1. GLOBAL MECHANISM TO FACILITATE POLICY EVOLUTION

Considerable experience concerning methods of reintegrating and engaging communities as forest managers has accumulated over the past two decades. The most significant action has been taken by communities themselves as they continue to struggle to find ways to protect and manage their endangered forests. Government forestry agencies in many countries have been developing new capacities as they move in the direction of more participatory modes of management. Donor agencies have made substantial progress in shifting their priorities to encompass the needs of communities. Finally, a new generation of forest management practitioners, many of whom work within NGOs and universities, have emerged. They possess new participatory planning and research skills and tools, and are committed to responding to community needs.

Unfortunately, much of this experience remains scattered. Government planners, agency administrators, donor project managers, NGOs, and academics tend to work in isolation from one another, each concerned with his individual projects and programs. Consequently, there is a marked lack of synthesis at the national, regional, and global levels as to the implications of held experiences and on how to link these initiatives to create integrated strategies that are capable of facilitating fundamental shifts in the way societies are managing their forest resources. The Working Group on Community Involvement in Forest Management (WG-CIFM) has been formed to fill this gap. Broadly, it seeks to identify ways of bringing greater synergy to regional and global efforts in order to facilitate the evolution of more participatory management systems for the public forest lands.

The initial focus of the WG-CIFM will be on six regions:

- Southern and Eastern Africa (SADC & Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, Eritrea)
- South Asia (India, Nepal, Pakistan)
- Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, PNG, Viet Nam, Laos)
- Northern Europe (Scandinavia, Scotland)
- North America (USA, Canada)
- Central America (including Mexico)
- South America (Andes)

How these ideals can be realized, given the complexities of cultures and legal frameworks, can be better understood by considering some of the successful strategies so far used by various countries.

In AFN, with involvement of members from two of the above regions, we are trying to draw on successes in particular countries and repeat them in appropriate ways in others. In South Asia for example, the learning potentials are in terms of efforts to re-orient state forestry policies, making the implementation of Joint Forest Management (JFM) more flexible in meeting the needs of communities. Nepal has had success in the implementation of community forest management and in re-focusing its state forestry department. In Southeast Asia, the Philippine Working Group (PWG) has now visited fifteen sites since its initiation after the Hawaii meeting in 1994.

However, as with AFN, there has been a long process of evolving policy review mechanisms. The Philippines is no exception with its Community-Based Forest Management Program (CBFM) being rooted in the acknowledgement of the occupation of people in the uplands. This latter has developed to involving communities in reforestation and other forms of social forestry. Initial mechanisms to review policy were from the Upland Development Working Group (UDWG) that started in 1981 and involved working group members from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the academe, plus donors and NGOs. An offshoot support mechanism developed specifically for NGOs was UNAC. These groups brought about critical developments in community reforestation by reviewing what was happening on the ground as well as trying out new ideas through implementing pilot projects.

In 1990, support emerged for the development of a formal policy review program within the DENR. This program focused specifically on developments in community forestry and emphasized reforestation and rehabilitation. Against this background, the AFN meeting in Hawaii in 1994 provided the venue for the PWG to emerge. The PWG members simply go to a specifically chosen site to see and learn:

- how communities, local government, and local DENR representatives are dealing with resource management issues in their area

- how they are dealing with policy implementation problems

- what initiatives they are taking to overcome difficulties

Where members of the group feel it appropriate, they offer advice and clarifications, and also offer to follow up on certain issues. The timeline below showing key policy changes coincides with a corresponding evolution in policy review mechanisms.

As a working group, the PWG has shown itself to be an effective mechanism in the cultural context of the Philippines: EMPHASIS ON - Regeneration - Watershed Management - Cultural Management Practice - Local Government Capabilities - Impact of Commercial Policies and Mining - Rattan Management SUPPORTED BY - Informal Processes - Dynamics relevant to Current Policy Issues - Informative Site Briefing and Documentation - Synthesis of Learnings

The Philippines provides a model where innovative policy leads ground-level implementation. Policy review mechanisms provide an effective and necessary means of understanding how the innovative policy is being interpreted at the different levels, which ultimately affects the amount and quality of forest cover. Once these learnings from the ground are passed back up, policy adjustments can be made. The legal framework needs to be highly flexible and, given the combination of statute and case law, the system is able to respond. However, at the same time, the lack of strong innovation coming from the grassroots is an indication that communities are not yet empowered. Questions then arise how ready are some of these communities or local governments for that matter, to take on the broader responsibilities of resource management that are being given to them by these policies.

PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES * Areas where innovation can start ** Areas where misinterpretation of legislation can arise and implementation can draw away from original intent of the law Situation: Current Forest Law PD 705 is no longer applicable to the ecological and socio-political reality of the Philippines. Policy change has been in response to new 1987 Constitution, very little remaining forest, changes in micro-climate, limited impact of reforestation, abuse of lease agreements by commercial firms, reduced budget and resources of the GA, and a historical event (Ormoc flooding).

Not all countries share the same policy evolution strategy as the Philippines. The opposite model, where community innovation pushes policy is most evident in Thailand. The legal framework is less flexible and relies only on statute law. Consequently, there is a reluctance on the part of legislators to change unless they are sure that the new policy works. It is also indicative of the highly centralized mode of government, a characteristic shared by other countries in the region as well. However, although official policy is very restrictive, the Royal Forest Department of Thailand (RFD), by developing a project site with its own rules and regulations, can provide the flexibility to implement new ideas. Innovations from communities on the other hand are brought about by highly effective traditional communication mechanism which provide the basis for the innovations to spread. The quality of local leadership is crucial and this has been maintained either through traditional mechanisms or through training provided by local forest monasteries. Critical support has been provided by a strong movement.

PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT IN THAILAND * Area where innovation can start ** Subject to influences of internal politics whether it will respond to own innovators Situation: 1985 National Forestry Policy DE 2528. Communities are tolerated in forest reserve areas and are now being relocated to buffer zones around national parks. OBT was given mandate to collect taxes, some of which can be used for resource management. The 1997 Constitution gives a mandate to communities to protect forest. There are 20,000+ community forest protection committees. Legally, communities still have no right to collect NTFPs, use forest resources, or occupy forest reserve areas. Communities are allowed to stay informally if they stop rotational fallow (swidden) farming.

In some ways, the second model makes it more difficult to find an effective mechanism that can assist in policy evolution. Things are made increasingly difficult when one combines the still highly authoritarian policy approval process with frequent government changes so characteristic of the last decade. Given that greater political stability is experienced over the next few years, what is critical is the establishment of projects or areas where implementation issues are worked out on the ground by both the RFD and NGOs / communities.

With this understanding, AFN is currently asking both the RFD and NGO representatives to articulate:

- what the community forestry movement in Thailand needs

- how we can support and build on similar learning processes already existing

- what are the gaps to be filled in

SUB-REGIONAL SYNTHESIS

Both Thailand and the Philippines are critical in their sub-regional context: Upland Mainland Southeast Asia (UMSEA) and Southeast Asian Archipelagos (SEAA). As discussed in the last meeting in Surajkund, there is a need to understand what is not working and why, as much as to similarly understand what is working. In order to focus this clear analysis, sub-regional discussions will be initiated so that during larger forums, synthesized learnings can be exchanged that will hopefully provide more insight into the region, which can be more effectively fed into the international forum.

VALUE OF CROSS-SITE VISITS

KEY POLICY IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES COMMON TO MANY COUNTRIES IN THE REGION WHO IS THE COMMUNITY? Use of community mapping and other participatory tools for identifying primary forest resource users and motivating communities. PRIMARY RESOURCE USERS Identify the relations of this group to broader circles of traders. COMMUNAL FORESTS Find ways to overcome legal limitations and to acknowledge traditional forms of ownership and tenure. CO-MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS Find strategies that devolve power and responsibilities to local government and communities. COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT Identify what is needed for empowerment, the role of federations / networks, and other strategies communities use to voice their concerns. CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE Use science to verify and acknowledge what is known and practiced by traditional communities and increase awareness where there are gaps. LINKING WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT Find ways to overcome problems of the local elite and ensure CFM activities are transparent and can connect to the experience of markets. REGENERATION AND REFORESTATION Understand community management systems that use the regenerative capacity of the forest, and their effectiveness to improve the quality and extent of forest cover. FIRE MANAGEMENT Identify cost of control vs. management, ie., the available systems and how communities can internalize cost. RE-ORIENTATION OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Promote changing roles, ie., from regulators to service providers DONOR COORDINATION Support government strategies which make outside assistance more effective. SPREAD MECHANISMS Understand the strategies communities employ to take project -supported innovations beyond the project zone. NATIONAL PARKS, PROTECTED AREAS, AND PEOPLE Adopt management solutions that acknowledges forest occupants as key participants in the management of forest resources.

