Steps to Sustainable Forestry Success: A Case Study Analysis
Of Community-Based Forest Management
In Developing Countries
Meaghan Hawes
B.Sc., University of Northern British Columbia, 2001

Project Submitted In Partial Fulfillment Of
The Requirements For The Degree Of
Master of Arts
In

International Studies
(International Development)

UNIVE .srrv OF NORTHEPtN
BtUT~SN COLUMBI.~­
L~Df.'iAfiV

Prine~ Gsorge, BC
The University Of Northern British Columbia
October 2008
© Meaghan Hawes, 2008

ABSTRACT
Community-based forest management (CBFM) is an approach that involves
small-scale community owned and managed forestry that is drawing serious attention for
its applicability to achieving sustainable forest practices. In this paper, I researched the
question: What factors explain the success and failure of CBFM in developing countries?
Thirty-four case studies of CBFM in 14 developing countries were reviewed and
statistically analyzed. A total of 47 independent factors were found to significantly
influence the outcome (success or failure) of these CBFM experiments, of which the most
important determinants of success were: the comprehensiveness and objectives of the
management plan, land tenure, ownership and property rights, types of support,
participation (in particular that of women), perceptions (project confidence, perceived
tangible benefits, social capitol, environmental concern, and equality between community
members), agricultural and land management systems used (use of agroforestry
techniques, rehabilitation of degraded lands), national community based forest
management policy, community governance and law, socio-economic attributes, and the
degree of decentralization. These factors were then used to develop steps to sustainable
forestry success as a guide to the initiation and development of successful community
based forest management in developing countries.

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ....... ........... ........... .......... .................. .................... ....... ............ ........ ............. ... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .... ................................... ...... ...... ........ ............... ....... .......... ........ iii
LIST OF TABLES .. ...... .... ... .. .... .... .. .... .... ..... ..... .. ... .................... ............ ..... ................... ... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................... .... ..... ...... ............... ..... ... .......... ... .... .... ... .... ....... v
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .... .. ............................................ ................ .. ................... 1
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3

Background ..... .................................................................................................... 1
Recognition of Current Problems and Movement Toward a Solution ............... 6
Community-Based Forest Management: History, Theory, and Practice ............ 8
Previous CBFM Studies and a Research Gap .................... .......... ..................... 14

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ...... .......... .. .... .... ...................................... .. .. ................ 17
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5

Introduction ............................... ..... ..... ...... ................ ....... ........... ...................... 17
Selection of Cases .... ............ ...................................... .............. .... .. .... ............... 17
Defining and Measuring Success .................. .... .. .... ........ ........ .......................... 18
Selection of Independent Variables ........ .. .. .............. .. .. .... .. .. ................ ............ 21
Measuring the Variables and Data Analysis Techniques ...... .. ......................... 23
Research Design Limitations ...................................................... ............ .......... 26

CHAPTER 3: ANALYTICAL RESULTS .. .... .......................... .... .... ............................... 28
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3

Introduction .......................... .... ................................ .... .... ............................ ..... 28
Variable Category Findings .................... ...................................... .................... 28
Summary: Factors Explaining Success and Failure .. .................................... .... 44
Compari son with Pagdee et al. findings ........................................................... 45

CHAPTER 4: steps to success ...................................... .......... .......... ................................ 49
4.0
4.1
4.2

Introduction ............................................... ............................ ................... .... .... . 49
Steps to Success for Implementation of CBFM in Developing Countries ....... 49
Steps to Success: Conclusion ........................ ........ ........................ .............. ...... 57

REFERENCES ..................... ... ............. .. .............. ... ....... .. .. .................. ............................ 58
APPENDIX 1: LIST OF CASE STUDY LITERATURE USED IN THIS STUDY ....... 62
APPENDIX 2: INDEPENDENT VARIABLES AND VARIABLE CATEGORIES ...... 65
APPENDIX 3: CROSS-TABLULATIONS ...... .. ...... ................................ ........ .. ............. 68

llJ

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Domains of Success ............................................................................................ 19
Table 2: Independent Variables and Variable Categories ........................................ ..... .... 22
Table 3: Independent Variables Significant in Influencing Success ................... ........... .. 29

IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Ken Wilkening and committee member Dr. Chris
Opio for their support and encouragement in the development of this project.

v

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
More than 1.6 billion people depend to varying degrees on forests for their
livelihoods. About 60 million indigenous people are almost wholly
dependant on forests. Some 350 million people who live in or adjacent to
dense forests depend on them to a high degree for subsistence and income.
In developing countries about 1.2 billion people rely on agroforestry
farming systems that help to sustain agricultural productivity and generate
income. (World Bank 2004, 16)

