0138-B1
Emmanuel E. Bassey[1]
The effect of tenure on natural resources conservation in the Nigerian rainforest ecosystem is discussed.
The inability of land users to acknowledge traditional tenure rights in project design and implementation results in conflicts which lead to high rate of de-reservation, deforestation, excessive poaching and over-exploitation of resources within the reserves.
On private lands, tenure regimes have led to abuse and misuse of resources due to dominant user rights existing within individual land ownership. Sustainable conservation of renewable natural resources must be based on public education, mutual agreement on their utilization and the recognition of the rights of the rural people who own, live with and earn a living on them within ecological limits.
Land tenure systems influence the use to which land is put for economic and social development. Yet land use determines whether a resource cold be conserved or not; and the level of conservation attainable for natural resources. Land tenure is a tool for conservation and it involves sets of rules and regulations used to control and manage natural resources: soils, water, wild living resources and the environment. Land tenure systems are dynamic. They respond to socio-economic and political changes put in place for resource utilization. Tenure systems are however not monospecific: they vary from one rural community to another but pivoted by three broad systems of communal, individual and family ownership.
Land tenure is a social institution in Nigeria. The tenure streams have evolved through war and settlement but based on local administration of natural resources. Over the years, land tenure had been the decisive factor in resource management at the local level. Unfortunately, the impact of tenure on natural resources allocation and exploitation is often ignored in public land policy. Yet land tenure issues contribute to deforestation, degradation of the environment, lowering of carrying capacities of soils, poaching and extinction of wild biotic resources.
This paper examines the effect of land tenure on natural resources conservation in the rainforest ecosystems of Nigeria.
The indigenous land tenure in Nigeria is communal. Access to land is based on membership of a land holding community by birth. Right to natural resources such as land, plants, animals and water is often communal (Osemeodo, 1991). The communal tenure enjoys strong proprietary and security rights to biotic resources in rural areas between and among two or more indigenous settlements respectively. Break down in traditional tenure and disputes on boundary marks have made governments to be involved in boundary adjustments in administrative units throughout the country; for communities to have exclusive rights to discrete areas of land.
When the tenure system is stabilized at the local level, it responds to changes in land use from communal to individual. But at the village level, the tenure system involves some element of societal control of land use (Bruce, 1988).
At the local level, natural resources are held as a common property. This implies common exploitation and management of resources with respect to hunting, collection of firewood, harvesting of fruits, nuts, leaves and even farming or grazing of livestock. It also relates to group interest and control of resources; with each group composed of extended family, a lineage or a village defined by common descent or common residence. The control of land is vested in council of chiefs and elders who hold them in trust for all members of the community. Land is allocated to individual indigenous farmer or household for farming where land has no conflicting rights. With increasing population pressure, access to land is carried out on equity basis until land reallocation looses its points.
Land is passed from generation to generation with customary rules of succession. Nevertheless, where agricultural cultivation is stabilized, dominant user rights are acquired on the land by the individual farmer and the land reverts to individual ownership within the family land or the village land.
Natural resource utilization means the difference between life and death to rural economies. Natural resources are used for traditional health care delivery, recreation, food and income generations. Therefore sustained conservation of natural resources through traditional rules, regulations and taboos have evolved over the years as the local tool for natural resources conservation.
The reservation of forest for shrines, and for evil and forbidden bushes has ensured long term conservation of plants such as Chrysophyllum albidum, Irvingia grandifolia, Sterculia africana, Elais guinensis, Parkia bigobbosa and Dialium guinensis for common utilization. These trees are relatively abundant in natural forests today when compared to other trees whose fruits or leaves are of little value to rural people. Taboos also exist against hunting of certain species of wild animals among various ethnic or religious groups.
The traditional methods of resource conservation through common property resource utilization have failed to meet modern requirements. Extensive land cultivation for cash crop production, changes in beliefs of people towards taboos and the inability to enforce the traditional regulations in the face of state laws have made common property regulations to break down. Nevertheless the ethics of conserving natural resources for future generations through protection or artificial regeneration of economic tress in individual farms are in vogue in many parts of the rainforest zone.
The commercialization of agricultural production through cash crop production, cocoa, rubber, oil palm and coffee stabilized land use and led to inheritance of land and individual land ownership. The land tenure recognizes properties to land titles, promotes strong attachment to land and perpetrates unequal access to land. The policy of land under the system is that local land owners:
have full user rights over all land acquired through pioneer clearing, inheritance, sale, gift and rights to manage and control existing wild biotic resources, water and soils for domestic and commercial purposes;
release land for public use through sale, loan or traditional process of negotiations;
recognize and respect communal land tenure as relates to boundary marks among different land holding units, traditional shrine forests, public lands and
have full control on the land for agricultural production in terms of farming period, the cropping system and the length of fallow. He is not answerable to misuse or abuse of land.
