DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The efficiency of the forest revenue system is reasonably high, because the costs of collection are relatively low compared to the amounts that are collected. However, this is only because the officers collecting revenue are not adequately paid. Implementation of the forest revenue system in the field is quite simple and straightforward, because the rules governing revenue collection, as indicated in the Forest Fund regulations, are straightforward. However, there is a general feeling is that the system is not fair because, in order to reinvest the money in afforestation activities, the bureaucracy is very complex. Moreover, the revenue that is collected from forest charges can only be used to support the capital budget or cover the direct costs of afforestation and can not be used to support the recurrent budget.

Another concern is that, at the moment, the forest charges are very low. For instance, the amount charged to purchase a seedling (20 lisente per seedling) does not cover the production cost (of M 2.00 per seedling). Other establishment costs have also risen, so it would seem reasonable to increase the prices paid for fuelwood, seedlings and other forest products. However, as already noted, forest charges have not increased for a long time.

Access to some of the forest areas is also poor, which makes it difficult to harvest these areas. This is because people do not see any benefit in harvesting these areas and hauling the fuelwood for long distances, because fuelwood is such a cheap commodity.

The impact of the forest revenue system on sustainable forest management

When the forest plantations in Lesotho were first planted, local communities contributed their land and labour during planting operations. They did this on the understanding that, in most cases, they must give up some of their rangeland in order to meet their future needs for fuelwood. Thus, as mentioned earlier, some of the revenue collected from State Forest Reserves is shared with local communities. It is believed that this in itself encourages communities to look after the State Forest Reserves to a certain extent. It is also believed that this has led communities to support sustainable forest management more generally.

Government expenditure on sustainable forest management

National Forestry Policy in Lesotho clearly indicates that the primary responsibility for the sustainable and beneficial management of natural resources and the environment lies with individuals and communities. Therefore, the Government allocates very little money to sustainable forest management activities. This is clearly reflected in the current condition of State Forest Reserves in Lesotho, most of which have not been tended since they were planted.

However, the poor management of the State Forest Reserves in Lesotho has been influenced by many other factors in addition to budgetary constraints. For example, decentralisation and restructuring of the Ministry of Agriculture, has led to the District Forestry Officer having no control over the use of resources such as vehicles. These resources are required to help the officer to manage the forest properly. However, with the present administrative structure in districts, the District Agricultural Officer is in charge overall. In most cases, these officers give priority to the needs of the local agricultural sector rather than the forestry sector.

Currently, deforestation in Lesotho is mainly due to fuelwood collection rather than agricultural activities such as shifting cultivation. Thus, other fiscal policies have relatively little effect on the forestry sector. Furthermore, the Government is now engaged in a process of restructuring the whole agricultural sector and, as part of this process, subsidies are being strongly discouraged. However, a proposal has been suggested to the authorities, to use incentives to encourage forestry activities. A pilot study is currently under way to examine the use of forestry incentives, under the Agricultural Policy and Capacity Building Programme between the World Bank and Government of Lesotho.

Another attempt to increase the financing of sustainable forest management from domestic resources is also currently underway, through a number of water catchment programmes. A small proportion of the funds from these programmes is used to raise tree seedlings and establish trees in the catchment areas.

5.5 Attitude to change

The Government’s commitment to support the forestry sector can be seen in various ways. In 1997, the Government approved a National Forestry Policy and followed this by passing the Forestry Act in 1998. The basis for these policy initiatives was the National Forestry Action Plan (NFAP) process, which was approved in 1996 and supported by FAO, DFID, GTZ and the Government of Lesotho. In 1997, the same document was incorporated into the overall Agricultural Sector Investment Programme and some of its proposals are currently being implemented under the Agricultural Policy and Capacity Building Programme between the World Bank and Government of Lesotho.

Thus, it would seem that the Government’s attitude towards the forestry sector is positive. This is because forestry is seen as a rural development activity and, therefore, politicians view the sector as one that can generate income for rural communities, particularly those in mountainous areas where there are very cold winters. Hence, the forestry sector is always mentioned in Lesotho’s national development plans. Unfortunately however, the socio-economic and environmental performance of the sector has not been analysed.

On the other hand, given the number of complaints that are received from communities, it would seem that forest revenues have not been efficiently and adequately distributed to all of the stakeholders in the forestry sector. It seems inevitable that the forest revenue system will have to be revised soon, because all of the State Forest Reserves will be transferred to communities themselves in the near future.