredited certification body (the SGS￾Qualifor Program) in Croatia 
ƒ meet other members of the Croatian national initiative, mainly from the economic 
and environmental chamber 
During a working session held at the beginning of the meeting, the author of the present 
report asked the participants which were the most important expectations they had from this 
study trip. The responses included the following: 
• Support for finding new markets 
• Learn from the Croatian model, including from mistakes 
• Learn about the process for developing national standards 
• Look at the Croatian organizational model 
• Learn about the first steps in certification 
• Find solutions to specific problems (like illegality, lack of staff with good knowledge) 
Discussions held with different members of the Kosovo delegation showed an encouraging 
level of interest in making certification work in Kosovo, with most of the participants 
embracing the idea enthusiastically. However, from the Government side, after discussions 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
with Mr. Quazim Kukalaj, it became evident that the issue should be dealt with carefully, in 
order for the government not to feel “pushed” towards certification. There was also a clear 
indication that in the end the government will make its own decision, taking into account 
various factors that are essential for such a decision. 
One important aspect and concern for the Kosovo Government representatives seems to be 
the current discussion in Kosovo about forest areas considered for certification, that will 
likely become part of a future National Park. In this context, it is important to clarify that in 
case a certain level of management (including even harvesting activities) will be allowed in 
the future national park (depending on the level of protection in different areas), certification 
would be a good tool for ensuring good management of these areas. 
Some members of the Kosovo delegation understood from discussions with a few Croatian 
individuals met during the study trip that certification in national parks is not possible, a 
misunderstanding that was clarified before the end of the study trip. (certification is possible 
in any forest areas, but, depending on the level of legal protection, decisions should be 
taken on a case by case basis, because, for example, it might not be a sound economic 
decision to certify areas under total protection) 
In case decisions in this regard will be taken during the coming weeks, it is very important for 
decision-makers to have a clear picture about which instruments can achieve a certain level 
of protection or a combination of protection and recognition fo management on the 
marketplace. This is a point that USAID should monitor closely. 
During the closing meeting of the study trip, participants were asked to express their 
opinion about how their expectations, presented at the beginning of the study tour 
were fulfilled. The unanimous opinion was that the learning objectives and 
expectations (see above) were all met. 
The author of this report learned also some lessons that could be applied in Kosovo in order 
to make the process more efficient that it was in Croatia: 
1. In addition to forest evaluations and gap analyses during the coming few months, it is 
highly recommended to start the development of a national initiative as soon as 
possible, balancing economic, social and environmental interests and raising 
awareness about certification, what it can and what it cannot do for forestry, forest 
management and the forest-based industry in Kosovo. 
2. Develop the national initiative as a body that is independent from government, with 
government participating actively as a key actor, but not dominating the process. 
3. Involve the private sector (private forest owners and processing industry) from an 
early stage. (The representative of the private sector in the delegation from Kosovo 
was enthusiastic about moving forward with certification in this country and will 
spread the word about the learning experience in Croatia). 
4. A main issue in Kosovo will be the preparation of management plans for the areas 
selected as a pilot project for certification. Funding opportunities should be sought for 
this activity. 
5. The study trip did not touch upon the situation of small and medium-sized enterprises 
in the processing industry, as the Croatian side wished to show their experience from 
the best side. The situation of these companies in Kosovo should be assessed in the 
context of forest certification and the potential benefits they might achieve. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
ANNEX II
Illegal activities in Kosovo forestry as observed or reported by different parties during 
the field assignments 
1. Illegal cutting of trees 
a. Performed by poor people for subsistence 
b. Performed on a commercial basis by illegal loggers (organized crime) 
2. Illegal transport, green-washing of illegally harvested timber (false transport 
documentation) 
3. Illegal award of cutting permits (social enterprises do not participate in tenders), lack of 
transparency in procurement 
4. Contractors to KFA do not respect contractual obligations without this having any 
consequences for their future employment. 
