I would like to thank the contributors to the discussion last week. The discussion covered a lot of interesting issues. Here is a summary of some of your contributions:
Social protection instruments that can be targeted to forest dependent people
Graded long-term food aid compatible with their traditional diet can help forest dependent people achieve self-sufficiency.
In-kind-transfers such as housing and clothing help
Social protection can help people meet their basic needs and also help prevent environmental degradation
Cash transfers can help re-establish livelihoods affected by deforestation by supporting afforestation.
Social insurance schemes in the form of rotating loan funds that can (i) meet critical short term cash needs for members while also (ii) preventing needs based tree cutting that threatens sustainable forest management planning.
Social assistance schemes for those unable to engage directly in such forest farm producer organisation (because they are ill, or in school, or landless etc). These schemes can be implemented via forest farm producer organisation.
Labour market policies to protect forest workers (minimum wages, safety standards etc).
Labour protection through preferential procurement from business collectives where labour not capital drives benefit distribution.
Subsidise inputs for forest farm producer businesses
The major sources of vulnerability for forest dependent people
Isolation from each other, markets, service providers and decision makers
Few owners of forest areas
Conflict or trade-off between forest extraction today and benefits for future generation
High demand for forest products to meet daily needs ( food, medical care, tools)
Criminal elements in the timber markets
Limitations of forestry policies in addressing vulnerability of forest dependent people
Lack of coherent integrated planning for economic development, sustainable use and conservation.
Lack of tangible information and dialogue amongst stakeholders.
Forestry policies and programmes typically marginalize forest dependent people in favour of the large industrial model, with little evidence that this model protects forests or reduces poverty.
Policy considerations
Ensure that social protection instruments and forest policies and programmes strengthen the organization of forest and farm producer groups who comprise the biggest part of the forest private sector are the most likely to conserve forests and facilitate poverty reduction e.g. leverage existing initiatives like the Forest and Farm facility designed by alliances of indigenous peoples, community forestry and smallholder family forestry
Design education systems that address the entrepreneurial necessities of local forest farm producers so that they may diversify income sources
Invest in locally controlled forestry (ILCF) which allow local people to: (i) secure commercial resource rights; (ii) gain access to technical extension and finance; (iii) develop business capacity and market access; and (iv) strengthen organisations that allow them market power and political influence. Evidence that this model protects forests and alleviates poverty e.g. examples in Gambia, Guatemala, Kenya, Mexico and Nepal.
Legal titling for forest dependent people to allow sustainable exploitation of forest resources
Financial and appropriate technical help to establish and operate co-operative to harvest and market forest products by forest-dependent peoples without the mediation of brokers.
Scale up community based approaches for sustainable use and management.
Establish legal and policy frameworks that would facilitate sustainable forest management e.g. mangrove special ecosystem in Cameroon
Dear participants
I would like to thank the contributors to the discussion last week. The discussion covered a lot of interesting issues. Here is a summary of some of your contributions:
Social protection instruments that can be targeted to forest dependent people
The major sources of vulnerability for forest dependent people
Limitations of forestry policies in addressing vulnerability of forest dependent people
Policy considerations