I

:r

I :

.)! I

' . I

I I I ! 1

.\ . j ",

PILOTING COLLABORATIVE FOREST MANAGEMENT · SYSTEMS IN OFF-RESERVE AREAS IN SOUTHERN GHANA

ITTO/FSO PROJECT PO 41/95 Rev. 1 (F)

OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES ON COMMUNITY FOREST (MANAGEMENT) COMMITTEES

Project Directorate Resource Management Support Centre Forest Services Division, Forestry Commission July, 2000

1 <

'.i '.,:'

:1" .1

Members of the Project Directorate

DR. KWESI T.ORGLE MR. ALEXANDER B ASARE DR.KYEREH-BOATENG MR. ATTA OWUSU MR. KOFI MAINU NANA OPIAH MENSAH MR. WALLACE KOOMSON MRS. VALERIE FUMEY NASSAH

© The Project Directorate ITTOfFSD Project PD 41/95 Rev. 1 (F) Resource Management Support Centre

Forest Services Division of the Forestry Commission July,2000

:1 "

I : ,'. -

, [ . . . , " ,

I , I

I 1, ',' '; ' , '

, ~ . ,

:.1 '"I I

I

I : '. I 'j 1

;

, . 1 . .-,

, I

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Most countries in the tropical regions, which incidentally have developing economies, had considerable forest coverage at the beginning of the Twentieth Century. Deforestation became the order of the day due to the need to increase food production to satisfy an ever-increasing population coupled with the quest to exploit readily available timber to provide cheap source of revenue and foreign exchange.

In the late seventies deforestation had become so rapid as to threaten a major environmental disaster, notably, the phenomenon of global warming from the accumulation of green house gases. The fate of forests was therefore no more to be left with individual nations but to be dealt with at the international level. International involvement in forests took the form of conventions and programmes designed for nations to ensure sustainable management of their forests. One such all-embracing programme was the FAO sponsored Tropical Forestry Action Plan.

Under the auspices of the TFAP, funds, strategies and expertise were made available to needy nations to put in place sound forest management programmes. Other international programmes were also executed under both bilateral and multilateral arrangements. The culmination of all these programmes was the renewed interest in forest research and training, increased donor funding and the provision of technical expertise. In Ghana the World Bank and countries such as the United Kingdom, Japan, and Germany (to name a few) have assisted immensely in the implementation of forestry programmes that have to be of far reaching success in helping to maintain the integrity of her forest resources.

Having embarked on initial studies it became apparent that throughout the poor developing nations forest fringe communities greatly influence the fate of forests since they depend on these forests for most of their livelihoods. Since the dawn of this knowledge almost all forest programmes have embraced some form of community involvement such that today the practice of community forestry has come to be synonymous with forestry all over the globe.

1.1. Forest Types of Ghana In general there are two types of natural forests that have survived over the years in tropical regions such as Ghana: the Tropical High Forest and the Dry Savannah Forest. Whereas the former is characterised by the presence of high value timber and thus is of extreme importance to powerful commercial interests represented by both governments and loggers the latter tends to be of significance to local people who extract products of crucial subsistence importance such as firewood. Both types of forests offer the associated environmental services by way of ameliorating micro-climatic conditions, protection of watersheds, and conservation of biodiversity.

, r

i 1

j "

I , I " I ! I " • I '

I"

A major difference between the two types of forests is that population densities around dry forests tend to be higher with the people relying heavily on the forests' resources for livelihood purposes whereas population densities around THFs are lower with the people engaged on off reserve farming as their main livelihood. Pressure on forest resources and the way forests are to be managed taking into consideration collaborative forest management imperatives therefore tends to be different for the two types of forests.

In view of the differences associated with the two forest types which goes on to affect the social environment of forest management, these guidelines have been tailored to suit representative structures for CFM practice in the HFZ rather than the dry forest zone (DFZ).

1.2. Forest Ownership Ownership of forests is closely linked to the indigenous system of land ownership within the country. In Ghana, land is communally owned and is held in trust on behalf of the people through the stools and skins. On that basis landowners exert substantial control in deciding as to whether an area should be set aside as a reserve. Although the laws of the country grant authority to the government to constitute any land it deems fit as a reserve, landowners must be consulted through an arbitration process under the jurisdiction of a reserve settlement's commissioner who must take into consideration the concerns of landowners. There were instances when the constitution of proposed reserves have had to be abandoned due to strong opposition from landowners.

In some instances, as in game reserves, the government purchased the lands outright from the landowners. Under those circumstances the government becomes the bona-fide property owner and enjoys commensurate rights just like any other landowner. In effect landowners -whether stools, skins, the government or individuals - wield immense power on the setting aside of an area as permanent forest estate and in all cases have their rights to revenues from the exploitation of the resource.

