What rewards community forestry?

摘要

The potential for community forestry to bring additional income to the forest-dependent communes exists. Proof that it can alleviate poverty of rural populations can be adduced quite easily. But the real challenge appears to be convincing the governments to pursue this avenue as a viable option, with many built-in advantages. There are many factors in favour of such an approach. For one, the state-led management systems have performed dismally, with both the resource and environmental considerations. Next, the approach favoured the rich more than the forest-dependent communities. With community forestry, it can be argued that sustainable forest management is more likely to be adhered to, since the survival of the communities is directly tied to the resource base. Then again, local communities have developed knowledge systems and institutions that regulate well the use of forest resources. It would therefore be appropriate that governments should maximize this opportunity to bring about dual goals, one of conservation and poverty alleviation. The stumbling block still remains the governments' inertia to change. The history of state forestry is indeed one of social conflict than that of technical inadequacy. On the one side, professional foresters still hold the view that timber production can only be attained through exclusion of humans from the forests. The disaffected communities have responded with encroachment and arson. Considering the forest areas delineated for community forestry are mostly depauperate, such conflicts need not be revisited. However, the forest policies in most countries have to be revised to support community forestry.