Building broad‐based partnership for sustainable forest management: the Model Forest experience in Cameroon

Conservation, protection, and proper utilization of forests play an important role in environmental sustainability of the globe. The ultimate goal of sustainable forest management is to create a balanced and appropriate solution for human well-being and preservation of forest ecosystems. However, one of the prominent obstacles to achieve this goal is the gap existing between governmental development aims and the perspectives of local people and communities. Forest conservation requires an integrated management that works in partnership with local communities. Local and community-based forest management is a multi-dimensional approach to sustainable forest management in which different stakeholders with different interests play a part in achieving a common goal. However, little research has been done in this area. In this regard, the main purpose of this chapter was to examine the role of participation of local community in sustainable land and forest management. This purpose fulfilled through six steps. In the first step, the role of community participation in sustainable forest management and its typology were explained. I the second and third steps, the barriers and drivers of local communities’ participation were introduced, respectively. In the fourth step, techniques for participation of local communities in forest management were analyzed. In the fifth step, some practical experiences related to the participation of local communities in forest management were highlighted. In the sixtieth or final step, some social principles were introduced for agricultural system and interventions aiming at sustainable management of forests and lands.

Who Counts Most? Assessing Human Well-Being in Sustainable Forest Management presents a tool, ‘the Who Counts Matrix', for differentiating ‘forest actors', or people whose well-being and forest management are intimately intertwined, from other stakeholders. The authors argue for focusing formal attention on forest actors in efforts to develop sustainable forest management. They suggest seven dimensions by which forest actors can be differentiated from other stakeholders, and a simple scoring technique for use by formal managers in determining whose well-being must form an integral part of sustainable forest management in a given locale. Building on the work carried out by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) on criteria and indicators, they present three illustrative sets of stakeholders, from Indonesia, Côte d'Ivoire and the United States, and Who Counts Matrices from seven trials, in an appendix.

Who counts most? Assessing human well being in sustainable forest management presents a tool, 'the Who Counts Matrix', for differentiating 'forest actors', or people whose well-being and forest management are intimately intertwined, from other stakeholders. The authors argue for focusing formal attention on forest actors in efforts to develop sustainable forest management. They suggest seven dimensions by which forest actors can be differentiated from other stakeholders, and a simple scoring technique for use by formal managers in determining whose well being must form an integral part of sustainable forest management in a given locale. Building on the work carried out by the Center for International Forestry Research on criteria and indicators, they present three illustrative sets of stakeholders, from Indonesia, Côte d'Ivoire and the United States, and Who Counts Matrices from seven trials, in an appendix.

Who counts most? Assessing human well being in sustainable forest management presents a tool, 'the Who Counts Matrix', for differentiating 'forest actors', or people whose well-being and forest management are intimately intertwined, from other stakeholders. The authors argue for focusing formal attention on forest actors in efforts to develop sustainable forest management. They suggest seven dimensions by which forest actors can be differentiated from other stakeholders, and a simple scoring technique for use by formal managers in determining whose well being must form an integral part of sustainable forest management in a given locale. Building on the work carried out by the Center for International Forestry Research on criteria and indicators, they present three illustrative sets of stakeholders, from Indonesia, Cote d'Ivoire and the United States, and Who Counts Matrices from seven trials, in an appendix.

Who counts most? Assessing human well being in sustainable forest management presents a tool, 'the Who Counts Matrix', for differentiating 'forest actors', or people whose well-being and forest management are intimately intertwined, from other stakeholders. The authors argue for focusing formal attention on forest actors in efforts to develop sustainable forest management. They suggest seven dimensions by which forest actors can be differentiated from other stakeholders, and a simple scoring technique for use by formal managers in determining whose well being must form an integral part of sustainable forest management in a given locale. Building on the work carried out by the Center for International Forestry Research on criteria and indicators, they present three illustrative sets of stakeholders, from Indonesia, Cote d'Ivoire and the United States, and Who Counts Matrices from seven trials, in an appendix.

The CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA), led by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), focuses on the sustainable management of forests, trees and agroforestry systems. Strengthening the capacity of forestry, trees and agroforestry research, policy and implementing institutions and their staff is critical to FTA’s mission and is embedded in its work. Capacity development is a long-term process whereby individuals, organizations and their networks improve their systems, resources, skills and knowledge. This becomes reflected in their capacity to perform functions and solve problems to better address national and sub-national development objectives. Capacity development enables research and development organizations, individuals, and their networks to achieve impact.This capacity needs assessment was conducted in 2018 to identify the capacity needs of World Agroforestry (ICRAF) and CIFOR to achieve the research objectives and targets specified in the FTA II proposal 2017–2021, including the amended FP2 proposal. The capacity needs assessment focused on four key areas for analysis: partnerships, networking, resource mobilization and human resource capacities. The analysis and recommendations contained within this document result from data collated from more than 70 interviews conducted with flagship and cluster leaders and key actors within the FTA II management teams and partner organizations.

Despite a moratorium by the Indonesian government rejecting new logging concessions since May 2011, Indonesia saw 840,000 hectares of forests cleared in 2012 and deforestation levels continue to increase at an alarming rate every year. International experiences have shown that chances of sustainable long-term forest management improve when the ownership and management of forest resources remain with local communities. Once they have secured long-term access to resources through property rights they become confident enough to widen their time horizon and to invest in sustainable forestry practices. However, Indonesian forests are owned by the national government, which then delegates management rights to local levels of government. The ensuing struggle over control of forest resources between all levels of government caused weak legal and regulatory frameworks and a major barrier for sustainable forest management. Considering these complexities of forest governance, there is no simple way towards sustainable forest management and to the prevention of further deforestation. Nevertheless, several case studies from Indonesia and abroad can serve to inspire the following policy recommendations in Indonesia. They are based on the existing Indonesian system of forest classification and allowable land uses. For-profit businesses should be allowed to build and manage eco-tourism facilities in conservation forests (hutan konservasi). These activities will support the preservation of ecosystems and biodiversity. Protection forests (hutan lindung) are meant to prevent floods, control erosion, and maintain soil fertility. For their sustainable management, usufructuary rights should be granted to local communities allowing them to manage these forests and giving them limited rights to access forest resources. Finally, production forests (hutan produksi), where timber and non-timber products can be extracted, should either be handed over to local communities or be privatized. The national government should move away from approaching those forest areas as a source of national state revenues. Instead, it should allow these resources to support local income generation and growth.

Forest ecosystems are a prime example of the heated debates that have arisen around how forests should be managed, and what services and benefits they should deliver. The European transitions in governance to and from communist regimes have had significant impacts on forests and their management. Unstable legislative and institutional changes prior to, during, and after a communist regime, combined with unique remnant areas of high-conservation-value forests, make Romania an ideal case study to explore the social–ecological transitions of forest landscapes. The aim of this paper is two-fold. First, we present the origins of, the evolution of, and the current state of forest management and ownership in Romania during transitions between the pre-communist (–1945), communist (1945–1989), and EU periods (2007–). Second, we focus on the enablers and barriers in Romania towards sustainable forest management as defined by pan-European forest policies. We used a semi-systematic, five-step scientific literature review on forest ownership, governance, and management in Romania. The analysis shows that both enablers (e.g., forest certification) and barriers (e.g., redundancy and the questionable effectiveness of the network of protected areas; illegal, unsustainable, and unreported logging; loopholes in the legislative framework) have contributed to the current approaches to interpreting forests, forestry, and forest management. The installation of the communist regime translated into sustained wood yield forest management under singular forest ownership, which opposed the previous system and forest ownership pluralism. In the post-communist period, forestland restitution led to significant legislative changes, but forest management must still confront remnant elements of the communist approach. Both communist and post-communist policies related to forests have shaped the evolution of forest landscape management in Romania, thus stressing the need to learn from the past towards securing sustainable forest management into the future. These lessons provide insights on both positive and negative drivers of forest management, which can contribute to smooth future transition towards more sustainable forest management practices.