1.3 Ghana's Policy on Community Forestry Ghana's approach to community forestry is inspired by the 1994 Forests and Wildlife Policy. The Policy enjoins the nation towards 'the conservation and sustainable development of the nation's forest and wildlife resources for the maintenance of environmental quality and perpetual flow of optimum bene'fits to a" segments of society.

Other relevant provisions of the Policy relating community forestry are to:

o Promote public awareness and involvement of rural people in forestry and wildlife conservation so as to maintain life-sustaining systems, preserve scenic areas and enhance the potential of recreation, tourism, and income generating opportunities.

'I!

i r , ,

..

I,

1 I, .1 I . i . I

o Promote and implement public education programmes to increase awareness and understanding of the role of trees, forests and wildlife and the importance of conservation.

o Develop consultative and participatory mechanisms to enhance land, tree tenure rights of farmers, and ensure access of local people to traditional use of natural products.

In terms of the guiding principles the policy stipulates that in view of the importance of local people in pursuing these principles, the Government proposes to place particular emphasis on the concept of participatory management and protection of forest and wildlife resources and will seek to develop appropriate strategies, modalities and programmes in consultation with relevant agencies, rural communities and individuals.

1.4. Structure of Guidelines The main aim of these guidelines is to provide information on how to set up management structures for implementation of community forestry programmes. The guidelines are meant to be applied by foresters, practitioners of community forestry, non-governmental organisations, local authorities and communities.

Within the guidelines, concepts on forestry, forest policy, and issues connected with community forestry have been described. On the management structure itself the broad framework governing community leadership systems have been explained. Later in the guidelines more detailed measures have been provide. This has, however, been narrowed down to a community management structure that has proved workable to the FSD.

. I"

'I 'I

. I ,

,'j :" ; :-i

J <; ).,:-,j ",

:, r··

I '

CHAPTER 2. DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY FORESTRY

2.1 Definitions

Against the background of the policy framework governing community forestry there is the need to define what constitutes community or collaborative forestry, One definition with a broad outlook of community forestry that embraces all the various communities with interests in forests as listed above is that given by Carter (1999) as: "Working partnerships between key stakeholders in the management of a given forest"

In Ghana the Forest Services Division (FSD) has adopted a narrower outlook choosing to call its community forestry concept as 'collaborative forest management', which is defined as:

"A working partnership between the local people and the Forest Services Division to ensure that management of all forest resources is equitable and more efficient".

The FSD has since 1993 pursued strategies to achieve the goals as set under the definition of collaborative forest management. This has taken the form of ensuring that land owning communities secure in timely manner a fair share of the benefits that are derived from forests whether reserved or outside reserves. To this end, revenues passed on to the land owning communities have been substantially increased whereas bureaucratic impediments have been removed to enable revenues to be paid on a quarterly basis at decentralised locations. Resource exploiters are additionally enjoined to directly execute development projects at the community level through what is termed as Social Responsibility Agreements. Such projects benefit everybody within the community including migrants and natives in an equal manner unlike revenues, which are supposedly passed on to the land owning communities only.

Similarly, the FSD has instituted systems that involve communities in decision making as well as implementation of forest operations to promote efficiency in its work while guaranteeing fair remuneration to forest fringe communities. It is now enshrined, as part of the forest management procedure that community needs assessments must be undertaken, community workshops held and management plans agreed upon by both forest fringe and land owning communities.

The provision of fair share of benefits and invitation to communities to participate in execution of forest operations leads to better management of forests thus facilitating the achievement of sustainable forest management to the satisfaction of all sections of society.

When it comes to the implementation of operations under management plans, forest fringe communities in particular are encouraged to be assigned tasks on a negotiated contract basis.

;,

J ;-:: " ' . i , :' i , ; ,

,',' I ,.-.! :' ;

! I

I,

I '" ' . l" ! I

.1 : j \ I I

, I ., I ' i , .. ,:

" '

I I

::i "

"

'~ '"

Operations that communities are successfully engaged in are maintenance of forest reserve boundaries and rehabilitation of degraded reserves. Meanwhile further exploratory work is going on to develop systems to embrace more community participation in forest operations.

Considering the fact that there are several interest groups or 'communities' associated with the ownership, management and use of forests, it is essential that interests of each community is addressed when community forestry is recognised as the cornerstone of a forestry programme.