a. Do not maintain roads even if the price they pay for standing timber is discounted 
to take account of road maintenance and other investments 
b. Harvested volumes are higher than allowed harvesting concession 
c. Hire workers illegally (without proper working contracts), without respecting health 
and safety regulations 
d. Income from timber sales not channeled through official financial/accounting 
system (mainly in cash) 
5. Private owners harvest illegally in neighboring public forests 
6. Marking of trees for felling does not follow current regulations (cases observed at Deqani 
where selection and marking of trees for felling were not appropriate because they were 
biased towards the extraction of the most valuable trees, a practice that fails to maximize 
the net benefit from the forest in the long run), even if KFA local staff performing the 
marking activity were experienced and trained 
7. Calculation of “stumpage fees” against current regulations, especially when contracts are 
awarded directly (without tender) 
8. Harvesting area changed after the approval of operational plans, without any 
authorization or justification 
9. Managers at local level not aware of budgetary planning and expenditure, they had to 
insist for obtaining such information from KFA, without any success (there is a legal 
requirement relating to transparency in the operation of public authorities) 
10. Illegal hunting and collection of non-timber forest products for commercial purposes. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
ANNEX III
Kosovo assignment for the evaluation of forest management practices at the Kosovo 
Forest Agency (Decan and Ferizaj districts) 
Objectives of the Kosovo assignment from 10-16 December 2006: 
 Identify and evaluate major gaps in forest management at the Ducane and Ferizaj 
forest districts, from the perspective of the certification standard 
 Identify organizational and operational limitations at the level of the FA 
 Identify areas for training to be implemented in January 2007 
 Explore options for removing barriers to compliance with the certification standard 
Preliminary results: 
A. Major issues to be addressed before the two forest management units can apply 
for certification. 
a. Illegal acts in forestry 
Clear evidence of illegal acts at Decan, (also indications of probable illegal acts 
also at the level of the forest administration), generating a non-sustainable use of 
the forest resource. The forestry authorities (Ministry of Agriculture and Forest 
Agency must demonstrate a clear commitment and also concrete results in 
tackling illegal acts perpetrated by third parties and also the apparent lack of full 
compliance with current legislation by forestry authorities. Illegal activities seem 
to be under a better control at Ferizaj, at least at the level of the FMU that is 
being proposed for certification (ca 2,700 Ha). However, at the level of this 
region, which is considered to be in a better situation from the perspective of 
illegal harvesting, in 2006, the volume of illegally harvested wood is estimated at 
1,500 m3
, about 15% of the legal harvest. For management planning purposes, 
FA staff needs to take into account the estimated amount of illegal harvesting in 
order not to overharvest and damage the resource. There are clear numbers 
relating to illegal harvesting at Decan, but the problem seems to be much more 
serious in this area, even if the management is claiming some progress, achieved 
through the introduction of new checkpoints. 
Illegal activities have multiple root-causes and minimizing them is a significant 
challenge that requires commitment at highest level, and also inter-agency 
collaboration (e.g. between forest authorities and the justice system). 
A process for identifying illegal acts and proposing solutions with all involved 
parties was suggested, without a clear response from the FA and ministry. Not 
addressing illegal harvesting and other illegal acts could lead to public protests 
from the civil society during 2007. 
b. Forest management plans 
At both areas (Decan and Ferizaj), forest management plans (fmp) have expired 
several years ago and they have not been updated. A valid fmp is a precondition 
for certification. The lack of updated management documentation would preclude 
certification, especially in the current context of forestry in Kosovo. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
During a meeting with FA representatives it became clear that the Agency has 
budgeted 400,000 Euro for the elaboration of forest management plans on 
80,000 Ha during 2007. During the previous week, the budget commission has 
rejected this project due to other priorities. However, a reforestation project was 
approved for 180,000 Euro. The FA would accept to finance the elaboration of 
fmps for the areas proposed for certification from this budget, provided the 
Finance Ministry approves the use of at least a part of these funds for activities 
that differ from the approved activities (reforestation). Support from KCBS/USAID 
at political level in this regard would be welcome. 
B. Other issues to be addressed during the preparation phase for forest certification 
a. Quality management 
The FA should consider an investment in the development of quality and 
environmental management systems. The first step would be to have at least a 
few staff members (at engineer level) trained in ISO 9000 and/or ISO 14000. 
