Forests Sourcebook - HCV Resource Network

Box 1.3
Forests for Poverty Alleviation:World Bank Albania Forestry Project
Direct short-term poverty alleviation impacts were
substantial in this project, which financed approximately
5,000 person-years of local villager employment
to implement many field interventions. The
budgets of households participating in project activities
increased by an estimated 30 percent annually.
The quality and productivity of forest and pasture
land managed under the new plans by the newly created
resource user associations improved to such an
extent that commune families quickly began deriving
income from forest and pastures (including fuelwood,
fodder, nontimber forest products, some grazing, and
the like) that had been seriously degraded bush before
project-supported investments.
Of significance is evidence that some commune
and family investments in resource management (for
example, active protection of areas from grazing, fencing,
tree planting, and erosion control intervention)
continued even after project support ceased, indicating
that the shift to improved land-use practice
brought about by the project is likely to be sustainable.
This unexpected level of success led to identification
of the need for the Albanian government to further
develop its skills and capacity to provide communes
with silvicultural and other technical guidance that
will be necessary as their forests mature, and to
approach the World Bank with a request for a followup
project that would scale up and expand the coverage
of communal forest and pasture management
throughout the country.
Source: World Bank Albania Forestry Project (P008271). Board approval: April 16, 1996; closed: June 30, 2004.
because communities have their own strategies for coping
with wood shortages. Activities focused on processing and
trade often proved to be susceptible to changes in market
requirements, to domination by intermediaries, and to shifts
to domesticated or synthetic sources of supply, and few
proved to be sustainable. Considerable room remains for
improving the contribution of forests to poverty alleviation.
Improved performance framework for forest
interventions. An improved performance framework is
necessary to enhance pro-poor benefits. A clear understanding
of what forestry can and cannot do to alleviate poverty is
essential to enhancing effectiveness of poverty-related
interventions at all levels within the forest sector. To give greater
emphasis to poverty alleviation within forestry, it is necessary
to acknowledge that the greater part of the rural populations
that benefit from forest products are located outside forests as
normally defined. Thus, forestry interventions need to
encompass all tree stocks and activities based on them to
contribute significantly to poverty alleviation, rather than be
confined to forests and forest-dwelling households. Forest
sector interventions also need to recognize the different wealth
levels among rural poor households and need to be
appropriately structured to target the population of concern
(see note 1.3, Indigenous Peoples and Forests).
Harmonization of activities with other sectors.
Harmonizing poverty alleviation activities in the forest
sector with what is happening in other sectors is equally
important. This harmonization requires recognizing and
considering the implications of broader changes, such as
market liberalization and structural adjustment for rural
development (additional discussion on this is found in
chapter 6, Mainstreaming Forests into Development Policy
and Planning: Assessing Cross-Sectoral Impacts).
Transparency and accountability in governance.
Transparent and accountable governance is critical to
fostering pro-poor growth and essential to ensuring that
this natural resource wealth is managed wisely (see chapter
5, Improving Forest Governance). A pro-poor growth
strategy for rural areas must build on natural resources and
facilitate management of these resources for the long term
to provide the fuel for economic development to relieve
poverty. It also must grant secure and equitable access to
assets—which requires development of property rights (see
note 1.4, Property and Access Rights) and efficient land
administration.
Property rights and land administration. Allocation
of property rights and efficient land administration are
critical to pro-poor growth in rural areas. The process of
developing statutory property rights influences the pro-poor
potential of forest activities (see note 1.4, Property and
Access Rights, and note 1.3, Indigenous Peoples and Forests).
Customary rights over forest resources often exist, and where
these are codified and made statutory, they are seldom causes
for conflict. However, in areas where customary systems of
CHAPTER 1: FORESTS FOR POVERTY REDUCTION 19