Upload
trandan
View
224
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
2
International
• US$ 141 Billion of total timber trade (ITTO, 2004)
• US$ 8 Billion tropical timber (ITTO, 2004)
• US$ 19 Billion NTFP international trade (PROFOR, 2005)
• US$ 37 Billion pharmaceuticals (Laird, 2002)
Scale of Forest Enterprises
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
3
• 98% of wood industry in Brazil SMEs; 94% in India,
• NWFPs are > 30% rural incomes in 14 African countries
• At least 763,000 grass/cane sellers in Africa
Most Forest Enterprise is Small Scale in Developing Countries
• 18 million headloaders, mainly women, in India
• 0.5 M mandays/yr generated by Petén CFEs,
• 1 permanent job for every US$10,000 invested in Mexico CFEs
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
4
Important supplier of forest products
Financial and economic viability
Can have high returns to local economy in terms of employment, diversifying income streams, supporting agricultural production, and business skills
Platform for effective biodiversity conservation, fire control, watershed management
Enhance cultural well being and investment in social goods
Generate increased revenues at multiple levels of the productive chain
CFEs generate many types of benefits
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
5
Conservation Benefits exceed investmentIn southern Mexico, GIS documents forest conservation in tropical timber-
producing CFEs (Bray, et al 2002)
6
Community enterprises in frontier areas can exceed protected area benefits
Research indicates less deforestation in CFE forests Some CFEs are as effective, in not more, than the state as managers
Guatemala Community Guatemala Community ConcessionsConcessions
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
7
Pueblos mancomunados belongs to thezapoteca ethnicity, and actively conserves its customary systems and the values of itsancestors
Conserving our values:
Honesty, work ethic, respect (for human life, the family, nature), the principle ofauthority, the practice of “tequio” (work for collective benefit), the “guelaguetza”event, our love of education.
Statement from Peublos Macomunados
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
8
Background: Forestry’s feudal history (and present)
77
4
7
12
Administered by Government
Reserved for Community and Indigenous Groups
Community / IndigenousIndividual / Firm
2002
2015
1. Colonial/imperial era: 77% of all forests government owned
2. Post WWII – industrial expansion/concession model, state-owned forest enterprises dominate
3. Centralized, proscriptive, overregulation (regardless of tenure)
4. ‘80’s-90’s collapse of industrial model: illegal logging, end of old growth, low, declining contributions to GDP, protected area focus
5. All models are state-centric
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
9Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
10
Global Context for CFEs is changing
Sarawuk Tropical Log Prices: SQ Up, Small and Super Small
0.00
100.00
200.00
Jan-9
8
Jan-9
9
Jan-0
0
Jan-0
1
Jan-0
2
Jan-0
3
Jan-0
4
Jan-0
5
1998 Prices = 100
Meranti SQ Up Meranti Small Meranti Super SmallKeruing SQ Up Keruing Small Keruing Super Small
Industrial Plantation Roundwood Output
0102030405060
1995 2010 2020 2050Year
% o
f tot
alin
dust
rial
roun
dwoo
prod
uctio
n Scenario 1Scenario 2
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
11
Why do Community Enterprises and SMEs have poor markets
Policies:Monopoly sellers and buyersDiscriminatory market policies, subsidiesUnreasonable, hi-cost rules & regulations (criminalization of small enterprises)Lack of legal ownership/control of the resource
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
12
Why do Community Enterprises and SMEshave poor markets
Community/Enterprise Factors
Internal conflict; disorganizationInadequate finance, info, technologyLack of market links, gaps in value chainUnable to exploit economies of scaleLack of business expertise
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
13
Source: Goldman Sachs Global Economics Paper 99
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
14
Inspiration from the Ag. Sector’60’s – ’90’s global community invests billions in establishing governance structure in agricultural areasRapid response to policy reforms
China ’78-’84 – regulatory, administrative, property reforms led to 2X production and 3X income increase
No similar level of effort in the forest sectorGovernment’s beginning to respond, the Big Question: will these decisions be pro-poor, pro-community?
The Challenge: Establishing the Institutional Platform for Forest-based Development, Growth, Conservation
Indices of G ross O utput in C hinese A griculture
1978-2003
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1978 1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
T otal Farm ing Forestry
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
Communities respond to Policy and Tenure Reforms
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
16
CFEs expanding in scale and scope in response to policy reforms Examples
Bolivia: comprehensive reforms led to 1.1 million has.
