IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i6p1643-d215056.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Type of Land We Want: Exploring the Limits of Community Forestry in Tanzania and Bolivia

Author

Listed:
  • Nicole Gross-Camp

    (Department of Environmental Science & Sustainability, Allegheny College, 520 N Main St, Meadville, PA 16335, USA)

  • Iokine Rodriguez

    (School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, Norfolk, UK)

  • Adrian Martin

    (School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, Norfolk, UK)

  • Mirna Inturias

    (Universidad Nur, 100, Av Cristo Redentor, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia)

  • Glory Massao

    (Mpingo Conservation and Development Initiative, Kilwa Masoko, P.O. Box 49, Tanzania)

Abstract

We explore local people’s perspectives of community forest (CF) on their land in Tanzania and Bolivia. Community forest management is known to improve ecological conditions of forests, but is more variable in its social outcomes. Understanding communities’ experience of community forestry and the potential benefits and burdens its formation may place on a community will likely help in predicting its sustainability as a forest and land management model. Six villages, two in Tanzania and four in Bolivia, were selected based on the presence of community forestry in varying stages. We found that communities were generally supportive of existing community forests but cautious of their expansion. Deeper explorations of this response using ethnographic research methods reveal that an increase in community forest area is associated with increasing opportunity costs and constraints on agricultural land use, but not an increase in benefits. Furthermore, community forests give rise to a series of intra- and inter-community conflicts, often pertaining to the financial benefits stemming from the forests (distribution issues), perceived unfairness and weakness in decision–making processes (procedure/participation), and also tensions over cultural identity issues (recognition). Our findings suggest that communities’ willingness to accept community forests requires a broader consideration of the multifunctional landscape in which it is embedded, as well as an engagement with the justice tensions such an intervention inevitably creates.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicole Gross-Camp & Iokine Rodriguez & Adrian Martin & Mirna Inturias & Glory Massao, 2019. "The Type of Land We Want: Exploring the Limits of Community Forestry in Tanzania and Bolivia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1643-:d:215056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1643/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1643/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Green, Kathryn E. & Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "The politics of expertise in participatory forestry: a case from Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 27-34.
    2. Scheba, Andreas & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2015. "Rethinking ‘expert’ knowledge in community forest management in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-18.
    3. Lund, Jens Friis & Treue, Thorsten, 2008. "Are We Getting There? Evidence of Decentralized Forest Management from the Tanzanian Miombo Woodlands," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 2780-2800, December.
    4. Arturo Escobar, 2006. "Difference and Conflict in the Struggle Over Natural Resources: A political ecology framework," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 49(3), pages 6-13, September.
    5. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    6. Larson, Anne M. & Cronkleton, Peter J. & Pulhin, Juan M., 2015. "Formalizing Indigenous Commons: The Role of ‘Authority’ in the Formation of Territories in Nicaragua, Bolivia, and the Philippines," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 228-238.
    7. Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "Paradoxes of participation: The logic of professionalization in participatory forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-6.
    8. Ribot, Jesse C. & Agrawal, Arun & Larson, Anne M., 2006. "Recentralizing While Decentralizing: How National Governments Reappropriate Forest Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1864-1886, November.
    9. Kaysara Khatun & Nicole Gross-Camp & Esteve Corbera & Adrian Martin & Steve Ball & Glory Massao, 2015. "When Participatory Forest Management makes money: insights from Tanzania on governance, benefit sharing, and implications for REDD+," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(10), pages 2097-2112, October.
    10. Wily, Liz Alden & Dewees, Peter A., 2001. "From users to custodians : changing relations between people and the State in forest management in Tanzania," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2569, The World Bank.
    11. Arts, Bas & de Koning, Jessica, 2017. "Community Forest Management: An Assessment and Explanation of its Performance Through QCA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 315-325.
    12. Anderson, Jon & Mehta, Shreya & Epelu, Edna & Cohen, Brian, 2015. "Managing leftovers: Does community forestry increase secure and equitable access to valuable resources for the rural poor?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 47-55.
    13. Faye, Papa, 2015. "Choice and power: Resistance to technical domination in Senegal's forest decentralization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 19-26.