The individual land tenure has led to the concentration of land in few hands thereby depriving others of subsistence opportunities. The unequal land tenure experienced in Eastern Nigeria seriously endangered the soils which farmers mine beyond their carrying capacities thus encouraging sheet and gully erosion. Land ownership is skewed in favour of the rich to the disadvantage of the poor who eventually remain landless or refugees in their traditional lands
The alienation patterns of land result in extensive subdivision (Chubb, 1961) generated by indigenous inheritance on one hand and in the other, the differences of soils and topography of the environment which encourage farmers to own fragmented parcels of land in different locations. In the face of unsettled agricultural development some tenure systems secure farm and not land (Bruce, 1988) and farmers may loose land for communal development thus creating insecurity for private lands and forest reserves which are particularly close to settlements.
The implications of individual land ownership and dominant user rights on resource conservation are varied. They include
inability of the natural vegetation to exist in contiguous pattern for the stability of wild biotic resources, soils and water sources.
lack of third party influence on the control of land has led to abuse and misuse of natural resources. For example, the over exploitation of soils for agricultural production lead to declining crop yield and eventual degradation of the environment as in many parts of Eastern Nigeria.
Rendering farmers landless. Farmers who are unable to gain access to the land through sale and inheritance migrate to areas where farmlands are relatively abundant.
Perpetration of unequal land tenure. Rural land owners hardly support conservation measures in the face of land scarcity.
Massive destruction of cultural and economic trees useful to rural economies. Most of the indigenous trees protected under the common property utilization are destroyed in mechanized agricultural production thereby endangering the diversity of indigenous plant species.
Forest and game reserves are a form of tenure imposed on traditional communal land ownership system. Because the natural resources sustain the rural economies for food, cash and shelter, their interests were accommodated in the reservation exercise (Egboh, 1985).
Two steps were taken: the first was to create enclaves for indigenous settlers who could not be resettled in different locations. The second was to give user rights to families or entice village communities to exploit for domestic requirements, wild biotic resources within the reserve. In order cases, the rural people were given user rights in paths to bury their dead and worship their deities within the reserves. While the main objectives of creating the reserves were to conserve wild plants and animals and to produce timber on sustainable basis, the natives were made to understand that the reserves were created for their interests (Adeyoju, 1975). To convince them, the natives were paid royalties on the reserve land.
The colonial land policy of dual land use within the reserves was weak and undermined the principles on which biotic resources could adequately sustain the growing human population within the rainforest ecosystem. First the rural population were given "open access" to exploit natural resources without any form of control. The land area within the reserve in which the resources could be exploited were not indicated. The rural communities exploited resources beyond their traditional lands within the reserves.
Second, the period in years by which the resources would continue to be exploited by these communities were not given nor was the population of individuals allowed to exploit forest products at any given time. There was no monitoring system by which the rate of resource exploitation could be known and controlled. Forth, the actual family members given user rights in reserves are no longer known thereby making resource exploitation a free for all affair within the reserves.
The consequences of dual land use between the indigenous landowners and government within the reserves are far reaching. For instance, changes in the status of reserves from forest to game management are not compatible with the user rights enjoyed by rural communities within the reserves. Attempts by government to rescind the user rights has not met with success (Bassey, 1990). The local people are at pains in accepting land policies which tend to destabilize their economic base. The conflict in land use has been one of the root cause of poaching in forest reserves.
The tenure imposed on economic trees in private lands is a major cause of concern for the rural farmers. The enforcement of tree protection regulation outside the reserves has established poor working relation between the rural people and the government. This has made many rural farmers not cooperative with foresters in tree planting campaigns on private lands (Bassey, 1990). The rural farmers view three planting on their lands as an extension of forest reserves, and government control of farm trees on their lands aside from the natural trees.
Inspite of the land use decree of 1978, which vests the ownership of land in the state governments, rural land owners still look onto the reserves as their traditional lands and there have been pressures from local communities for de-reservation. The growing demand for reserve lands for agricultural production has led to habitat loss of wild animals and reduction in diversity of indigenous plant species. This has generated conflict in resource use and management
The legislative control of natural resources along lines of tenure regimes is harmful for resource protection. The formulation of laws and their enforcement, though often weak, are decided on separately and in the realm of the governments which are responsible for the laws (Osemeobo, 1989).
Actually, enforcement of legislation in the areas constituting the national parks across the country is a federal government affair; while forest reserves and lands thereof are the responsibility of state governments. Forest lands outside the state forest reserves are owned and controlled by communities. Utilization activities in the community forest have been uncontrolled and unco-ordinated. The devolution of control of forests outside reserves aimed to stem encroachment into forest reserves. Today deforestation occurs mostly in these community forest and unfortunately, forest departments have no authority over community forest apart from collecting tariff for wood extracted there from.
