0226-A1

Using Secondary Forest Resources as Indicators for Developing Forestry Partnerships

Delali B.K. Dovie^[1]

Abstract

Constant under-reporting of the value of secondary resources (e.g. non-timber forest products) from forests and woodlands have resulted in the least importance being attached to these resources in national accounting. Consequently, their role in supporting livelihoods and food security has been undermined. This paper uses the value attached to these secondary resources as indicators for identifying opportunities for managing their sources (e.g. forests, woodlands and agro-ecosystems). Subsequently, it is hypothesized that resource evaluation approaches that provide in-depth knowledge of secondary resource use are important for interfacing the goals of both natural and social scientists.

A newly tested technique, the Hierarchical Valuation Scheme that elucidates the understanding of dynamics of resource use in bringing forth common or similar agendas for stakeholders, has been suggested. Further to this discussion, the use of community-based initiatives (e.g. tenure and entitlement, extractive reserves, and participatory forestry management) has been identified as relevant to efforts for sustainable management of forests and woodlands. Forest management strategies however, need to fully recognize the role of other land-use activities (e.g. agriculture) as not only threats but also opportunities for inclusion in sustainable management practices. Additionally, there is the need to raise the production value of secondary resources in order to diversify livelihood options, and to attract people for reasons other than commercial timber production. This can be achieved in tandem with agricultural sector investment, and the introduction of small, micro and medium scale forest enterprise schemes.

In conclusion, there were pointers to broad-base management models (e.g. community-based natural resource management, and integrated development and conservation projects) that can provide the required partnership for sustainable management of forests and woodlands. Of these, seven partnership scenarios have been identified (i.e. commensally, leases, joint ventures, gestures, co-management, statute indenture and reciprocal ventures).

1. Introduction

1.1. Direct-use values of forests and woodlands

Harvesting and consumption of secondary resources from natural forests and woodlands account for the great majority of forest species used, the bulk of products extracted, and a significant percentage of the potential and actual value of forests (Godoy and Bawa 1993, Padoch 1992). Secondary resources are natural resources available from a given land (e.g. forests and agro ecosystems), coincidental to the primary management objectives (Shackleton 1996). The greater majority are non-timber forest products (NTFP) encompassing biological materials other than commercial timber, such as for poles and fuelwood, furniture, woodcarvings and craft for subsistence use and the medicinal needs of many (Dovie et al. 2002a, Shackleton 1996). Additionally, they are important sources of wild fruits, leafy vegetables, and herbs, particularly important in ensuring food security for women, children and the poor, and maintaining nutritional balances in peoples' diets (Falconer 1994, FAO 1995).

In times of stresses such as famine, wild plants literally keep people alive when they would otherwise perish. Many NTFP have significant economic value by preventing the need for cash expenditure and providing ready sources of income to cash-poor households (Campbell et al. 2000, Cunningham 1997, Emerton 1996, Guijt et al. 1995, Scoones et al. 1992). In South Africa, a study has revealed the value of secondary resources to be 19.4% of rural household incomes (Dovie et al. 2002a). At least 150 NTFP are important in terms of international trade (FAO 1997). These include rattan, bamboo, honey, cork, nuts, mushrooms, essential oils, and plants and animal products for pharmaceuticals. It is estimated by the FAO that the total value of these well known internationally traded products is about 1.1 billion US Dollars annually.

1.2. Production from forests, agro ecosystems, and farmlands

Many years of official agricultural development policies worldwide have completely overlooked the importance of food harvested from "wild" species (Bell 1995). The result in many cases has been decline in sources of food security, overexploitation of natural ecosystems, and subsequent loss of biodiversity (Bell 1995, Scoones at al. 1992). After decades of focusing on developing a handful of commodity crops, policy makers and agriculturists are being faced with what is to them, a new reality. This is because increasing commodity yields decreases food security at local levels and increases vulnerability of poor farmers, and at economic, social and environmental costs (e.g. genetically modified foods) capable of disrupting production networks of resource-poor households. In reality there is no clear divide between "domesticated" and "wild" species for food supplies. Rather, it is a continuum resulting from co-evolutionary relationships between humans and their environment at different levels of nurturing (Bell 1995). The implication thereof is that a compromise needs to be established between forest and woodland production, and the agricultural sectors because the two are not mutually exclusive.

