Collaborative management of forests

Governments around the world increasingly seek to manage their forests with the collaboration of the people living nearby. Ministries of forestry or their equivalents usually do this by offering local people access to selected forest products or forest land, income from forest resources, or opportun...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wollenberg, Eva Karoline, Campbell, Bruce M., Shackleton, S., Edmunds, D., Shanley, P.
Format: Brief
Language:Inglés
Published: International Food Policy Research Institute 2004
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/18936
_version_ 1855522229810364416
author Wollenberg, Eva Karoline
Campbell, Bruce M.
Shackleton, S.
Edmunds, D.
Shanley, P.
author_browse Campbell, Bruce M.
Edmunds, D.
Shackleton, S.
Shanley, P.
Wollenberg, Eva Karoline
author_facet Wollenberg, Eva Karoline
Campbell, Bruce M.
Shackleton, S.
Edmunds, D.
Shanley, P.
author_sort Wollenberg, Eva Karoline
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Governments around the world increasingly seek to manage their forests with the collaboration of the people living nearby. Ministries of forestry or their equivalents usually do this by offering local people access to selected forest products or forest land, income from forest resources, or opportunities for communicating with government forestry officials. In return, the agency obliges local people to cooperate in managing the forests around them by protecting existing forest or by planting trees. Governments claim that the programs devolve control over forests to local people and provide more secure livelihoods, as well as help maintain and regenerate forests. By sharing rights among local groups and the state, the programs also help to reconcile the resource claims of local people with those of the national government. Everybody supposedly wins. Millions of the rural poor now participate in collaborative forest management schemes under a variety of tenurial and organizational arrangements.We examine those arrangements and ask whether local people have indeed gained more access to benefits from and control over forests. Our findings suggest that most co-management projects actually maintain and even extend central government control.Where communities had already managed forests in Orissa and Uttarakhand in India, the government required that they share their incomes with the state forest department. Governments in many countries typically predetermine which species can be planted in reforestation or agroforestry schemes and what types of organizations can be given rights to manage forests.Whereas local people have gained greater legal access to forests and some might have increased their incomes, many have also lost out. For example, game areas and plantations have been frequently established on land used by poorer members of communities for grazing or cultivation. Local people have also not shown a consistent interest in forest management.
format Brief
id CGSpace18936
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2004
publishDateRange 2004
publishDateSort 2004
publisher International Food Policy Research Institute
publisherStr International Food Policy Research Institute
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace189362025-11-12T05:31:07Z Collaborative management of forests Wollenberg, Eva Karoline Campbell, Bruce M. Shackleton, S. Edmunds, D. Shanley, P. forest management collaboration rural communities community forestry institutions government property rights collective action poverty rural population land tenure state intervention central government Governments around the world increasingly seek to manage their forests with the collaboration of the people living nearby. Ministries of forestry or their equivalents usually do this by offering local people access to selected forest products or forest land, income from forest resources, or opportunities for communicating with government forestry officials. In return, the agency obliges local people to cooperate in managing the forests around them by protecting existing forest or by planting trees. Governments claim that the programs devolve control over forests to local people and provide more secure livelihoods, as well as help maintain and regenerate forests. By sharing rights among local groups and the state, the programs also help to reconcile the resource claims of local people with those of the national government. Everybody supposedly wins. Millions of the rural poor now participate in collaborative forest management schemes under a variety of tenurial and organizational arrangements.We examine those arrangements and ask whether local people have indeed gained more access to benefits from and control over forests. Our findings suggest that most co-management projects actually maintain and even extend central government control.Where communities had already managed forests in Orissa and Uttarakhand in India, the government required that they share their incomes with the state forest department. Governments in many countries typically predetermine which species can be planted in reforestation or agroforestry schemes and what types of organizations can be given rights to manage forests.Whereas local people have gained greater legal access to forests and some might have increased their incomes, many have also lost out. For example, game areas and plantations have been frequently established on land used by poorer members of communities for grazing or cultivation. Local people have also not shown a consistent interest in forest management. 2004 2012-06-04T09:08:58Z 2012-06-04T09:08:58Z Brief https://hdl.handle.net/10568/18936 en Open Access application/pdf International Food Policy Research Institute Wollenberg, E., Campbell, B.M., Shackleton, S., Edmunds, D., Shanley, P. 2004. Collaborative management of forests. 2020 Focus briefs 11 No. 8. In: Ruth S. Meinzen-Dick and Monica Di Gregorio (eds.). Collective action and property rights for sustainable development. Washington, DC, IFPRI. IFPRI. 2p. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/18936
spellingShingle forest management
collaboration
rural communities
community forestry
institutions
government
property rights
collective action
poverty
rural population
land tenure
state intervention
central government
Wollenberg, Eva Karoline
Campbell, Bruce M.
Shackleton, S.
Edmunds, D.
Shanley, P.
Collaborative management of forests
title Collaborative management of forests
title_full Collaborative management of forests
title_fullStr Collaborative management of forests
title_full_unstemmed Collaborative management of forests
title_short Collaborative management of forests
title_sort collaborative management of forests
topic forest management
collaboration
rural communities
community forestry
institutions
government
property rights
collective action
poverty
rural population
land tenure
state intervention
central government
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/18936
work_keys_str_mv AT wollenbergevakaroline collaborativemanagementofforests
AT campbellbrucem collaborativemanagementofforests
AT shackletons collaborativemanagementofforests
AT edmundsd collaborativemanagementofforests
AT shanleyp collaborativemanagementofforests