RESEARCHABLE CONSTRAINTS IN PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT
by Anna Lawrence and Kate Green
This research was funded by the Department of International Development's Forestry
Research Programme (FRP) through project ZF0118. However, the views expressed
in this article are entirely those of the authors, and are not necessarily shared
by DFID.
In 1999 the Forestry Research Programme (FRP) of the UK's Department for International
Development (DFID) commissioned AERDD (Agricultural Extension and Rural Development
Department, University of Reading) to survey and analyse the researchable constraints
encountered in a range of participatory forest management (PFM) projects. 'Researchable
constraints' are interpreted as constraints that can be overcome by the creation
of new knowledge, or improved access to and application of existing knowledge.
Furthermore, in the context of FRP's interests, the focus was on constraints that
have benefits for the livelihoods of the poor.
The survey used an open questionnaire approach, combined with scores attached
to priorities for research. An initial questionnaire distributed to key informants
(KIs) was modified and distributed to research collaborators in Bolivia, Brazil,
India, Nepal, Philippines and Tanzania, who interviewed staff and forest users
in selected PFM projects. The complementary qualitative and quantitative approaches
allowed issues to be identified, discussed and evaluated despite the distance
and number of respondents involved.
Overall, a total of 165 questionnaires were completed: 45 from key informants,
59 from project staff and 61 from forest users. The results from these show that
the top four broad issues prioritised by respondents are communication and
extension, organisation and partnerships, silviculture, and sustainability.
However there were marked differences between different groups of stakeholders.
For example, silviculture was a higher priority at local level (project staff
and forest users) than at international level (KIs) and the high priority accorded
to benefit distribution by KIs was not echoed by local respondents.
There were also some key differences between countries, notably a high priority
given to market research in Bolivia and Brazil, where communication was not rated
highly (reflecting a preoccupation with management for commercial timber production);
and in Tanzania a high priority for conflict management and tenure contrasted
with the low priority given to silviculture (reflecting the fact that most of
the projects surveyed were in protected areas).
The most significant result is the very high level of agreement among different
stakeholders from different countries, that communication constraints are both
widespread and researchable. This is an issue which links in with many others,
notably policy (low awareness at field level, lack of consultation at policy-making
level); silviculture (poor dissemination and implementation of research results);
and benefit distribution (related to monitoring and evaluation of participation
and benefits). These problems are closely tied to the most frequent comments made
in the questionnaires, that project staff lack appropriate extension tools and
methods for PFM.
High importance was attached by respondents to organisation, with comments indicating
that this relates strongly to interactions between partners in PFM. There is a
need for a more comprehensive study to document the pros and cons of different
institutional interactions, and their suitability within different social and
political contexts.
The difference of opinion between KIs and local respondents over the priority
for silvicultural research is an important one, and indicates a disjunction between
field experience and international opinion. We interpret this as a need not only
for better dissemination of existing silvicultural methods and practice, but perhaps
more importantly, a need for methodological guidelines on local adaptation of
silvicultural practice, and experimentation with cultivation of lesser-known indigenous
species and Non-Timber Forest Products. The different problems associated with
silviculture identified in the various countries suggest that research to develop
such guidelines would need to take place in a range of countries, not only India
and Nepal where such methods are currently most advanced. Furthermore, responses
suggest that the methodology should not make rigid assumptions about the type
of forest resource to be managed, as distinctions between 'community forest',
'private forest' and 'farm trees' may discourage interest in improved tree management.
Analysis of the cross-cutting issues raises the importance of monitoring and evaluation
as an issue for research, by linking it with organisation/partnership and stakeholder
collaboration; policy implementation and transparency of decision-making; and
benefit distribution. These are all issues that need particular attention if existing
resource distribution patterns are to be modified to strengthen the access of
the poor to natural capital. Pluralistic methods will be required both to ensure
that benefits of PFM are available to the poor, and to make more visible the decisions
(and the effect of decisions) taken by more powerful actors.
Finally markets appear to be a particularly high priority in the South American
countries included in the study, reflecting the generally higher commercial value
of forests brought under local management in those countries. The emphasis on
sustainable timber production there contrasts with the other focus countries and
draws attention again to the need for PFM strategies to be adapted to local contexts.
Elsewhere, however, income generation is an issue widely considered to be neglected
in PFM policy and project design.
The study provided an opportunity to understand perceptions of research by PFM
practitioners, and suggests that conventional research is held in low regard by
many field workers who see it as irrelevant, external and long-term. The value
of such research is further undermined by poor dissemination of its results. Such
views are linked to the traditional model of research which KIs in particular
distinguish from action research; they advocate the latter for its ability to
respond to locally identified problems, adapt to emerging results and empower
participants.
The analysis of results concluded by outlining five key areas where FRP can effectively
address the knowledge constraints identified in the study: developing communication
and extension guidelines for PFM; developing participatory silvicultural research
methodologies; testing the role of participatory forest resource assessment in
facilitating government approval of management plans; developing and enhancing
the use of pluralistic M&E methods in PFM; and developing guidelines for the structure
and management of organisations and partnerships in PFM.
