Prior to the introduction of the Tribal Land Act (TLA) of 1970, there was a hierarchical and diffused system of land allocation and management, with the Paramount Chief retaining authority in Tribal Territories while the District Commissioner was in charge of Crown Land Districts.
When the Land Boards replaced the chiefs in 1970, the new authorities did not take up the planning and management function, although they had been empowered to do so by the TLA. This led to the creation of a management vacuum, which may still be felt today at community level. This management vacuum means that local communities have no say in or control over the allocation or use of the natural resources, including forests. Legal power for these functions now resides in a number of bureaucratic institutions, all of which are located very far from those communities.
(Samson and Maotonyane, 1998)
The issue of institutions is crucial because their development will have either a positive or negative impact on natural resource management. The Government of Botswana has made legislative changes that allow most rural communities to participate in the decision-making process regarding resource utilisation.
The two communities reported in this case study have derived economic and financial benefits through management of the hunting quota in their respective areas. They themselves make decisions on the distributive mechanisms with respect to the benefits. This includes hard cash payouts to bona fide beneficiary members of the communities, the development of action plans for other investment and development options, as well as developing monitoring and evaluation programmes as a tool for checking periodically the condition of their natural resources against extinction, misuse or any other damage.
This process involves locally based institutions that are democratically elected, representative, accountable and legitimate in the eyes of the respective communities.
In Botswana, Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) is based on the recognition that local communities must be given direct control over the utilisation and benefits of natural resources in order to value them in a sustainable manner. One component of this strategy is local natural resource monitoring and maintenance, employing systems that encourage active community conservation.
The KD1 Controlled Hunting Area has a number of settlements. In 1997 Wildlife Monitoring Teams (each made up of two men and one woman) were elected for each settlement. Their major duties are to ensure adherence to the approved community wildlife off-take quota (stipulated in their hunting lease as part of their Land-Use and Management Plan to the District Land Board) and collect wildlife population data for monitoring of trends.
Male Team members were trained by the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) on problem animal control, rifle shooting, escort guide duties, Global Positioning System use and counting and recording animals. On the other hand, the female Team members (deemed to be more responsible) take care of recording and management of hunting and monitoring data. The Team is also used in the outreach programme to explain to residents why monitoring activities are necessary and what the status of the wildlife population is. Once a month, each Team goes on six patrols in designated areas, recording spoor and sightings with a GPS. The information is then sent to the DWNP for their national trend watch.
At the turn of the last century, dense impenetrable forests covered the Gambia. By 1981 just about 45 per cent of the total land area was still classified as forest. By 1988 forest cover had fallen to 30 per cent. The degradation of forests has been so severe that mostly tree and shrub savanna of poor quality are what remain today. The main causes of forest destruction are annual fires in combination with other human activities, exacerbated by a high population density of 96 inhabitants per hectare.
With the introduction of the state-owned Forest Park concept in the 1950s and the forest legislation in the 1970s, which vested all power over national forest resources in the state, the local surrounding communities were condemned to a process of gradual alienation. This institutional framework deprived the rural population of the responsibility to manage their own forests, and yet it was the same population, which always emerged as the primary victim of deforestation.
By the mid 1980s, the government acknowledged that it would never be able to correct the mistake while counting solely on its own resources. This change in thinking, in part, gave birth to the 1987 Forestry Department and the Gambian/German Forestry Project "Proposal for the Introduction of Community Forestry in the Gambia"
One of the first steps taken by the project was to ensure the existence or establishment of adequate institutional arrangements for community forestry implementation. An initial condition for that first step was the creation of Forest Committees at the village level, preferably made up of members already active in (other) existing village structures. The community forestry implementation itself had three phases:
i) The preparatory phase;
ii) The preliminary (or pilot) phase during which committees demonstrate their capacity in forest protection and management. If successfully implemented, the pilot phase should culminate in the signing of the Preliminary Community Forest Management Agreement (PCFMA); and
iii) A consolidation phase during which the committees gain further management and technical forestry skills aimed at self-management. The consolidation phase should culminate in the signing (between the Forest Department and representatives of the local community) of the Community Forestry Management Agreement (CFMA).
The CFMA grants permanent ownership rights over the forest resource of a clearly demarcated forest to the community or communities, and specifies details on the extent of cooperation with the Forest Department. The communities are entitled to keep the benefits accruing from their forests in exchange for managing the forest resource according to a simple management plan approved by the responsible Divisional Forest Officer. Every agreement should have attached to it the respective traditional chief's attestation that the community has customary ownership of the land that they claim.