Policy evolution strategies can facilitate: cross-visits, establishment of working groups to review in-country implementation innovations, and identification of research sites. Where research is going on in countries looking at some of these issues, the network would seek to support and assist in documentation and skills training so that those in each country have a more effective set of tools for servicing the needs of their communities and encouraging further community forest management. Some of the suggested cross-visits could also include community-to-community visits, but at a later stage as there would be a need for strong internal support for them upon returning to assist in the processing of the experience. (If member countries want to gain insights into certain learnings or feel they have learnings to share, please contact AFN's Regional Secretariat.) If support can be obtained from a donor in the members' own countries, this would speed up the process.

PARTICIPATORY TOOLS IN FORESTRY ACTIVITIES FOR COMMUNITIES Various countries are trying out different methods to enable communities to participate in community forestry activities. Which tool is used depends in part upon the accuracy of the maps available. In the Philippines, where there is an absence of accurate, readily available resource management date, and where we have conflictual spatial data on settlements and infrastructure, community maps are favored as they are the form with the most accurate depiction of the local situation. In India where government maps are more accurate, community mapping is used for motivation and to differentiate the resource-use sectors in their communities. In developing microplans, foresters are more likely to use community mapping on technical base maps. In Thailand, 3-dimensional models have been used as a means of bringing the RFD and communities together so that more trusting relations can be developed. The following are some comments that have been drawn from users of these methods.

2. VOICES FROM THE FOREST - VIET NAM: MRS. LAN, DZAO HERBAL HEALER

Prior to government market liberalization in the 1980s, Mrs. Lan used to market her herbal medicines on foot. Carrying the necessary herbs for her patients on her back, she typically would set out for two weeks, selling her healing prescriptions to people in the neighboring communities and districts. With the recent improvements in transportation, she is now able to travel farther, can carry more herbs, and meet more patients than ever before. On average, she takes 40 to 50 kilograms of medicine on each trip. Normally, Mrs. Lan makes approximately 20 two-week-long trips per year, often travelling as far as Hanoi, Hai Phong, Than Hoa, Thai Binh, and Ha Bac. On her most recent trip, she visited five villages during a one-week journey, staying overnight at her patients' homes.

For each individual ailment, Mrs. Lan and the other healers prepare a special package of medicine comprised of over 20 different species of plants. This special mixture is consumed either as an alcohol infusion or as a brewed tea. Known locally as tampuang, a packaged prescription can sell for as much as VND5,000 (US$0.45) in the market, but is typically brought to the home by healers like Mrs. Lan, where she can make a proper diagnosis and adjust the prescription as required.

To reduce the volume of the medicinal plant material taken on each trip, and to minimize postharvest loss due to molds or bug infestation, Mrs. Lan developed an innovative herbal processing technique: Most herbal medicine recipes involve a standard selection of herbs that serve as a "base" into which special herbs are added to treat specific diseases; in recent years, Mrs. Lan has been preparing the base set of herbs prior to her trip by boiling them in water until they become a thick, dark, and sticky paste which is then cooled and rolled into a firm tube. During her home visits, she carefully cuts segments off the tube, adding other herbs as required.

Mrs. Lan treats a range of illnesses including dysentery, nervousness, allergies, cough, inflammation, postpartum ailments, kidney diseases, cancer, rheumatism, diabetes, paralysis, and even heart disease. Some of Mrs. Lan's patients who were still sick after coming from a hospital have found her medicines more effective and less expensive. Mrs. Lan's treatments do not exceed VND100,000 (US$9.00)

Some of the plants Mrs. Lan collects are easily accessible. Others however are only found deep within the strict protection zone of the forest park. Access to these plants at different elevations is vital to Mrs. Lan and other herbalists. She and her colleagues are highly motivated to ensure that their sources are protected and sustainably managed.

(From STEWARDS OF THE FOREST, AFN Research Report #10)