1.0

Background
Forest land and resources in the developing world provide basic subsistence to

millions of people; however, access to and availability of these resources is increasingly
threatened by rapid deforestation and environmental destruction. Approximately 80% of
the world's population lives in the developing world and 80% of these people in tum
depend on non-wood forest products, such as fruits and herbs, for their primary health
and nutritional needs (FAO, 2005). The increasing destruction and disappearance of
forests, therefore, is cause for major concern.
As of 2005, the world total forest area was estimated to be just less than four
billion hectares; more than half of which is located in developing countries (FAO, 2005).
Each year about 13 million hectares of the world's forests are lost due to deforestation
(FAO, 2005). The ten countries with the largest net loss per year in the 2000-2005 period
were all developing countries and had a combined net loss of 8.2 million hectares per
year (FAO, 2005). The magnitude of this loss is unsustainable. The implications of
unsustainable practices occurring in developing countries are wide-ranging; for example,
deforestation accounts for up to 20% of the global greenhouse gas emissions that
contribute to global warming (FAO, 2005).

There are multiple direct and indirect causes of deforestation in the developing
world. Although opinions are divided as to which causes are most responsible for the
poor state of their forests and land, it is generally agreed that the most prevalent are
increasing population, state ownership of land, poverty, unsustainable resource exports,
poor government management, and illegal logging (Barraclough and Ghimire, 2000;
Chew, 2001). These factors are briefly discussed below.
The already large and growing forest-dependant population in developing
countries is a major cause of deforestation. As population increases, so too does the need
for food and shelter, which translates into increased cutting of trees for fuel wood and
agricultural conversion for subsistence and cash crops (United Nations, 2001). As more
trees are harvested, ecosystems often lose their ability to recover from misuse, abuse and
overuse. In some areas, soils erode into rivers causing deteriorating water quality and
leaving behind land that is devoid of nutrients and incapable of sustaining food crops. In
other areas, once productive land is claimed by encroaching deserts. In the worst affected
areas, poverty and food shortages become common, frequently leading to urban
migration and conflicts over the few resources that remain. The rate at which population
growth and deforestation are occurring is unsustainable in the long run (Barraclough and
Ghimire, 2000; Chew, 2001).
State ownership is another cause of deforestation. Deforestation is an age-old
phenomenon; however, it wasn't until the age of European colonialism that it became
significant in what are today known as "developing countries" (Williams, 2003).
Traditional forestry and land management in the developing world witnessed
monumental change throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. During this time, Europeans

2

became directly involved in formulating developing countries governmental forestry and
land management policies. Western concepts, such as capitalist organization of timber
production, were introduced. One result was 'legal' appropriation of traditional land from
locals and indigenous people (Lindayati, 2000; Chew, 2001; Owubah et al., 2001;
Becker, 2001). Eventually, most land and resources in colonial developing countries
came under the management of the state with the result that individual or communal
ownership of land was disrupted or destroyed. Lack of ownership opened the land to
exploitation and illegal harvesting by outsiders and, in cases where this did not occur,
diminished incentives for sustainable use of the land and resources, especially for those
fighting to eke out an existence. The result was often deforestation.
Poverty often followed increased state control over forests. Poverty and food
shortages increase as land ownership and legal access to the land and resources are
diminished. Many people illegally gather food and other resources to trade or sell in
exchange for food, fuel and income (Glastra, 1998). High levels of poverty can decrease
the likelihood of sustainable forest management. lllegal harvesting of trees for wood
products to be traded or bartered for food, or income becomes a common occurrence
(Hiller et al, 2004). Sustaining forests and other natural resources is of little concern
when poverty levels are high and people are unable to feed their families (Lindayati,
2000). Many areas are heavily deforested as a result of poverty in developing countries.
Another cause of deforestation is unsustainable export of forest resources,
particularly tropical wood products. Because most developing countries are heavily in
debt, exporting valuable natural resources for foreign currency is a common method to
pay down their debt. Gaining foreign currency from forest exports (legal or illegal)

3

allows many developing countries to not only pay their debt but also participate in the
global economy. Increasingly, forest harvesting in these countries is export-oriented and
heavily influenced by international demands for timber and forest products (Dauvergne,
2001). Harvesting is typically contracted out to large and powerful multinational logging
companies, which are frequently owned by the wealthy elite.
Another cause of deforestation is poor government management. Poorly
formulated policies resulting in unequal and inappropriate management and allocation of
land and forest resources by governments is a significant contributor to deforestation
(World Bank, 2004; Brown and Schreckenberg, 1998). One management practice is to
grant harvesting rights to large foreign multinational companies. Because the majority of
land and resources in most developing countries is owned by the state, harvesting rights
can be granted by governments to large companies regardless of the needs or rights of
rural and indigenous peoples living in the area.
A final cause is illegal logging. In many countries the unequal distribution of
harvesting rights, lack of environmental regulations and incentives for conservation,
coupled with poverty and population increase, frequently lead to illegal logging (Lynch
and Talbott, 1995). In several developing countries, the timber extracted from illegal
logging surpasses that which is legally permitted. For example, in some countries in
Southeast Asia and Africa, up to 80% of all trees are cut illegally (WWF, 2006).
Governments are often unable or unwilling to sustainably manage permitted harvesting
and control illegal harvesting.
The unsustainable factors and practices driving deforestation discussed above
have resulted in an increase in the number of powerless, landless people, an increase in