Private extensionists and foresters mostly drawn from the NGO community offered extension services. Between 1991 and the time this account was compiled (1998) there were over 6000 ha of forest under community management while an additional 7000 ha were waiting to join the programme. More than 300 villages were actively involved in community forestry by then. As a result of the extension efforts, there has been a significant drop in the frequency of wildfires in the forests.
(Matakala and Mushove, 2001)
Table 1: Spectrum of local institutions in CBNRM in Mozambique
SOME OF THE INSTITUTIONS MENTIONED IN SURVEY ON CBNRM |
THE NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH JUSTIFY EXISTENCE OF PROJECT |
Maputo/Gaza/Inhambane Provinces: President of the Locality; Cell Secretary; Commission for Natural Resources; traditional Chief; Chief of the Administrative Post; President of the Executive (municipal) Council; Natural Resources Management Committee; The Chief's Council; Community Forest Guards. |
Wildlife; Natural forest; Small river basins; Umbeluzi river; Old (pine) plantation |
Manica/Sofala/Zambezia/Tete Provinces: Traditional leaders; Community counsellors; Headmen; Local Management Committee; secretary of the Locality; Village Secretary; Local Council for Natural Resources Conservation; Community Forest Guards; President of the Locality. |
Natural (timber) production forest; Wildlife; Fisheries; Mangrove; Water; Old plantation |
Nampula/Niassa/Cabo Delgado Provinces: Local Committee for Natural resources Management; Community Court; Traditional Chief; Party (political) Secretary; Traditional Elders; Management Committee; Fisheries Co-management Groups; Militia Elements (RENAMO8, Ribawe Forest Reserve, Nampula Province); Political Parties; Churches/Mosques; Community Forest Guards. |
Natural forests; Wildlife; Fisheries; Scenic landscapes for tourism. |
(Government of Mozambique, 1999)
The development of this policy reflects the link between objectives of the policy with chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the principles associated with that chapter, for example:
(i) The generation of socio-economic benefits for the present and future generations
(ii) Involvement of people who depend on forest resources in the planning and sustainable development of those resources
(iii) Conservation of the resource base, including biological diversity.
Other relevant themes under Agenda 21 include:
(i) Chapter 3 - reduction of poverty
(ii) Chapter 12 - management of fragile ecosystems
(iii) Chapter 15 - conservation of biodiversity.
Besides Agenda 21, principles from the following conventions were also considered:
(i) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
(ii) Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
(iii) Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD)
(iv) Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
Since the 1950s 17 forest reserves covering some 450 000 hectares have been established. Not much is known about the delimitation quality of these reserves because of difficulties in accessing them. There is a need to expand and develop these forest reserves.
Successive legislative instruments created 21 conservation areas (national parks, reserves and hunting areas) with a total land area of 6.7 million hectares.
(iii) The country still does not have a forestry and wildlife management system. This loophole implies the non-existence of harvesting plans for both flora and fauna.
Forest exploitation is characterised by timber extraction under the simple licence system, instead of the concession regime. This brings problems in terms of control and management, as the relevant authorities are unable to cover all forest exploitation areas effectively.
Local communities in the production forest areas have always watched hopelessly as outsiders exploited their resources with no return to the local communities.
Forest policing is weak partly due to lack of incentives for forest guards.
The 17 forest reserves are abandoned because of lack of resources to maintain the same. In the same way, it has become impossible to think of establishing new forest reserves
(v) Conservation areas present conditions for the adoption of participatory management arrangements between the state, the private sector and local communities as autonomous management entities.
(ii) Social development objective in the short- and medium-term: an increase in rural population and local community participation as direct agents in integrated management, protection against fires, use and conservation of forest and wildlife resources.