Sustainable forest management (SFM) plays a critical role in maintaining ecological balance, supporting livelihoods, and mitigating climate change. This study was conducted to explore the management practices and user perspectives regarding sustainable forest management in Nepal, focusing on community forestry and government-led initiatives. Using a mixed-methods approach, data were collected through surveys, interviews, focus group discussions and field observations. A total of 180 user’s opinion were collected in 9 selected forest user groups from four district of Nepal (i.e. Ilam, Jhapa, Sarlahi, and Makawanpur). The study revealed that major forest management practices applied by community users’ are thinning, pruning, and improvement felling. Majority of the users (70.56%) were unsure about the forest management practices prescribed in the Operational plans (OPs). Accordingly, most users (92.78%) were agreed with the opinions that they need to be trained about forest management practices and its implementation. Majority of the users (92.00%) also agreed that participatory forest management modalities like Community Forest (CF), Collaborative Forest Management (CFM) and Leasehold Forest (LHF) area protecting biodiversity and reducing environmental risks. However, people believe that arbitrary policy changes was the main challenges for proper implementation of sustainable forest management practices. Therefore, strengthening capacity-building programs, enhancing government support, developing a consistent guideline, and promoting adaptive management practices are essential for improving sustainable forest resource management in Nepal.

A growing world population and rapid expansion of cities increase the pressure on basic resources such as water, food and energy. To safeguard the provision of these resources, restoration and sustainable management of landscapes is pivotal, including sustainable forest and water management. Sustainable forest management includes forest conservation, restoration, forestry and agroforestry practices. Interlinkages between forests and water are fundamental to moderate water budgets, stabilize runoff, reduce erosion and improve biodiversity and water quality. Sweden has gained substantial experience in sustainable forest management in the past century. Through significant restoration efforts, a largely depleted Swedish forest has transformed into a well-managed production forest within a century, leading to sustainable economic growth through the provision of forest products. More recently, ecosystem services are also included in management decisions. Such a transformation depends on broad stakeholder dialog, combined with an enabling institutional and policy environment. Based on seminars and workshops with a wide range of key stakeholders managing Sweden’s forests and waters, this article draws lessons from the history of forest management in Sweden. These lessons are particularly relevant for countries in the Global South that currently experience similar challenges in forest and landscape management. The authors argue that an integrated landscape approach involving a broad array of sectors and stakeholders is needed to achieve sustainable forest and water management. Sustainable landscape management—integrating water, agriculture and forests—is imperative to achieving resilient socio-economic systems and landscapes.

SUMMARY A range of countries have sought more equitable governance of their natural resources, by devolving decision-making and resource control to local populations. In 1994, Cameroon adopted a new law granting local communities the possibility of greater control over forests, principally in response to donor conditionality on Structural Adjustment Loans (SALs). However, the enactment of the law lacked signifi cant domestic support. Confl icting interests and Cameroon’s highly centralized administrative machinery have prevented effective devolution of forest management. In 2003, the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and a consortium of institutional stakeholders started the Model Forest Project in Cameroon. This project is part of the International Model Forest Network (IMFN). The goal of the IMFN is to assist in the development of sustainable management of forests around the world, while taking into account the needs of local communities. In 2005, the government of Cameroon recognized Campo Ma’an and Dja et Mpomo as model forest sites. The partnership involved, policy dimensions, government commitment, accomplishment to date and its contributions to national and sub regional forestry programmes are discussed.