For further information please contact:
Dr Anna Lawrence, Snr Research Associate
Centre for Natural Resources and Development
Green College, University of Oxford
Woodstock Rd, Oxford OX2 6HG
United Kingdom
Email: anna.lawrence@green.oxford.ac.uk
Tel:+44 1865 284796, Fax: +44 1865 274796
Kate Green, Research Fellow
AERDD, University of Reading
3 Earley Gate, Whiteknights Road
Reading RG6 6AR
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 118 9316514
Fax: +44 118 9261244 Email: k.m.green@reading.ac.uk
FOREST GOVERNANCE AND LOCAL INSTITUTIONS: KARNATAKA, INDIA
by Adrian Martin
This project is a study of a participatory forestry project in the Western Ghats
of Karnataka, South India. The Karnataka Forest Department, in partnership with
the British government's international aid programme, has implemented a policy
of Joint Forest Planning and Management (JFPM) which involves local people sharing
responsibility for the protection and improvement of their local forests. This
study concentrates on the institutional basis of this new policy by focusing on
the development of Village Forest Committees. These committees consist of villagers
as well as representatives from the Forest Department. They are responsible for
producing forest management plans, organising plantation, harvesting and protection
works, and distributing benefits. Fifty percent of the products from designated
forests go to the Village Forest Committee and in this way it has the potential
to become self-financing and sustainable.
The first phase of the project involved interviews in seven villages, in the districts
of Uttara Kannada and Dakshina Kannada. Interviews were qualitative and explored
the ways in which local people perceived and responded to the ongoing changes
in the management of local resources. The project focused on some of the least
powerful communities, explaining the causes of their vulnerabilities and the ways
in which policy implementation both limited and exacerbated their personal risks.
The implementation of JFPM was encountering several problems. Research found that
the policy encountered the greatest obstacles where its implementation overlooked
vernacular systems of power, and where there was the greatest cultural and spatial
distance between villagers and the implementing agents. Whilst there was some
evidence of target and process-oriented successes, there were also many incidences
of local behaviour that ran counter to the project objectives. Failure to understand
the local context of forest use often meant that the project was not liked by
some groups of villagers and led to low participation rates and even destructive
activities. Communication was also a big problem. In some villages, the majority
of people knew nothing of JFPM despite the fact that the Village Forest Committee
had been running for three or four years. Women were particularly likely to be
excluded from participation.
The first phase of the field research was completed in 1997, four years after
JFPM was introduced into the villages, and at a time when many 'teething problems'
were still coming to light. I now want to conduct a second phase of this project.
The first objective of this is to add a longitudinal aspect to the study, such
that the operation of Village Forest Committees will have been researched in the
same villages at periods of four and eight years after project implementation.
I am hopeful that this will provide valuable information about the dynamics of
local institutional development and the process of building the capacity for local
governance. Such detailed, longitudinal case-work is vital to understanding the
complex situations in which participatory management is introduced. The first
phase was mainly written up as a PhD thesis and I am currently negotiating a book
contract for writing up the combined, longitudinal findings.
I am also hoping that a second objective can be introduced into phase two of this
study, by linking up with individuals and groups who have been conducting similar
research in other areas. This might involve a synthesis of previous research,
new research work or an edited volume that brings together a number of works.
For further information, please contact:
Dr. Adrian Martin, Human Geography
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
De Montfort University
37 Lansdowne Road
Bedford MK40 3TX, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 1234 793408
Fax: +44 1234 350833
Email: amartin@dmu.ac.uk
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN NORTHEASTERN THAILAND - A CASE
STUDY
by Rainer Schwarzmeier and Franz Heidhues
The Setting
The following research project was carried out within the framework of a PhD Programme
on 'Socio-Economic Aspects of Forest Use in the Tropics and Subtropics' at the
Albert-Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Germany. Within this programme, empirical
research was conducted by twelve PhD students in Thailand and Venezuela. The study
reported here also contributed to a Thai research programme on 'The Ecology and
the Socio-economic Importance of Community Forests in North East Thailand' coordinated
by the Rural Development Institute of Khon Kaen University and financed by the
Ministry of Science and Environment.
Background In the early 1990s, Thailand's Government launched an ambitious but widely
criticised 'Forest Programme' to protect the remaining forest and to rehabilitate
degraded forest areas. The 1993 Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan stated that the
country should maintain 40% of its total land area as forest.
In recent years several community forest bills have been introduced and have been
widely discussed by governmental organisations, NGOs, academics and farmers' organisations.
Even though the ideas of these organisations still differ on many points, there
seems to be a growing consensus that the protection and management of natural
forests should also be carried out at village community level.
Research Topic The research project investigated the socio-economic importance of community
forests for rural villages and their contribution to the household/village economy.
Its objective is to qualitatively and quantitatively analyse the diversity and
intensity of community forest use at household and village level, and to identify
factors that determine community forest use. The following specific issues were
addressed:
The socio-economic contribution of community forest products/activities
to the household/village economy;
A comparative analysis of alternative socio-economic activities at household/village
level;
The specific interests of village groups in the community forest;
Which measures/activities are preconditions for sustainable 'Community forest
programmes'.
Research Methods
The field research took place in the southern part of Northeast Thailand. The
main research site for the case study was the Non-Yai Community Forest in the
District of Potisrisouan, Sri Sa Ket Province. This community forest exemplifies
a kind of 'forest development' typical for the northeastern part of Thailand in
which the rehabilitation of severely degraded forests is assured by locally initiated
community forest projects/activities.
The research was carried out primarily by applying standardised quantitative and
qualitative interviews at household level. These interviews took place on several
occasions during the field research phase and followed the seasonal working schedules
of the households (farmers). Where appropriate, interviews were supplemented and
cross-checked with other techniques like RRA and PRA which were also used to gather
information on the relationship between village-level socio-economic factors and
community forest activities.