Some of the strategies for the social objective in Article 53 (ii) include:
(i) Implementation of a network of pilot areas with community participation in conservation and use of forest and wildlife resources
(ii) Capacity building to strengthen development of participatory community forestry and wildlife projects in all land-use categories
(iii) Establishment of Natural Resources Management Committees with the participation of local communities, local state authorities, NGOs and the private sector
(iv) Introduction of legal mechanisms to progressively guarantee access to forest and wildlife resources by local communities
(Matakala, 2001)
Table 2: Forest management models in Mozambique
MODEL |
TYPICAL SCENARIOS |
Forests managed by the government |
The State retains both the authority and the responsibility to manage and control the resource while the local communities are considered a threat to the resource. This normally leads to "open access" `arrangements' mostly because the State does not avail of sufficient resources to control utilisation of the forest resources by the local communities. Examples include many conservation/protection areas and also areas outside protection areas, throughout the country. |
Forests managed by local communities |
The forest belongs to the government but it is managed by local communities. The initiative to manage the forest was `home-grown' by the community after realising that the forest was a valuable resource. Examples: Chirindzene sacred forest in Gaza Province. |
Forests managed under external assistance |
The government owns the forest but the incentives and justification for management originate from outside the community. Examples: The majority of CBNRM projects in Mozambique; external/donor funds are used for CBNRM while the government retains global control of the resource and policy. |
Co-management of forests |
Here there is active partnership between the resource users and external agencies, although the State retains the final authority and control. Examples: Tchuma Tchato Project in Tete Province, run along the CAMPFIRE lines in Zimbabwe, The Chimanimani Trans-frontier Project in Manica Province. |
(v) Demonstrations to communities on the value of tree and forest systems in the general agricultural systems
(vi) Education campaigns and general outreach programmes for community responsibility over good forest husbandry
(vii) Inventories, demarcation and establishment of management plans in forests utilised by local communities, thus adding value to the resource.
The goal of Namibia's CBNRM Programme is "... to improve the quality of life of rural Namibians by empowering people to care for their natural resources and to derive benefits from these resources" (Government of Namibia, 2001). The programme is subdivided into a conservation programme, a rural development programme and a political programme and is implemented under partnership arrangements between the Government, donor organisations, local NGOs and communities.
The programme seeks to make full use of the 1996 legislation devolving rights over wildlife and tourism to communal area residents by encouraging communities to form land management units known as conservancies and thus create a common property resource management system for wildlife and tourism related aspects of land management. Unlike many conservation areas, conservancies enable people to practice normal farming methods in parallel with wildlife management, thus recognising wildlife as a legitimate and profitable form of land use (Government of Namibia, 1998). So far more than 3.8 million hectares have been conserved through the gazetting of established communal area conservancies. The household "land-holding" figures vary between just under 100 ha to well over 4000 ha per household depending on the zone in which the conservancy is situated.
According to the revised legislation of 1996, conservancies require the following:
1) defined membership,
2) a representative management committee,
3) a legally recognised constitution, and
4) defined boundaries.
To date ten communal area conservancies have been gazetted and more than 20 are in the process of being established. Communities that satisfy the conditions for registration receive limited rights of ownership over certain animal species and use rights over others. Such rights are similar to those enjoyed by commercial farmers since 1967. Such legally-formed conservancies can also apply for hunting and/or tourism rights within the conservancy.
The 1932 Forest policy was amended in 1986 in response to socio-economic and political developments in the country. The Forest Policy of 1986 is characterized by the following:
i. Maintenance of the major objective of the Forest Department
ii. Stressing the role of forests in environmental protection.
iii. Recognizing and encouraging the establishment of community, private and institutional forests within the agricultural sugar schemes.
iv. Subjecting tree cutting outside forest reserves to the discretion of the General Manager, of the Forests National Corporation (FNC), provided that these areas are reserved immediately following their utilization, for the purpose of their protection and regeneration.
v. Making obligatory the utilization of tree stocks on lands allocated for agricultural investment (not to be burnt into ashes) and to leave a stipulated percentage of tree cover inside and around agricultural schemes in the form of shelterbelts and windbreaks).
vi. Stressing the polarization of popular and international efforts for participation in afforestation, tree planting and forest protection.
vii. Raising the national goal of reserves from 15 to 20 percent of the total area of the country for environmental protection and meeting the population's needs for forest products.
viii. Emphasis on forest extension and awareness.
ix. Conceptualizing the multiple use of forests.
x. Division of authority between the centre and the regions as regards forest management.
Significant changes have taken place in the Sudan and in the world since the present policy was adopted in1986. These changes and the continuous pressure on the forests led to the preparation of a Draft Forestry Policy in 1997. The 1997 draft policy emphasized the privileges and rights of the local people in obtaining their needs from the reserved forests according to agreements between them and the Government. The draft policy also encouraged the establishment of private and community forests. Protection of trees outside the reserved forests was emphasized to maintain biodiversity. The role of forests in environmental protection was also elaborated. Also it is partially based on the Comprehensive National Strategy (1992 - 2002) which contained a chapter on environment and which allocated 25 percent of the total area of Sudan for natural resources (forests, range and wildlife), and considering the following:
i. The general aim of forest policy is to provide guidelines to leaders, administrators and decision makers and to those people whose livelihood depends on the forests as to how the forest resources should be managed to give sustained yields.
