0438-C1
T. Y. Chee 1
Forestry, today, in broader terms mark a great milestone in our continuing efforts and cooperation in the field of tropical forestry management. In our country we share a common heritage; the evergreen tropical rainforest and as custodians of this valuable resource, we must manage it on a sustainable basis. This is because the rainforest plays an important role in the lives of our people. It is the life support system of our country, ensuring environmental stability and ecological balance in the process. In our countries, we exercise policies which ensure that our forests remain a renewable resource and maintain a healthy balance between economic and environmental needs. In this respect, our future generations can look forward to the future with much confidence and hope, knowing that the forests will still be around to provide a stable environment.
During the last few decades, social forestry (as the term commonly used in Malaysia) has played a prominent role in uplifting the standard of living of the rural communities, particularly in the ASEAN region. This has often been thrust upon us by social, economic, cultural and political events. Moreover, faced with the twin problems of diminishing forest resources on one hand and increasing population pressure on the other, many Governments could no longer afford to allow shifting cultivators to degrade the forest environment and thus began introducing the concept of social forestry to the people.
In Malaysia, we have this big problem with regard to shifting cultivation. We have so far identified 3.5 million hectares of shifting cultivation areas located mainly in the states of Sabah and Sarawak and actions have been taken to reduce as well as rehabilitate these areas with the active participation of the local people. Sabah, for instance, has a few agencies promoting social forestry. These include the Sabah Forestry Department, Sabah Forest Development Authority (SAFODA) and Sabah Forest Industries (SFI). Similarly, Sarawak's approach in tackling the problem is the implementation of agroforestry programmes, particularly the highly successful SABAL Agro-forestry Project.
In the Peninsula, social forestry programmes are designed to provide amenity through the establishment of recreational parks within the Permanent Forest Estate, urban planting of trees for aesthetic values and the planting of traditional fruit trees along forest fringes by the rural communities, primarily to create local awareness on the importance of forestry to their living environment.
In the advent of scarce land resources, forested lands can no longer be viewed as the exclusive domain of foresters. In most cases, foresters have to come to terms with other land users, particularly the agriculturalists. It is now recognised that land, irrespective of its inherent fertility or terrain, lends itself to many alternative uses - all of which have legitimate claims upon the land and are defensible on socio-economic and even technical grounds.
Traditionally, tropical foresters in our country have often sought to exclude other land users primarily on legal grounds and partly on the grounds that only foresters can manage the fragile tropical forest ecosystem.
The mood of deliberations evidenced by foresters today point to the primary function of forests, that is, to fulfil human needs both tangible and intangible. The role of foresters in the ensuing decade is clear. Not only must the forest services provide the industrial wood requirements of the wood-based industries, they must also develop a sense of anticipation and ability to cooperate with other land-users. More importantly, however, is to redefine national policies towards social forestry and to develop appropriate strategies and action programmes/ plans as an integral solution towards the resolution of apparently competing claims by various land-users. The main beneficiary of such an integral exercise must be the rural communities.
In Malaysia, much of the existing forest reserves is set aside either for the production of industrial raw materials or for the protection of the environment such as sensitive watersheds and there seems very little possibility of decreasing the area under forest reserves to effectively meet the increasing demands of the rural people for land. Opportunities have to be created within the forest reserves for the growing of trees with the participation of the rural communities. Within this context, Social Forestry has an important role to play. It is an accepted fact that in our country, the main role of the indigenous forests is the sustainable production of timber products, without impairing the ability of the forest to produce a wide range of other products now commercialised or used domestically by the rural dwellers. However, before social forestry is implemented at the national level, it is necessary to consider and define its scope, objectives, role in the ecological balance, impact on farm output and rural economy, development of social amenities for rural as well as urban population, mode of its implementation and the type of organisation(s) required to administer approved programmes. Surveys can then be conducted to assess the availability of areas and needs of the people, classification of these areas, involvement of the people and above all, to analyse the problems of Man-Forest relationships, conflicts and behaviour in a particular situation.
Any kind of land, either productive or unproductive, irrigated or unirrigated, stable or erodible, can be brought under some form of Social Forestry programme after carefully assessing the site, requirement of the population and the right choice of species. A great deal of information already exists with regard to the choice of species for different sites. However, choice of species for farm forestry or agro-forestry has to be conducted with a great deal of care, taking into account the root system, competition with arable crops for water and nutrients and acceptance of the species by the farmers.