Summary The need for new criteria and indicators for the assessment of biodiversity conservation as part of sustainable forest management of tropical forests has been identified as a priority by many international organisations. Those biodiversity criteria and indicators which formed part of a much broader initial assessment by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) (Prabhu et al. 1996) were found to be deficient. This Working Paper contains specific proposals for biodiversity criteria and indicators. These proposals originated from a workshop of experts, and are intended to be adapted and refined for use in specific situations. Criteria and indicators need to be applied at the forest management unit level and those for biodiversity are just one part of a package that includes socio-economic and other categories. Biodiversity is an extraordinarily broad concept and, given the huge diversity of life in tropical forests, it is impossible to make rapid direct assessments of biodiversity in forests in anything other than a superficial manner. It is likely that there will be limited skilled human resources and time for biodiversity assessment in any system of criteria and indicators, so it is important that we design tools that do not require expert application and interpretation. The usefulness of Oindicator groupsO, OkeystoneO species and other concepts is still argued among biologists and their utility is questionable. This paper suggests that, in contrast to more traditional approaches to assessing taxonomic diversity, it may be possible to assess the effects of management practices on biodiversity by examining the state of those processes that generate or maintain biodiversity. The indicators and verifiers that we have suggested examine the state of these processes. We recommend that for each indicator, quick and easy verifiers, which we designate OPrimaryO verifiers are used first, and more sophisticated (OSecondaryO) verifiers are used only if clear results are not obtained from Primary verifiers. This paper is merely a first step in creating a suitable framework for applying a proposed a set of forest biodiversity indicators and verifiers. The framework and the indicators and verifiers require field testing, and we fully expect there to be changes resulting from the field trials, which will be reflected in major improvements in their effectiveness. For the sake of brevity we have not discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the verifiers in full. While changes are expected, the approach taken is powerful in that it recognises the relationship between interventions and consequences, and it demonstrates that some indicators are more widely valuable than others.

This paper uncovers the importance of people’s place-values on sustainable forest management, and how such values can be incorporated into forest management actions and decision-making. Specifically, it focuses on mapping economic and cultural values on forest ecosystem services; assesses how non-materials and materials benefit from forest ecosystem cause landscape fragmentation; and how this information could assist in better forest planning and management. The data were collected from ten villages surrounding the Ngezi forest reserve in Pemba, Tanzania. Data were collected through participatory mapping, field observation, and focus group discussions. A map of place-values for each respondent was transferred from paper to digital format, digitized and coded using the GIS, and analysed using kernel density. Non-spatial data were processed and integrated into GIS-based spatial analysis. The results indicate that only 12 areas were identified as very high-valued and these require careful consideration for sustainable forest planning and management. About 4 out of 6 very high-valued areas for material services are found inside the reserve. The areas outside the reserve are undervalued and not utilized effectively for material services. Contrary to cultural services, only 1 out of 6 very high-valued places is located inside the reserve. Furthermore, economic situations, together with social driving forces, have been important determinants of forest values in the areas. Therefore, placevalues issues, particularly economic development outcomes, preservation of the aesthetics and improvement of recreational amenities should be considered when examining sustainable forest resource management.

This chapter uses an historical case study approach to convey some sense of the kinds of research social scientists do at the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). It describes CIFOR's work in developing criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, which led to the creation of the programme entitled 'Local People, Devolution, and Adaptive Collaborative Management of Forests'. The experience of two other CIFOR programmes are discussed: 'Underlying Causes of Deforestation' (UCD) and 'Forest Products and People' (FPP, previously 'Nontimber Forest Products'). UCD focuses on policy issues, with a nearly exclusive socioeconomic orientation. FPP's central orientation is on economic and, to a lesser extent, ecological concerns, but it too includes a considerable amount of social science. The chapter ends with a discussion on some organizational aspects of CIFOR.

This chapter defines and classifies various types of partnerships such as public-private, company-community, non-governmental organisation (NGO)-community, multi-sector or intersectoral, research and political partnerships. It analyzes how partnerships for sustainable forest and tree resource management fit in with mainstream forest management thinking, general development paradigms, Latin American forest policies and the broader academic debate on social movements and multi-spatial interactions. The goals of the partnerships are related to forest conservation, responsible forest use and/or the sustainable production of forest and tree resource products. The chapter also summarizes the lessons learned from the cases in Latin America with regard to the conditions under which partnerships for sustainable forest and resource management can reconcile multiple interests and contribute to pro-poor, socially just and environmentally-friendly forest governance.Keywords: company-community partnerships; environmentally-friendly forest governance; intersectoral partnerships; Latin American forest policies; non-governmental organization (NGO)-community partnerships; political partnerships; public-private partnerships; research partnerships; sustainable forest management; tree resource management