［Contribution］Forestry Technology and Forest Technology Must Develop into Technology Industries.

Jung Gyu-won, President of the Korea Forest Technicians Association

Recently, the carbon neutrality 2050 policy in the forestry sector was announced, raising controversies over environmental damage caused by logging projects and legal interpretation issues regarding the construction sector and business domains in projects such as natural recreation forests and urban forests. In particular, with the full revision of the 「Forest Resources Act」 forthcoming, there is a growing demand for reviewing and improving new directions in the field of forest technology.

The 「Forest Resources Act」 is related to laws such as the 「Forest Technology Act」, 「Timber Act」, 「Forest Promotion Act」, and 「Carbon Act」, and especially, as the parent law of the forest technology field, it requires close attention. Forest technologists empathize with the urgent demands for change in this critical field and recognize that there are important matters to be carefully observed during the legislative amendment process.

We foresters always use the terms ‘forestry technology’ and ‘forest technology’ for the skills needed in forestry, but unfortunately, ‘forestry’ is not defined in the 「Framework Act on Forest」, and its definition can only be found in the 「Act on the Promotion of Forestry and Mountain Villages」.

Forestry includes forest management (including the creation or management and operation of natural recreation forests, arboretums, and gardens under the 「Act on Forest Culture and Recreation」 and the 「Act on the Establishment and Promotion of Arboretums and Gardens」), production of forest products, distribution and processing of forest products, wild bird breeding, and related industries such as bonsai production, landscaping, and tree planting services.

However, the technology for practicing ‘forestry’ as mentioned in the 「Forest Promotion Act」 can only be conceptually found in Article 24 of the 「Framework Act on Forest」 under the clause ‘Promotion of Forestry Technology’, and it is not explicitly detailed in the 「Forest Resources Act」 or the 「Forest Promotion Act」. The 「Framework Act on Forest」 states, “The state and local governments shall establish and implement necessary policies such as research, development, and dissemination of forestry technology to enhance the competitiveness of forestry and increase the added value of forest products.”

Moreover, the ‘forestry technology’ in the 「Framework Act on Forest」 is limited to technologies necessary to enhance forestry competitiveness and increase the added value of forest products, which can be seen as a narrow concept. Here, forestry technology can be defined as ‘technology intended for workers and management necessary for forest owners’ management.’

Technologies necessary to enhance competitiveness can be interpreted as foundational technologies such as seeds, afforestation, thinning, harvesting, and forest road construction, while technologies for increasing the added value of forest products include wood processing and short-term income forest products. Unfortunately, the ‘technology for forestry’ as we know it does not seem to have room for broader interpretation under the 「Framework Act on Forest」.

For example, projects such as ecological restoration, conservation, forest trails, healing forests, forest camping sites, forest tourism, experience programs, urban forests, fine dust management, carbon sinks management, biomass collection, and street trees cannot be considered as included in forestry technology. Furthermore, recent disputes over business domains with other sectors and projects for public interest management are legally ambiguous to be regarded as ‘forestry technology,’ which is the author’s conclusion.

Forest technology companies on the ground that issue and receive orders for projects demand a solid legal basis and clear concepts for our forest technology. Of course, these projects are specified in the 「Forest Technology Act」 in terms of company business domains and the roles of technologists, but it is still insufficient.

Article 34 of the 「Forest Resources Act」 refers to ‘forestry technology’ as ‘forest science and technology.’ However, this seems distant from practical field technology. The ‘forest science and technology’ specified in the 「Forest Resources Act」 appears to be far from the concept of forestry technology used by general field forest technologists in their work.

This is because forest science and technology in the law is a comprehensive concept that includes long-term research projects and the transfer of large-scale field technologies. It is reasonable to call the subordinate concept ‘forest technology.’ However, this also seems problematic. The 「Framework Act on Forest」 defines ‘promotion of forest technology,’ and the 「Forest Resources Act」 defines ‘forest science and technology,’ so in reality, forest technology can be considered more comprehensive.

However, in reality, ‘forest science and technology’ has enormous budgets and policies, while ‘forest technology’ relatively lacks accompanying policies and budgets. Even though the 「Forest Technology Act」 has been enacted and enforced, nothing has changed. Therefore, it is practical to organize the technology underlying all forest projects and related businesses as ‘forest technology’ following ‘forest science and technology,’ and to define technology including production and processing of timber and short-term forest products as ‘forestry technology.’

The 「Forest Technology Act」 defines “forest technology” as follows: 1) “Forest projects” refer to projects conducted in forests to maintain, develop, or restore forest functions such as forest creation, nurturing, utilization, disaster prevention, recovery, and restoration, as well as projects related to the creation and management of urban forests, living forests, street trees, and arboretums. 2) Technologies related to planning, investigation, design, implementation, supervision, safety inspection and safety analysis of forest projects, development and operation of forestry machinery, feasibility review of forest technology, information processing of forest technology, progress analysis, and unit cost estimation of forest projects.

