Guillaume Lescuyer (CIRAD & CIFOR), Robert Nasi (CIFOR), Paolo Cerutti

(CIFOR), Tito Kakundika et Isaac Shabani (R&SD), Ignace Lubala (Océan)

2nd annual FLARE meeting, December 2-5, 2016, Edinburgh

WILL THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY FOREST MODEL

IN DR CONGO BE VIABLE?

THE RISE OF COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN DRC

• A sub-regional trend for 2 decades (Cameroon, Gabon, CAR), but

implementation still faces challenges.

• An innovation (though little detail) of the 2002 DRC forestry law

• A slow beginning with an accelerating trend over the last 3 years:

– Decree 14/018 of 2 August 2014 on the forest concessions for

local communities

– Ministerial Orders 49 and 50 of 25/09/15 on small-scale

logging, abrogated and replaced by MO 84 of 29/10/16

– Ministerial Order 25 of 09/02/16 on the management and use

of community forests (CFs)

• A new department at the Ministry of Environment (2014) +

national strategy (ongoing)

(THE TYRANNY OF) MANY PILOT EXPERIENCES

• Forests Monitor, end 2000s: sensitization of local

communities

• ForCom, end 2000s: templates of Simple

Management Plans (SMP)

• Makala: SMPs for fuelwood production

• Océan: REDD + initiatives in Eastern province

• Tropenbos: CFs for small-scale logging in Eastern

province

• GIZ: CFs for small-scale logging in Maniema

province

• WCS: SMPs around the Okapi Reserve

• FAO: CFs for sustainable hunting in Bas Kongo and

Tshopo provinces

SAMPLE OF PILOT SITES

(Source: Bauer, 2016)

STAKEHOLDERS AND TOPICS

Research

International NGO

Nationale NGO

Internationalinsitution

Cooperation

Administration

(Source: Bauer, 2016)

QUESTIONING THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC RELEVANCE OF

COMMUNITY FORESTRY INITIATIVES

• Lack of profit or bad distribution of revenues have been two

common criticisms of community forestry in Cameroon

• How do current initiatives in DRC tackle the issue?

– Which economic activities are proposed ? Do they match with local

capacities and needs?

– What is their financial return?

• Methods

– Literature review

– Review of most CF initiatives in the Tshopo and Ituri provinces

– Financial analysis for 3 case studies

SELECTED ACTIVITIES IN THE 3 CASE STUDIES

CF Uma CF Lolwa CF Mosenge

Animal breeding X X

Beekeeping X

Biodiversity conservation X X X

Carbon sequestration X X X

Ecotourism X X X

Fish farming X

Fuelwood harvesting X X

Handicraft X

Intensive agriculture X X X

NTFP collection X X X

Small-scale logging X X X

Small-scale mining X

Sustainable fishing X X X

Sustainable hunting X X X

ARE THESE ACTIVITIES LOCATED INSIDE OR DEPENDENT

OF THE FOREST?

CF Uma CF Lolwa CF Mosenge

Animal breeding X X

Beekeeping X

Biodiversity conservation X X X

Carbon sequestration X X X

Ecotourism X X X

Fish farming X

Fuelwood harvesting X X

Handicraft X

Intensive agriculture X X X

NTFP collection X X X

Small-scale logging X X X

Small-scale mining X

Sustainable fishing X X X

Sustainable hunting X X X

ARE THESE ACTIVITIES DETAILED AND QUANTIFIED IN THE

MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS?

