Logging Ban in Kenya : Convergence or Divergence from the Forest Law and Policy and Impacts on Plantation Forestry

Abstract

Logging bans as means of trying to control deforestation and other wrong forestry practices has been in use for along time in many parts of the world. It is evinced by command and control regulation. Recent cases of interest are in Asia Pacific countries. This mainly involved logging bans in natural forests. In the case of Kenya, cutting in natural forests was banned many years back. What is of interest lately is the near total ban, which includes a cutting moratorium on plantations. Kenya's case is unique in the sense that the ban is a presidential decree. The aim of this paper is to explain the relationship between the ban and law and policy, and to show that imposition of a logging ban without due consideration of existing forest law and forest policy does not enhance the well-being of the forest plantation. This research was conducted through an examination of the Forests Act and Forest Policy and interviews with forestry officers and saw millers. Other forms of secondary data were also examined. Results indicated that there is lack of convergence to the law and policy, as the President does not derive his powers from the forest law and policy. There are associated impacts on plantation forestry. These are both positive and negative. Long term unintended effects are negative and this is a lesson that we can learn from this form of command and control in forestry when applied to plantations. Stakeholders should learn that adverse political solutions do not sit well with good plantation forest management.