This can be achieved only when the opportunity is created to enable the views of various interest groups to be represented in decision-making. Under an International Tropical Timber Organisation and Government of Ghana sponsored project 'Piloting Collaborative Forest Management Systems for Off-Reserve Areas in Southern Ghana' a successful system of community representative structure for community forestry projects was evolved. The need was therefore felt to have the system documented for widespread adoption in Ghana and other countries pursuing similar community or collaborative forest management programmes.

2.2 Areas of community involvement

Collaborative forest management can be practiced at the two levels of involvement of communities in decision-making and in the execution of forest operations. Collaboration in decision-making ranges from the highest levels of policy and legislation formulation through forest systems development and projects formulation down to the level of forest reserve management planning.

2.2.1. Policy and Forest Plans Formulation

Collaboration can be infused into the formulation processes of policies, legislation and general guidelines concerning forestry. In fact it is at these levels that the highest decisions are taken thus the guiding principles must incorporate the views of all relevant stakeholders otherwise there are bound to be inequitable arrangements against some of the parties. In the case of Ghana, as already mentioned, our current forest policy was formulated through collaborative dialogue processes. Since then all issues involving high-level decisions employ collaboration as a tool to determine the outcomes. A few examples will suffice here.

The issues at stake become publicized thus removing prejudices emanating from ignorance and skepticism amongst communities who in any case are to be bound by the decisions reached. The quality of decisions reached is of the highest standards ever since ideas are shared amongst people of varied backgrounds and responsibilities. The people assume ownership of the decisions thus becoming committed to their implementation.

.. I '

~i . j.

. ~ ;

'! t.

,I , ' '

<I j " j ,

i j! " i) I' ,

'i

'-) I -.'

:.1

Conflicts are removed amongst opposing forces when people are brought together at a round table for discussions on controversial issues to increased flow of information among collaborating partners,

2.2.2. Forest Operations

Generally if it is feasible and more efficient then forest fringe communities should be assigned to take charge of particular responsibilities of forest operations. These range from protection of forests, development of the forest resources, harvesting and exploitation and finally, utilisation, processing and marketing. Besides, economic feasibility aspects of community involvement in forest operations, there is also issue of involving communities in these tasks so as to make them share in the common vision of sustainable forest management.

2.3. Degree of Community Control

In every community forestry program, the goals specify the extent to which communities are to be involved in the management of the forest resource.

At one extreme no conscious effort is made to involve communities whereas at the other extreme communities may have full control of management over the forest resources. The extent of involvement of communities in forest management is explained in Table 1. Collaborative forest management as practiced in Ghana advocates the adoption of all these approaches depending on the ownership and management rights over the forest.

Table 1. Hierarchy of degree of community involvement in forest t managemen.

Level Extent of involvement Community Control Community in full control, Technical advice available

on request by community. e.g., Adwenase Community Forest, Foso

Full Community Involvement FSD increasingJy ceding control. e.fl. trees on farms Partial community Interested community members involved planning, involvement implementation & ma nagement. E.g . Afram

Headwaters FR, Offinso ConSUltation Communities actively encouraged to offer ideas. E.g.

Interim Measures Information Telling people what is going to happen. E.g. broad

spectrum workshops-ITTO workshop at Kumasi in Oct,1997

Persuasion Securing a commitment to pursue community participation. E.g. SRA in TUC allocation

Agency Control No reference to community in the scheme of issues. E.g. Demarcation of SBPAs in forest reserves.

i , i·

I .

l i· I I ., !

I; I I

! I

I! j \ ' , I

.\ i·· 1\ :

I , I t;

,. ·1 '

2.4. Analysis of Forest Interest Groups

An understanding of the concept of community forestry could be made only by way of differentiating amongst the various interest groups on a given forest estate at any point in time. Broadly defined, the term 'community' refers to a conglomeration of persons with identifiable characteristics and or common interests. It follows that in the case of forests, the following five categories of communities could be identified: These are:

People with ownership rights over the forest People living within or close to the forest estate People who use forest products. People who become affected by changes in the forest People who provide resources towards management of the forest.

From the above it may happen that the same person could belong to one or more of the communities.

In Ghana forest ownership is patterned along customary land ownership traditions thus kinsmen own forests with their traditional heads represented by skins and stools serving as overseers on behalf of the people. In Ghana's contest whenever mention is made of consulting communities on forest management activities it is to this land owning group that readily comes to mind. This is because they constitute an identifiable entity with justifiable legal rights to benefits from forests. Benefits and consultations are normally passed through the traditional heads and elders, however, owing to the complexities of the traditional hierarchical leadership structures beneficial revenues reach chiefs who are only high up in the hierarchy. This tends to isolate the traditional leaders who find them themselves at the grassroots level where the people are settled close to the forest.

