General Directorate of Forestry: Evaluation of Forestry Policies

Mahzar DİKER, one of the most respected forestry engineers in our country, identified the fundamental problem of Türkiye’s forestry policy in 1974 as “the lack of continuity in forestry policy”. Unfortunately, Diker’s observation remains valid to this day. The decision-making teams formed at various times to carry out the duties of the General Directorate of Forestry (GDoF) have sought to implement different forestry policy measures. Changes in the decision-making team have led to the implementation of new policy measures. This widespread approach has hindered the planning of a sustainable forestry policy and, more importantly, the establishment of a fundamental forestry policy that transcends political parties. Although each new administration has utilised the junior staff of the previous administration, it has felt the need to formulate distinct forestry policies as a new administration. The senior decision-making staff of the GDoF are appointed by the political authority, contrary to the principle of meritocracy. Consequently, new decision-making teams have sought to formulate forestry policies they believed would secure their own acceptance. Management teams formed in the absence of meritocracy will be unable to develop forestry implementation policies that the entire organisation can embrace through democratic, transparent and participatory approaches. Consequently, forestry implementation policies are dictated from the top down. Policies developed from the bottom up cannot be put in place. Consequently, the acceptance rate of current policies amongst the Forest Enterprise Directorate Managers (FEDM) and Forest Enterprise Chiefs (FEC) who are responsible for implementing these policies is low. This, in turn, has a negative impact on work efficiency. This study was conducted to prioritise the GDoF’s current forestry policy implementations by the FEDM and FEC across different Forest Regional Directorates. The survey covered 19 FEDM and FEC units within the scope of various Forest Regional Directorates affiliated with the GDoF. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with a total of 111 staff members. An R-WOT analysis was carried out using a total of 21 sub-criteria, with seven for each forestry policy implementation. As a result, the ‘forest conservation’ policy ranked first. This was followed, in order, by the ‘policy on the utilisation of forest products and services’ and the ‘policy on forest development and expansion’. The analyses also identified three main groups. Each main group was further subdivided into sub-groups. The most important forestry policy implementation criterion for the first group was “Carrying out forest fire prevention, suppression and restoration work at a more technical level (Forest Conservation Policies1)”. Findings and recommendations were developed for all sub-criteria within the first group.