Expected Results
The project aimed to contribute to the ongoing discussion on whether and how community
forests can be an integral part in forest policies and contribute to the protection
and management of forest resources in both the short and long-term.
The Non-Yai Community Forest is described as Mixed Decidious Forest and covers
about 350 ha within an area of 2,700 ha which were declared a National Forest
Reserve in 1971, several decades after most of the area had been cleared for agricultural
use. More than a decade ago five villages decided to stop farming their fields
and restore a natural forest area under their close supervision. The decision
was in part the result of external pressure as the land was earmarked for a eucalyptus
plantation under private, village-external control, as well as internal concerns
that the land might not be suitable for long term agricultural use due to its
poor conditions and the need for non-timber forest products respectively.
Nowadays a community forest committee with ten representatives of each village
is responsible for the supervision of the community forest area which is conducted
with support by the Sri Sa Ket Provincial Office of the Royal Forest Department.
The main concerns of the villagers are unresolved problems regarding their land
titles, the insecure status of the community forest and questions regarding the
use of community forest products.
The preliminary results of the research project indicate that villages with community
forests have a wide array of income-generating activities to choose from, the
outcome being a balance between forest dependent and non-forest dependent activities.
Products used from the forest can be classified as food (mushrooms, roots, vegetables,
fruits or insects), herbal medicine and fuelwood. The use of forest land as grazing
area is steadily declining. There seems to be a growing demand for construction
wood. Limitations are the lack of trees with usable size and government regulations
that prohibit logging. Most of the products are collected for self-consumption.
Distribution or marketing of community forest products plays a minor role and
in most cases takes place within the villages.
The collection of minor forest products tends to be on the decline for households
with access to secure and attractive income generating activities. However, farmers
with limited access to these activities, due to moderate land holdings, lack of
education and or ageing family demographic structures, still depend on community
forest activities. If the community forest concept is to be a successful measure
in restoring Thailand's forests, it seems to be necessary to increase the economic
attraction of community forests. Preconditions include secure land rights for
villages on their community forest land and regulations that allow the implementation
of sustainable forest management measures.
For further information, contact:
Rainer Schwarzmeier
Institute for Agricultural Economics and
Social Sciences in the Tropics and Subtropics
University of Hohenheim (490a)
70593 Stuttgart, Germany
Email: rschwarz@uni-hohenheim.de
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF STAKEHOLDER INCENTIVES IN PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT
by Jonathan Davies and Michael Richards
This research was funded by the Department of International Development's Forestry
Research Programme (FRP) through project R6914. However, the views expressed in
this article are entirely those of the authors, and are not necessarily shared
by DFID.
Project objective It is widely recognised that tropical forestry without participation is generally
unsustainable. Experience shows that the poor understanding of the costs and benefits
to different stakeholders, and their incentives, limits the capacity to identify
effective project interventions. Socio-economic impact assessment has also been
weak. Such problems result partly from the lack of appropriate economic methodologies
for use throughout the project cycle. The main objective of this research will
be to prepare a manual containing a toolbox of economic methodologies based upon
a literature review and field case studies. In-country training will build capacity
in the use of the manual.
Project activities A literature review was carried out prior to the field cases. The review suggested
that economic methods have tended to be applied in a top-down fashion, with bias
towards global and national stakeholders and relative neglect of equity, livelihood
and institutional issues. The use of conventional economic tools has been greater
in project preparation than in later stages of the 'project cycle'. Nonetheless,
there is potential to combine these conventional tools with participatory research
methods. An 'economic stakeholder analysis' methodology was outlined, and elements
tested in the case studies. (Jonathan Davies and Michael Richards, 1999, 'The
Use of Economics to Assess Stakeholder Incentives in Participatory Forest Management:
A Review', See Publications section of this issue for details).
Fieldwork has been carried out in Nepal, Ghana, Zimbabwe, Mexico and Bolivia.
In Nepal a methodology was developed to enable forest user groups to assess for
themselves the changing costs and benefits associated with the introduction of
community forestry. A study was made of the economic incentives to tend trees
on cocoa farms in Ghana. In Zimbabwe a head-to-head comparison of participatory
and conventional methods was undertaken in relation to the Ilala palm. (Richards,
M., Davies, J. & Cavendish, W. 1999. Is PRA better than neo-classical tools in
the collection of economic data? A non-timber forest product case study from Zimbabwe.
PLA Notes 36: 34-40). The Mexican study looked at the current incentives for forest
management from the point of view of forest communities for timber and non-timber
forest products (chicle). In Bolivia a study was made of the returns to alternative
land use practices for colonist farmers, including the management of small forest
blocks.
The manual and in-country training will be completed during 2000.
For further information contact:
Michael Richards
Forest Policy and Environment Group
Overseas Development Institute
Portland House, Stag Place
London SW1E 5DP, United Kingdom
Tel:+44 20 7393 1600,Fax: +44 20 7393 1699
Email: m.richards@odi.org.uk
THE DYNAMIC OF CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT AMONGST THE BULU: PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE
RESPONSES TO AN ICDP IN THE DJA RESERVE, SOUTHERN CAMEROON
by Hilary Solly
Anthropological research was undertaken over an 18-month period in a village in
The Dja Reserve, South Cameroon amongst the Bulu population (who belong to the
basaa-beti (béti-fan) ethnic group). The Reserve, created in 1950, occupies
some 530,000 hectares of tropical forest. Since 1992 it has been jointly managed
by ECOFAC (Conservation et Utilisation Rationelle des Ecosystèmes Forestiers
en Afrique Centrale), a project funded by DG Development of the European Commission,
and MINEF (Ministère de l'Environnement et des Forêts). The project
is one of an increasing number of Integrated Conservation and Development Projects
(ICDPs). One of its main concerns is the control of commercial bushmeat hunting
which is seen as a major threat to maintaining biodiversity in the Reserve.