In terms of settlements within and around forests the people tend to be either natives or migrants. Although no authority has fixed any distance within which to delineate forest fringe communities, an arbitrary distance of approximately 5 kilometres around forests have been proposed as being practically suitable. In contemporary community forestry parlance, whenever there is talk of involving communities in forest management, it is to this community that practitioners refer to. In Ghana the problem presented is that amongst the forest fringe communities are migrants who legally do not have to enjoy any of the ownership rights, however, by virtue of proximity to the forest all such members of the forest fringe community should of necessity be included in forest management activities.

In terms of forest products the community of users tend to be far and wide. The most basic of users are those who harvest timber and NTFPs for commercial and domestic purposes. Other user communities are those who do not necessarily consume products from the forest but all the same make use of the forest for such purposes as observance of rituals, recreation and other allied functions. Furthermore, one must include secondary purchasers of such goods and services up to the consumer.

1 ·1 ! 1( ·

, 1:: ,~. -_.

. "

I I I .: ~ . i

.,

I ; . I I I I , I,' ..

I

j .! i ·

I •

': 1

All the consumer communities along the chain tend to be interested in ensuring the sustainability of their supplies.

The fourth category of forest community interest group embraces those whose lives are impacted in one way or the other by changes that occur to the forest. Such impacts are mainly of an environmental nature; for example, flooding due to siltation resulting from forest cutting, build up of green house gases, and a host of other environmental impacts.

The last category of forest community is the one that provides resources to facilitate management of the forest. To this group can be mentioned forest owners who have relinquished the use of their forest for the common good, the general public as represented by governments through the use of taxes on forest management activities, donors and voluntary bodies that offer both resources and technical expertise.

! ,-I . I .'

! . , . , ; !

I I , '

~ L

I I i

I .

' . ~

I '

'1 ( ' '1' : I . , \ i I' , i

I i

., . '1 '

" i

CHAPTER 3. EXISTING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES

In seeking to evolve structures suitable for community involvement in forest management, there is the need to recognise that already governing structures are in place within each community and as such those structures should be taken into consideration. Ghana has since time immemorial had its traditional structures for managing the society. The structure falls into both the traditional and the modern.

3.1 The Traditional Governing Structure The traditional leadership structure has the village or township headed by an 'odikro' as the basic unit. The odikro is normally appointed by the ohene as a caretaker chief at a distant village under the jurisdiction of the ohene. A number of odikros' serve under the 'ohene' who in turn serves under the 'omanhene'. At each level the ruler has a group of 'elders' to assist in administrative functions. Decisions are therefore arrived at based on consensus by the elders and the chief sitting at the chiefs court. In terms of land, final oversight rights are vested in the omanhene on behalf of the indigenous community. The ohene by right enjoys part of the powers of the omanhene but to a lesser degree. Under customary traditions, however, the odikro is not entitled to any such rights. This explains the reason for the non­payment of royalty shares to odikros' or ordinary members of the community. The Social Responsibility Agreement system has been designed to address this problem.

3.2. Formal Governing Structures The formal structure of governance is represented by the central and local government structures. The executive wing of the central government acts through ministries and territorial authorities at the regional and district levels. Acts are passed at the Parliament and assented to by the President and passed on to the sector agencies such as the FSD for implementation. In times past such agencies used to execute their programmes without assigning formal roles to communities. With the advent of community-based programmes, attitudes are changing and systems are being created to integrate traditional structures with formal ones in the execution of programmes. Notable amongst these is the Collaborative Forest Management Programme of Ghana.

At the basic elementary level, ten elected Unit Committee chairpersons represent the people within each electoral zone. They hold meetings with the entire community to deliberate on important issues affecting the community. The outcome of such meetings are implemented by the entire populace or passed on to higher authorities for implementation.

At the next higher-level communities are represented by elected assemblypersons that constitute the District Assembly. The DA plans and supervises the execution of programmes within the district. It also has the powers to pass byelaws to regulate matters of local concern.

; I I

. (

i l (. ,

i· " .. -

..

I . I , :

.:: \.

. I'

I I' . ·1,. '

i I J • 1 \ .

. ' I. I

": !

Additionally, each DA has an Environmental Sub-committee that exercises oversight responsibility on all environmental matters, including forestry issues, within the district.

3.3. Justifying Specialised Community Development Structures The argument has been that the DA structure should be adapted to facilitate the execution of community forestry activities. These guidelines therefore seek to provide the tools by which such a modified structure could be formed to complement government structures in the management of forest resources. Basically, the modified community forestry structures should be operated according to the principles as outlined in Box 1

BOX 1

Principles Governing Operations of Community Forest Committees

FSD District, Region and Head Offices are to ensure the formation and operation of the structures within their jurisdiction.