These individuals could take the lead in the development of quality and 
environmental management systems at the level of the FA. 
b. Staff training 
Staff training at all levels in forest certification requirements for forest 
management enterprises. There is potential for collaboration with SIDA/Scanagri 
on capacity building. Training should focus on the development of a solid 
documented system in support of the forest management plan, on skills for 
improving social communication, the evaluation of social and environmental 
impacts of forest management activities, and the ability to evaluate social and 
environmental aspects relating to standard compliance. 
c. Operational model for the use of the forest resource 
Improve the current operational model, where contractors are buying standing 
timber at a very low price, (about 15 Euro/ m3
), compared with the market price of 
this commodity (about 100 Euro/ m3
), with large benefits for contractors, 
important revenue losses for the FA, and significant externalities (bad road 
infrastructure). The head of the FA indicated that there are some efforts ongoing 
to change this situation. However, it is not yet clear how this will be solved. 
d. Communication with civil society 
There seems to be little communication between forest authorities and the local 
population, which can affect negatively forest management and prevent the FA 
from finding effective solutions to illegal harvesting. One way of improving this 
aspect is the formation of a working group aimed at elaborating forest 
management standards for Kosovo, with a balanced participation of individuals 
and organizations from the social, environmental and economic sector, including 
government. KCBS/USAID is recommended to support the activities of such a 
group, and strive to keep it balanced, avoiding that any one group dominates the 
process. With the government being the most important and powerful forest 
owner in the country, there is a risk that the government dominates the process, 
which would damage the process and its outcome (lesson learned from the 
experience in Croatia). 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
ANNEX IV
Answers from course participants to questions addressed during the certification course 
(information compiled by Hysen Shabanaj, translated into English, based on information in 
Albanian and Serbian on flip charts) 
Q: What are your expectations from this course? 
A: Participant expectations: 
- advanced forest management 
- new knowledge for certification process 
- learn for tasks after the certification 
- new possibilities to penetrate in new markets with wood products 
- to gain knowledge how to achieve chain control 
- prepare operating plan for forest certification 
- to gain knowledge, how to fulfill certification standards 
- to identify problems that Kosovo have in certification process 
Q: Is certification important for the forest sector in Kosovo? What are the benefits you expect 
from certification of forest management in Kosovo? 
A: Certification important for a better perspective of Kosovo 
- Protect the environment and forest development in long terms 
- Better management 
- Increase wood value, expand the market, community benefits, increase value of 
specific forest zones, better management for those who works in forestry 
- Protecting risked types 
- Select specific rivers zone to be protected 
- Protecting specific zones with fauna 
Certification important for a better perspective of Kosovo 
- Better protected forest, less illegal cutting and damages in environment aspects 
- Achieve forest generation and higher wood quality in the future 
- Environment protection “Healthy environment” 
- By certification we will know forest origin that would affect positively in market 
- In general better management 
- Higher benefits- economical because of the quality and international standards 
- Benefits for forest users – wood volume will be more sold in international market 
Certification important for a better perspective of Kosovo: 
- to know the wood origin, structure, quality and type. Also to find market. 
- Certification has effects on forest protection, environment and management 
 In general helps population and community: 
- Adapt long term plans for management 
- Long term benefits and increase wood price in market 
- Increase wood quality 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
Certification important for a better perspective of Kosovo: 
- more advances management in forest 
- effect on environment protection 
- effect on social and economical problems 
- penetrate in international markets with final wood products 
- long term benefits – helps population in economical, social and environment aspects 
- support maintaining, protecting and forest management planning 
- increase wood value 
Q: What illegal activities you know in the Kosovo forest sector? 
A: Illegal activities are 
- activities in contradiction with forest law and regulations 
- cutting the forest and transportation without necessary documentation 
- forest land usurpation 
- not identifying persons that are doing illegal activities 
- not follow up the process, court procedures for illegal activities 
- no co operation with court and police for stopping illegal activity on forest 
- not registration the forest damages 
- not reporting to the responsible management 
Q: What are the criteria you would use to select protected areas? 