In the Malaysian context, much has yet to be done to upgrade our knowledge on species selection, the regenerability of tropical rainforests under certain conditions, clear felling vis-à-vis polycyclic management systems and growth dynamics, and most important of all, the awareness of the future problems of wood scarcity and tree removal.
Essential prerequisites of social forestry development in rural areas include assurance that benefits accruing to the community must commensurate with the efforts they are called upon to make and must be seen to be so.
Monetary support may be necessary to induce projects with protective or delayed returns; land can be diverted for crops and grazing to trees, only if provision is made for joint production systems in areas of high population pressure and concurrent improvement of productivity on crop and grazing lands. The long time-frame required for forestry programmes requires security of tenure of the land and alternative sources of income during the establishment phase. Forestry may provide seasonal employment on a part-time basis. This will generally require technical support from outside the community; the degree of support depending on the technical complexity or product mix of the agro-forestry project and the self-sufficiency of the community. It is abundantly clear that agro-forestry schemes designed to uplift the standard of living of the local people practising shifting cultivation in the deep forests will be significantly different from those schemes that are designed to support viable forestry villages with the objective of slowing transmigration of rural dwellers to the urbanised centres. Tree crops will require marketing systems. Community organisations may require extensive assistance before being able to handle such projects.
In our effort to develop and promote projects which will provide development to the people, I can foresee some prerequisites which are more important than others and the following five appear to be the most-fundamental to progress.
I. A need for closer integration between rural forestry programmes and agriculture or rural development projects.
II. Commitment and cooperation at the village level to participate in the projects and for the people of the village to directly be involved in the development and protection of their designated project area.
III. Firm central government commitment to project objectives and the existence of a strong forestry institution which can act as an effective lending channel for local and external funding agency and provide assurance of organisational and administration capability for project development.
IV. Assurance of a satisfactory technical package.
V. Availability of the basic data needed to develop economic justification for the project.
Because of the close relationship between forestry, fodder and food production, past experience indicates that social forestry programmes need to be integrated wherever possible with agricultural or rural development projects. The perceived needs of the rural people, particularly in remote areas, such as roads, water supplies, health clinics, schools, improved seeds, fertilizers, access to credits, and agricultural extension services, are clearly of higher priority than long term forestry development programmes or soils conservation. In short, social forestry development programmes will be most likely to succeed in areas where an integrated approach is being taken towards rural development; where these perceived needs are being met and where forestry is included as part of an overall development package.
In Malaysia, Social Forestry have three distinct approaches. In Sabah, social forestry programmes are designed for community development; in Sarawak the programme is agro-based and in Peninsular Malaysia for amenity and the creation of awareness among the people. However, on the whole Malaysian situation, social forestry concepts must take second place to those relating to primary wood production for industrial uses because we have already a thriving export trade in primary wood products as well as a strong domestic demand for timber products. The recreational requirements of urbanised population should also be taken into account.
In a traditional, non-industrialised society, the establishment of forestry activities may have an important role in the beginning of economic and social development which is rational from the point of view of the local communities as well as society as a whole. However, forestry may have also some influences which one can classify as socially undesirable. As far as traditional societies are concerned, one basic problem is that the establishment of forestry activities may advance the disintegration of ancient social institutions and structures. On the other hand, in a modern, industrialised society one primary function of forestry seems to be to maintain and strengthen the rural social structures and to equalize the regional differences caused by cumulative development. However, the role of forest in rural development is likely to decrease when industrialization and modernization progress further. One reason for this is the fact that the increasing urban population will use forests for purposes other than forestry, such as recreation and nature conservation. In Malaysia, with the increase in economic affluence, we are beginning to feel the pressure of urbanised groups for more and better recreational facilities such as out-door activities.
Therefore, in conclusion it can be envisaged that the primary purpose of this is to focus and review our attention on some of the social forestry concepts as practised in our country, and to provide a forum to provoke active discussions on the exchange and formulation of definitive concepts for policy purposes, particularly in the Malaysian context.
1 Global Environment Centre
7A, Jalan 19/29
46300 Petaling Jaya
Selangor, Malaysia
Tel: +603-79572007
Fax: +603-79577003
E-mail: [email protected]
Website : www.gecnet.info