Attitudes of Forest Users Towards Participatory Forest Management: The Case of Gebradima Forest, Southwestern Ethiopia

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solomon Tadesse ◽  
Muluneh Woldetsadik ◽  
Feyera Senbeta
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Participatory Forest Management ◽  
Southwestern Ethiopia ◽  
Forest Users

Developing capacity of forest users through participatory forest management: Evidence from Madhupur Sal forest in Bangladesh

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khondokar H. Kabir ◽  
Andrea Knierim ◽  
Ataharul Chowdhury ◽  
Beatriz Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Participatory Forest Management ◽  
Sal Forest ◽  
Forest Users

Participatory Forest Management in India: An overview and some emerging issues

Social Change ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 156-164
Author(s):  
V. K. Misra ◽  
S. N. Shabbeer
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Community Forest Management ◽  
Joint Forest Management ◽  
Forest Patch ◽  
Participatory Forest Management ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
Forest Users

Joint Forest Management (JFM) represents a radical departure from the tradition of centralised forest management in India. Forest Department (FD) all over the country has started to forge alliances with local communities to regenerate degraded forests adjoining villages. The strides it has made in less than a decade-with 20 states issuing JFM orders; large numbers of forest officers, NGOs and villagers experimenting with new approaches and relationships; and between four to five million hectares of degraded forests regenerating under local care are remarkable. The local community is given more formal access and usufruct rights over a forest patch which they regenerate by protection and plantation. Given its potential of restoring both the health of our forest and the self respect and dignity of impoverished forest users through assured access to forest resources for securer livelihoods, enthusiastic supporters of JFM have understandably tended to monitor positive impacts of achievements through studies and research. A set of studies were conducted during 1995-96 on self-initiated Community Forest Management (CFM) and Joint Forest Management (JFM) systems, with the aim to largely serve as the benchmark or baseline studies to gain a preliminary understanding. Juttadapalem, a small tribal village in the district of Vishakapatnam, A.P., is one of the sites where SPWD supported a research programme in collaboration with Andhra University, Vishakapatnam. The present paper discusses the findings of the sub-network on ecology and economics with Juttadapalem as a case study.

Attitudes of coastal-forest users in Eastern Cape Province to management options arising from new South African forest policies

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A.F. Obiri ◽  
Michael J. Lawes
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
The State ◽  
Forest Resource ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Participatory Forest Management ◽  
Management Policies ◽  
Forest Users

New participatory forest management policies are being promoted in South Africa involving devolution from the state to local communities at a time when traditional authority has been eroded and is weak. Here, attitudes of forest stakeholders (forest resource users and managers) to three possible forest management policies, as well as to resource use, were investigated using questionnaires. There was concordance in the attitudes of resource users and managers and a general lack of support for community forest management (CFM), particularly among older resource users. Power shifts, uncertainty about land tenure and the management of what has essentially become an open-access system, all confound attempts to implement community-based forestry programmes. Local communities appeared to be wary of taking on responsibility for forest management at this time and indicated comparatively stronger support for state forest management (SFM). Forest stakeholders were more equivocal in their support for participatory forest management (PFM), although this probably reflects a poor understanding by forest users of the new PFM process. No stakeholders supported a total ban on forest resource use, but all supported controlled use. These latter attitudes were independent of the preferred management system (i.e. CFM, SFM or PFM). This study corroborates the view that CFM has been overemphasized. Rather than narrowing forest management around communities, but recognizing the state's incapacity to ensure the integrity of forest resources into the future without the co-operation of forest users, an all-inclusive approach, such as PFM, provides for greater management input by the state.

scholarly journals Challenges Facing Community Participation in Participatory Forest Management in Southwestern Ethiopia

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 659-670
Author(s):  
Kero Alemu Danano
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Household Survey ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Systematic Sampling ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Participatory Forest Management ◽  
Southwestern Ethiopia ◽  
External Stakeholders ◽  
Study Sites

The purpose of this paper remained to detect the Contests of the communal participation of participatory forest management in selected kebeles of Addiyo woreda, Kaffa zone of SNNPRS of Ethiopia. The study engaged main and subordinate data sources. The study sites were selected by using purposively, and sample respondents were selected by using systematic sampling techniques. Accordingly, 295(91 females and 204 males) households were selected. The household survey, FGD, personal observation, and key informant interviews were used for primary data collection. The data of the study had analyzed using both numerical and qualitative methods. Binary logistic regressions remained employed to evaluate factors affecting the participation of households in PFM. The study initiates that woodland coverage is decreasing, the logistic regression results revealed that participation in PFM has a statistically significant and negative relationship with annual income, the distance of households from the PFM site, and PFM site from the market, whereas a positive relationship with family size, forest income, number of livestock, awareness of households about PFM and support from external stakeholders. Therefore, to see sustainable participatory woodland managing in the study zone, awareness would remain created among communities for this government, and external stakeholders should work co-operatively and actively.

scholarly journals Effects of forest certification towards sustainable community forestry in Nepal

1970 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pem N Kandel
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
Community Forestry ◽  
Forest Certification ◽  
Managed Forests ◽  
Forest Stewardship Council ◽  
Community Forests ◽  
Sustainable Community ◽  
Forest Stewardship ◽  
Forest Users

In early 2005, 10,045 ha Community Forests (CFs) were certified in Bajhang and Dolakha districts of Nepal by using the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification scheme. After two years of forest certification, subsequent questions are being asked such as: What benefits have certification brought for the Forest Users Groups (FUGs)? What tangible differences are there in forest management system because of forest certification? and What lessons have been learnt from the certified forests? In an attempt to answer these questions, a study was carried out in April 2007 in Dolakha district where 11 (2,182 ha) community managed forests were certified in 2005. On the basis of field study from two certified forests (Vitteripakha and Suspa) of the district, this paper analyzes the effects of forest certification and its implications for enhancing Sustainable Community Forestry (SCF) in Nepal. Key words: Sustainable forest management, forest certification, community forestry Banko Janakari: A journal of forestry information for Nepal Vol.17(1) 2007 pp.11-16

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document