A: 
- higher biodiversity 
- high value of forest 
- places where there are better conditions to grow animals (fauna) 
- places with rivers 
- places with low vegetation 
- places with no natural reproduction 
- places with specific trees 
- places with high slant 
- places with higher risk for fauna and flora 
- legal base to regulate these zones 
Q: As a forest manager, how would you demonstrate compliance with legal requirements 
A: FSC requirement Principle 1 
 
- forestry law and administrative directions 
- management plans 
- maps 
- protecting plan 
- lack of the international convents and agreements 
- involve in protection-collaboration with community to prevent forest from illegal 
cutting 
- collaboration with institutions 
FSC requirement Principle 1 
Office manager should have: 
1. international conventions 
2. management plans 
3. list of the main partners 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
4. maps for the operative places 
5. publicity material 
Office manager should posses: 
1. law, regulations and administrative directions 
2. environment limits 
3. internal supervising programs 
4. training procedures 
5. structure and organizational responsibilities 
Q: Identify social and environmental impacts relating to your forest management activities 
A: FSC requirement on Social and Environment affects 
a. Social affects: to hire local community, train, aware, organize meeting and be in 
close contact with management. 
b. Environment affects: to create condition according the direct intervention and in 
this way save the flora, fauna etc. 
During the forest administration, use has especial affect on 
1. land erosion 
2. rivers 
3. biodiversity 
4. flora and fauna 
5. clime 
 
FSC requirement on Social and Environment affects 
- forest development in long terms 
- improved forest management 
- Increase wood value, 
- expand the market, 
- community benefits, 
- increase value of specific forest zones 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
ANNEX V 
Findings of forest management systems evaluation at the Ferizaj district and activities 
to be implemented during 2007 in order to ensure compliance with the certification 
standard 
In the absence of a local standard for Kosovo, the forest management at the Ferizaj forest 
district was evaluated against the indicators of the Soil Association standard for Croatia, as 
an official standard used by a certification body during a certification assessment. In order to 
have a complete overview over how the certification standard might be looking like in the 
case of Kosovo, forest managers were advised to consult also the draft standard produced 
by a standards working group in Montenegro, and the certification standard used recently for 
the certification of two forest management units in Bosnia & Herzegovina. 
The evaluation of forest management practices at the Ferizaj forest district took place on the 
14th th th th and 15 of December 2006, and also on the 18 and 19 of January 2007. The 
recommendations included in this annex that require concrete follow up by forest managers 
either at KFA central office or at field level, which are marked with bold italic characters, 
are also valid for the other evaluated management units (Decan and Leposavic). 
Not all indicators were evaluated, for example principle 3, which does not seem to be 
relevant for Kosovo, and Principle 7, relating to the elaboration of forest management plans. 
1.1.1 Prepare list of applicable legislation 
1.1.2 have legislation available at all offices including the central office 
1.1.3 prepare and implement training on applicable legislation 
1.2.1 Needs to be verified at the central office KFA/Ministry. 
1.3.1 Have text of international agreements at all offices, train staff on this together 
with national regulations. Take into account the FSC policy on the ILO 
conventions, which will have to be translated into the local languages. 
1.4. Analyze the standard and report any contradictions with legislation to the 
certification body before the certification main assessment. 
1.5.1 Regulation specifies what forest guards have to do in case they find illegal loggers. 
There are gaps in the law, guards cannot use guns, law is being changed to allow 
guards to be armed. Regulatory gaps in how to deal with illegal loggers when they 
are caught by forest guards. Address legal framework dealing with illegal acts in 
forestry. 
Guards are trained when they are hired, and they know well what their 
responsibilities are. 
Guards gets personal information of the person, takes pictures of the place, inform 
the supervisor, presents a report, describing equipment, vehicles used, specify the 
magnitude of the damage, time, the amount of damage. Damage under 2 m3
 the 
guard has to present report within 5 days. If more than 2 m3
, the person broke the 
law: 2 options: under 3.5 m3 the same procedure if more 3.5 m3
 forest guard has to 
call police and supervisor, police has to arrest the person and take it to court. System 
not effective, and not working properly. 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
All persons doing illegal cutting should be arrested. Lack of staff in courts, cases are 
addressed late (after years). In 2006 there were 11,000 cases - 2,039 for forestry 
issues. Courts should have a person for cases relating to forestry. Would be good to 
regulate compensation of damage, this is not happening. 
Accuracy of the guards’ reports is checked regularly. Guards are responsible 
personally for the damage caused by unidentified individuals. Disciplinary 
commission (guards pay for the damage or they are suspended). Guards do not have 
a work schedule they set working hours themselves, but forest protection has to be 
ensured 24 hours a day. Not enough staff to protect 24 hours. 3 shifts necessary. 