The research is now being written up as a PhD thesis, which will:
Describe and analyse the different perspectives of the stakeholders involved
in the Dja Reserve conservation and development project (local population,
members of the elite, local administration, national government, national
and international NGOs, European Delegation, Commission and Parliament, etc).
Demonstrate the impact the different concepts and attitudes held by stakeholders
have on their relations with an Integrated Conservation and Development Programme
(ICDP).
Argue that these different attitudes amongst stakeholders need to be understood
and taken into account when planning and running an ICDP.
It will look at all stakeholders (local, national and international), but due
to the nature of the study (the majority of the research took place in the village
of Mekas in the Reserve) the focus will be on the local Bulu village population.
A major part of the thesis will be an understanding of their history, culture
and economy, placed within the context of the regional, national and global systems.
The work is based on the following hypotheses:
The social, economic, historical and cultural backgrounds of the local population
in the project area have a major influence on the management of the protected
area.
The various stakeholders implicated in ICDPs have different perceptions,
priorities and expectations of these projects. This leads to a conflict of
interests and ideas between, and at times within, these different groups.
The Main Research Question: Conservation and development projects are failing to achieve their objective
of successfully integrating conservation and development programmes to the satisfaction
of the local population, national government and international donors. Why?
Discussion will circulate around the following themes and issues:
The history of Bulu relations with Europeans/Europe and the question of
power.
The consequences of living in an 'unjust system' and the question of corruption.
Differing visions of development (Local, National and International).
Differing visions of conservation (Local, National and International).
Traditional systems and the limits placed on development and change.
Since its outset, the project managing the Dja Reserve (ECOFAC), has talked of
the importance of involving all stakeholders and particularly the local population
in the management process. However, now in its ninth year and preparing its third
phase, relations with the wide range of stakeholders are becoming increasingly
complex. Genuine participatory management is not a simple process and involves
a huge amount of work with few visible results. The thesis will attempt to describe
the complexity of the situation, explaining the pressure that the project is under
in order to satisfy the different stakeholders needs as well as the errors they
have made on the way.
As is so often the case, it is the local population - supposedly those who should
be benefiting the most from the project - who end up being the most disadvantaged.
In this case, losing the freedom to hunt and sell bushmeat and yet having no equivalent
alternative form of income. At the same time the local population should not be
seen as innocent victims. The situation is highly politicised and certain members
of the local population are more than willing to play their role in this game.
The argument of the thesis is not one of villains and victims but rather the need
to understand the multi-layered and multifaceted nature of the situation.
This research was funded and undertaken as part of APFT (Avenir des Peuples des
Forêts Tropicales), a multidisciplinary project funded by the DG Development
of the European Commission.
For further information contact:
Hilary Solly
60 Ave de la Brabançonne
Bruxelles 1000, Belgium
Tel: +322 734 68 32
Email: hilsolly@yahoo.com
PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANS IN THE
MIDDLE CAQUETA REGION OF THE COLOMBIAN AMAZON
by Carlos Rodriguez
Forests are now perceived in a much more holistic manner, with less focus on timber
exploitation and more on their ecological and conservation role and their importance
as a source of multiple uses, including non-timber forest products. This shift
in perception has highlighted social factors and the role of local communities
in resource management, leading to the development of new ideas around the concept
of participatory forest management.
In Colombia the role of indigenous communities in the management of forests has
acquired great importance and has been recognised by the government through the
creation of indigenous territories with a collective property right. At the same
time the importance of traditional management for conservation of the amazonian
forest has been recognised.
In order to contribute to knowledge about indigenous management models, an interdisciplinary
and intercultural research project has been carried out within the framework of
Tropenbos Colombia to study indigenous forest management along the Middle and
Lower Caqueta River. This article presents some of the insights gained so far,
including the role of traditional knowledge and its current status, the use of
participatory research methodologies, the role and applicability of scientific
research, the dialogue between different knowledge systems and the generation
of education materials on the management of the forest and its resources.
Traditional management: forests for life
One of the most remarkable aspects of indigenous communities is their extensive
knowledge of the forest based on complex symbolic models developed through detailed
observation over many generations. The perception of the forest as a human being
gives rise to a whole set of relationships with plants and animals which, as natural
beings, are seen as 'people' and therefore thought of in social terms.
Indigenous communities see the forest as the home and source of life and their
relationship with nature is therefore ruled by a whole set of ecological principles
which ensure the continuity of forest cover. The use of resources takes place
within a context of recycling of vital energy between all living beings. Care
is taken to avoid accumulation as the resulting imbalance would cause illness
and death.
Interventions in the forest are carried out in the context of permanent ecological
restoration, an indicator of which is the excellent state of the forests in indigenous
territories. These traditional principles of interaction with the forest are being
seriously affected. Contact with the western world and market economy has provoked
substantial changes in human settlement patterns, use of the territory and of
its resources.