At the local level the structures should be infused within the Unit Committee and District Assembly structures through byelaws by the District Assemblies. The governing body should be broad-based with fair representation amongst primary community stakeholders.

The governing body should be a blend of existing traditional and local government structures as well as any new structures created for the purposes of community forestry. The selection procedures amongst each stakeholder group should satisfy democratic principles.

The elected body should occupy office for a fixed period of time after which a new body must be elected .

Primary forest resource beneficiaries such as the FSD, landowners, and the District Assemblies should agree on a system to finance activities of the community representative structures.

Extra funding sources should be identified and formalised by the FSD through the offer of services by the community representative structures to resource users such as commercial timber and NTFP operators, communities and projects.

Finally, the community representative structures should be recognized as integral part of the communities and groups they represent and as such must act in the best interest of their people .

1 ·1 ( .:

I I ·

j

• I

-.. : ,

i . : I ! \ . , i

' 1 I I ' .

1\': 1

i : .. 1 i I I

: (. :

. . ; i

.1 f :

CHAPTER 4. FORMATION OF COMMUNITY FOREST COMMITTEES

4.1. Genesis of Community Forest Committees

In a bid to devise an appropriate community forest management structure, the FSD in conjunction with communities and timber concessionaires implemented a project that explored and developed what has now come to be known as Community Forest Committees (CFC). The original project aim was to devise innovative schemes by, which timber and forests outside forest reserves could be managed by communities and timber concessionaires with technical assistance from the FSD. Under the project, consultations were held with major stakeholders connected with forest management outside forest reserves to identify important forestry issues requiring attention. A strategic plan was therefore formulated to address the issues. At the early stages of project implementation, it became apparent that there was the need to form exclusive management structures at the community level to link up with the FSD to execute the project's activities.

4.2. Formation processes

Under the ITTO/FSD sponsored collaborative project, a strategy was drawn up to investigate and devise a suitable community forest management structure that could stand the test of time. The activities that were executed in order to achieve the formation of the structures have been refined and are outlined in Box 2. Once the structures were formed there was the need to come out with a suitable name. After extensive deliberations the name Community Forest Committees was arrived at though some other names such as Forest Management Committees, etc. were considered to be equally suitable. The term committee was already familiar amongst the rural populace thus they could easily understand the role such a body was to play. Also the term community and forest describe those who are to constitute the committee as well as the kind of activity they are to be engaged on

BOX2 Community Forest Committees Formation Processes

1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

6.

7. 8 .

Undertake publicity campaigns amongst the target community on the need to form community forest management committees. Conduct PRA to determine the form of the management structure. Conduct education to explain modalities of selecting representatives and operating CFCs to all interest groups. Set date and time to elect interest group representatives. Hold rallies to introduce selected representatives to entire community. Jointly formulate working modalities and programmes with CFC members and community. Provide adequate resources for implementation of CFC activities. Put in place monitoring, reporting and review mechanisms.

"

I " . I·

. ,

'I .': . "

\ '

I I

'-: ;:"

, .: I, ""

. 1

4.3. Membership Criteria

Membership of the CFCs should be derived from the major or primary identifiable groups or stakeholders within the community. Stakeholders that must of necessity have at least one representative on a CFC are as indicated in Table 2. Members constituting a CFC at the village level should be a total of seven, nine or eleven persons. The executives are to be selected from the members.

T bl 2 C't . f St k h Id R a e n ena or a e 0 er t f epresen a Ion on L ICFC oca s. Primary Description Number of Stakeholder representatives Rulers Odikro, Ohene, Omanhene, Sub-chief or a One

selected representative Landowners Elected family head One Farmers A member of a farmers' or crop association One or two

or farmers' elected representative. Women Queen mother or representative, a member One or two

of a broad based women's group or elected representative.

The Youth Youth associations or elected youth One or two representative.

Migrants Elected representative. One NTFPs Elected representative. One Exploiters Unit committee Elected representative. One chairperson Assembly Elected representative. One person Others Elected representative One to three Ex-officio Representatives of Statutory Agencies, e.g. members Forest Services Division, The Police

Service, MOFA, etc.

4.4. Tenure of office

By way of tenure it is proposed that elected representatives should serve for a maximum of fOLlr (4) years after which they could be re-elected for a second term only. Communities or interest groups have the prerogative to recommend the removal of their representative(s) if there is cause that they are not performing as expected. The final authority to cause removal should rest with a majority decision by the respective CFC with endorsement by the District Forest Manager or a delegated officer.