1.6.1 Develop written statement of commitment to forest management according to 
the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council at the level of KFA and each 
FMU participating in the group. 
2.1 To be solved at KFA/Ministry level. Fill in…. 
2.1.2 Map at the level of KFA showing all areas managed by KFA. No map, needs to 
be clarified by KFA, in some areas the boundaries are not clear. 
2.2.1 Document customary rights. Pasture in the forest, public holiday. They are 
preparing to make a suggestion to KFA to enable communities to harvest more 
firewood and every year there should be cleaning activities. 
Consult local communities to find out how much firewood is needed. List sent 
to central office which has not done anything on this during 3 years. Agreement 
signed for firewood supply. KCBS Forestry Specialist says it is an instruction from 
KFA. 
Prepare law amendment on how to supply the rural population with firewood. 
Ahiste needs 150-170 m3 people are ready to pay for firewood, but the law does not 
allow the managers to sell firewood to local population. Sales of any materials should 
occur only though tender. This would help also to reduce illegal logging by 50-60%, 
based on the experience of the local foresters. Current law difficult to apply here. 
2.2.2 Legal framework does not respect traditional use rights customary rights e.g. 
firewood 
2.2.3 Keep records of meetings with local communities, minutes should be also 
available at the local KFA office, not only at the municipality. 
Oral agreements with herders to inform the office about things they see in exchange 
for small amounts of wood, not formalized. Herders pay taxes for this. This is another 
customary right of local communities 
2.3. Complaints dealt with at local level if not possible they are sent to KFA. There is a 
procedure for dealing with complaints and disputes. (According to KCBS Forestry 
Specialist). Local managers not aware, but they are implementing the system. Have 
complaints procedure in the office and be aware of its requirements. 
2.4. Local communities do not have any legal rights, but they have some customary rights 
that are taken care of (e.g. fire wood). In a way, the current regulatory framework 
does not allow the implementation of standards requirements, as local people do not 
have access to firewood, which seems to e a customary right. Clarify.
4.1.1 No apparent problems. Keep records of documentation (contracts, etc) 
4.1.2 No initiatives so far. To be developed in the future.
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
4.2.1 Yes. Keep law text in office, collective contracts not signed yet. Regulation for 
public service (min of public service). Unions do exist a national collective contract 
signed. Health care free in Kosovo. 
4.2.2 No risk assessment. To be done. No regulation to compensate workers and their 
families for accidents or damage. 
4.2.3 No training. Do it and document it.
4.2.4 No safety equipment. KFA should conduct analysis regarding needs of 
protective equipment and provide the necessary equipment. 2 deadly accidents 
plus an illegal logger. 
4.3.1 Have text of ILO conventions, evaluate required employment conditions and 
ask KFA/Ministry to fix. It is expected to have a collective contract for forest 
workers only. Forestry union to sign with ministry within 2-3 months. All depends on 
the budget. 4.3.2 similar. Ensure that ILO conventions are being respected. 
4.4.1 KFA to support local foresters in identifying social experts to help with social 
impact assessment 
4.5.1 Have the mechanisms documented at KFA. 
5.1.1 Plans do not penetrate to the local offices. Head of office involved with KFA, other 
managers at local level not involved. Managers do not know how budget is going to 
be spent, they have only a general idea about the budget. Managers say that their 
Director does not have access to centrally managed budgetary information. 
5.1.2 KFA 
5.1.3 Contractors sell mostly locally, one from Peja. Wood from Deqani goes to Mitrovica. 
In Ferizaj local sawmills buying lumber from contractors. 
5.2 .1 Residual damage controlled and monitored. 
5.3.2 Contract requirements. 20% advanced payments. 
5.4.1 Stone, mushrooms, blueberries, Stone extractions (quarries). Contracts are kept 
in the regional office. Some land leased, requests from PTK for antennas. Local 
communities harvest berries, not controlled. Not allowed for commercialization. There 
is illegal hunting, but is decreasing. Wild boar. Muslim people do not eat it, this is 
changing. KFOR and association of hunters responsible. Contact with the 
association. Elaborate and implement plan for minimizing illegal hunting and 
collection of non-timber forest products. 
