Adaptive collaborative management of community forests in Asia ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

214 • Cynthia McDougall, Ravi Prabhu and Robert Fisher improvements in access to (influence on) decision making by women and marginalised forest users, in both representation and participation; more explicit attention to equity in rules, regulations and distribution of resources; significant increases in multidirectional information flows amongst users and between forest users and other agencies 4 ; increases in transparency and accountability and supporting mechanisms; development of increased internal capacity to manage conflicts; and increased engagement of more forest users and mechanisms for sharing leadership and ownership. Changes in social and human capital The most significant changes that resulted from adoption of an ACM approach during the project period seem to be in human and social capital. We consider these significant both because of the degree of change in the sites and also because we perceive these forms of capital as essential building blocks for other forms of capital, such as financial benefits from forests. Prior to the participatory action research, social capital in all sites ranged from low to medium. Researchers and local people agreed that the limitations were restricting effective and equitable forest governance and management. Changes noted in all three country sites included increased trust and respect within groups of forest users, and between forest users and other groups; increased collective action within the forest user groups and between the groups and other stakeholders; and increased satisfaction amongst nonelite community members with access to decision making, training and other opportunities, and with the quality of decision-making and planning processes 5 . One common factor in the building of social capital was the increased willingness to cooperate. Addressing conflict and power differences was a significant part of the ACM approach, both directly and indirectly, through social learning, governance innovations and active facilitation. Shifting power relations, however, is an extremely challenging undertaking. An ACM approach in several cases created space for negotiation, helped set the stage for more level engagement, and gave marginalised people ‘levers’, but actual levelling of power cannot be planned, forced or guaranteed, only encouraged. The ACM approach tended to increase human capital in all sites because it emphasised ongoing learning and capacity building by developing skills in facilitation, leadership, participatory decision making and planning processes, recordkeeping, and in some cases, funding-proposal
Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusions • 215 writing. Researchers in all countries noted the increased knowledge and understanding of community forest policy and regulations by the forest users. In some cases, the means of generating forest-related knowledge also changed: although there was some ‘reproductive learning’ (e.g., through forest management training), collective knowledge was developed through enhanced information sharing and social learning processes 6 . Skills and knowledge increased in communication and negotiation, conflict management, leadership, the development of policy and joint action plans, and technical aspects of forestry, such as nursery management. Researchers also saw an increase in the self-confidence of many forest users, including marginalised people, and of the groups as a whole in dealing with outside groups. One example is a poor, lower-caste Nepali woman who developed the confidence to challenge a community forest user group decision. She used the ACM-based self-monitoring and transparent objectives setting to get the community forest user group to reconsider its decision—in itself a sign of flexibility and learning. The Indonesian case study also illustrates the importance of confidence—encouraged by a facilitated process—in people’s ability to tackle problems themselves. Improvements in social and human capital illustrated in the Jambi and Pasir cases included the following: • The incidence of conflict amongst community leaders went down. • Reciprocity amongst community members (e.g., voluntary work on agricultural plots) went up. • Previously poor relationships between original people and settlers improved. • Relationships with neighbouring communities improved. • Collective knowledge developed within stakeholder groups (e.g., women) because of improved relationships. • Sharing of information and knowledge increased amongst stakeholder groups. • Social networks and platforms developed. • Discriminatory regulations that prohibited settlers from owning agricultural plots were relaxed. • Community representation mechanisms, as illustrated by the involvement of settlers and women in village decision making, began working better. • The management of village affairs was adjusted, and structures and processes related to decision making at the village level improved.
Page 1:
Adaptive Collaborative Management o
Page 4 and 5:
Copyright © 2007 by Center for Int
Page 6 and 7:
iv • Contents Chapter 5. Muddling
Page 8 and 9:
vi • Foreword problem solving. Th
Page 10 and 11:
viii • About the Contributors God
Page 12 and 13:
Acknowledgements In early 1999, two
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1. Introduction: People, Fo
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1: Introduction: People, Fo
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Chapter 2: Adaptive Collaborative M
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Chapter 3: Adaptiveness and Collabo
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Chapter 4. Shaping Opportunities fo
Page 107 and 108:
Chapter 4: Improving Forest Quality
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Chapter 5: Muddling Towards Coopera
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176: Chapter 6: Facilitating Change from
Page 221 and 222: Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusio
Page 225: Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusio
Page 241 and 242: CIFOR is a leading international fo
show all

Adaptive collaborative management of community forests in Asia ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?