0660-A2

Assessing Ethnosilvicultural Knowledge: A Viable Approach to Integrate Non-Timber Forest Products into Forest Management

Krishna H. Gautam^[1] and Teiji Watanabe

Abstract

Ethnosilvicultural knowledge from Canadian Aboriginal communities and community forest users of Nepal are assessed in the context of multiple-product forest management. Both cases showed the richness of such knowledge, indicating possibilities of integrating non-timber forest management into mainstream forestry. It is argued that ethnosilviculture is valuable in sustaining ecological processes and cultural heritages and maintaining rural livelihoods. Guidelines for acquiring ethnosilvicultural knowledge are suggested.^[2],^[3],^[4],^[5]

1. Introduction

Agenda 21 (UNCED, 1992) realized major shortcomings in policies, methods and mechanisms adopted to support and develop the multiple ecological, economic, social and cultural roles of trees, forests and forest lands; subsequently, an immense need was felt on ensuring a rational and holistic approach to the sustainable and environmentally sound development of forest resources through adequate and appropriate institutional strengthening. It clearly indicated that realizing multiple roles of forest resources is one of the unresolved challenges for sustainable forestry.

Multiple roles of forest resources comprise wide ranges of products and services; broadly, they can be grouped into timber and non-timber forest product (NTFP). NTFP include plant and animal products used or potential to use for food, ornament, decoration, medicine, cosmetic, etc., and may have environmental, cultural and spiritual values. In present paper, we confine only on plant products obtained from forest that does not necessitate felling trees.

As most of the global forest resources is either owned by government or influenced by its policy, government's forest policy plays a pivotal role in regulating NTFP. Government usually regulates permits for collection and extraction of these products depending upon the species and end-uses. NTFP with commercial value may attract some levies whereas products for subsistence uses are mostly free of charges (Gautam, 1991; Mahapatra and Mitchell, 1997). People residing within and around forests are mainly involved in NTFP collection and extraction, and are mostly collected at collectors' discretion without any management guidelines. Collectors may be influenced by their motive of maximising income without considering any adverse effects on future yield and other products; such instances are common, especially, when the harvesters are not assured of subsequent usefruct rights on these products (Gautam and Devoe, 2002). The situation, thus, suggests that most of the NTFPs are still in state of open access. Furthermore, activities, such as forest harvesting and mining, overlooked their impacts on many NTFP growing in the same forests. Nonetheless, various efforts are initiated globally, though sporadically, to improve the deteriorating status of NTFP of particular importance.

Traditionally, whenever people felt that species of their importance was disappearing from forest or needed more often, they have domesticated by transplanting in their home garden. Mostly subsistence-natured NTFP are produced in home garden.

Some NTFPs emerged as raw material for industrial product, and resulted in their increasing demand. Subsequently, stabilising supply and increasing economic return has created conducive environment for domestication. Cultivation could be an effective approach for producing raw material.

'Extractive-reserve', relatively a new concept introduced for NTFP regulation, was specifically devised to safeguard the Amazonian rubber tapers when they were threatened by forest clearance in the 1980s (Brawn and Rosendo, 2000), It is an approach in which tracts of forests are set aside for residents to harvest non-timber forest products. Extractivism may promote local commitment to forest conservation, provided clear and binding management prescriptions are followed.

Recently, NTFP emerged as an important product in community-based forest management. Waves of community forestry evolved globally and NTFP production has been the main motivation for such evolution, indicating enormous potential for integrating NTFP into forest management..

As mentioned above, several efforts have evolved for NTFP supply. Studies (Gould et al., 1998; Romero, 1999; Myers, et al., 2000) have studied on possibilities of managing NTFP within forest ecosystems but they have considered effects of single product. Unless and until NTFP management is integrated with forest management, sustainability of NTFP and eventually of forests remains threatened. Management regime has to integrate economical, environmental, cultural and spiritual values of NTFP (Gautam and Watanabe, 2002).

Present paper, based on two contexts (Canada and Nepal), argues that ethnosilviculture (traditional knowledge on silviculture) could be a prospective base for integrating NTFP management in mainstream forestry. Nepal case is based on information collected from two community-managed forests (while conducting khg's doctoral research during 1997-99), whereas the Canada case is developed mainly from earlier studies, and supplemented by information from a field visit (Gautam, 2002).

2. Case studies

2.1 Canadian forestry

Origin of conflicts

Canada holds 10% of the world's forests, and 94% of its forests are publicly owned; forests under provincial and federal jurisdictions are 71% and 23%, respectively. Out of 417.6 million hectares forest, 235 million hectares are categorised as commercial forests, mainly for timber.