5.5.1 Water is used by local people. People submit a request for the use of water or springs 
for certain purposes. Many requests refused. Trout in one forest river. 
6.1.1 Identify environmental impact assessment requirements in the country; 
identify potential impacts for each activity relating to forest management and 
how to minimize them; have training with staff to explain 
6.1.2 Develop system documentation 
6.2.1 Fraxinus excelsa, Ulmus sp., Acer pseudoplatanus, Acer negundo, bear; list of 
protected species in the law on hunting. There is a red list of protected species at 
Kosovo level. List is not available in the Ferizaj office. Get list to the office, map 
areas where you have protected, rare and threatened species. 
6.2.10 develop system 
6.2.11 
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
Other actions to undertake in order to comply with standard requirements at Criterion level: 
6.4 Define representative areas of natural ecosystems for protection purposes 
6.5 Find solution to road building and maintenance, improve text of contracts with 
contractors; prepare guidelines for road construction and soil erosion 
6.6 Develop documented procedures for dealing with chemicals 
6.7 Develop system for dealing with waste management 
7.1 Develop forest management plans according to standard requirements 
7.3 Plan and implement training to forest workers, ensure that staff is qualified to 
perform the tasks relating to their jobs 
7.4 Develop public summary of the forest management plan in case the whole 
management plan is not a publicly available document 
8.1 Develop plan and procedures for monitoring 
8.2 Define indicators for monitoring according to the standard 
8.3 Develop chain of custody procedures 
8.4 Make provisions for the results of monitoring to be taken into account for the 
update of management plans. 
 9.1 Conduct assessment to determine the presence of high conservation attributes 
in the area considered for certification 
9.3. Include measure to protect high conservation value areas in the forest 
management plan 
9.4 Develop monitoring plan with regards to high conservation value forests 
In case plantations are established in the area considered for certification, their management 
should follow the requirements outlined in the FSC Principle 10.
STTA Report –Liviu Amariei, January 2007 
WORKING TOWARDS 
FOREST CERTIFICATION 
IN KOSOVO
Liviu Amariei 15 December 2006
Agenda
1. Objectives and preliminary 
results of the forest 
management evaluation
2. Proposed actions
3. Roadmap to certification
4. Discussion and conclusions
Objectives
• Identify major gaps in forest management
• Identify areas for training in January 2007
• Prepare roadmap for certification of 3 forest areas
1. Preliminary results
Kosovo Forest Agency Two forest areas visited: 
• KFA Peja office (15th and 16th December)
– Deqani forest area (2 forest management units)
• KFA Ferizaj office (17th and 18th
)
– Kaqanik forest area (1 forest management unit)
Other meetings
• Environmental 
Responsibility Action 
(11th Dec.) 
• Scanagri (Pristina, 12th
Dec.)
• Ministry for Agriculture, 
Forest Agency (Pristina, 
13th Dec.)
Major issues to solve 
1. Legal compliance
• Illegal cutting and other uncontrolled activities
• Procurement procedures
2. Ownership rights
• Forest areas belong to Socially Owned Enterprises. 
• Current conditions agreed (MoU) between KTA, Ministry 
of Agriculture and rural Development and UNMIK Legal 
Office
• Conditions unclear (status?)
Major issues to solve (2)
3. Forest management plans
• Expired years ago
• New forest management plans needed for the areas to be 
certified (ca 15,000 Ha)
» Seek funding 
» Find professionals to prepare the fmps
• Current work on 1,200 Ha by Inventory Division (KFA) and 
the Norwegian Forestry Group (NFG), to be extended during 
2007
Proposed actions
1. Legal compliance
• Decision and commitment at highest level
• Prepare and implement a process aimed at eradicating 
illegal acts in forestry (Ministry). Involve public officers at all 
levels, judiciary, police, companies involved in forest 
operations, and local communities
• Demonstrate progress in fighting illegality within a 
reasonable time
Proposed actions (2)
2. Ownership rights
• Clarify the situation 
(MAFRD, KTA and 
UNMIK)
Proposed actions (3)
3. Forest management plans
• Seek funding (own budget, aid agencies, e.g. NFG)
- Use funding from approved 2007 budget for reforestation 
(consult Ministry of Finance, role of KCBS?)
- Search for other budget items in own budget
- Consult with other aid agencies present in Kosovo
• Seek specialists (own team and support from outside, role of 
KCBS?)
