Community based natural resource managment

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Thol Dina on November 10, 2010 at 6:33

Dear Karlyn,

Hello Karlyn. My name is Thol Dina; currently studying in Japan. Since my future study is similar to what you mentioned, I would like to give some ideas responses to your questions.

There are some literature reviews about the relationship between CF and poverty alleviation. Community Forestry has provided some tangible benefits to poor people. However, they did not show the scale of the relationship. Let's me share from my own research experience on CF before I give some cases of other countries. CF not only give chance to community to control their forest by themselves, but it gives them both legal management and benefits. Related to property regime and legal right of CF, I wrote in my Master Thesis and you can find it in Phnom Penh. With their own management, they can withdraw their resources from their forest. They could get benefit from timber and NTFP.

Let's me give me some cases in other countries.

-Income Generation from Community Forests in Nepal

A rapid appraisal of forest product utilization, income and patterns of expenditure of 1,788 FUGs from 12 hill and Terai districts in Nepal was carried out in 2002 and extrapolated to all FUGs in the country. The results indicated that the total annual cash income from the sale of forest products from community forests was Rupees 747 million (more than US$ 10 million). This amounted to almost 42% of the annual budget of the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation. At
the present time 100% of these benefits are going to the FUGs. To this figure can be added the cash equivalent of subsistence forest products and other income generated by the user groups, which was estimated to bring the total income to Rupees 1.8 billion (almost US$ 24 million). About 36% of the income from community forests was spent by the FUGs on community development activities such as building of schools, roads and drinking water facilities. Only 3%
was targeted towards specific pro-poor activities.

Source: Kanel and Niraula (2004)

-Vietnam (Apel et al. 2001)
A recent study in Vietnam demonstrated that poor people have been benefiting from cash income at household level from allocation of land under Forest Protection Contracts. Though poor households have no actual role in the management of forests, the revenue received for protection had been distributed equitably by communes. A strategy for community-based natural resource management to benefit poor households was also proposed and presented to the National Community Forestry Working Group.

-Lao PDR (Foppes and Ketphanh 2000, quoted in Fisher 2000; Nurse and Soydara 2001)

In one village in Oudomxay province, the villagers had faced rice deficiency for part of the year. Although individuals earned cash from collection and sale of bamboo shoots, the income was inadequate. An IUCN-NTFP Project team facilitated a series of village meetings which led to an agreement to ‘team up’ and sell collected bamboo shoots at fixed prices (by weight rather than number) and in a fixed place. Within a five-month period, the average income per family came to US$ 130. This was ‘at least four times more than the year before’. In addition, several hundred dollars were earned for a village development fund. In the context of rural incomes in Lao PDR, this amount is very significant for the poor households. The same project had also supported the development of rice banks to poor households to solve food deficit problems with a positive impact on forest conservation by reducing hunting levels during the food deficit period (wildlife was previously being sold to buy rice). Furthermore, poor households have been provided access to forests allocated to village authorities for the collection of subsistence products.

-Thailand (Fisher 2000)

In Pred Nai village in eastern Thailand, villagers are attempting to renovate a mangrove forest damaged by commercial shrimp farming. They initiated a mangrove management planning process which is being facilitated by RECOFTC project staff. So far the plan includes regulations to prevent (or reduce) over-harvesting of mangrove crabs which are a major source of income for poorer villagers (one collector can earn as much as Baht 500 or US$ 12 per day from crab
collecting.) Management includes mangrove protection and regeneration, as well as planting of mangrove species. Community members clearly recognize that crab numbers depend on adequate supplies of food from mangrove tree species. There is a clear link between forest conservation activities and economic benefits. At Pred Nai, the benefits in terms of poverty alleviation are undisputed, but it is less certain that the management system, as it now stands, is
sustainable. It is, however, undergoing continuous development and there are good reasons for optimism based on the commitment of the community.

I hope we can exchange ideas in the future. I will visit Cambodia in December. I hope we can have a talk about this topic.

Best Regards,

Dina

• ▶ Reply