Canada announced its commitment at UNCED (1992) towards sustainable forestry, and acknowledged the forest's multiple roles - environmental, commercial, cultural and spiritual benefits. Since then efforts are made in incorporating multiple benefits into forest management, mainly through amending provincial policies (NRCan, 2002). However, forests are predominantly managed for timber despite the public values forests primarily for non-timber uses (WRI, 2000).

Over 80% of Canadian Aboriginal communities (AC) are living in productive forest areas and large tracts of forests may come under them while settling outstanding land claims (Quaile and Smith, 1997). But, they are struggling to maintain values as per their traditional way of life. Timber harvesting is threatening subsistence of many communities in far north whereas aboriginals are poorly involved in forest management decisions throughout Canada (WRI, 2000). Thus, Canadian Government's timber-biased attitude has often conflicts with AC's rights and traditional respect and interest towards forests (WRI, 2000).

Although Canada launched First Nation Forestry Program (1996), and few other pilot projects were designed to increase AC's involvement, the communities are feeling that they are not well represented in decision-making process (Gautam, 2002). Accordingly, National Aboriginal Forestry Association (NAFA) recently proposed a separate Aboriginal Criterion for Sustainable Forest Management (NAFA, 2002). Proposed criterion argues that the Canadian forests need to be managed for multiple products and values with active participation (not simply as stakeholder) of AC, and appreciating their traditional knowledge. Thus, the Canadian forestry is at crossroad: timber-biased industrial forestry evolved over the past 100 years and AC's forestry evolved from several centuries. Value system of these two approaches are different, and such differences may result in an unwanted outcome. As the industrial forestry developed over a century could not reconcile the values of AC, it may be a time to assess the elements of AC's forestry that has been built up with practice of several generations.

Ethnosilviculture

Traditional ecological knowledge, which not only assesses physical environmental relationships but also considers cultural and spiritual beliefs, could be able to assemble the element for multiple-product management (Gliddon, 2000). North American communities hold tremendous ethnobotanical knowledge (Davidson-Hunt et al., 2001; Gautam, 2002). Marles (2001) noted the long history of Canadian forests in meeting subsistence activities of AC. Almost all AC value their respective forests for multiple products. Furthermore, an indigenous institution, such as 'hahuulhi', was evolved on traditional territory for sustainable resource use (Turner, 2001).

Turner (2001) noted the following ethnobotanical knowledge, indicating the type of the knowledge that could be available upon the intensive exploration.

• Replanting propagules;

• Transplanting of valuable and frequently usable plants;

• Pruning and coppicing to improve quality and quantity;

• Thinning of density-dependent species to enhance growth;

• Partial harvesting of bark, branch or root;

• Cuttings planting;

• Selective harvesting of medicinal plants; and

• Control burning for enhancing growth of important species.

AC's ethnosilvicultural knowledge:

The system of transferring knowledge to new generation was an established culture in AC. Language, food, artefacts, culture, etc. are very important in this process, and any change in such factors could be threats for such process. Collecting such information from any indigenous community such as AC most be done in careful way so that the process neither embarrasses them nor the information is disrupted. Davidson-Hunt et al. (2001) presented approaches and methodologies for collecting indigenous knowledge on plant use and management. Furthermore, Marles (2001) developed following stepwise guidelines for ethnobotanical research, which may be useful for exploring silvicultural information.

1. Consent from Band council and elders;
2. Approval from appropriate institutional ethics committee;
3. Advisory committee of elders to supervise work;
4. Involve young people from the community;
5. Regular reporting to Band council;
6. Compiling information from community and literature;
7. Communicating research results to the community; and
8. Appropriate arrangements regarding intellectual property rights.

2.2 Nepali Forestry

Conflict to reconciliation

Nepal, with an area of 147,000 square km, was once rich in forest resources and timber export was one of the main revenue sources until 1970s. Until 1950s, forests in the Tarai were intact, which were later opened for settlement programmes. Industrial forestry intervened through enactment of Private Forest Nationalization Act 1957; although this was mainly intended to nationalize the forest owned by earlier ruling-elites, it affected the forests throughout country by instigating people in converting forest to agriculture (Gautam, 1991). The Act affected badly to the traditional forest management practice, and Nepal's forests became a basis for 'Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation' (Ives and Messerli, 1989).