CF Uma CF Lolwa CF Mosenge

Animal breeding X X

Beekeeping X

Biodiversity conservation X X X

Carbon sequestration X X X

Ecotourism X X X

Fish farming X

Fuelwood harvesting X X

Handicraft X

Intensive agriculture X X X

NTFP collection X X X

Small-scale logging X X X

Small-scale mining X

Sustainable fishing X X X

Sustainable hunting X X X

PREPARATION COSTS

Activity

Total cost (USD)

CF Uma (SMP ready to be implemented)

CF Lolwa (SMP to be written and

submitted)

CF Mosenge (some basic studies still

remain to be done)

Information and validation meetings 4,700 4,950 3,401

Installation of management committees 9,980 12,000 not available

Delimitation and cartography 66,470 16,000 4,445Forest inventory 14,825 11,000 not available Baseline studies 9,500 1,000Elaboration of the Simple Management Plan

4,000 4,670

Constitution and depot of the request for logging permit

3,150

Costs for venue of provincial and national authorities

9,300 11,200 1,530

Total 112,425 64,650 15,046

PRELIMINARY COSTS FOR THE CASE STUDIES

Activity

Total cost ($)

CF Uma (with SMP ready to be implemented)

CF Lolwa (with SMP to be written and

submitted)

CF Mosenge (with some basic studies that

remain to be done)

Extra costs related to the Order 25

Information and validation meetings 4,700 4,950 3,401

Installation of management committees 9,980 12,000 not available

Delimitation and cartography 66,470 16,000 4,445

Forest inventory 14,825 11,000 not available Baseline studies 9,500 1,000

Elaboration of the Simple Management Plan 4,000 4,670

Constitution and depot of the request forlogging permit

3,150

Costs for venue of provincial and nationalauthorities

9,300 11,200 1,530

Creation of local Supervision and Monitoringcommittees

6,120

Writing and adoption of new statutes 5,385

Training of the committees' members 9,000

Investments and running costs for localcommittees

12,260

Costs for venue and involvement of localauthorities

8,716

Total 112,425 64,650 15,046 41,481

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE LOLWA CF

in Francs congolais Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Small-scale logging

Starting costs 84,080,000 12,630,000 12,630,000 14,915,000 12,630,000

Running costs 90,911,933 90,911,933 90,911,933 90,911,933 90,911,933

Turnover 121,500,000 121,500,000 121,500,000 121,500,000 121,500,000

Sustainable hunting

Starting costs 8,505,000 10,005,000 11,505,000 9,500,000 9,500,000

Running costs 15,337,500 29,175,000 43,012,500 41,512,500 41,512,500

Turnover 20,250,000 40,500,000 60,750,000 60,750,000 60,750,000

Fuelwood collection

Starting costs 4,005,000 4,005,000 4,005,000 2,000,000 2,000,000

Running costs 2,700,000 5,400,000 8,100,000 8,100,000 8,100,000

Turnover 7,200,000 14,400,000 21,600,000 21,600,000 21,600,000

Net benefits of activities -56,589,433 24,273,067 33,685,567 36,910,567 39,195,567

Net Present Value (F.congo) 43,471,688 (with a 10% discount rate)

Net Present Value (USD) 43,472

Net benefits of activities and CF creation -206,589,433 24,273,067 33,685,567 36,910,567 39,195,567

NPV (F.Congo) -92,891,949

NPV (USD) -92,892

CONCLUSION – CAN CFS BE MADE PROFITABLE FOR

COMMUNITIES ?

• Local livelihoods can be improved without engaging local people in a community forestry approach, simply by supporting rural development.

• Most initiatives of community forestry in DRC target biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration:

– these benefits remain intangible for local people. To what extent is the creation of CFs exploited by external actors to promote their agenda ?

– On the opposite, the financial performance of productive activities is almost never assessed in the CF management documents. The expected socio-economic impact of CF initiatives is not quantified, and often not even documented.

• Regulations and procedures to create and manage a CF are complicated, very expensive and out of the ability of any rural community. Like in Cameroon, this context generates a dependence on external funding (via NGOs and elites) favoring illegal practices to cover these costs.

cifor.org

blog.cifor.org

ForestsTreesAgroforestry.org

“Forestry is not about trees, it is about people.

And it is only about trees insofar as they serve the needs of people.”

www.cifor.org/strategy-2016-2025