1.3. Commercial harvesting and implications for sustainable management

It is becoming increasingly clear that the capacity to sustain livelihoods and to reduce poverty whilst maintaining species diversity will be undermined by a threatened natural resource base (Koziell 2001). Forests and woodlands are fundamental to that resource base. Though many studies have touched on the use of species, linkages to livelihood impacts and sustainable use are obscured. Commercial quantities of any NTFP produce measurable impacts on the structure and genetic composition of the harvested plant population (Peters 1994, Reis 1995). Such impacts are essential for understanding market forces, institutional and land tenure arrangements that shape the sustainability of the resources.

The expansion of markets of NTFP has been found to be directly proportional to increasing human population (Cunningham 2001). Activities of non-resident harvesters also pose recognisable threats to forest resources and difficult to monitor and control under unfavourable land tenure practices such as in South Africa (Dovie 2002a). Harvesting and marketing impacts of forest resources need to be clearly defined and isolated for management. The impact of harvesting can become quite severe under high levels of exploitation in response to market demand. The complexity of the problem leads Dovie et al. (2002b) to argue that adaptive management strategies involving adequate stakeholder diversity will minimise conflict of use.

2. Evaluation Of Secondary Resources

2.1. Interfacing ecological and socio-anthropological approaches

Evaluation of secondary resources provides powerful measures for empowering local people towards sustainable use. Dovie (2002b) observed that effective evaluation would require methodological approaches with outputs understandable to diverse stakeholders and elucidating the role of culture, economics and science. Methodological evolution should therefore be implicit with ecology and history of exploitation in relation to other land-based activities (e.g. farming). Local knowledge, indigenous perception and local participation are important components. In so doing, the role of biologists, forest ecologists, foresters, resource economists and agriculturists, and social anthropologists is tested for the much-needed cross-sectoral intervention. All these categories of specialists need as a matter of principle understand societal dynamism with respect to resource use. The Hierarchical Valuation Scheme (HVS) has been suggested for revealing such baseline knowledge (Dovie 2002b). The HVS (Figure 1) provides a methodological robustness that adequately caters for the concern that, information generated through traditional Participatory Rural Appraisal portrays only public knowledge. HVS generates detailed information for thorough investigation and development work, and sensitising all disciplines towards livelihoods-nature relationship.

Figure 1. Diagrammatic representation of the hierarchical valuation scheme (HVS)

2.2. Evaluation and policy - the South African example

Natural woodlands are a home to over 9.2 million South Africans, majority of who are poor and dependent on the woodlands. Woodlands have the highest plant diversity and endemism in South Africa yet only 5% is sustainably managed. The species used daily (the NTFP) account for a considerable proportion of the total biodiversity in natural woodlands. Yet we have limited understanding of the effect of changes in this diversity on utilisation and sustainability. In line with the 1997 National Forestry Action Programme (NFAP) of South Africa, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) recognised the need to include local communities in the management of natural forests and woodlands (DWAF 1997). The National Forest Act in 1998 proposes an increase in the proportion of sustainably managed woodlands to 10%. However, most of the woodlands are in communal lands where people depend on them for their livelihoods.

In line with the challenges, various research agendas were formulated in support of the NFAP. A national collaborative research project was therefore established to first investigate the role of NTFP for rural livelihoods. The project involves collaboration with local institutions such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and universities nationwide. The project will among other aims evaluate and document the state of local utilisation of woodland resources in order to improve existing knowledge towards sustainable management strategies. Additionally, the role of woodland resources for livelihoods will be analysed, and alternate activities and options identified for sustainable use across bio-cultural diversity.

3. Quantifying The State Of Secondary Resource Use

3.1. Monetary valuation

The often-neglected value of most NTFP in national accounting and macro-economic policies is aggravated by limited information in ethnobiological studies. In a study to examine the precise contribution of NTFP to rural livelihoods in the woodland biome of South Africa, NTFP contributed 19.4% (equivalent to US$559) of household incomes per household per annum; crops (15.4%), informal cash income (15.6%), livestock (22.7%) and formal income (26.9%). The value of NTFP came from direct home consumption, and very significant compared to daily farm wages in South Africa. Resources harvested included medicinal plants, wild edible herbs and fruits, insects, fuelwood, housing materials (Table 1) and several miscellaneous uses.