Forest policy responded by amending legislation and introducing community forestry legislation 1977. Since then evolving-policy has given heavy focus on involving local communities in forest management. Major shifts are: 'timber-only to multiple-products', and 'centrally- to locally-managed'. Policy changes received overwhelming response from the field, and about a million hectares of government forest is handed over to over 12000 forest users groups (FUG), involving 1.3 million households (as of November 13, 2002 record from forest department).

Ethnosilvicultural knowledge

Because silviculture for integrated management for timber and NTFP was not adequately addressed by earlier forestry, majority of community forests were simply protecting the forest, i.e. passive management. Utilization of local knowledge was not only beneficial but also essential for actively managing community forests. Managing community forests created opportunities to learn about the indigenous knowledge on various aspects of forest management, and encouraging evidences to demonstrate local people's knowledge were recorded (Gautam, 1991).

A detail study (Gautam, 2001) on ethnosilvicultural knowledge in two community-managed sal (Shorea robusta) forest showed encouraging information. Users demonstrated knowledge on uses of over 200 species. Users are aware of various aspects of 97 species of different life-forms. Ethnosilvicultural knowledge included:

• Species abundance,

• Associate species,

• Dispersal mechanism,

• Distribution,

• Phenology,

• Propagation

• Microclimate and

• General features.

Acquiring FUG's Ethnosilvicultural knowledge

1. Explaining study objectives to FUG, and seeking their consent;
2. Informal discussions to identify and key informants;
3. Meetings with key informants;
4. Participatory meetings in each sub group and class;
5. General meeting (presentations from each sub-group and class);
6. Forest transect with key informants;
7. Outputs - list and silvicultural characteristics of NTFP species, key informants;
8. Communicating results to users.

3. Discussion

The cases showed that AC in Canada are still struggling for their traditional tenure of their land including forests, whereas similar issues created by nationalizing private forests in Nepal were resolved after entrusting forest to FUG. Nepal had very bitter experiences of isolating local people from forest management, such situation may have been conceiving in Canada, which, if not handled timely, may affect sustainability of Canadian forests.

Forest management for single product may bring dissatisfaction to users of other products, i.e., clearly creating at least two classes in the community. Such disarray may lead to class struggle. Struggle between timber-biased elite and others resulted in degraded bare hills in a very short span of time in Nepal. In Canada, too, differences in valuing between AC and others may affect Canadian forests in the same way it affected in Nepal. Disappearance of species from their ecosystem is one indicator of degradation (Turner, 2001). Thus whether it is a developed nation such as Canada or a least-developed (developing?) country like Nepal, the forests of both countries demands for producing timber and non-timber forest products.

Ethnosilvicultural knowledge of AC concerns about NTFP, whereas FUG in Nepal hold knowledge on the whole forest ecosystem. This may be because forest users in Nepal are heavily involved in forest management whereas government manages most of the AC's forests. Turner (2001) found disappearance of some species after ceasing the indigenous management, indicating that the two-way relation exists between indigenous knowledge and species diversity. While some NTFP species are ecologically dependent on a diverse forest environment, so disappearance of one or more species may affect the condition of other species. This may have been well understood by AC, and so are giving high emphasis on developing mechanism to utilize the aboriginal forest-based traditional knowledge in forest management (NAFA, 2002). Both AC and FUG are aware that ethnosilviculture ensure NTFP production. The instances of local people holding such knowledge are recorded elsewhere (Salick et al., 1995; Ruiz Perez and Arnold, 1996; Davidson-Hunt and Berkes, 2001; Emery and Zasada, 2001; Love and Jones, 2001). Thus ethnosilviculture could be an effective base for developing silvicultural regimes.

Acquiring ethnosilvicultural knowledge involved long procedure in both AC and FUG. In both cases making rapport seems beginning for acquiring information from local people. Although protocols may vary, person who is giving information has to be convinced that the information given will not be used against their value. Offering tobacco while meeting senior people is an established culture in AC (Gautam, 2002). It is necessary to piece together information from different sources. Information can be collected from gatherers, loggers, ground-managers, crafters, artisans and their families and friends (Emery and Zasada, 2001). All sections of the community hold at least some sort of knowledge; so participation of all (gender, age, profession, ethnicity) groups will be beneficial. Civic events such as fairs, churches, temples, etc. could be very important venue to acquire such information. Multiple meetings with resource persons may be useful to triangulate and verify the information. Forest transects with local users were very useful to record species, uses and habitats in Nepal.

4. Conclusions

We now offer the following conclusions concerning the integration of NTFP in mainstream forestry.

• Tenural or proprietorship right need to be safeguarded.