Current management of the forest and its resources
Taking into account the differences between the traditional patterns of use, management
and control of natural resources, and the present situation, it has been necessary
to generate new approaches in order to understand current resource use. Through
its project, Indigenous Management of the Forest, Tropenbos Colombia has, therefore,
been developing participatory methodologies for a quantitative study of resource
use at the level of indigenous communities, in order to provide the information
needed for the design and implementation of resource management plans.
One of the project's greatest successes has been the development with local communities
of a participatory research methodology, based on daily consumption diaries which
record information on agricultural activities, hunting, fishing and gathering
of forest products. Recording is carried out by members of each household in a
process co-ordinated by the traditional leader of the ethnic group. The results
are discussed with the communities in local workshops and have generated a wide
debate on the use of the resources. This has inspired a process of recovering
traditional knowledge about consumption norms, the role of seasonal changes and
the traditional calendar, which together regulate resource use. In this sense,
the internal dynamics generated by the analysis workshops are helping to reinforce
the cultural processes at work in indigenous communities.
Tropenbos researchers analyse the information from a scientific point of view,
taking an interdisciplinary social and natural science approach. The diaries are
entered into a database in order to analyse the pressure on the resources and
the long-term sustainability of current use patterns. With this information a
dialogue between the two knowledge systems has been established leading to a better
understanding of the two contexts, their complementarity and potential of use
and application for both parties.
Through this research process the communities have appropriated elements of analysis
that are helpful for the definition of natural resource management plans for their
territories. This experience, developed with some communities, has been used as
a model at regional level. Tropenbos Colombia has, therefore, been invited by
the regional indigenous organisation to participate in the formulation of a natural
resource management plan for their area of influence which covers approximately
3 million ha.
Participatory management: a two-way process
As a general policy the research programme of Tropenbos-Colombia is trying to
establish a better rapport between researchers and indigenous communities in order
to facilitate a dialogue that allows a better understanding of research processes,
and thus a greater implementation of the results. In contrast to the disciplinary
perspective taken by most research, the project intends to stimulate a more interdisciplinary
vision and better integration of all research.
One of the most outstanding results of working with the indigenous communities
has been the elaboration of educational materials on the management of the forest
and its resources for use in community education projects and the local indigenous
schools. These were formulated in collaboration between indigenous 'experts',
teachers, researchers and students. In this manner, thematic compilations written
by indigenous people, booklets with traditional information and its pedagogical
applications, didactic games and posters, are all part of a proposal for dissemination
of results with a high level of acceptance among local communities and institutions
that work with education, especially indigenous education.
This approach - combining traditional knowledge and scientific research - will
also provide information for the formulation of management plans which respond
to the current social, cultural and economic needs of the indigenous communities.
A PARTICIPATORY GIS FOR COMMUNITY FORESTRY USER GROUPS IN NEPAL
by Gavin Jordan
Introduction There is an increasing interest in the use of Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) and other spatial technology in a participatory context. This contribution
explores some of the benefits and concerns of using GIS as a participatory tool,
using a community forestry case study from Nepal. The key objective of the work
was to determine whether integrating spatial methods within a participative framework
would provide an approach for gathering the information necessary for community
forest management. Participatory techniques have been the primary tool for obtaining community
and resource information, and can be highly effective at obtaining qualitative
and social data. Increasingly there has been a need to obtain more quantitative
information for community forest management purposes in Nepal and elsewhere. These
resource information needs do not replace the need for social information, but
extend the range of information that has to be collected, analysed, and collated.
Much of this information has a spatial component, and GIS has been increasingly
used for data management and analysis.
A common problem with the use of GIS District or National level studies often use GIS for mapping socio-economic
indicators, commonly called 'indicators of development', although the people targeted
for the development process are entirely unaware of these indicators. Indicators
are used for policy planning to identify both development priorities and geographic
regions of activity. Therefore the 'developmental' role of GIS is often one of
disempowerment of local people, involving a very low level of participation. It
encourages the separation of the planning process from the people affected. There
is little or no consultation with communities. Their needs have not been identified,
and the information gathered does not reflect their requirements. An observation
made nearly a decade ago for developmental work in sub-Saharan Africa still holds
true today; most GIS applications are driven by a desire to demonstrate the technological
capability rather than a desire for real life problem solving.
The Study A study was initiated in Nepal, with the aims of assessing the applicability
and relevance of a Participatory GIS in this context. Initially, it was felt that
a technical evaluation of GIS and the associated means of data collection were
the most pressing needs. However, as the study progressed it became apparent that
a more process-orientated approach was necessary. The focus shifted towards examining
a systematic approach for participatory forest management. This interdisciplinary
approach combined the use of social science participatory techniques with geomatics
technology and participatory assessment procedures. The methodology is at the
interface between social approaches to community forestry and more traditional
quantitative techniques to resource assessment. A greater emphasis has been placed
on the means of collecting and disseminating information than on the technical
design of the GIS database, as it is believed that a Participatory GIS is fundamentally
dependent on obtaining community needs, perceptions and ideas.
Participatory sessions with the FUG examined their specific information requirements.
These included:
maps of the community forest for boundary dispute issues
inventory information to assist in planning sustained yield harvesting for
commercial purposes
the sustained yield of fodder (grass, leaves and shrubs for stall-fed livestock)
when they could start removing fuel wood
the general condition of their forest.
Once the information needs of the FUG were established the data collection process
was developed. This was based around a participatory forest resource assessment.
