THINKING beyond the canopy
Non-timber forest products and conservation: what prospects?
Terry C.H. Sunderland, Ousseynou Ndoye and Susan Tarka Sanchez
49th Annual Mee-ng of the ATBC Bonito, Brazil, 19th June 2012
THINKING beyond the canopy
This presentation… § Sunderland, T.C.H., S. Harrison
& O. Ndoye. 2011. NTFPs and conservation: what prospects? In: S. Shackleton, C. Shackleton & P. Shanley (eds) Non-timber forest products in the global context. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
THINKING beyond the canopy
Summary
§ NTFPs hailed as “silver bullet” for sustainable forest conservation
§ Many conservation interventions still rely on NTFP “development” for alternative livelihoods
§ However, evidence suggests that the NTFP/conservation linkages are tenuous
THINKING beyond the canopy
Brief history of NTFP/conservation paradigm
§ Colonial expansion led by novel forest products that became agricultural commodities
§ “Boom and bust” nature of production systems often characterised by elite capture and exclusion (Homma 1992; Dove 1993)
§ Revisionist “Rainforest Harvest” theory of 1980’s, led in part by “extractive reserve” model where high value forest products and established markets coincided
THINKING beyond the canopy
NTFP’s and rural livelihoods § Significant value of forest
products to rural dwellers and often keystone of food and nutritional security
§ Often provides only means to access cash economy
§ Recent global study suggests that one fifth of rural income is derived from forest products (CIFOR’s Poverty and Environment Network)
THINKING beyond the canopy
Is NTFP harvesting sustainable? § It depends…. § Factors to consider: tenure, plant part
harvested, intensity, long-term management and monitoring
§ Unfortunately, very few examples where sustainable management of individual resources have taken place in the context of the individual resource and wider ecosystem
§ Even high value forest products (e.g. Prunus africana) are harvested without a basic understanding of long-term impacts of exploitation
§ Very little investment in sustainable multiple-use forestry: co-management
THINKING beyond the canopy
NTFPs and protected areas (PA’s)
§ Exponential increase in PA’s globally (now 11.5% of terrestrial surface)
§ 8.4% of land area are IUCN I-IV classifications, thus annexed from human use (conflict and non-compliance)
§ Clear advocacy for “wild nature” over sustainable use § If NTFPs and conservation are compatible, why is this the
case?
THINKING beyond the canopy
Transition from natural forests to “domestic” forests
§ Low density of NTFPs in natural forests § Transition from “nature to culture” (Dove 1995) and
anthropogenic landscapes § Domestic forests (e.g. peri-urban forests of Belem
(Brazil) or rubber agroforests of Sumatra (Indonesia)) § Simplification of production systems § Thus NTFP extractive systems not reliant on biodiversity
per se
THINKING beyond the canopy
Constraints to NTFP contribution to biodiversity conservation
§ Estimates of non-timber “value” greatly over-exaggerated (c.f. Peters et al. 1989, Nature)
§ Commercialisation often leads to appropriation and depletion
§ Increased demand + resource scarcity = cultivation or substitution
§ Thus “value” of biodiversity-rich forests is reduced
§ NTFP-based income often part of the informal forestry sector; the “hidden harvest” (Laird et al. 2010)
§ Erosion of traditional knowledge § Lack of tenure
THINKING beyond the canopy
PEN: A global study of NTFPs
§ 25 countries § 36 PEN studies § 239 households in the average study § 364 villages or communities surveyed § 2,313 data fields (variables) in the average study § >10,000 households surveyed § 40,950 household visits by PEN enumerators § 294,150 questionnaire pages filled out and entered § 456,546 data cells (numbers) in the average study § 17,348,734 data cells in the PEN global data base!
THINKING beyond the canopy
Value of NTFPs to livelihoods?
§ NTFPs classified as “safety nets” but sometimes as “poverty traps”
§ Not a pathway out of poverty § Agriculture and off-farm income more attractive than forest
product harvesting alone § Thus further disassociating integrated conservation and
livelihood functions
THINKING beyond the canopy
In summary
§ Links between NTFPs and biodiversity conservation have been based on simplistic assumptions and generalisations
§ Further hindered by separation of protection and sustainable use
§ Multiple-use sustainable forestry requires long-term investments and complex co-management approaches
