Abstract
Community forest management (CFM) is often a field of encounter between knowledge systems, where a conventional forestry blueprint is frequently applied in contexts rich in traditional ecological knowledge (TEK). This is the case in Mexico, a bioculturally diverse country and a reference of community forestry. Based on a review of laws, policies, literature, and empirical examples, we explore technical, epistemological, political, and contextual dimensions associated with the inclusion and exclusion of TEK in CFM in Mexico. Our analysis is composed of three steps: (1) A diachronic analysis of how TEK and associated practices have been considered by federal forest laws and codes (1960–2018), (2) a diachronic analysis of the scope of conventional forestry and its evolution in time and space, and (3) situated examples illustrating the inclusion and exclusion of TEK in CFM. We argue that: (1) Legal recognition of TEK as a concept does not necessarily entail the legal recognition of all traditional management practices; (2) the inclusion of TEK in CFM is heterogeneous across communities, ecosystems, regions, products and historical trajectories; and (3) different traditional practices are not equally integrated in CFM: traditional practices that contradict the spatial segregation of activities (i.e., land sparing) favored by conventional forestry tend to be less easily accepted or ignored by government institutions.
Highlights
We argue that: (1) legal recognition of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) as a general concept does not necessarily entail the legal recognition of all particular traditional management practices; (2) the prevalence of TEK in Community forest management (CFM) is heterogenous across communities, part of this variation is related to different periods of government interventions to establish conventional forest management across ecosystems, regions, products and historical trajectories; and (3) on the ground, different traditional practices are not integrated in CFM, and in particular those traditional practices that contradict the spatial segregation of activities favored by conventional forestry tend to be less accepted or ignored by government institutions
The 1997 forest law was the first to mention Traditional Ecological Knowledge [72], and its salience has increased in subsequent forest laws
Under the 2018 forest law, local participation and TEK is considered necessary for the respect of the rights of people and communities, which includes for example the translation and interpretation of forest management documents and procedures into indigenous languages
Summary
Community forest management (hereafter CFM) took hold in the 1980s and 1990s in the context of decentralization policies [1], as an approach striving for conservation and development, mostly in the tropics [2]. Community forest management often arose as a response to post-colonial state forestry, private logging and top-down conservation [1,3]. CFM implies the devolution of forest management rights to local populations, and fostering forest-based livelihoods that maintain forest cover and biodiversity conservation [2]. Under CFM, local populations are considered suitable forest stewards, with rights to derive benefits from and take decisions over local forests [2].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