In other words, all technologies necessary for forestry projects are defined as ‘forest technology.’ Forest technology goes beyond the scope of ‘forestry technology’ defined in the 「Framework Act on Forest」 to include foundational and related technologies for forest projects. This includes material research and production industries for projects, construction method development and material industries for safety, development and manufacturing industries for forestry machinery, electronic software industries for information processing, and especially cooperative projects with other sectors such as arboretums, gardens, urban forests, and forest restoration projects. This can truly be called an industry.

Therefore, the author wants to define the roles and production-inducing activities of all companies in the technical sector engaged in consulting and construction as a ‘technology industry.’ To achieve this, several issues must be resolved.

First, the 「Framework Act on Forest」 needs to include the concept of ‘forest technology’ within ‘forestry technology.’ If it cannot be specified in the basic law, it should be stated in the upcoming full revision of the 「Forest Resources Act」. The 「Forest Resources Act」 defines concepts such as ‘forest resources’ and ‘forest projects.’ The proposed amendment to the 「Forest Resources Act」 currently under discussion suggests specifying the entities performing forest projects and defining their activities as a ‘technology industry.’ The current 「Forest Technology Act」 enacted in 2018 is a technology promotion law and is insufficient to define the technology industry and the fundamental rights of industry participants.

In other sectors, the 「Construction Industry Basic Act」 introduces the definition of the construction industry and defines construction and construction consulting as a ‘technology industry.’ Construction includes civil engineering, architecture, industrial facilities, landscaping, and environmental facility construction, while consulting includes investigation, design, supervision, project management, and maintenance. The electrical and cultural heritage sectors have similar systems despite different names.

In our field, it is desirable to define the activities of all companies related to technology as the ‘forest technology industry’ and for the state to foster it to enhance domestic and international competitiveness.

Second, active support policies are needed for forest technology research and development projects specified in the 「Forest Technology Act」, and technologies across forest projects must have high applicability in the field. The technology sector should be able to develop, systematize, and institutionalize technologies directly used in the field.

Also, the satisfaction with the results after technology development must be high. Satisfaction is judged by field applicability and economic feasibility and must meet public expectations. The reality is that technology development and field technology are separate, and no one is aware of this problem. Almost all technology development projects are supported only to research institutes like the Korea Forest Research Institute and universities, limiting voluntary participation from the technology sector and reducing the efficiency and timeliness of applying developed technologies in the field.

Other sectors invest long periods and large funds to ensure technology development is solid at the basics before applying ICT, advanced, smart, and applied technologies in the field. However, our reality is different. We must understand the level, scale, and characteristics of our forest technology, develop it to suit excellent markets, and apply it in the field. Blindly following other sectors will widen the gap with field technology and result in unusable technologies.

Currently, forest technology lacks an institutional foundation to accept research results in the field, and the small scale of projects makes it difficult to apply developed technologies. Also, there is a shortage of scaled companies and technologists in the technology sector to adopt and use these technologies.

Finally, efforts to secure competitiveness in the technology sector are needed from both policy and industry. Policies should include systems for selecting and nurturing field technologies. It should be reviewed which machines are actually used in forest tending, afforestation, and logging projects, and what investigation equipment, field offices, and computer programs are used when planning and designing projects. The Korea Forest Service should select excellent field technologies through a comprehensive survey of forest technology and prepare active measures to certify them within the institutional framework.

The industry urgently needs to secure technologists and scale companies capable of performing not only resource creation and nurturing technologies but also urban forests, natural recreation forests, environment, and landscape projects comprehensively. Moreover, comprehensive forest project companies capable of planning, designing, and construction should be established by pooling internal capabilities, and policies should provide institutional improvements and nurturing plans.

Additionally, consulting businesses require the introduction of a system for comprehensive consulting capable of performing overall planning such as basic plans, project management, environmental management, and safety management. In the construction sector, the introduction of comprehensive companies capable of all forest projects is necessary. Currently, comprehensive consulting businesses lack exclusive business domains. This will minimize the entry of other sectors into the forest technology field and foster fair competition capabilities.

Therefore, although late, everyone must unite and strive to restore the forestry and forest technology industry to its rightful place. Forest technology must become the foundation for forest owners’ forest management and national public-interest forestry management. Only then can forest technology be expected to lead future-oriented industries such as forest sector New Deal projects, carbon zero projects, forest culture, education, and healing.

We look forward to the introduction and revitalization of the concept of the forest technology industry.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.