What are the indicators of Good Forest Policies in participatory natural resource management?
I think the following are the major one:
- Fair benefit sharing between government and the local community
- Empowerment of local institutions
- Good enforcement of laws and bylaws
in addition to Lemma's points, the development of a sustainable forest product harvesting scheme that can ensure no net forest loss.
To analyze good forest policies, you have to analyze three main aspects; social, environmental and economic aspects. In social- you have to examine participation of right holders/stakeholders, benefit sharing, accountability, decision making roles etc. Likewise, forest conservation for environmental protection- identification of species, protection of engendered species, plantation, etc . Furthermore, forest should be conserved for economic benefit of the people, so that researcher have to examine all three aspects to dig out...
Hello Nvenakeng Suzanne Awung!
In addition to what Lemma, amartya and Bhola have indicated you must also ensure that Gender Issues and all Social costs/externalities are incorporated in the Management System.
Thank you are for your valuable contributions @ Greyson, Bhola, Tiki, Sahal et al.
Please kindly check on figure 1 attached and state what you think could be added and explain your reasons.
Let's keep the ball rolling.
Environmental health in all aspects of earth, water, air and soil. No Industrial forestry.
Economic vitality thru decentralized and inter-dependent small businesses all contributing to value added, job creating finished products.
Social equality thru creating hope toward future generations as sustainable, long term jobs are created and maintained.
Taxing greed and eliminating poverty.
"There's enough for everyman's need but not for everyman's greed" Gandhi..
simple...if everyone was conscious.
Though it is not direct answer to your question I recommend you to read (if not read already) the Attached article on ten Principles of landscape approach by Sayer et al.,(2013)
Thanks @ Sisay, Craig, Murray, Poudel et al. for your input. Your comments have providing more insight especially the article on landscape approach by Sayer et al.
More peer-review papers are welcome.
How many here have any 'hands on' experience and how many are just academics? I'm curious....
I see your point Craig Petterson. However, information from both academicians and those with practical experience will provide greater understanding on how to better evaluate forest policies.
Yes, Prince. There are a few examples across North America, but very few and marginalized compared to Industrial forestry.
When I asked Mary Mitsos of the National Forest Foundation who helps fund different community groups, if she could point to ONE thriving rural community anywhere in the country. She was honest and said NO. Consider that she has been directly involved with helping and or funding 'sustainable forestry for over 35 years.
I find it fascinating that researchers in their little cubicles can find more examples than practitioners ... 'on the ground'. Compounding these problems are that Industrial forestry makes community based forestry nearly impossible when it attempts to follow after Industrial forestry.
Ecological inputs ( academic) are necessary in planning (*and monitoring) stages to ensure that forest management ( both participatory and protected area) ensure the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services such as regulating streamflow. However, the real challenge is mobilizing communities, creating shareholder networks and effective communication, apart from aligning nontimber forest produce with market demand. And strong community presence is perhaps the only way to fight greed (outside investors who want to have large scale forestry/cash crop agriculture schemes and pay off the govt to get these lands).
- Badges
- Science topic