4.5 Hierarchy of CFCs

The various envisaged levels of operating CFCs are: the village, TUCllocal area, district, regional and national. Whereas the village level membership will be derived from the primary stakeholders as outlined in Table 2.

:-

, \ "

:1 I I j i j I

I "

! \'

. .\ I , 1.4

, ; . ,"'

The Assembly Area CFCs (ACFC) will be formed from two representatives from the local (TUC) CFCs. The ACFCs are to elect their executive in line with laid down democratic procedures that prevail at the Local CFCs level. Higher levels of CFCs will derive their membership from the lower levels such that of the Area or TUC level will be formed from amongst the village levels while the district level will be formed from the Area or TUC level. This will go all the way up to the national level. The national level CFC will be consulted on major policy issues together with other members of the civil society. The national CFC will form a pressure group with equal or probably stronger influence than the timber industry associations. The structure of the levels is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Hierarchy of Community Forest Committees

Optional

NATIONAL CFC

NATIONAL CAUCUS OF

COMMUNITY FOREST rOMMITTFF.<;

REGIONAL CFC

CAUCUS OF DlSTRlCT

ASSEMBLY COMMUNITY

FOREST COMMITTEES

DISTRICT ASSEMBLY CFC

CAUCUS OF AREA (ASSEMBLY)

CFe & OTHER ST AKEHOLDERS

l"· ...... · .. ........ ·;;~~~~; .............. · .. .. .. ·1

: AREA COMMUNITY FOREST :

~ .......... " ................. ~.:. ~ .. ~.~ .. ::::::.:-~~ ......... , ............. , ..... j

AREA (ASSEMBLY) eFe

REPRESENTATIVES OF

VlLLAGE/TOWN eFes

VILLAGE OR TOWN eFe

7-11 REPRESNTATfYES OF

PRIMARY STAKE HOLDERS

: I.

I ..

. : .,. ...

I ' , t :

I (

! I

I'

1 ;

CHAPTER 5. FUNCTIONS OF COMMUNITY FOREST COMMITTEES

At their fully functional state, the Community Forest Committees are to be the main channel through which the statutory forest management agency, that is, the FSD is to implement its collaborative forest management activities. To this end, the CFCs will operate from the grassroots up to the highest levels of forest management. The involvement of the CFCs in forestry will focus around the three levels of forestry, namely:

Forest Policy Formulation Forest Management Planning Execution of Forest Operations.

5.1. Forest Policy Formulation It is an enshrined provision in the Forest and Wildlife Policy of Ghana to involve communities in the adoption of decisions through a decentralised democratic system. The CFCs together with other forest forums in existence will contribute towards the formulation of forestry policies at the national, regional and district levels. Once the CFCs achieve consolidation on the ground they must become an integral part of all major decisions concerning forestry just as the Trade Associations, namely: GTA, GTMO, FAWAG etc. are consulted whenever any major policies are being introduced.

Since it is envisaged that there shall be district, regional and national forest committees, they shall represent the communities at each level whenever any forest formulation consultations are taking place. With the existence of these bodies it is expected that those in charge of forest policies will consciously assign a role to the CFCs in the course of the policy formulation procedures. The normal approach is to hold workshops and meetings at which the community representatives, that is, the CFCs will be invited to present their views.

After policies have been drafted it is proper that they are presented for comments by various stakeholders including communities through the CFCs. Workshops could also be held to subject such policies to public scrutiny before promulgation. By involving stakeholders throughout the formulation processes stakeholders tend to be more receptive of policies as well as committed towards their implementation. Another major advantage is the indigenous knowledge to be gained through consultations with the communities.

5.2. Forest Management Planning Current provisions on management planning require consultations with communities and landowners with a view to incorporating their views in management plans. Basically community conSUltations are required during the following stages of the management planning process:

o Conducting Socio-economic surveys to determine the felt needs of the communities

o Holding of interest group consultations

:,

I I:",

;. ".

I ' " I

\

~: ',.";.

! . ' i

,I

! ' , i,

o Holding of reserve planning workshop with communities and other stake holders

o Endorsement of draft forest management plans.

Since the CFCs are the communities' representatives it is expected that they shall be consulted at all the stages of the forest planning process. More importantly because the CFCs executives should be made to append their signature on documents to ascertain that they, being the representatives of the communities, endorse the agreements, observations or arrangements contained in the documents.