Table 1. The direct-use value of secondary woodland resources in Thorndale in 1999

The five resources (Table 1) that exhibited highest direct-use values per user household in 1999 were fuelwood ($311), edible herbs ($182), thatch grass ($75), weaving reeds and mats ($60), and medicinal plants ($41). The proportion of households that used various secondary resources ranged from 33.3% - 97.8%. Over 90% of households used utensils and fuelwood (from trees such as Diospyros mespiliformis, Acacia nigrescens, Combretum imberde), twig hand-brushes, and wild edible herbs (e.g. Corchorus tridens, Bidens pilosa). Income generation from secondary resources could lead to commercial harvesting including commercial timber production and overexploitation. Hence, the conviction that income generation and development of markets based on extraction of secondary resources must not be at the expense of household requirements but towards sustainable use (Dovie et al. 2002a).

3.2. Sufficiency and availability

Generally, majority of respondents noted that most NTFP were in short supply. Wild edible herbs were sufficient to meet current requirements, but diversity of species used had diminished. Carving wood was inadequate and stocks had decreased over a ten-year period from 1990 to 1999 (Figure 2). Other resources perceived to have decreased over a ten-year period included fuelwood, wild edible herbs, thatch grass and indigenous housing poles (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Households' perception about availability of resources from 1990 - 1999, and sufficiency to households in Thorndale in 1999

4. Implications Of Secondary Resource Use For Forest And Woodland Management

4.1. Reforestation and agro ecosystems

The unfamiliarity, and haphazard appearance of agro-ecosystems has led many researchers and development workers to overlook the rich complexity of diverse production systems. Similarly, other vegetation formations that extend from the immediate neighbourhood of settlements have been assumed to be self-regulating "wastelands", rather than productive ecosystems which are the partial product of human design (Bell 1995, Daily 1997). Failure to recognise the value of these "wastelands" means that they are either subjected to commercial use, such as industrial plantations, or else high external input agriculture, displacing more diverse traditional forestry and agricultural systems. Either of these fates has grave implications for peoples' livelihoods and the maintenance of forest and woodland ecosystems. Areas of low forest production priority due to absence of highly valued species need to be developed and sustained through community-based forestry practices such as:

Community forestry initiatives

The term "community forestry" is also referred to, as Participatory Forestry Management, a concept whereby local people form partnerships to manage forests and the resources therein, be it state or communally owned.

Community tenure and entitlement initiative

Tenure rights of rural communities have proved to be strong incentive for promoting the conservation of natural resources. Local people need a de jure tenurial security and declarations of access to resources where they can reforest, and have the right of control.

Extractive reserves

These are conservation units mostly found either in crucial or marginal lands that guarantee the rights of traditional populations to engage in harvesting of forest products.

4.2. Forest enterprise and partnerships

Forest enterprise development is an important commercial venture for promoting NTFP and timber production. The new reality of commercial forest production especially for timber, need to consider the importance of secondary resources towards diversified options for mitigating pressure on highly valued activities. Such enterprises may operate in partnerships, as products of Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM), Integrated Community and Development Projects (ICDP) and, or Man and Biosphere projects (MAB). The partnership could exist between companies and communities, companies and individual landowners, communities and individual landowners, and inter communities. Small, Micro and Medium Enterprises (SMMEs) are emerging models in the forest sector. Unlike in other economic sectors, the emphasis is on giving people the opportunity to manage what they want whilst maintaining livelihoods. It is important that such enterprises operate within partnerships that can be monitored and evaluated for repercussions on livelihoods and the environment. The following partnerships are proposed:

Commensally: May be undertaken between two or more neighbouring communities with a council of elders to administer access to natural resources through licensing and or household tariffs and proceeds pumped into joint community projects such as schools, clinics, etc.

Leases: An agreement may be signed between a holding community and another community or with an investor, and payment of fees by the outsider to develop the facility. The holding community is not obliged to implement the projects unless otherwise agreed.

Joint ventures: This is an agreement between an investor and a community where the community holds shares of equity. Benefits accrue to partners according to their level of investment.

Gestures: This form of agreement involves individual landowners, and well-known acquaintances or a community. The resources are held in trust for the individual owner on condition of improved status of the resource. The individual landowner is not involved in the running of the project, but receives financial benefits in the form of gift.

Co-management: This form is tied to joint management of resources concurrently by the parties involved with rights and obligations defined in the best interest of the parties, and the resources.

Statute indenture: Cohorts of individual or community growers are often given incentives (e.g. loan subsidies, extension services) to produce on their own land but are obliged to sell only to the investor that is involved.

Reciprocate ventures: This may involve an investor with other ventures (e.g. in the agricultural sector) prepared to enter into agreement with a community and the community, benefits directly from other ventures of the investor (e.g. employment or land for farming). This can exist between communities and communities as well as between individuals.

