Dear Readers,
The last decade has seen a sea-change in attitudes. Today it is hardly possible
to conceive of any tropical forest being managed without some kind of involvement
by local people. This can range from joint forest management schemes in which
state foresters still play a dominant role to situations in which decision-making
power is fully devolved to indigenous people. But what constitutes successful
participatory forest management? Although popular and recognised as being the
most promising way to ensure that forests are conserved while continuing to meet
the needs of the poor, implementation of the concept of participatory forest management
(PFM) is still lagging far behind the optimistic rhetoric.
As illustrated by the contributions in this issue from Africa, Asia and Latin
America, effective PFM still faces many challenges. Examples from India show that,
even after several years of implementation, many community members are unaware
of the Joint Forest Management schemes in their villages. This lack of involvement
is particularly true in the case of women, whose participation needs to be promoted
more actively with training and exchanges of experience between communities. Successful
implementation must recognise and work with traditional social structures. This
means that there is no simple PFM model that can be copied from one project to
another - rather it is necessary in every case to be aware of local power systems
and to identify all stakeholders with their often conflicting agendas. In particular
we need a better understanding of the costs and benefits of PFM to each group
of stakeholders in order to be able to provide the appropriate incentives for
them to participate more actively.
While there has been much focus on the socio-economic and institutional challenges
facing PFM, we should not forget the more technical silvicultural issues. Many
PFM projects begin with a focus on a relatively passive use of forest products,
predominantly for subsistence. We now need to take the next step and help communities
move towards more active forest management to meet both subsistence and commercial
needs. The use of simple software and technology such as aerial photos can help
to combine qualitative and quantitative information, providing resource information
relevant to communities' needs at the same time as presenting it in a form acceptable
to forest administrations.
The greatest need perhaps is for better communication. At the level of individual
PFM projects this means better dialogue between scientific research and the often
very detailed indigenous knowledge available amongst local people. At a regional
level, networking of communities involved in PFM can help to ensure the sustainability
of the system by providing support and locally relevant information. Finally,
at the global level, as this issue shows, we are seeing a very rapid accumulation
of PFM experience. It is essential that we continue to share this information,
assess it constructively, and find more ways of making it available to the growing
number of foresters and communities embarking on PFM activities.
Kate Schreckenberg, Overseas Development Institute, United Kingdom
We are grateful to Kate Schreckenberg for editing this issue of the ETFRN News.
Please note the themes and deadlines for the next issues on the back cover and
I look forward to receiving your contributions.
Willemine Brinkman
ETFRN Coordination Unit
c/o The Tropenbos Foundation
PO Box 232, 6700 AE Wageningen
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 317495516
Fax: +31 317495521
Email: etfrn@iac.agro.nl
Http://www.etfrn.org/etfrn
Editor: Willemine Brinkman
Guest Editor for this issue: Kate Schreckenberg
Editorial assistance: Evelyn Whyte
