Consensus? Using the term non-timber or non-wood forest products is determined by the objective of the paper. The main difference between the two is that non-wood excludes (in most cases) fuelwood and construction materials for local use. When for instance one concentrates on the commercial feasability of sustainable extraction of non-timber or non-wood forest products for distant markets, it is clear that the sustainable and commercial extraction of fuelwood is highly unlikely and one should use the term non-wood forest products. But when focus- sing on the importance of extraction for rural development non-timber seems to be preferred. Non-timber is used by among others de Beer & McDermott (1989), Panayoutou & Ashton (1992), Wickens (1991), Lamb (1991), Godoy (1992) and Falconer (1992). It is the most preferred. Non-wood is used by among others May (1991), Okafor (1991), Peters et al. (1989) and Flint (1992). FAO and CIFOR prefer non-wood forest products. To include on the list of "things" from the forest: extractive commodities, renewable forest productions (including timber) and by-products. Rick Dubbeldam Tropenbos Foundation PO Box 232 6700 AE Wageningen The Netherlands e-mail: Tropenbos@IAC.Agro.NL
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0