    14. Hayes, Tanya M., 2006. "Parks, People, and Forest Protection: An Institutional Assessment of the Effectiveness of Protected Areas," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2064-2075, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kumeh, Eric Mensah & Bieling, Claudia & Birner, Regina, 2022. "Food-security corridors: A crucial but missing link in tackling deforestation in Southwestern Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    2. Neema Simon Sumari & Gang Xu & Fanan Ujoh & Prosper Issahaku Korah & Obas John Ebohon & Neema Nicodemus Lyimo, 2019. "A Geospatial Approach to Sustainable Urban Planning: Lessons for Morogoro Municipal Council, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Abebe, Bethlehem A. & Jones, Kelly W. & Solomon, Jennifer & Galvin, Kathleen & Evangelista, Paul, 2020. "Examining social equity in community-based conservation programs: A case study of controlled hunting programs in Bale Mountains, Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    4. Magessa, Kajenje & Wynne-Jones, Sophie & Hockley, Neal, 2020. "Does Tanzanian participatory forest management policy achieve its governance objectives?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scheba, Andreas & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2015. "Rethinking ‘expert’ knowledge in community forest management in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-18.
    2. Baral, Srijana & Meilby, Henrik & Khanal Chettri, Bir Bahadur & Basnyat, Bijendra & Rayamajhi, Santosh & Awale, Srijana, 2018. "Politics of getting the numbers right: Community forest inventory of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 19-26.
    3. Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "Paradoxes of participation: The logic of professionalization in participatory forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-6.
    4. Mustalahti, Irmeli & Gutiérrez-Zamora, Violeta & Hyle, Maija & Devkota, Bishnu Prasad & Tokola, Nina, 2020. "Responsibilization in natural resources governance: A romantic doxa?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. Eliezeri Sungusia & Jens Friis Lund & Christian Pilegaard Hansen & Numan Amanzi & Yonika M. Ngaga & Gimbage Mbeyale & Thorsten Treue & Henrik Meilby, 2020. "Rethinking Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania," IFRO Working Paper 2020/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild & Vedeld, Paul, 2019. "All that glitters is not gold; Power and participation in processes and structures of implementing REDD+ in Kondoa, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 44-54.
    7. Kalonga, Severin Kusonyola & Kulindwa, Kassim Athumani, 2017. "Does forest certification enhance livelihood conditions? Empirical evidence from forest management in Kilwa District, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 49-61.
    8. García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking elite persistence in neoliberalism: Foresters and techno-bureaucratic logics in Mexico’s community forestry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 169-181.
    9. Basnyat, Bijendra & Treue, Thorsten & Pokharel, Ridish Kumar & Baral, Srijana & Rumba, Yam Bahadur, 2020. "Re-centralisation through fake Scientificness: The case of community forestry in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    10. Basnyat, Bijendra & Treue, Thorsten & Pokharel, Ridish Kumar & Lamsal, Lok Nath & Rayamajhi, Santosh, 2018. "Legal-sounding bureaucratic re-centralisation of community forestry in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 5-18.
    11. Koch, Susanne, 2017. "International influence on forest governance in Tanzania: Analysing the role of aid experts in the REDD+ process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 181-190.
    12. Vatn, Arild & Kajembe, George & Mosi, Elvis & Nantongo, Maria & Silayo, Dos Santos, 2017. "What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-9.
    13. Dobrynin, Denis & Smirennikova, Elena & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2020. "Non-state forest governance and ‘Responsibilization’: The prospects for FPIC under FSC certification in Northwest Russia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    14. Mutune, Jane Mutheu & Lund, Jens Friis, 2016. "Unpacking the impacts of ‘participatory’ forestry policies: Evidence from Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 45-52.
    15. Carla Roncoli & Brian Dowd‐Uribe & Ben Orlove & Colin Thor West & Moussa Sanon, 2016. "Who counts, what counts: representation and accountability in water governance in the Upper Comoé sub‐basin, Burkina Faso," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 6-20, February.
    16. Long, Hexing & de Jong, Wil & Yiwen, Zhang & Liu, Jinlong, 2021. "Institutional choices between private management and user group management during forest devolution: A case study of forest allocation in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    17. Trejos, Bernardo & Flores, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Influence of property rights on performance of community-based forest devolution policies in Honduras," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    18. Erbaugh, James T., 2019. "Responsibilization and social forestry in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    19. Hinojosa Flores, Isaías Daniel & Skutsch, Margaret & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2016. "Impacts of Finnish cooperation in the Mexican policy making process: From the community forest management to the liberalization of forest services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 229-238.
    20. Thuy, Truong Dang & Tuan, Vo Quoc & Nam, Pham Khanh, 2021. "Does the devolution of forest management help conserve mangrove in the Mekong Delta of Viet Nam?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:6:p:1643-:d:215056. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.