The pursuit of sustainable conservation of natural resources at the local level must be based on an understanding of the rural people. Answers must be sought to the following questions. Whose lands and whose resources? What roles do these resources play in the social, cultural and economic well being of the rural economies? Are rural people aware of the dearth of indigenous biotic resources for future generations of Nigerians?
In the past few decades, forestry department had established poor working relationship with the traditional landowners in forest reservation and moreso by imposing tenure rights on wild animals and indigenous timber trees.
The persecution of natives in enforcing forest laws within and outside the reserves did not go well with rural communities. This created a cat and dog relationship in resource control and management. Yet, the rural people were often blamed for not supporting government programmes aimed at sustaining the environment.
However, the trend in resource conservation, has changed. The view is strongly held by conservationist that to ensure the full cooperation of the rural people in resource conservation, the forests must have an immediate economic importance for the people who own the resources, live with them and live by them. (IIED, 1989; IUCN, 1989).
In some states of southern Nigeria particularly Cross River and Edo States, communities are now involved in forest management following the evolution of new forestry sector strategies. For instance, Cross River State which has the last remaining pristine rainforest in Nigeria has in place a forest strategy which recognizes that for sustainable management of the forest resources of the state to be feasible will depend upon the active collaboration of the major stakeholders, principally the local communities, the forestry Department and the timber industry.
The strategy has the long term objective of assuring the conservation and rational utilization of the state forest resources through improved protection and management and the sustainable exploitation of both timber and non-timber products. At the same time, the socio-economic benefits that the local people derive from the forest will be increased and secured.
In addressing these problems in other parts of Nigeria where there is no community participation, the following remain crucial:
i. Government should recognize the rights of indigenous people in the management of their ancestral lands. Poaching activities are an issue of land tenure. In order to achieve a conservation level for sustained production of goods and services, the rural communities should actively participate in the control, management and utilization of natural resources in government reserves. This can only be based on full understanding of the need for conservation and the negative impacts of environmental degradation. A mutual dialogue between the people and government is the main instrument by which common interests can be accommodated in public land management.
ii. Sustainable land use practices in both private and public lands should be enforced through legislation. This will put in check the misuse and abuse of land through dominant user rights enjoyed by land owners under the individual land ownership system.
iii. The private sector should be involved in tree planting on lands outside the reserves. Provision for alternative sources of wild animal production for meat should be made; multiplication projects and ranching of game with domestic stock.
iv. As conservation measures are cost effective, governments should provide adequate funds at the local, state and federal levels for the conservation of natural resources.
v. Public education should be enunciated by virile extension services, radio and television programmes, seminars, workshops and symposia. Public awareness will instill conservation ethics into the populace for effective conservation of natural resources.
Land tenure has been the main cause of natural resources degradation. But land tenures have been treated as a side issue in project execution, hence the management controls have faced serious leakages: poaching, dereservation, misuse and abuse of farmlands, deforestation and extensive destruction of wild biotic resources. The solution to the problem of resource conservation is far from being attained.
Governments should acknowledge and recognize the rights of the indigenous people to their natural heritage and guide them through mutual understanding on how resources should be managed on sustainable basis.
Adeyoju, S.K. (1975), Forestry and the Nigeria Economy. Ibadan University press, Ibadan, Nigeria. 294pp.
Bassey, E.E. (1990) Why people don’t grow tress: A case study of Nigerian Small holders 30 - 31.
Bruce, J.W. Land Tenure Issues in project design and strategies for agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. LTC Research paper 128. Madison, Land Tenure centre, University of Wisconsin 190pp.
Chubb, L.T. (1961), Ibo and Land Tenure. University of Ibadan Press, Ibadan, Nigeria 115pp.
Egboh, E. (1985) Forestry Policy in Nigeria 1986- 1987, University of Nigeria Press, Nsukka, 246pp.
IIED, (1989) International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Annual Report 1988-89, 36pp.
IUCN (1989) From Strategy to Action. The IUCN response to the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Gland 96pp.
Osemeobo, G.J. (1987) The Migrant Igbira Farmers and food crop production in Bendel State, Nigeria.
Osemeobo, G.J. (1989) Forest Recreational Land use and zoological gardens in a Developing Economy. The case of Southern Nigeria Environmental Conservation 16(i) 69-74.
Osemeobo, G.J. (1990) Poaching in Wildlife Conservation. The experience in Nigeria. The Nigerian Journal of forestry 20(1 & 2): 35-40.
Osemeobo, G.J. (1990) Land use policies and biotic conservation: Problems and Prospects for forestry Development in Nigeria. Land use Policy 7(4): 314-322.
Osemeobo, G.J. (1991) Effects of Common property resources utilization on wildlife conservation in Nigeria Geojournal 23(3) 241-248.
| [1] Executive Director, Ed
Basee & Co, Calabar, Nigeria. Email: [email protected] |