5.3. Community Execution of Forest Operations In terms of community involvement in forest operations the CFCs are to play an immense role in supporting the FSD to assign tasks, roles and responsibilities to communities in return for commensurate rights, benefits and remuneration. Basically, communities can be involved in any aspect of forest operations since it is on record that some community forests are already being managed solely by the communities themselves with all tasks and forest operations being executed by the communities. The envisaged areas in which communities are to be involved in forest operations are broadly categorised into four:

Forest Information Acquisition Forest Protection Forest Regeneration Forest Resource Exploitation Commercial Forestry Operations

5.3.1. Forest Information Acquisition In pursuit of involving communities in every aspect of forest management, FSD staffs are to tap the indigenous knowledge base of communities to acquire data for forest management planning purposes. Communities should therefore be recruited to spot trees and or identify species during forest inventories. They should also be called upon to assist in the location and assessment of NTFPs as well as any rare resources that forests may harbour.

5.3.2. Forest Protection Traditionally, the FSD carries out series of activities designed to maintain the integrity of forest reserves. These involve the demarcation, clearing and patrolling along forest reserve boundaries. Also requisite portions of forest reserves are set aside for protective functions. These include Special Biological Protected Areas, Hill Sanctuaries, etc. it is expected that CFCs will be involved in the mobilisation of their communities towards effective protection of forests and forest resources as enshrined in forest management plans.

, '.

..

I.

,I : ; ~ .. ~ ; ' ::~:..

;-. ..

" .

5.3.3. Forest Regeneration. It is in the area of forest regeneration that CFCs are really to prove their worth since they are viewed as the best bet for involving communities in plantation investment. The main functions of the CFCs in this direction are to:

o act as managers of community nurseries. o provide training to the community members on plantation

development techniques after undergoing a training of trainers course themselves.

o play an active role in negotiations by ensuring that community interests are catered for on such issues as access to degraded lands in forest reserves as well as off-reserve areas, access to credits and grants, formulation of agreements and any other envisaged issues.

5.3.4. Forest Resource Exploitation Another crucial role expected to be played by the CFCs is in the area of regulating timber and non-timber forest products exploitation. In this respect, the CFCs are to be consulted in all matters pertaining to the award and monitoring of TUCs.

The Community Forest Committees are expected to lead the communities in terms of the following aspects of forest resource exploitation.

Determination of TUC coverage areas Formulation and negotiations on SRA Implementation of development projects under SRAs Monitoring of operations of TUC holders Arbitration in cases of compensation payments Reforestation in connection with TUC requirements Negotiating for community access to timber for local use Negotiating on incentive payments for farmers who tend timber trees Management and production of NTFPs. Determination and monitoring of NTFP harvesting quotas.

5.3.5. Commercial Forestry Operations Since communities are now equal partners in forest conservation and management they might as well derive a fair share of the benefits accruing from forests. In this respect CFCs are to explore possibilities of enhancing the incomes of their communities through forest-based livelihood activities. These activities range from the running of commercial nurseries, plantation investments, taungya farming, contract works, small-scale timber conversion ventures, NTFPs processing and marketing, and a host of others.

Another important activity the CFCs could lead the communities is in the area of mobilisation towards productive income-generating ventures. It is anticipated that with time beneficial proceeds from timber harvesting would be channelled directly towards livelihood activities of communities. Interviews have revealed that in certain instances individuals would wish that community share in timber revenues be disbursed as credit to assist them in their livelihood activities. These activities could include integrated tree

.- i-· I

:. I,'

."

:1 I :

- , -,

-I ! f , \-i'

: i ·

plantation cum agricultural production schemes by ensuring access to credit for the procurement of seedlings, labour, fertiliser, improved seeds and inventory credit schemes. The CFCs could through a screening mechanism act as guarantors for members of their communities and also assist in the recovery of credits.

I I~

CHAPTER 6. WORKING MODALITIES

This chapter outlines the modalities by which CFCs could effectively carry out their assigned roles and responsibilities. As with every new human institution, it is essential that whatever modalities prescribed, is subject to refinements following the necessary review processes to achieve improved workable modalities.

6.1 Publicising the CFCs Since the CFCs are a new structure on the forestry management landscape massive amounts of publicity is required to explain their structure and functions. Apart from specialised forestry programmes publicising contemporary forestry developments, District FSD staff are to embark on publicity campaigns on important forestry issues including the fact that CFCs are now in existence to link the communities with forest management agencies. As part of the District's Annual Work Programmes the number and locations of campaigns to be mounted should be stated and reported on during annual audit workshops. District Assemblies, NGOs and communities themselves are also to embark on publicity campaigns to publicise the presence of CFCs.