5. Conclusion

The analyses of the role of secondary resources in the forest and woodlands sector reveal important sets of criteria and indicators for sustainable resource use. These include value placed on forest resources and relevance for commercial and subsistence use. Value addition to resources through improved harvesting and processing techniques to minimise waste is inevitable for continuous dependence on these resources. Various grassroots initiatives based on indigenous knowledge and practices that have promoted sound relationship between humans and natural resources need to be revisited and organised. Additionally, there is the need for local empowerment to account for resource use by promoting and investing in institutional structures such as the identifiable partnership types that will pave the way for judicious use and conflict minimisation. A broad-base forum with diversified stakeholders linked to forest activities is relevant for compromising on, and implementing adaptive and proactive management strategies.

6. Bibliography

Bell, J., 1995. The Hidden Harvest. Seedling 12(3).

Campbell, B.M., R. Costanza and M. van den belt, 2000. Land use options in dry tropical woodland ecosystems in Zimbabwe: Introduction, overview and synthesis. Ecological Economics 33: 341 - 351.

Cunningham, A.B., 1997. Review of ethnobotanical literature from eastern and southern Africa. Bulletin of the African Ethnobotany Network 1: 23-88.

Cunningham, A.B., 2001. Applied ethnobotany: People, wild plant use and conservation. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, 300p.

Daily, G.C. (ed.), 1997. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington D.C.

Dovie, B.D.K., 2002a. Rural economy and livelihoods from the non-timber forest products trade. Compromising sustainability in southern Africa? International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, in press.

Dovie, B.D.K., 2002b. Whose involvement? - Can Hierarchical Valuation Scheme intercede for participatory methods for evaluating secondary forest resource use? Forest Policy and Economics, in press.

Dovie, B.D.K., C.M. Shackleton and E.T.F. Witkowski, 2002a. Direct-use value of woodland resources consumed and traded in a South African village. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 9(3): 269-283.

Dovie, B.D.K., C.M. Shackleton and E.T.F. Witkowski, 2002b. Accessing natural resources: implications for sustainable management and livelihoods. In: Benjaminsen, T., B. Cousins, and L. Thompson. (eds.), Contested Resources: Challenges to Governance of Natural Resources in Southern Africa. Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, pp. 336-348.

DWAF, 1997. National Forestry Action Plan, Department for Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.

Emerton, L., 1996. Valuing the subsistence use of forest products in Oldonyo Orok Forest, Kenya. Rural Development Forestry Network. Summer 1996, ODI, London.

Falconer, J., 1994. Non-timber forest products in southern Ghana: main report. Ghana Forestry Department and ODA, Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK.

FAO, 1995. Non-wood forest products in nutrition. In Non-wood forest products for sustainable forestry, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 17-27 January 1995. Non-Wood Forest Products 3. FAO, Rome.

FAO, 1997. State of the World's Forests, Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, Rome.

Godoy, R.A. and K.S. Bawa, 1993. The economic value and sustainable harvest of plants and animals from the tropical forest: Assumptions, hypotheses and methods. Economic Botany 47(3): 215-219.

Guijt, I., F. Hinchcliffe and M. Melnyk, 1995. The Hidden Harvest: the value of wild resources in agricultural systems. IIED, London.

Koziell, I., 2001. Diversity not adversity: sustaining livelihoods with biodiversity. IIED, London.

Padoch, C., 1992. Marketing of non-timber forest products in Western Amazonia: General observations and research priorities. In: Nepstad, D. C. and S. Schwartzman (eds.), Non-timber products from tropical forests: Evaluation of a conservation and development strategy. Advances in Economic Botany 9: 43-50.

Peters, C. M., 1994. Sustainable harvest of non-timber plant resources in tropical moist forest: an ecological primer. Biodiversity Support Program-WWF, Washington, D.C.

Reis, M., 1995. Resource development for non-wood forest products. In Non-wood forest products for sustainable forestry. Expert Consultation on Non-Wood Forest Products, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, FAO, Rome.

Scoones, I. C., M. Melnyk, M. and J. Pretty (eds.), 1992. The Hidden harvest: wild foods and agricultural systems. A literature review and annotated bibliography. 111.1, IIED, London.

Shackleton, C., 1996. Potential stimulation of local rural economies by harvesting secondary products: a case study from the Transvaal Lowveld, South Africa. Ambio 25(1): 33-38.