Michael Balinga, Terry Sunderland, Serge Ngendakumana, Abdon Awono, Zida Mathurin and Bouda Henri Noel

Promoting best practices for joint forest management of forest resources in the Mano

River Union

2

MANO RIVER UNION COUNTRIES

Colonial Period

1st Republic 2nd Republic 2nd Republic

Establishment of Classified

Forests

Repressive conservation of forests

Global economic crisis & National

Policy reform

Development of

comanagement in Guinea

4

1986: Decentralisation policy

1989: Forestry Code in 1989, Environment Code in 1989

1991: Wildlife code

1992: Land Code

1997: Environmental Action Plan

2005: Law on Cooperatives

2007: Agricultural development Policy, draft National Strategy

for Participatory Forest Management

2008: Co-management Guidelines

POLICY REVIEW PROCESS

5

Balayan Souroumba Sincery Oursa Souti Yanfou Nyalama

Size 42,737 ha 30,195ha 21,501ha 23,944 ha

No. of villages 20 30 30 25Population (est.) 8,714 11,058 7,618 5,703Revenue sources Farming, Livestock

rearing, NTFP collection, charcoal and firewood exploitation

Farming, Livestock rearing, Hunting, NTFP collection charcoal, firewood and timber exploitation

Farming, Livestock rearing, Hunting, NTFP collection charcoal, firewood and timber exploitation

Farming, Livestock rearing, Hunting, NTFP collection, firewood and timber exploitation

Legal framework for land and forest resources

Classified in 1951 as a state protection forest. Co-management of Natural resources introduced in 1999. Weak to inexistent land tenure system

Classified in 1943 as a State protection forest.Co management introduced in 2000. Weak to inexistent land tenure systems

Classified in 1943 as a State protection forest. Co management introduced in 2000. Weak to inexistent land tenure systems

Classified in 1943 as a State protection forest. Co management introduced in 1996. Weak to inexistent land tenure systems

NRMA

1993-2000

ENRMA

2000-2005

LAMIL

2005-2008

Chemonix Winrock CIFOR-ICRAF-USFS

•Scoping studies •Design & Introduction•1st Management Plan•1st FMC

•Support policy reform•Advocate for PFM•Scale out Initial model•Other management Plans

•Model analysis•Governance review•Policy development•Capacity building

Watershed protectionCollaborative Management introduced

Landscape managementAdaptive management

Auto-evaluation of comanagement process by the existent comanagement committees using each FMC as a focus group

Set of 9 questions used for a SWOT analysis

Identification of strengths and weaknesses of current model highlighted and recommendations made by communities

Testing and periodic review of procedures on an annual basis based on a dialogue process

Limited stakeholder involvement from the start (representivity and gender inequity)

Access to resources restricted (timber, Land, etc.) although necessary for commitment

Weak Implementation capacity (policy gaps, guidelines, reporting and accounting procedures, audits systems, etc)

Benefit sharing mechanism often unclear or not applied

Lack of appropriation by communities of the process

No provision for long term monitoring and reorientation

1996 MODEL

Executive Bureau FMC Commissions

Supervisor

Village Assemblies

WomanCraftsman

YouthElder

2008 MODEL

FMC General Assembly

FMC Administrative Board

FMC Director/President

Protection CommitteeExploitation Committee

Control Committee

Voluntary registration and purchase of shares

Devolution of power and access rights over forest resources (timber, land, NTFPs, firewood, etc.) from state to community

Sharing of responsibilities (monitoring, reforestation, policing, etc.) but also benefits

Audits systems Gender equity (25%) Legal and Policy foundation

Involving communities in the design as well as implementation is an important element for success of failure of joint management schemes

Devolution of management responsibility was facilitated by access to economic benefits especially timber and agricultural land

The economic value of timber can be an important asset to community development but is often a source of conflict

Designing a functional model is an evolutionary process requiring periodic evaluation and adaptation

Devolution model must be aligned to or embedded in existing policies

These policies must in turn integrate contextual realities in order to be appropriate

Governance measures should ensure continuity of change processes

Technical and managerial capacity is often a constraint to effective implementation and needs to be addressed

Integrated and multidisciplinary approach needed: Biodiversity conservation is an objective, livelihoods improvement a means and governance the framework.

BUT

“joint forest management”, “community forestry”, “participatory forest management”, “co-management”, “communal forestry” might mean the same thing in different contexts.

Or

Any single one of these terms could refer to several different forms of forest management across different contexts.

“There is increasing recognition also that there is no single model of collaborative management that can be applied indiscriminately regardless of context.” (Brown 1999)

• Objectives: e.g. biodiversity conservation vs. livelihood and community development

• Ownership and tenure issues: e.g. state vs. communal lands• Level of devolution: total community control to shared

management• Duration of community mandate: short (5 years) to longer (25

years or more)• Legal representation of communities: associations, councils,

etc.• Benefit sharing mechanisms: taxes vs. direct revenue or

minimal to optimal revenue allocated to communities.• Incentives: Cash vs. non cash

Guinea comanagement model has been successfully tested as a model in a couple of sites, however there is need for replication within Guinea.

Neighboring countries are in the process of adopting comanagement, but this needs to be adapted to the specific policy and socio-economic contexts of each country

Identifying and promoting good practices in Forest management is a long term and adaptive process.

www.cifor.cgiar.orgwww.cifor.cgiar.org

Thank youTHANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR

YOUR YOUR ATTENTION, ATTENTION,

INTEREST, AND INTEREST, AND CONTRIBUTIONSCONTRIBUTIONS