As part of the publicity strategy each CFC is expected to mount notice­boards at conspicuous places within their localities. Such boards should contain clear, concise and detailed information as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. A Replica of a Community Forest Committee Notice Board

COMMUNITY FOREST COMMITTEE

FSD/ITTO COLLABORATIVE PILOT

PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS OF COMMUNITY

MEETING DATE

VENUE

TIME

CHAIRMAN

. r

. I

I .

'. ! .. i -,

• I~"-' :. ,J.~':,

:. /~

: i·· , '

6.2. Maintaining Constant Interaction The foremost requirement of the CFCs is to maintain constant interaction with the communities they serve and the interest groups they represent. To this end, the following modalities are proposed:

Members of the Community Forest Committees should meet at least once in a month throughout the year. The entire CFC or executive should meet with the entire community at least once in three months, that is, every yearly quarter. Representatives of various interest groups serving on the CFCs should meet with the interest groups they represent at least once per month, Whenever any issues emerges, such as, the preparation of a new SRA, the CFC should call an emergency meeting with the entire community to inform them of developments and to solicit for their inputs. The notice boards to be mounted at each village or township are to be used in communicating information on meetings.

6.3. Training Since the CFCs are to be the links between the communities and the foresters, it is expected that they acquire knowledge on basic forestry issues to enable them offer the necessary services to their communities. FSD staff and other NGOs are to provide the technical expertise for training the CFCs. The training is expected to cover all the various aspects of forestry including new developments. Normally such training should take the form of workshops, practical working sessions, demonstration and field visits.

6.4. Basis for Legal Recognition Since it has been confirmed that the CFCs are functioning effectively at the pilot sites, it is proper that they are given formal legal recognition in the nation's forestry statutes. To this end they must be accepted as part of the forest management institutional make up. The Forest Services Division Charter, for example, makes proviSion for the recognition of such community structures.

Even in the absence of formal laws of recognition, the FSD or other forestry agency could initiate the formation and operationalisation of such structures and grant them formal authority by way of administrative directives and procedures.

In the meantime there are some paraphernalia that must be provided to CFCs to back them up and prove that they have been granted permission to play the role expected of them. The main important paraphernalia that CFCs are to possess as proof of their authority are:

Standardised Identity Cards endorsed by the Head of the FSD or the representative Rules, agreements and MOUs endorsed by the FSD, the relevant CFC and other collaborating partners. Certificates of attendance at workshops and seminars Relevant badges, Uniforms, Caps, etc. as may be appropriate.

.. ; , .. f .

1-

r -

, i '

I I

I 1· -I' . I

, " .... -. !",.:

6.7 The Way Forward

Since there is ample proof that CFCs can effectively contribute towards collaborative management of forests, the next most important step is to form CFCs amongst forest fringe communities across the landscape of Ghana, particularly in the high forest zone where the concept has been adequately tested.

Under the various projects to be pursued by the FSD, such as the NRMP, FSDP, FORUM, and others, it is expected that the formation and normalisation of CFCs will become an integral part of the projects. The main processes that are to be followed in order to form and operate the CFCs have been outlined under these guidelines. The guidelines are for the benefit of policy makers, field officers, the DAs, communities, and other stakeholders.

As with guidelines on an emerging area such as community forestry, it is reckoned that as and when new and better information is received on community forest management structures the guidelines would be appropriately reviewed.

..

In

To: <itto@itto.or.jp> Subject: PO 41/95 Rev.1 (F)

Page I of I

Dear Dr Efransjah, /

Please find attached copies of the hree technical guidelines for d,elopment of COllaborC lve forest manage ent systems produced (Output 3) by the abOV~rOject as requested. ./

Please acknowledge receipt. ~

Yours sincerely, ITTO rnail / [a x

DrTK Orgle Director, RMSC, Forestry Commission PO Box 1457 Kumasi, GHANA Ph: +233-51 233 66 Fax: +233-51 28495 Mobile: +233-24 250 664 E-mail: Kwesi@i:!JU5<.<l9.DJlne .c_Ql]J..gb

~!'t.li:_9Jjl~.l..~lineS for ll!J2.doe

~~~ exploit guidelines. doe

~ ~Eg!Jidelines.dOC

Date : 10 ~~ ' 0 I

~F~i~l e~: ~P~D~~TI ~/~~~~~~~~ ) lllfu.

ExeclItil'cDirl:ctol 1--+--1

:VlarkeLin g

Forest m?llflgm~nl

~e~tlnB\~ls~tr~y+-~ __ ~~ r1

_ll"~_-l---'--- - .J-

~.

Printed for itto <itto@itto.or.jp> 08130/200 I