Proposed supportive actions
Training and systems development
• KFA Staff training on certification and development of 
the management systems
• KFA Staff training on quality management (ISO 9000) 
and environmental management (ISO 14000)
• Development of management systems (policies, 
procedures, other documentation relating to the 
certification standard
Proposed supportive actions (2)
Launch National Working Group on Forest Certification
(USAID/KCBS, other aid agencies)
• Seek funding 
• Identify all relevant stakeholders
• Ensure balanced participation (economic, social and 
environmental stakeholders), avoid dominance of the process 
by any single stakeholder group
• Training 
• Start working on the development of a national/regional forest 
stewardship standard 
• Seek synergies with similar working groups in Montenegro, 
Croatia, BiH, Serbia, Macedonia
• Get integrated into the European network
Proposed supportive actions (3)
Chain of Custody (USAID/KCBS)
• Support certification of processing companies
• Continue work on market linkages in order to 
enhance demand for good forest management
Roadmap to certification 
1. Address legal compliance in forestry
• Prepare action plan (MAFRD/KFA, 28 February 
2007)
• Implement a process/campaign (MAFRD/KFA, 30 
June 2007)
• Monitor and demonstrate improvement/report 
(MAFRD, 30 September 2007)
2. Ownership rights
• Clarify and document (MAFRD, 30 June 2007)
Roadmap to certification (2)
3. Forest Management Plans & additional documentation
• Clarify funding (MAFRD/KFA, 31 January 2007)
• Prepare new fmps for 15-20,000 Ha (KFA, 30 November 
2007), taking into account certification standard 
requirements in addition to local regulations
• Prepare additional documentation/management system for 
certification (KFA, 30 November 2007, role of KCBS?)
4. National Working Group on forest certification
• Launch national working group (USAID/KCBS,1 April 2007)
• Produce first draft standard using existing standards in the 
region (1 September 2007)
Roadmap to certification (3)
Apply for certification (October 2007), provided 
demonstrated improvement of legal compliance, 
clarified ownership rights and forest management 
plans close to conclusion
Thank you very much for your attention
Additional information 
and clarifications:
Liviu Amariei
+39 329 5728473
liviu@liviu.eu
© 1996 FSC A.C.
Introduction to forest certification 
according to the standards of the 
Forest Stewardship Council 
Liviu Amariei
Pristina
16-17 January 2007
© 1996 FSC A.C. FSC training and capacity building Slide 2
Programme Tuesday 16 
January
‰ 9:30 Introduction
‰ 9:45 Presentation of the participants and 
expectations for the FSC course 
‰ 10:15 Module 1: Forest certification and the 
Forest Stewardship Council 
‰11:00 Coffee break
‰11:15 Module 1: (continuation)
‰13:00 Lunch
‰14:00 Module 2: The FSC Principles and Criteria 
and their use for forest 
certification 
‰15:30 Coffee break
‰15:45 Module 2 (cont.)
‰17:00 End of the day
© 1996 FSC A.C. FSC training and capacity building Slide 3
Programme Wednesday 17 
January
‰ 9:30 The FM certification process
‰10:00 Impacts of FM: exercises
‰11:00 Coffee break
‰11:15 Module 3: Group Certification 
requirements
‰12:00 Module 3: (cont., workshop) 
‰13:00 Lunch 
‰14:00 Module 4: The FSC Chain of 
Custody standards 
‰14:45 Coffee break
‰15:00 Closing session, feedback from 
participants, next steps
‰16:00 End
© 1996 FSC A.C. FSC training and capacity building Slide 4
Thank you very much for 
• Punctuality
• Switching off your cellular phones
• Asking questions anytime
• Active participation during exercises
• Suggestions for improvement
© 1996 FSC A.C. FSC training and capacity building Slide 5
Additional information
Contact:
Liviu Amariei
Consultant to USAID/KCBS 
Via Viterbo 46/1
Manziana (RM) 
CAP 00066 Italy
Tel/Fax: +39 06 99675138
Mobile: +39 329 5728473
E-mail: liviu@liviu.eu
E-mail: l.amariei@fsc.org
© 1996 FSC A.C. FSC training and capacity building Slide 6
Because forests matter