Justifying climate resilience through participatory forest management in a natural forest involves making a strong case for how this approach can contribute to mitigating and adapting to climate change. Here are steps and key points to help you justify the importance of this approach:

Remember to tailor your justification to the specific context of the natural forest and the local community's needs and aspirations. Providing a well-rounded argument with scientific evidence, social benefits, and economic considerations will help garner support for your climate resilience initiatives through participatory forest management.

Dear Md Zafar Alam Bhuiyan , I think the points 1-12 sufficiently answer your question, I don't have anything substantial to add, and from a non-expert viewpoint, I'd say perhaps a very important parameter would be to convince the local stakeholders that they have more to gain, even materially and financially (this is the most difficult part perhaps) from preserving the forest rather than either allowing others to destroy it or destroying it themselves. However, in order to achieve this, the infrastructure and support ought to be there already to support these stakeholders in order to just keep living off the (sustainable) forest as they have been living perhaps for centuries.

Let us first note that participatory forest management is not a good management and conservation strategy for our forests.

dear Justin Dossou , mind providing an argument for your claim? :)

best wishes,

haris

Haris Shekeris

Thank you for your contributions here. You've highlighted a crucial aspect of forest preservation that often gets overlooked - the need to engage and convince local stakeholders of the benefits of preserving the forest and provide them with the necessary support to sustain their way of life. This is indeed a challenging but vital parameter in any conservation effort. Here's a more detailed explanation:

Preserving a forest is not just an environmental concern; it's also a socio-economic one. Many communities around the world depend on forests for their livelihoods, whether through traditional hunting, gathering, or sustainable resource management. When considering forest preservation, it's essential to address the following key points:

In summary, convincing local stakeholders to support forest preservation requires a multifaceted approach that addresses their economic, social, and cultural needs. It's a challenging but essential aspect of sustainable conservation efforts that can lead to the coexistence of thriving forests and resilient communities.

Regards

Justin Dossou

Thank you very much for your concept. But why dear sir?

While participatory forest management (PFM) has been widely recognized as an effective strategy for sustainable forest management and conservation in many contexts, it's important to acknowledge that there may be specific situations or conditions where PFM may not be the most suitable approach. Here are some reasons why PFM might not always be the best choice:

It's crucial to recognize that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to forest management and conservation. The suitability of PFM as a strategy should be assessed on a case-by-case basis, considering local conditions, ecological factors, and the capacity and willingness of local stakeholders.

In situations where PFM is not deemed appropriate, alternative conservation strategies, such as protected areas with strong enforcement, sustainable logging concessions, or market-based incentives for conservation, may be more effective in achieving conservation goals while addressing the specific challenges of the area in question. The key is to select the most appropriate approach based on a comprehensive assessment of the circumstances and objectives at hand.

Dear Md Zafar Alam Bhuiyan ,

Totally agree with your points 1-8, especially on the importance providing local stakeholders with real, tangible economic incentives to continue preserving the forest. And this may be one of the toughest fights I can imagine, in the face of for example huge multinationals wanting to use the land for crop cultivation (as for this to happen, other things such as biodiesel or soy feed to animals may have to be rethought too - unfortunately there's demand for these things at other links of a chain).

Best Wishes,

Haris

Haris Shekeris

Thank you very much.

I completely share your agreement with points 1-8, and I couldn't agree more on the crucial importance of providing local stakeholders with concrete economic incentives to encourage the preservation of forests. It's undoubtedly a formidable challenge, especially when facing the interests of major multinational corporations that may be vying for land to expand crop cultivation. This situation raises several interconnected issues that require careful consideration.

Firstly, the pressure for land conversion for agriculture, particularly for crops like soy or biofuel feedstocks, has indeed been a significant driver of deforestation. These industries are often intertwined with global supply chains, and addressing this problem requires not only local efforts but also a broader, systemic approach.

To tackle this challenge effectively, here are a few key strategies:

Addressing the complex issue of deforestation driven by global demand for agricultural commodities is undoubtedly challenging. However, with a combination of local empowerment, international cooperation, and responsible corporate practices, it is possible to strike a balance between economic development and environmental conservation, ultimately benefiting both local communities and the planet.

Regards

Justin Dossou

Participatory forest management (PFM) is a popular forest management as it has many positive impacts in my country such as illicit cutting, and encroachment of forest land has decreased through Alternative Income Generating Activities( AIGA) but the following are the criticisms:

Participatory forest management (PFM) is a conservation and management strategy that involves local communities and stakeholders in decision-making processes related to forest resources. While PFM has its merits and can be effective in certain contexts, it is not without criticism. Here are some common criticisms of participatory forest management:

It's important to note that the success or failure of participatory forest management largely depends on how it is implemented, the specific context, and the level of support provided to local communities. While PFM has its criticisms, it can also be a valuable tool for achieving sustainable forest management and conservation when carried out effectively, with attention to addressing these challenges and ensuring that local communities genuinely benefit from and participate in the process.

Still, I will say, that a coin has two heads, it is not possible to separate one from another.......

Dear Md Zafar Alam Bhuiyan , excellent points, totally agree that each one of them is valuable and that they should all be on the table in serious discussions about saving the forests!

Haris Shekeris

I will request you to add more that will help to add value to this thread.

Thank you very much,

Dear Md Zafar Alam Bhuiyan ,

I don't know if this helps, but here's a small thought: It may be good to try to do outreach and enlarge the pool of stakeholders to ultimately involve all citizens of your country or even beyond that, all citizens of the world. A measure would be to organize school trips to the forest areas for children from distant areas. The reason is that you don't want your forest protection policies to be at the mercy of the whims of government, but have all citizens develop an environmental conscience.

I hope this helps!

Best Wishes,

Haris