IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/foi/wpaper/2020_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rethinking Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Eliezeri Sungusia

    (College of Forestry, Wildlife and Tourism, Sokoine University of Agriculture)

  • Jens Friis Lund

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Christian Pilegaard Hansen

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Numan Amanzi

    (College of Forestry, Wildlife and Tourism, Sokoine University of Agriculture
    Tanzania Forestry Research Institute)

  • Yonika M. Ngaga

    (College of Forestry, Wildlife and Tourism, Sokoine University of Agriculture)

  • Gimbage Mbeyale

    (College of Forestry, Wildlife and Tourism, Sokoine University of Agriculture)

  • Thorsten Treue

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Henrik Meilby

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

Abstract

Around 20 years ago, Tanzania adopted the policy of participatory forest management (PFM) to create incentives for increasing villagers’ participation in forest management. The timing is thus fitting to reflect on the achievements and challenges of the PFM process so far. There have certainly been successes. Nonetheless, challenges remain. Notably, there is a mismatch between participation ideals and the way the process has been framed, or structured, as well as outcomes on the ground in terms of actual participation and forest management practices. This working paper presents experiences with PFM from a handful of sites across the country, relying on existing published literature as well as our own research experiences. Having been involved in a number of major PFM research projects in Tanzania, we, the authors, have a combined experience of more than 20 years of conducting research in this field. We summarize important findings that explain the observed chasm between participation ideals and local realities and offer some recommendations. While some of our diagnoses and recommendations may contradict conventional wisdom in forestry, we believe that this report contributes valuable insights to the continued efforts to further sustainable forestry in Tanzania. We begin by outlining the global ideals of participatory forestry. We then present an overview of the realities of PFM as they appear in existing research. We do not attempt an exhaustive survey of literature or our own research. Rather, we emphasize issues concerning the framing of PFM as a bureaucratic and scientific project, and how that shapes it in practice. We then present case studies illustrating some of the core problems with PFM before concluding with some general recommendations for improving participatory forestry policy and guidelines.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:foi:wpaper:2020_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://okonomi.foi.dk/workingpapers/WPpdf/WP2020/IFRO_WP_2020_02.pdf
    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. 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.
    3. Lund, Jens Friis & Saito-Jensen, Moeko, 2013. "Revisiting the Issue of Elite Capture of Participatory Initiatives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Daniel James Klooster, 2002. "Toward Adaptive Community Forest Management: Integrating Local Forest Knowledge with Scientific Forestry," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(1), pages 43-70, January.
    8. Lund, Jens Friis & Sungusia, Eliezeri & Mabele, Mathew Bukhi & Scheba, Andreas, 2017. "Promising Change, Delivering Continuity: REDD+ as Conservation Fad," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 124-139.
    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. Frey, Gregory E. & Charnley, Susan & Makala, Jasper, 2021. "Economic viability of community-based forest management for certified timber production in southeastern Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    2. Ballal, Aabha & Guha, Asi & Tambe, Sandeep & Patnaik, Suprava & Joe, Elphin Tom, 2023. "Community forest legislation in India: Rights-based polycentrism or responsibilization?," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    3. Mabele, Mathew Bukhi, 2020. "The ‘war on charcoal’ and its paradoxes for Tanzania's conservation and development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Eilola, Salla & Käyhkö, Niina & Fagerholm, Nora, 2021. "Lessons learned from participatory land use planning with high-resolution remote sensing images in Tanzania: Practitioners' and participants’ perspectives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Kimengsi, Jude Ndzifon & Owusu, Raphael & Djenontin, Ida N.S. & Pretzsch, Jürgen & Giessen, Lukas & Buchenrieder, Gertrud & Pouliot, Mariève & Acosta, Ana Nicole, 2022. "What do we (not) know on forest management institutions in sub-Saharan Africa? A regional comparative review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad, 2018. "No sense of ownership in weak participation: a forest conservation experiment in Tanzania," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 434-451, August.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. 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.
    15. Rutt, Rebecca Leigh & Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Pokharel, Ridish & Rayamajhi, Santosh & Tiwari, Krishna & Treue, Thorsten, 2015. "The scientific framing of forestry decentralization in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 50-61.
    16. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    17. Angelingis Makatta & Lupala ZJ & Faustin Maganga & Amos Majule, 2018. "Forest Governance at Village Level with Potential for REDD+ in Participatory Forest Management, Tanzania," International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 8(2), pages 40-51, - January.
    18. Fischer, Harry W. & Ali, Syed Shoaib, 2019. "Reshaping the public domain: Decentralization, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), and trajectories of local democracy in rural India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 147-158.
    19. 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).
    20. Mahapatra, Ajay Kumar & Shackleton, Charlie M., 2011. "Has deregulation of non-timber forest product controls and marketing in Orissa state (India) affected local patterns of use and marketing," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 622-629, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Forestry; Planning; Participation; Inventory; Tenure; CBFM; PFM; Africa; Tanzania;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:foi:wpaper:2020_02. 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: Geir Tveit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/foikudk.html .

    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.