The role and perspectives of forest
 communities in the forest reform process
Presentation to International Conference on ...
Outline
1. What community organization
participated in the reform process?
2. What was my role & unique
perspectives?
3. W...
National Context and Background
            Forest Land Management Systems


    Private and community
          forests 9...
What Community Organizations?
NGOs and CBO
These included
Tanzania Forest Conservation Group – TFCG
Village Natural Resour...
My role & Perspectives?
Facilitation
 • Involving communities on the ground – 1996 before the
   establishment of Forest P...
My role & Perspectives?
Trainer
 • Facilitating and Training Decision makers and
   practitioners on Participatory Forest ...
The Role of TFCG:
Identifying scope of reform;
Resulted after implementing the policies:
e.g. By providing feedback – Harm...
The Role of TFCG:
Bid for projects
Developed the communication strategy for National
Forest Programme (NFP),
Service provi...
Impact of participation
•   Approximately 1.9 million hectares under village
    management (CBFM) in around 1500 villages...
Spread and Adoption of PFM to date

            2,500,000

            2,000,000
                                         ...
Spread and Adoption: JFM

                    JFM and CBFM occurance across different forest types

            1,400,000
...
Impact on Livelihoods

Joint Forest Management
•   Much of donor funds for early PFM directed towards
    “catchment” fore...
Impact on Livelihoods
Some signs of inequitable sharing of costs and benefits
within communities as well as between stakeh...
Impact on Livelihoods
Community Based Forest Management
- Degraded forest resource base = low potential to
  generate reve...
Impacts on governance
       Little evidence so far… but some evidence that villages are
            more effective at col...
Impacts on governance
Local level forest governance remains one of the largest
constraints to effective PFM
However….Impro...
The decentralisation continuum
  Emerging Differences between CBFM and JFM

State Controlled                             C...
The decentralisation continuum
Characteristics    Exclusive State     Joint Forest Management           Community Based
  ...
The decentralisation continuum
Some possible indicators of decentralised forest governance for discussion

               ...
Conclusions and Lessons Learned

Both JFM and CBFM are spreading rapidly and now cover more
than 10% of the total forest a...
Conclusions and Lessons Learned

Community Based Forest Management promises greater returns to
livelihoods, but in many ca...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Charles Meshack: The role and perspectives of forest communities in the forest reform process

876 views

Published on

Day 2, Session 3: The role and perspectives of forest communities in the forest reform process

Presentation by Charles Meshack, Tanzania Forest Conservation Group

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
876
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Charles Meshack: The role and perspectives of forest communities in the forest reform process

