Community forestry in developed and developing countries: A comparative study By Azim U. Mallikl and Hafizur ahm man^ Concerns about the ecological and economic sustainability of La probltrnatiqueentourant la durabilit6hlogique et konomique industrial forestry led to the revival of community forestry (CF) de la foresterie industrielle a provoqut la renaissance de la in the developing countries. Recently, the developed countries are foresterie communautaire (FC) dans les pays en voie de developpe- also examining the feasibility of CF as a land management alter- ment. Les pays dtvelopp6s se sont depuis peu pencht sur la pos- native for the similar reasons. This paper compares the opportunities sibilitt d'utiliser la FC en tant qu'altemative B la gestion du terri- and challenges of CF in the developing and developed countries. toire pour des raisons similaires. Cet article compare les possibilitts Particular emphasis is placed on the goals and objectives, participants et les &fis de la FC pour l a pays en voie de &veloppement et &velop and beneficiaries, land tenure, size and management, ecology and p6s L'accent est mis en particulier sur les buts et les objectifs, les economics of CF. Jn the developingcountries CF is generally small, participants et les bCntficiaires, la tenure du temtoire, les dimen- labour intensive and geared to meeting the basic needs of the com- sions et l'amknagement retenu, l'tcologie et l'tconomie B la base munity people. By contrast, CF in the developed countries is large, de la FC. La FC dans les pays en voie de dCveloppement est capital intensive and market oriented. Notwithstanding the dif- gtntralement effectuk B une tchelle rtduite, exigeante en terme ferences, CF provides an opportunity for ecosystem management de main d'oeuvre et orient& pour satisfaire les besoins primordiaux to maintain community stability and ecological integrity in both des gens de la cornrnunautC. Par opposition, la FC dans les pays developing and developed countries. dCvelopp6s couvre de grandes superficies,nikessite une importante mise de fonds et orientte en fonction du marcht. Malgrt ces dif- Key words: community forestry, sustainability, ecosystem man- ftrences, la FC constitue une avenue permettant l'amtnagement agement, community stability d'un kosyst&me dans le but de rnaintenir la stabilit6d'un communaug ainsi que son intCgrit6 tcologique tant dans les pays en voie de dtveloppement que dans les pays dtveloppts. Mots clCs: foresterie communautaire, durabilitt, amenagement Ccosysttmique, stabilitC communautaire Introduction Sustainabilityof industrial forestry (IF), in its present form, has been questioned by many economists, ecologists, and sociologists. It has been particularly questioned in the context of densely populated developing countries since the 1970s (Adhikari 1990, Apin 1987, Arnold 1987, Kengen 1987, Lohrnann 1990, Sivaraksa 1985, Svedin 1979). Traditionally, an age-old method of forest management, now known as community forestry (CF), had been practised in these countries. Subsequently,the Western concept of IF was introduced in an attempt to generate higher incomes from forests. In recent years, it has become increasingly evident that the IF approach to tim- ber harvesting and regeneration is neither ecologically nor eco- nomically sustainable. This is particularly the case in nutrient- poor sites in North America and overpopulated developing countries (Duinker et al. 1991, Grewal et al. 1990;Mallik and Rahman 1991, Murthy 1990). As an alternative to IF, many developing countries have revitalized their traditional practice of CF (Adhikari 1990, Cornte 1980, Rao 1985, Singh et al. 1985). International agencies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have helped initiate many such projects (Sharma and Rowe 1992). A well-managed CF can help alle- viate the ecological degradation of land and improve the socio-emnomic conditions of the community (Grewal et al. 1990, Gunatilake et al. 1993, Sun 1992). 'Department of Biology, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7B 5E1. 2~lphanorth Research, Box 29007, 1186 Memorial Ave., Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7B 6P9. The issue of ecological and economic sustainabilityof IF has now become a matter of concern in Canada and elsewhere in the West due to reasons such as: (i) i n d awareness of adverse ecological impacts of IF; (ii) concerns about instability of forest-based communities; (iii) interest in a holistic approach to forest management, i.e., ecosystem management; and (iv) forecasts of possible shortages of wood supply. These concerns have stimulated an interest in CF as an alternative form of for- est management. However, the development of CF in North America is rather recent, and few are exploring the prospect of this alternative for forest management. For example, the first conference on agroforestry (which is related to CF) in North America organized in 1991had no mention of CF (see Forestry Chronicle, Vol. 67, No. 3). Nevertheless, a number of CF ini- tiatives have recently been undertaken in Canada and the U.S. (Duinker et al. 1991, Dunster 1989). The objective of this paper is to compare and contrast the CF pmctices in developingand developed countries. Particular empha- sis is given in regards to (i) goals and objectives, (ii) partici- pants and beneficiaries, (iii) land tenure, (iv) size and management, and (v) ecology and economics of CF. Goals and Objectives Communityforestry is the @ce of forest management where local people participate in various ways to obtain a sustainable return from the forest. In developing countries, such landuse and management have been given various names, such as community forestry, social forestry, agroforestry,forest farm- ing, communal forestry, rural forestry, village forestry, home- stead forestry, etc., depending on the type of land used and the composition of trees, orchards, crops, and grazing lands (Arnold 1987,Pant 1979, Rao 1985, Sanwal1988, Shingi and NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1994, VOL. 70, NO. 6, THE FORESTRY CHRONICLE 731 The Forestry Chronicle Downloaded from pubs.cif-ifc.org by 3.214.217.210 on 06/20/22 For personal use only.