Since the 1990s, the forest administration has made a radical shift in its focus from economic growth to environmental issues. While the practive of forestry requires a constant adjustment to the globalization, the forest administration is currently facing a series of problems. (1) The forest administration has not fully overcome the enormous confusion that followed the worldwide shift in resources from the natural forests to the artificial plantation and the "regenerated second growth". (2) As a result of the decades of dealing with the expansion of domestic demand, the forestry and wood industry are yet to establish the "net formation of the opposite regionalization". (3) The forest administration is in short of a consistent survey (and lack of manpower, for that matter) on the intricate relationship between the forest farmers and the employed workers. Thus, the innovation policy is being lost in direction at many different levels. (4) The role of the forest administration is still unclear in the context of regional policy. Especially, the life condition of local mountain villages has deteriorated through years, due to a persistent poverty. With an increasing number of aspiring workers and tourists from urban areas, however, there is a clear indication of "interactivity", which the administration is expected to take for granted, in the hope of future benefit for mountain villages. In the course of globalization, the policy making for the forestry has gradually deemphasized the "hierarchical governance" of the forest administration. There is an urgent need for a critical assessment of the economic dependence on the forestry in the local areas and its social and cultural consequences, in addition to attempts to involve local communities and private sectors on a daily basis to provide more innovative approaches to sustainable forestry development.
View full abstract