  1. 1. The role and perspectives of forest communities in the forest reform process Presentation to International Conference on Forest Tenure, Governance and Enterprise - Cameroon May 2009 Charles Meshack (TFCG, Tanzania)
  2. 2. Outline 1. What community organization participated in the reform process? 2. What was my role & unique perspectives? 3. What has been the role of my organization in reforms? 4. What other specific roles the organization has played? 5. What impacts? 6. What are the lessons learned
  3. 3. National Context and Background Forest Land Management Systems Private and community forests 9% Forest on general land 54% Total forest area: 33 Government Forest million hectares Reserves 37%
  4. 4. What Community Organizations? NGOs and CBO These included Tanzania Forest Conservation Group – TFCG Village Natural Resource Committees – VNRC Lawyer Environment Action Team – LEAT Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania - WCST LAMP/OURGUT WWF CARE International Community Forest Network (MJUMITA),
  5. 5. My role & Perspectives? Facilitation • Involving communities on the ground – 1996 before the establishment of Forest Policy 1998 Participation Provide input/comments in the drafting of the Forest Policy Consultative Meetings/workshops in the preparation of Forest Policy 1998, National Forest Programe (NFP 2002), Forest Act 2002.
  6. 6. My role & Perspectives? Trainer • Facilitating and Training Decision makers and practitioners on Participatory Forest Management Editor Community newsletter produced in Kiswahili Producing articles/papers Writing articles/papers in newspapers and Journals
  7. 7. The Role of TFCG: Identifying scope of reform; Resulted after implementing the policies: e.g. By providing feedback – Harmonization of Participatory Forest Resource Assessment methodology Two different Participatory Forest Management (PFM) guidelines (Community Based Forest Management – CBFM & Draft Joint Forest Management – JFM) Informing decision makers and politicians Participate in public trade show – by displaying the achievements and challenges of PFM Prepare and disseminate targeted materials e.g. Mass media – Television, video show, newspapers Prepare displays during parliament session
  8. 8. The Role of TFCG: Bid for projects Developed the communication strategy for National Forest Programme (NFP), Service provider in Facilitating PFM Planning Create awareness Prepare information in user friendly and disseminate
  9. 9. Impact of participation • Approximately 1.9 million hectares under village management (CBFM) in around 1500 villages • Approximately 1.6 million hectares under joint forest management (JFM) between the state and about 530 villages • PFM operating in over 60 districts (out of 104) under various levels of support
  10. 10. Spread and Adoption of PFM to date 2,500,000 2,000,000 Forest area under CBFM Area (ha) 1,500,000 (hectares) Forest area under JFM 1,000,000 (hectares) 500,000 0 1999 2002 2006 Years
  11. 11. Spread and Adoption: JFM JFM and CBFM occurance across different forest types 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 Community Based Forest Area (ha) 800,000 Management 600,000 Joint Forest Management 400,000 200,000 0 Montane Mangroves Coastal Miombo Acacia evergreen Forests woodlands woodlands forest and thickets Forest Types
  12. 12. Impact on Livelihoods Joint Forest Management • Much of donor funds for early PFM directed towards “catchment” forests with high biodiversity values – with limited use potential under prevailing laws • Government has not provided guidance on benefit / cost sharing in JFM arrangements • Reduction in fines over time as illegal activities drop – negative incentives • Increases in wildlife populations causing conflicts • “Elite capture” within the village management – uneven share of costs and benefits within the village
  13. 13. Impact on Livelihoods Some signs of inequitable sharing of costs and benefits within communities as well as between stakeholder groups in JFM arrangements
  14. 14. Impact on Livelihoods Community Based Forest Management - Degraded forest resource base = low potential to generate revenue in first years - Increases in wildlife populations causing conflicts - Some resistance by communities and districts to start harvesting - Some villages now harvesting modest amounts (eg revenues around 10-15,000 USD per year) - Some interesting new opportunities where communities are gaining rights over large areas of valuable miombo woodlands – potential forest revenues up to USD 70,000/village/year
  15. 15. Impacts on governance Little evidence so far… but some evidence that villages are more effective at collecting revenues than districts… Annual Forest Revenues Collected by Iringa District Council and 14 villages implementing CBFM Iringa District Council 14,000,000 14 Villages 12,000,000 10,000,000 Tsh 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Note: 153 villages in Iringa District
  16. 16. Impacts on governance Local level forest governance remains one of the largest constraints to effective PFM However….Improved legal literacy and awareness of villagers results in: – Defending their resources and preventing “asset stripping” by unscrupulous logging interests – Demanding PFM from leaders at local government levels – Challenging corrupt practices – from their own leaders, district staff, and loggers – Preventing elite capture within the village and transparency of management institutions
  17. 17. The decentralisation continuum Emerging Differences between CBFM and JFM State Controlled Community Controlled Traditional Community Joint Forest Forest Based Forest Management Management Management All Costs and Sharing of Costs All costs and Benefits Benefits with State and Benefits with Community Conservation benefits Development benefits
  18. 18. The decentralisation continuum Characteristics Exclusive State Joint Forest Management Community Based Management Forest Management Community Threat Beneficiary Actor/partner Seen As? Forest User Manager Consultee Decision maker Rule Follower Rule maker Subject Citizen Local Passive and by Centred around sharing of Centred around Involvement invitation only. Benefits (eg NTFPs, paid Rights and sharing of Seen as? labour) and sometimes Power income Centred around Centred around Use Management Unnecessary Optional Mandatory Overall Reducing threat of To reduce management To decentralize Management forest destruction costs by co-opting Management rights Objective and by community communities through and responsibilities approach? sharing costs and benefits Devolution and Policing Negotiation emplowerment Livelihood None Limited benefits sufficient To maximize Objective? to maintain interest in forest livelihood benefits management from sustainable utilization of forest
  19. 19. The decentralisation continuum Some possible indicators of decentralised forest governance for discussion State JFM CBFM Management Who initiates? Not applicable State Village / District Who signs / Not applicable State + village Village and District formalises? Who terminates? Not applicable State Village / District Who decides State State Village allowable benefits from harvesting? Who decides State State Village harvesting levels? Who has overall State State + village Village management responsibility? Who enforces the State State + village Village rules? Who keeps the State State (some Village money? village)
  20. 20. Conclusions and Lessons Learned Both JFM and CBFM are spreading rapidly and now cover more than 10% of the total forest area of mainland Tanzania Effective forest management tool that devolves management responsibility to lower levels and leads to improvements over open access management regimes Joint Forest Management remains problematic, if it is to realise its two other objectives of improved livelihoods and local governance Conflicts have emerged due to: - Limited benefits available (especially catchment forests) - Lack of cost-benefit sharing mechanism and ratios - Crop raiding from wildlife - Elite capture of the few benefits As a result, management costs to communities often exceeds benefits
  21. 21. Conclusions and Lessons Learned Community Based Forest Management promises greater returns to livelihoods, but in many cases these have yet to materialise. Some areas generating revenues from their forests which are enough to maintain PFM process with a surplus to community development Evidence that massive increases in efficiency in forest revenue collection when responsibilities devolved from district to village Single most effective mechanism for improving local forest governance is civic education and legal literacy around rights, responsibilities and returns from sustainable and community based forest management systems Rolling out of PFM nationally requires working top-down (laws, regulations, guidelines) and bottom –up (awareness)

×