Author
Listed:
- Guillaume Lescuyer
(UPR Forêts et Sociétés - Forêts et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)
- Tito Kakundika
(UNIKIS - Université de Kisangani)
- Ignace Muganguzi Lubala
(UNIKIS - Université de Kisangani)
- Isaac Shabani Ekyamba
(UNIKIS - Université de Kisangani)
- Raphael Tsanga
(CIFOR - Centre de recherche forestière internationale)
- Paolo Omar Cerutti
(CIFOR - Centre de recherche forestière internationale)
Abstract
Since the second half of the 2000s, several options for implementing community-based forest management in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), like the local community forest concession (LCFC), have been discussed in the country's technical and political circles. Proposals and pilot testing have increased in the last five years, but the funding of initiatives is often proposed for divergent purposes and taking different approaches. We reviewed current experiences in the Eastern province of the DRC and found that nobody has carried out an estimation of the financial returns of the business models they drew up for/with the communities involved. We therefore conducted a financial feasibility analysis for two case studies, estimating the costs of developing/implementing activities and the benefits expected for the communities within the next five years. Three main conclusions were drawn from the analysis: (1) most activities conducted under the LCFC model deal with rural development, and not with forestry operations per se; (2) several forestry activities such as biodiversity conservation or carbon sequestration are not detailed in the management documents and appear to have little legitimacy for local populations; (3) the two LCFCs show a negative financial performance because the inception and implementation costs are substantially higher than the medium-term profits. Community forestry is unlikely to develop in the DRC unless local people are guaranteed that it will contribute to improving their livelihoods, notably their financial and physical capital. This requires that LCFC initiatives focus on actual productive uses of forest resources, which financial performance is systematically assessed ex ante. A simplification of the legal constraints is also needed to reduce the cost of creating and managing a LCFC.
Suggested Citation
Guillaume Lescuyer & Tito Kakundika & Ignace Muganguzi Lubala & Isaac Shabani Ekyamba & Raphael Tsanga & Paolo Omar Cerutti, 2019.
"Are community forests a viable model for the Democratic Republic of Congo?,"
Post-Print
hal-05173681, HAL.
Handle:
RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05173681
DOI: 10.5751/ES-10672-240106
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05173681v1
Download full text from publisher
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:hal:journl:hal-05173681. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.