4

those living in extreme poverty, a rise in the number of conflicts between forest dwellers,
government agents and patrons, and an expansion in the amount of severe environmental
degradation. Recent reports on forest sustainability and resource management criticize
global forest policy and practice (FAO, 2007; Owubah et al., 2001; Wiggins et al., 2004).
The majority of this criticism is directed at the tropical forest policies and practices of
developing countries, which have been in the past and are still today heavily influenced
by developed countries. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)'s
Global Forest Resources Assessment, Brazil, Indonesia, Sudan, Myanmar, Zambia,
Tanzania, Nigeria, Congo, Zimbabwe and Venezuela rank, in this order, as the top 10
countries with the largest annual net loss in forest area (FAO, 2005). The FAO report
argues that sustainable forest management must collectively consider social, cultural,
environmental and economic factors. Sustainability can not be achieved by considering
only one factor while ignoring others.
The unsustainability of forest practices led in the early 1990s to coining the term
"sustainable forest management", the origin of which can be traced to the non-binding
"Forest Principles" contained in Chapter 11 of Agenda 21 formulated during the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992. The purpose
of the Forest Principles was to set guidelines that would contribute to the management,
conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to the provision and
protection of their complementary functions and uses. Principle 2b states that, "Forest
resources and forest lands should be sustainably managed to meet the social, economic,
ecological, cultural and spiritual needs of present and future generations" (UN, 1992).

5

Agenda 21 was signed by the heads of state of 178 countries. The challenge is to put this
ideal into practice.

1.1

Recognition of Current Problems and Movement Toward a Solution
Forest-dependent people in developing countries are negatively affected by forest

destruction and degradation and by the mismanagement of forest resources by state
governments. These people are commonly indigenous people and non-indigenous rural
poor. Until recently, little recognition was given to these populations and their forestrelated needs. This seems to be changing. There is greater understanding that the
prevalent method of Western-influenced forest resource management largely ignores the
needs of the poorest populations.
Typically, the Western-style approach involves large-scale harvesting and
processing operations. These operations frequently involve clear-cutting of large tracts of
land and often, due to lack of environmental regulation in many developing countries,
leave behind damaged rivers and eroding land. Commonly, harvesting takes place with
little regard for those dependant on non-timber forest products from the land. Once
forests are clear-cut, many of the non-timber forest products, such as fruit and
mushrooms, are destroyed.
Western-style forestry originated in northern temperate (North American and
European) ecosystems. However, these ecosystems are very different from the tropical
ecosystems of most developing countries. The high levels of biodiversity and heavy
dependence of large populations for subsistence and income associated with tropical
forests warrant a different approach to timber and resource extraction methods. Forest
management and practices can not be directly translated between these ecosystems.

6

The identification and recognition of problems associated with the current
Western-influenced, 'one size fits all', large-scale management schemes have led to the
idea of small-scale community owned and managed forestry with diverse crops grown
using local and indigenous knowledge. This 'new' method of small-scale forest
management is drawing serious attention.
There are numerous terms used to describe the different approaches to local
involvement in forest ownership, activities and management, including community
forestry, joint management, joint forest management, co-management, social forestry,
and community-based forest management. In this study, the term "community-based
forest management" (CBFM) is used and is considered interchangeable with the other
terms. CBFM is treated as an all-encompassing label for multiple types of forestry
activities that involve local and/or indigenous people with differing degrees of ownership
and decision-making authority.
In some developing countries, there have been policy shifts towards implementing
CBFM programs. For example, in Indonesia and the Philippines in the early 1990s,
community forest policy agreements were concluded which recognized traditional land
claims. These agreements included calls for a more sincere partnership between local
people and the government in which greater decision-making power was delegated to the
local level. The policy shift towards CBFM has been slow, however. Many obstacles to
wide acceptance remain. For instance, the absence of critical legal and administrative
structures, in addition to the need for increased development support, often limits
acceptance of CBFM programs (NGO Statement, 2000; 2005). Also, powerful owners of
logging concessions have much to lose politically and economically by granting full

7

rights to local people (Lynch and Talbott, 1995). In spite of increasing support for
CBFM, success has not been consistent. Many cases have failed.
If CBFM is to be a viable alternative to the prevalent large-scale, Western-

oriented methods, it is important to analyze and understand the determinants of success
and failure in cases where CBFM has been tried in developing countries. The central
research question tackled in my project is: What factors explain the success andfailure of

CBFM in developing countries?
In my project, I sought to not only identify factors but also organize them into a
framework for understanding and guiding successful CBFM, "steps to CBFM success".
Such a framework provides governments, communities, and NGOs with a valuable tool
to assist in formulating and implementing successful CBFM-related policies and
programs, and in achieving sustainable forest management in developing countries.
Before discussing the methodology used to answer my research question, background
material on CBFM is presented in the following section.