ii. The threat faced by the natural forests and the need to give them better protection to conserve their biodiversity and make available their sustained indirect benefits.
iii. The concept of multi-purpose management as a general principle, especially in indigenous forests, woodlands or bush lands that are not strictly protected as national reserves.
iv. The enhancement of social forestry and farm forestry, including diversification of farming systems by various types of tree planting to ensure improved management of water catchment areas, higher land productivity, increased agricultural products, increased rural incomes and alleviation of poverty.
v. The role of woody vegetation in supporting development in arid and semi-arid lands.
vi. The need for forest protection especially against pests, diseases and fires.
vii. The rationalization of forest industry to maximize its contribution to the national economy.
viii. Fulfillment of the agreed national obligations under international environmental and other forest-related conventions and principles.
(Wily, 1997; Wily, 1998)
Tanzania is the envy of many sub-Saharan African states in the unique manner of legal identity granted to rural communities, and in supporting administrative and land laws, which provide for village-based control over natural resources management. Two key elements feature:
i. Rural villages in Tanzania are recognised as a formal level of government; and
ii. Rural villages may attain legal corporate status including the possibility of managing and owning property under communal tenure.
The forest estate of Tanzania covers around 40 million ha of different vegetation formations and, therefore, calls for different approaches in management. This particular case study deals with three forests: Duru-Haitemba (9000 ha woodland falling under `public land'); Mgori (40000 ha, also formerly `public land' before establishment of community-based management), and Shume-Magamba (12000 ha moist montane forest, which is a gazetted forest reserve, with 2500 ha under exotic plantation). As is frequently the case in innovative development, community-based management of these three forests has been initiated under specific donor-funded projects. Implementation is by central government (through the Forestry and Beekeeping Division) and local government authorities (district councils).
`Community' in the Tanzanian sense means those village settlements, which share boundaries with the forest. Firstly, the villages should define and demarcate that area of the forest over which they would establish jurisdiction. Next, there is a need to establish, through intensive discussion and decision-making, precisely how the Village Forest Area (VFA) will be managed, and by whom. Consistently, this led to the establishment of Forest Management Committees at various levels, the appointment of village youths as `Village Forest Guards', the definition of Forest use Rules, and procedures for dealing with those who break such rules.
There are three essential elements to this process:
i. What each village has done is, in effect, to close down their area of forest, in a socio-spatial sense because the VFA is physically enclosed and unwanted use and users denied.
ii. Almost instinctively, one of the first actions taken by villages is to inform neighbouring villages that the use of the forest is no longer free; and
iii. The nature of the process is a political process in which the community has to deal with the implications of gaining power, and thus turn authority into responsibility.
The formalisation of this new balance of power follows two steps:
i. Promulgation of the Village By-law - a unique Tanzanian instrument integral to status of villages as legal persons under modern administrative law, able to hold property, elect (village) government, and regulate themselves and use of any resource within the defined and titled Village Area in a legal manner; and
ii. Joint Management Agreement (JMA) between State and the people. This makes good sense for forest or protected areas that would otherwise be "owned' by the State alone.
In practice, the actual formalisation of the new balance of power is usually delayed (deliberately) until such time as the concerned village forest managing authority, and the supporting government office have had a chance to exercise their new roles and responsibilities, make adjustments in their regimes and relations as necessary, refine and further their functions.
1) The above case studies suggest that an analysis of policy and institutional arrangements should start off with stakeholder analysis. Because policy formulation is nothing but a power game, we need to analyse the distribution of power among the various participating institutions and/or stakeholders. A proxy measure of power can be obtained through analysis of participation levels of different stakeholders in the policy formulation process.
2) Whether for pragmatic or for other reasons, gone are the days when national policy formulation was done behind closed doors, for globalisation has come to stay. But with globalisation also comes peer and `Big Brother' pressure demanding nation states to tow the line or risk alienation.
3) Local communities are aware of the economic and environmental consequences of deforestation and, therefore, are prepared and willing to participate in forestry activities on condition that the governments create a conducive environment for that community participation.
4) There is no way governments will achieve sustainable management of secondary forests or any natural forests for that matter, while counting solely on government resources: there is need to devolve authority and forge partnerships with the hitherto marginalized stakeholders such as the local communities. That devolution should not be confused with abdication of responsibility on the part of governments; rather, it should be genuinely passed on, reinforced with streamlined capacity-building programmes.
8 A political party in Mozambique
