Autonomy, ambiguity and symbolism in African politics: The development of forest policy in Sierra Leone

Abstract

The stated forest policies of governments of developing countries, published in official documents, often differ from their actual policies. The historical trend in actual forest policy in Sierra Leone is explained by changes in the balance of pressures on policy makers from internal exploitative and protectionist groups. The combined trend in actual and stated policies is episodic, passing from the exploitative phase to the sustainable management (1911), ambiguous (1922), exploitative (1929), sustainable management (1946) and ambiguous phases (1968). This contrasts with the progression through exploitative, ambiguous and sustainable management phases seen in other countries. Divergence in colonial times from a stated policy of sustainable management, justified by a narrative framed within a colonial environmental discourse, mainly resulted from external pressure stemming from an Imperial discourse of political and economic security. Divergence in the post-colonial era is explained by lack of domestic ownership of colonial, and later eco-imperialist, forest policies, and the peripherality of policy texts of the institutional state to the ‘shadow’ neo-patrimonial state, which was the real centre of power and added institutional ambiguity to policy ambiguity as a tool to contest overseas pressures and defend national autonomy. There is no apparent link between divergence and type of political system, probably because of the pervasiveness of the neo-patrimonial state, though ambiguity was less prevalent in colonial times. Indigenous democratization and pluralization should help domestic protectionist groups to become more powerful, but external attempts to impose political change might be counterproductive by prompting further instrumental use of ambiguity.