The resource assessment procedure contained one or more of the following elements:
a participatory photo mapping session, a participatory inventory (always conducted)
and a Global Positioning Systems survey of internal and external boundaries. Of
these methods, perhaps the least known is participatory photo-mapping. This is
similar in philosophy to Participatory Sketch Mapping (PSM), but uses a large-scale
aerial photograph as a participatory tool. This has the participatory advantages
of PSM, but greatly increases the spatial accuracy of information obtained.
The information was organised using a GIS and other basic software. Descriptive
information obtained from the participatory research was recorded, such as indigenous
management, and FUG requirements and problems. Inventory information was entered
into a database, and the spatial information was entered into a GIS. For a given
FUG the GIS had:
a georeferenced boundary of the community forest, with the area of the forest
(something that is in itself often unavailable for community forests);
internal community designated boundaries;
associated basic information, such as key species;
the sustained yield;
recommended management practices;
community uses;
the importance of spatial areas of the resource for the community.
For the FUGs, images and management information was used to form the basis of
a visual report/management plan, which the FUG committee could use for its forest
management. Initial work indicated that FUGs regarded the maps as a tool that
could help them in their negotiations with the Forestry Department. The FUGs asked
to have the inventory information converted into basic management information,
which allows them to participate in discussions with the forest ranger and DFO.
This feedback is of critical importance: a Participatory GIS is there for its
users, the participants. Some FUGs have been very satisfied with its role, but
the evaluation process is not yet complete. It should be noted that although the
initial evaluation was based on the ability to produce and organise data for FUG
use, this is only one benefit. The participatory work involved in community consultation,
obtaining resource information, and the feedback meetings gave the FUG a sense
of ownership and involvement with the process. This acted as an agent of empowerment,
raising community expectations of what the FUG and individuals could achieve.
These 'social' processes are felt to be of great importance, and should not be
ignored by concentrating solely on the technical performance of the Participatory
GIS.
Conclusions The use of GIS enhanced the participatory process in this work. It allowed
quantitative and qualitative information to be combined, to provide resource management
information that was both relevant to the communities' needs and detailed enough
to determine sustainable yields. Whether a participatory GIS is going to benefit
the participatory process needs to be examined at an early stage.
All the findings converge with the need to view a Participatory GIS as a systems
based process. As with any good participatory methodology, the focus has to be
on the people, the participants. This has been the key problem with using GIS,
where the focus has usually been on the technology. The following five points
need to be concentrated on when developing a participatory GIS:
1. Evaluate why GIS should be used, and what the use of GIS adds to the participatory
process. If there is no defined need for it, don't use it!
2. The participatory process (including the collection and dissemination of information)
is more important than the 'technical' GIS issues. A good participatory framework
and practices are fundamental.
3. Concentrate on having the decision-making processes within the community. If
information is taken away and put into the GIS, outputs should be used to enable
the FUG (or other stakeholders) in their decision making.
4. Consider who owns the information, how it is going to be stored, who has access,
can it be used for purposes the participants may not want?
5. Is there the infrastructure and institutional support to obtain participatory
information, input it into a GIS, analyse it, and return to the participants in
a way they can use it?
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on work that was conducted whilst working with the People
and Resource Dynamics Project (PARDYP), at the International Centre for Integrated
Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, and the Nepal Australia Community Forestry
Project (NACFP).
Department of Agriculture & Forestry
Newton Rigg Campus, University of Central Lancashire
Penrith, Carlisle, CA11 1OH, United Kingdom
Email: gavinjordan@yahoo.co.uk
FOREST USER GROUPS FOREST MANAGEMENT PROJECT (FFMP) by Yam Malla and Peter Branney
Introduction
The Forest User Group Forest Management Project (FFMP) is a collaborative research
project involving the University of Reading's Agricultural Extension and Rural
Development Department (AERDD) in Reading (UK) and the Nepal UK Community Forestry
Project (NUKCFP) in Kathmandu. The project works with selected forest user groups
in the middle hills region of Nepal. It is funded from the UK government's Department
for International Development (DFID) Forestry Research Programme (R6918) and has
been operating since 1997.
The focus of the research project is to develop a methodology for participatory
action learning by forest user groups (FUGs) that will contribute to improved
management of their community forests. In particular this should increase the
supply of forest products, make their distribution among FUG members more equitable
and shift the position of FUGs from being concerned predominantly with forest
protection to engaging in sustainable, productive forest management.
Transfer of forest areas to FUGs generally leads to improved forest condition
as a result of better protection. Frequently, however, community forests are not
fully utilised to meet their productive potential. Pressure for forest products
may then simply be transferred to other areas, especially to non-community forest
sites, leading to their subsequent degradation. In addition, under-utilised forest
may develop a structure better oriented towards longer term timber production
than meeting the more immediate multiple forest product needs of the FUG members,
particularly those of the poor.
Participatory action learning methodology
The process of developing a methodology, which enables FUGs to move from passive
to more active forest management through "learning by doing" is now
well developed. This requires certain key interventions by external facilitators
(such as Forest Department, field project staff). A critical stage in this process
is for information generated (for example from harvesting sites) to be fed back
to all FUG members for their interpretation and consequent action. We have found
that simple software tools can be used to generate pictorial or graphic material,
which is much more readily understandable to FUG members, particularly for non-literate
members, than conventional numeric or tabular data. The final action learning
methodology will be written up and incorporated into training materials for support
staff before the end of the project, and should be of interest to other agencies
working closely with local groups on forest management issues. We have also reached
the conclusion that FUGs can carry out their own research. While this may not
be considered as research in the conventional sense, it is a practical method
of problem solving which is directly applicable to their own forest management
situation and as such it encourages the move towards more productive forest management.
