|
Forest management involves a large number of stakeholders
with disparate interests, hopes, expectations and rights.
Many years of efforts to halt deforestation and forest degradation
have not been successful, jeopardising the livelihoods for
large populations that depend on it. To a large extent this
is caused by disagreement between stakeholders on how to manage
the forest and for what, and how to share the benefits and
costs of forest management. As a rule, national level governments
have neglected the needs and concerns of local communities
and forest-dependent people in favour of interests that are
powerful or that benefit the national interests directly.
This does not mean that local populations do not manage their
forests, but that their interests have little weight in national
level decision-making. It is increasingly seen as essential
for local communities to participate in the sustainable use
and successful management of natural resources. In the past,
efforts to protect resources by preventing people from using
them proved to be unsuccessful. Gradually, recognition of
local people's dependence on resources and their interest
in managing these resources has grown, especially in relation
to improving or promoting sustainable livelihoods for the
poorest or disadvantaged groups.
The social components of sustainable forest management emphasise
the roles that forest play in enhancing human well-being.
Human well-being can be enhanced in many different ways, each
with different consequences for the well-being of different
stakeholders. In standards of sustainable forest management,
the target of increasing human well-being is captured in several
criteria and indicators, that should measure to what extent
it is compatible with the objectives of SFM, i.e. that it
is equitable and allows intergeneration access to goods and
benefits. This calls for a participatory approach to forest
management by all stakeholders.
Co-management or participatory management is defined as a
pluralist approach to managing natural resources, incorporating
a variety of partners in a variety of roles, generally to
the end goals of environmental conservation, sustainable use
of natural resources and the equitable sharing of resource-related
benefits and responsibilities. It is a political and cultural
process seeking transparent and equitable negotiated agreement
about natural resource management. Co-management requires
full access to information on relevant issues and options,
freedom and capacity to organise, freedom to express needs
and concerns, a non-discriminative social environment, the
will of partners to negotiate, confidence in the respect of
agreements, etc. Co-management is not a template leading to
a clearly defined state, but requires continuous adaptation
on the basis of new information and changing social and economic
contexts. This gives rise to the concept of adaptive management
which is defined as a management approach that acknowledges
the lack of unequivocal and definitive knowledge of the ways
in which ecosystems work, and the uncertainty that dominates
our interaction with them.
Participation in forest management may take several forms
and it is a matter of debate what is the appropriate degree
and type of participation in different aspects of forest management.
Participation may range from discrete consultation during
the policy formulation and implementation process, through
ongoing representation in decision-making bodies, to co-management
of forests at a local level.
ODI distinguishes different forms of management depending
on the distribution of control and authority over the forest
between communities and the government (based
on the situation in India and Nepal)
Government-managed forests
- Forest Department retain the authority and responsibility
for control and management.
- Priorities are protection of all products having a cash
value; licensing to harvest forest products.
- Local people considered to be a danger to the forest resource
Indigenously managed Forests
- Owned by the government by managed by local people on
their own initiative.
- Forest Departments and the local people each consider
themselves to be the 'owners'.
- Such systems usually associated with patches of natural
forest having clearly defined boundaries and use rights
and strong leadership, but not necessarily elected.
- Highly conservative, protection-oriented systems, using
consensus, sanctions and watchers.
Externally imposed or sponsored forest management
- Legally owned by the government. The impetus for common
management originates from outside the community and is
directed towards resource creation and protection in pursuit
of technical objectives
- Development and management mostly ignored existing indigenous
management systems.
- All physical and financial inputs are supplied, and authority
and control remain with the outside agency, though some
control given to local elected leaders.
- Forests managed by outside agency through appointment
of watchers.
- Infringement is usually punished externally and not through
internal mechanisms.
Joint Forest Management
- Active partnership between forest users and outside agencies.
- Draws on knowledge and experience of both outsiders and
local people to manage forests.
- Focuses on user groups rather than the politico-administrative
unit.
- Development of self-sustaining groups capable of articulating
needs and sourcing services.
In response to failure of existing management arrangements
and the complexity of the web of stakeholder interests, CIFOR
is developing methods and tools for Adaptive and Collaborative
Management (ACM). According to CIFOR, ACM is an approach to
managing forests that seeks to enhance the equity and effectiveness
of management. Undertaking ACM means that the stakeholders
involved make conscious efforts to communicate, collaborate,
negotiate and find opportunities to learn collectively about
the impacts of their actions. Through collective and collaborative
efforts, an ACM approach can speed up the process of transformation
of their policies and practices, and institutions. Because
the changes are based on conscious reflection and consideration
of pooled information, they are more likely to be responsive
to current pressures and future opportunities.
A critical step in managing forests is to identify the various
parties with an interest in forest management and to determine
their rights, responsibilities and objectives. There are always
many stakeholders, within the area where the forests are located
but also far outside. Stakes vary depending on the degree
of proximity to and dependence on the forest, the availability
of alternatives and the power they exert over decisions. Methods
have been developed to identify parties with a legitimate
interest in forests and their resources and chart their stakes.
Another important tool to identify and quantify stakes is
participatory mapping. Participatory monitoring of the implementation
of forest management is important to provide assurance that
the arrangements are implemented fairly and that benefits
are indeed generated.
Joint Forest Management (JFM) is recognised as an example
of an approach whereby the costs and benefits of forest management
have been redistributed between the State and forest users
in India. Joint Forest Management is a concept of developing
partnerships on the basis of mutual trust and jointly defined
roles and responsibilities with regard to forest protection
and development. Under the JFM programme, the user (local
communities) and the owner (government) manage the resource
and share the cost equally. This approach has made promising
impacts on the biophysical and socio-economic environment
of the JFM areas. Currently, it is estimated that over 10
million ha of forest lands are being managed under the JFM
programme through more than 36,000 committees. The devolution
of decision making power to local communities is not complete,
though and the Forest Department still retains much authority
in the relationship.
Participatory forest management is based on a number of assumptions,
which are sometimes disputed, e.g.
- local populations are interested and skilled in sustainable
forest resource use and conservation;
- rural communities are homogeneous and stable;
- local, community-based tenurial, knowledge and management
systems are uniquely suitable for forest management and
conservation.
|
TBI sources
 Hammen,
M.C. van der (1992).El Manejo del
mundo naturalesza y sociedad entre los Yukana de la amazonia
colombiana (Managing the world; nature and society by the Yukuna
of the Colombian Amazonia). |
Berg,
J. van den and Biesbrouck, K. (2000)