• NTFP need to be considered as an integral part of forest management;

• Ethnosilvicultural knowledge database need to be prepared for smallest unit or site, and compiled for larger scale and forest type. This information could be good base for scientific investigation depending upon the importance and urgency.

• Strengthening the traditional and indigenous institution is not only suggested but also essential approach. Such institution may be capable in monitoring the ecological condition of the forest.

References:

Brown, K. and Rosendo, S. (2000): Environmentalists, rubber tappers and empowerment; the politcs and economics of extractive reserves. Development and Change, 31(1):201-227.

David-Hunt, I. and Berkes, F. (2001):Changing resource management paradigms, traditional ecological knowledge, and non-timber forest products. In Davidson-Hunt et al., 2001:78-92.

Davidson-Hunt, I.; Duchesne, L. C. and Zasada, J. (eds.) (2001): Forest communities in the third millennium: linking research, business and policy towards a sustainable non-timber forest product sector. USDA Forest Service.

Emery, M. R. and Zasada, J. (2001): Silviculture and nontimber forest products: extending the benefits of forest management. Timberline 2001:10-13.

Gautam, K. H. (1991): Indigenous forest management systems in the hills of Nepal. MSc thesis, Australian National University.

Gautam, K. H. (2001): Lopping regimes in community-managed sal (Shorea robusta) forests of Nepal: prospects for multiple-product silviculture for community forestry. PhD thesis, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.

Gautam, K. H. (2002): Notes on a visit to Nipissing First Nation Ontario, Canada, October, 2002

Gautam, K. H. and Devoe, N. N. (2002):Conflicts between policy and local people in valuing non-timber fores products: perspectives from Nepal. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 2(1):43-52.

Gautam, K. H. and Watanabe, T. (2002): Silviculture for non-timber forest product management: challenges and opportunities for sustainable forest management. The Forestry Chronicle 78(6):828-830.

Gliddon, A. (2000): Wapekeka First Nation: Sphagmum moss harvesting business. Final report, Non-timber Forest products Conference 2000,

Gould, K.; Howard, A. F. and Rodriguez, G. (1998): Sustainable production of non-timber forest products; natural dye extraction from El Cruce Dos Aguadas, Peten, Guatemala. Forest Ecology and Management 111(1,2):69-82.

Ives, J. D. and Messerli, B. 1989. The Himalayan Dilemma: Reconciling Development and Conservation. Routledge

Love, T. and Jones, E. T. (2001): Why is non-timber forest product harvesting an issue? Journal of Sustainable Forestry 13(3-4):105-121.

Mahapatra, A. and Mitchell, C. P. (1997): Sustainable development of non-timber forest products: implication for forest management in India. Forest Ecology and Management 94(1997):15-29.

Marles, R. J. (2001): Non-timber forest products and aboriginal traditional knowledge. In Davidson-Hunt et al., 2001; 53-65.

Myers, G. P.; Newton, A. C. and Melgarejo, O.(2000): The influence of canopy gap size on natural regeneration of Brazil nut (Berthilletia excelsa) in Bolivia. Forest Ecology and Management 127(2000):119-128.

NAFA, 2002. An aboriginal critetion for sustainable forest management: the rational. National Aboriginal Forestry Association's presentation at CIF Conference, Sept-Oct 2002, North Bay Ontario Canada.

NRCan, 2002. The State of Canada's Forest http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/cfs-scf/national/what-quoi/sof/sof02/feature01g_e.html

Quaile, G. and Smith, P. (1997): An aboriginal perspective on Canada's progress toward meeting it national commitments to improve aboriginal participation in sustainable forest management. XI World Congress, Vol 5:154-161.

Romero, C. (1999): reduced-impact logging effects on commercial non-vascular pendant epiphyte biomass in a tropical Montane forest in Costa Rica. Forest Ecology and Management 118(1-3):117-125.

Ruiz-Perez, M. and Arnold, J. E. M. (eds) (1996): Current issues in Non-timber Forest Products Research. CIFOR-ODA.

Salick, J.; Mejia, A. and Anderson, T. (1995): Non-timber forest products integrated with natural forest management, Rio san Juan, Nicaragua. Ecological Applications 5(4):878-895.

Turner, N. J. (2001): "Keeping it living": applications and relevance of traditional plant management in British Columbia to sustainable harvesting of non-timber forest product. In Davidson-Hunt et al.,2001:66-77.

UNCED (1992): The Earth Summit: The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.

WRI (2000): Canada's forests at a crossroads: an assessment in the year 2000. World Resources Institute pp 107.