Forest product supply and demand relationships
Development of the process of action learning by FUGs has generated much interesting
information which has enabled us to gain a better insight into the relationship
between the forest product requirements of FUG member households, and the ability
of the community forest to meet these needs. For example, although annual fuelwood
requirements are very similar in different FUGs - about 2.8 tonnes per household
- the proportion of this being met from the community forest varies from 1 to
37 percent in different FUGs. To a certain extent this is a function of the number
of households in the FUG and the size and condition of the community forest, but
invariably it has been found that this proportion can be increased through more
intensive and systematic harvesting activities carried out by the FUG.
Under predominantly protection oriented forest management the annual woody biomass
(fuelwood) yield from community forests in three FUGs averaged 1.38 tonnes/ha/year.
This could be increased to as much as 6.4 tonnes/ha/year under active harvesting
(depending on the actual harvesting regime used) and there is a corresponding
increase from 22% to 77% in the proportion of household fuelwood needs which can
be met from the community forest. In reality the situation is more complicated
than indicated by these simple figures, since fuelwood is not necessarily the
only product which FUGs wish to get from their community forest. Production of
timber or poles on a longer rotation, or alternative annual products such as grass
or NTFPs, may also be a management objective in which case a compromise has to
be reached possibly involving less fuelwood production.
Summary
Forest management for multiple products and multiple stakeholders is usually complex
and may be difficult to achieve. FFMP is generating methodologies and information
which can start to provide FUGs with a range of management options from which
they can learn and develop their more detailed management practices to meet their
specific site requirements.
For further information please contact:
Dr Yam B. Malla
Agricultural Extension and Rural Development Department
The University of Reading
Reading, Berks, RG6 6AR, United Kingdom
Email: y.b.malla@reading.ac.uk
Peter Branney
5 Little Road
Edinburgh, EH16 6SH, United Kingdom
Email: peterbranney@msn.com
NATURAL FOREST MANAGEMENT AMONG INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN LATIN AMERICA by S. Gram
The concept of integrating conservation and development has been widely applied
in rainforest projects during the last decade. But projects carried out by indigenous
forest dwellers involving commercial exploitation of timber resources are still
fairly uncommon and their results have been mixed. As early as 1988, an extensive
study carried out for ITTO concluded that political, economic and social obstacles
to sustainable forestry are more important than technical ones. Nevertheless,
we continue to see an abundance of technical forestry studies.
To gather socio-economic experience from local forestry projects, a research study
supported by the European Commission and the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural
University in Denmark carried out case studies in Latin American rainforests.
These included the Yanesha Forestry Cooperative in Peru, the Pacaya Samiria Integrated
Programme for Conservation and Development in Peru, the Forest Production Ejidos
of the Mayan Zone in Mexico and the Proyecto Forestal Chimanes in Bolivia.
The results are presented in a report which deals with socio-cultural, economic,
and organizational aspects of natural forest management. It discusses how the
socio-cultural characteristics of indigenous forest dwellers influence projects
and give rise to particular priorities and barriers that should be considered
in the planning, implementation, and social organization of locally based management
projects.
The report presents a thorough analysis of local knowledge of the forest environment,
traditional occupation and settlement structure, social organization, and power
structures among indigenous people. It discusses how projects can be organized
to be more in line with traditional structures and how to benefit from local knowledge
and experience.
The results points to the fact that projects successfully implemented among non-indigenous
forest dwellers cannot be copied in areas inhabited by indigenous people. Nevertheless,
in determining project structures, donor organizations seldom distinguish whether
local populations are indigenous or not. The poor results of projects promoting
timber management by indigenous people are mainly due to an inadequate analysis
of the social structure in the local communities. Both in projects involving timber
and non-timber forest projects, donor organizations have shown themselves unwilling
to cede decision-making authority to indigenous people, to respect traditional
culture and to incorporate local knowledge. Furthermore, projects are routinely
based on overly optimistic economic calculations.
For further information consult the full report, published in: The Research Series,
Vol 24, 1998, available from: Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute,
Hoersholm Kongevej 11, 2970 Hoersholm, Denmark.
Tel: +45 4576 3200, Fax: +45 4576 3233
Email: mml@fsl.dk; or contact:
Soeren Gram, Project Manager,
The Danish Board of Technology
Antonigade 4, 1106 Copenhagen, Denmark
Email: sg@tekno.dk
PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE MECHANISMS IN JFM THROUGH NGOS IN ANDHRA PRADESH by D. Suryakumari
Introduction
Following a circular issued in 1990 by the Indian Ministry of Environment and
Forests supporting the involvement of village committees and NGOs in the regeneration,
management and protection of degraded forests, the way was open for concerned
State Governments to formulate policies involving people in the management of
forests. In Andhra Pradesh, Joint Forest Management (JFM) was initiated in 1993-94.
It is particularly concerned with providing access to and control over resources
to people and achieving large-scale involvement of women in resource management
programmes. It also provides for the involvement of NGOs to help local communities.
Community organizations called VSSs (Vana Samrakshana Samithis/Village Protection
Committees) were formed at village level. They include all local people and have
an elected executive committee and chairperson. A certain extent of forestland
(25 to 300 ha) is demarcated for the VSS and a Memorandum of Understanding between
the Forest Department (FD) and the VSS outlines what can be done on the land.