of CFE forests since 1999 from none; smallholder area increased 5x
Mexico 1980s reforms enabled 1300 CFEs to emerge by 1995
Philippines: forest sector reform 10 years ago created new opportunities for community-based resource management
Gambia170,000 has. --honey, palm, timber
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
17
80 % of Mexico Forests managed by indigenous communities and ejidos since 1910Reforms in the 1980s and 1990s led to emergence of CFEs and CFE associations
• 1348 CFES in 1995; ~2400 CFEs today
Mexico: Response to Reforms
CFEs and their Associations in Mexico (1995)
3 2 6 2 1111461212141020
50100
150
200250
300
Cam
pech
e
Chihu
ahua
Dur
ango
Gue
rrer
o
Hidalgo
Jalis
co
Micho
acán
Nay
arit
Oax
aca
Pueb
la
Quintan
a
San Lu
ís
Sina
loa
Tamau
lípas
Vera
cruz
No.AssociationsNo. CFEs
18
Timber Volume Trends in Oaxaca CFE
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
m3
Volume
Mexico: Productivity Recovers after Transition to Communities
19
Community conservation is significant and growingat least 370 M has and probably triple that
Communities conserve more forests and forest landscapes than are in publicprotected areas systems
370 M in four continents compared to 450 M forest conservation overall
Communities invest as much in conservation as donors and governments in developing countries
1.3 billion compared to 1.4 billion
Main findings of the review
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
20Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
21Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
22
Wither Global Finance For Conservation
Government support to protected areas systems
Overseas development assistance and foundation support
Community investment
STABLE$ 3 billion per year$1000-3000/ha VS$12-200/ha LDC
IN DECLINE$ 1.3 billion a year ODA (1/3)$ 200 million a year Others
GROWINGCan be $ 1.5-2.5 billion per year at a minimum
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
23
1.Organized indigenous and traditional communities in their ancestral territories who own or administer large, areas of natural habitat. (minimum 120 million hectares).
2.Long-settled communities who own or administer working landscape mosaics, large patches of natural habitat, interspersed with intensive but biodiversity-compatible land uses (minimum 100 million hectares).
3.Recent settlers of agricultural frontier zones living in and around state and private lands, who are extractivists, agriculturalistsand/or pastoralists (minimum 50 million hectares).
4.Long-settled communities, practicing individual and community-based resource management in intensively-managed landscapes who actively seek to restore natural areas (+100 million hectares).
Types Of Community Conservation
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
24
Part of the 130 million hectares of indigenous reserves in the Amazon (Instituto Socio-ambiental 2001; Bamberger 2003)
One million hectares in the southern cone of Latin America (Oviedo 2002)Five million hectares of forested areas of Canada (Smith 2002)
Eight million hectares of community-managed forest lands within the U.S. (IFMAT 1993, Brechin et al. 2003)
At least 3 million hectares of community or village forests in 5,000 African communities (Alden Wiley 2000)
Type 1: Large Continguous Habitat
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
25
Agroforests in Central, South, East and West Africa
Community Forest enterprises in Mexico
Successional forests in agroforest systems of South and SE Asia
Sacred groves in India and Africa
Barrow 2000; Adams and McShane 1992; Neumann 1998
Bray, et al. 2002; Antinori and Bray 2003; Segura 2003
Poffenberger 2000; Colfer et al. 2001
Borrini-Fereyabend 2002; Pathak et al. 2002
Type 2: Community Forest Landscapes
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
26
Community Concessions in the Petén Guatemala (Sosa 2002, Oveido2003)
Extractive reserves in the Amazon (Nepstead et al, 2004, Amaral 2001)
NTFP management in the United States (Jones, McLain and Weijnand2004)
Transmigration settlers in Indonesia and Malay Peninsula (Colfer 2002)
Upland migrants who have maintained forested landscapes in the Philippines (Barry et al. 2002).
Type 3: New Settlers In The Forest
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
27
Successional forests in agroforestsystems of South and SE Asia
Organic and shade coffee in Mesoamerica
Collective plantations and forests in agricultural villages in China
Bushcare programs in Australia set aside biodiversity reserves in farmlands for watershed rehabilitation
Fox 1999, Gilmour and Fisher 2000.
Chapela 2001, Toledo 1998, 2001.
Miao et al 2004
Garrity et al 2001.
Type 4: Restoration Of Community Forest Landscapes
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
28
An Agenda For Producer CountriesCreate enabling conditions for CFE growth at national and regional level
Reduce regulatory barriers
Secure tenure and use rights
Promote business and technical support services
Support CFE networking and market information
Include CFEs into rule-setting processes for emerging markets
Tailor taxes and investments to multiple returns of CFEs (economic, social, conservation)
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
29
Recommendations For A New AgendaSupport community conservation efforts on their
terms rather than only seeking to conserve areas selected for their “biodiversity”
Empower and build capacity of communities to monitor and manage forests for conservation and sustainable use; community driven research models
Recognize tenure rights and work within co-managed models where multiple stakeholders and conflict--change the boundaries (India tribal bill)
Incorporate communities into policy setting and standards for emerging markets for ecosystem services and payment schemes.
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005
30
THANK YOU
Augusta Molnar
Forest Trends and Rights and Resources.
Presented at the Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005