The VSS has to protect the area and in return is entitled to enjoy usufruct rights.
Funding required to carry out work on the land is provided by the Forest Department
while the VSS members have to carry out the work as per the prepared plans. The
funds are transferred into a joint account to which the VSS chairperson and an
FD official are signatories.
The Andhra Pradesh Forest Department has so far formed about 6,575 VSSs in 22
districts. In all, about 250 NGOs are involved across the State. A key player
is the Centre for World Solidarity (CWS) which provides support to 32 local NGOs
in 8 districts, thus guiding about 450 VSSs . The CWS project has been funded
by NOVIB, a Dutch Development Agency, since 1996. During Phase I of the project,
CWS mainly concentrated on identification of suitable local NGOs, encouraging
village communities to form into VSSs, facilitating interaction with concerned
Forest Department officials, awareness building on National forest policy and
JFM, encouraging women to participate in the programme and providing management
training to VSS chairpersons.
The Phase II Project Proposal
A five-year second phase of the project begins in April 2000. Entitled 'Promoting
Sustainable Mechanisms in Joint Forest Management through NGOs in Andhra Pradesh',
it has been formulated to strengthen the initiatives taken up during Phase I and
to put in place appropriate institutional mechanisms in order to make the programme
sustainable. Addressing gender concerns and achieving sustainability (for JFM
as a programme and VSSs as an institution) are the twin goals of the Project.
The work components contemplated are:
Gender Concerns
Research carried out in the first phase indicated that the government requirement
for at least 30% of VSS committee members to be women was not being met, that
women who were committee members were often not aware of this fact or had little
idea of what their role required, that women generally knew very little about
the programme, and that women and men are not paid equal wages even when doing
the same work involved. The following actions have been proposed, therefore, to
enhance women's participation and level of involvement:
Achieve 50% representation by women in VSS Executive Committees;
Ensure that VSS committees send at least two women to participate in training
courses for every man;
Promote 50% representation by women in all Networks and their executive
committees.
Networking
Once implementation of the JFM Programme by the FD concludes, there is often a
danger of the collapse of the VSS institution. To prevent this, it is proposed
to network VSSs as follows:
At the NGO level, where the local NGO will facilitate the formation of a
network of 15-30 VSSs guided by it;
At the Forest Range level (consisting of 20-45 VSSs), where the NGO level
network influences the other VSSs in the range and promotes the formation
of a range level network;
At the State level, where representatives from all the 32 range level networks
can form into a State level network.
The VSSs will also be encouraged to build up a fund locally to take care of future
needs. Both the VSSs and the Networks will be encouraged to take up programmes
on their own which increase levels of responsibility and promote the sustainability
of the institutions. Specific Training Programmes on VSS management and economic
activities will be organised for VSS committee members. Networks will be encouraged
to meet regularly to work out common strategies for forest protection, collection
and marketing of non-timber forest products, etc. Workshops will be organised
to facilitate lateral learning and also to create common understanding.
The project proposes to carry out action research, so that the drawbacks if any,
in policies and/or implementation can be identified at an early stage and corrective
measures quickly taken. This provides scope for the communities to understand
the situation in a better way and enables them to participate more fully.
Documentation, information dissemination, publication of relevant resource material
and policy lobbying are other components of work proposed in the project. At the
end of the project it is intended to establish a People's Sustainable Forestry
Institute to extend support services to the State level VSS network and other
VSSs.
Acknowledgements
The author expresses her deep sense of gratitude to Sri.M.V. Sastri, Convenor,
and to Mr. K. Ramarao, Executive Secretary, of the Centre for World Solidarity
for their guidance and encouragement. The concern shown by Ms. Wenny Ho, Programme
Officer for India and the Himalayas of NOVIB, is gratefully acknowledged.
For further information, contact:
Dr.D.Suryakumari, Programme Officer
Joint Forest Management
Centre for World Solidarity
12-13-445,street No 1
Tarnaka, Secunderabad-17
500 017 Andhra Pradesh, India
LEARNING TO LEARN: WORKING WITH LOCAL PEOPLE TO DEVELOP TIMBER AND NON-TIMBER
FOREST PRODUCTS. EXPERIENCE FROM NEPAL by S.P. Dahal, H. Gibbon, G. Kafle and R. Subedi
The Nepal UK Community Forestry project is currently operating in seven districts
in the middle hills of Nepal. It has been supporting the government's community
forestry programme over the last seven years and is about to enter a second phase
which is likely to last a further ten years. A number of project staff, together
with other local stakeholders, have been actively supporting local communities
through village level forest user groups to explore and enhance their forest management
practices.
A paper with the above title was presented at the workshop on 'Learning from Resource
Users - A Paradigm Shift in Tropical Forestry?' in Vienna in April 2000 (see Announcements
section for details). The paper examines two themes: the distribution and availability
of local knowledge and the manner in which 'insiders' and 'outsiders' need to
interact in order to promote enhanced development outcomes. Pilot experiences
with three main non timber forest products are discussed: Girardinia diversifolia,
Edgeworthia gardneri, Swertia chirayita.
For more information, contact:
Hugh Gibbon
Natural Resources Institute
Chatham Maritime ME4 4TB, UK
Tel:+44 1634883409, Fax:+44 1634883959
Email: h.j.gibbon@gre.ac.uk