1.2

Community-Based Forest Management: History, Theory, and Practice
Community forestry is village-level forestry activity, decided collectively and

implemented on communal land, in which local populations participate in the planning,
establishing, managing and harvesting of forest crops, and receive a major proportion of
the socio-economic and ecological benefits from the forest (Martel and Whyte, 1992 as
cited in RIC Good Wood Guide, 1998). The objective of present-day CBFM is to create
incentives for rural communities to participate in sustainable forest management and to
ensure they benefit from the equitable management of the forest and its resources. CBFM
is ideally applied wherever communities have a cultural or livelihood dependency on
8

local forests (NGO Statement, 2000; 2005). To provide incentives for sustainable
management it is critical that local and indigenous communities have control of, secure
access to, and preferably tenure over, their land.
Land tenure and property rights are used and interpreted in a variety of ways. For
the purposes of this project, these terms are used to describe rights assigned to a
particular activity or resource without actually granting ownership over the land itself.
Ownership denotes rights assigned to the resources as well as to the land. Many analyses
of CBFM have focused on land tenure and secure ownership as a factor significant in the
success of CBFM (de Lopez, 2005; Suyanto et al., 2005; Wily, 1999; Lynch and Talbott,
1995). However, there is also evidence to suggest that actual individual property rights
need not be present and that clearly defined communal property rights are sufficient to
create incentives for sustainable management (Dauvergne, 2001 ). In this case, the state is
still in ultimate control but the perceived security among community members creates the
necessary incentives for participation and equitable sharing of benefits. Individuals and
communities that experience real or perceived limited access to land are less likely to
invest in preservation activities than those with land tenure. Common sense generally
dictates that investments of time, money and resources are less likely to be made when
there is no guarantee of future benefits.
Many successful examples of community forestry can be found throughout Asia,
Latin America, and Africa. By 1997, the Philippines had almost three million hectares of
forestland in more than 600 sites under community management (CIFOR, 2007). In
India, more than 63,000 groups have enrolled in Joint Forest Management programs to
regenerate approximately 14 million hectares of forest land (CIFOR, 2007). Likewise in

9

Nepal, 9000 forest user groups are striving to regenerate 700,000 hectares of forest land,
and in Brazil, farmers participate in managing 2.2 million hectares as extractive reserves
(CIFOR, 2007).
Decentralization and devolution are interchangeable terms that are often used to
describe the change from state-controlled forests and management to community control.
These terms characterize changes in policy instruments connected to deregulation and
reduced state intervention in the economy and the decentralization process. Ideally,
decentralization involves the transfer of political, financial, and administrative authority
from central to local governments ensuring that services will be decided by and beneficial
to the people. Factors affecting success in decentralization include infrastructure,
technology, access to information, human capital, planning, and the benefits to be gained
from natural resources in control (FAO, 2005). A national government must actively and
legitimately transfer power and support to the local level of community governance. The
idea behind decentralizing community forestry is to foster sustainable land and resource
management through the incentive of responsibility for land and future benefits to be
received from prudent management (Wiggins et al., 2004; Becker, 2001; Kajembe and
Monela, 2000; Wily, 1999).
The type of agricultural and forestry practices used and their suitability to the
needs of the community and environment are also of importance in determining the
success of CBFM. The appropriateness and value of various agricultural and forestry
practices is dependent upon the attributes of the community. In order to rectify problems
caused by previous mismanagement of the land there needs to be a thorough assessment

10

of the land, as well as the effectiveness and suitability of various agricultural and forestry
practices within the communities.
Variations of CBFM were widely practiced long before colonization and long
before appropriation of land by state governments. Local groups living in forested areas
of Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, Tanzania, the Philippines and India, for example, have
been practicing community forestry for centuries and developed sophisticated long-term
management practices (CIFOR, 2007). A typical modern-day CBFM program would
involve variations of the following. The local forest dependant community is granted
some degree of tenure over either the trees or the land within a given unit of land area; for
example, a traditional area for which they have a claim. The community appoints or
elects a leader or leaders who work in conjunction with the community members,
government agents/foresters and/or NGO groups to develop a long-term management
plan for the area under community control. Management plans are community specific
and take into consideration resource type and availability, community attributes, as well
as needs for present and future use of the community.
Many CBFM programs involve some type of agroforestry system (in other words,
a system in which intentional planting of trees is combined with agricultural crops and
raising livestock to maximize the ecological, economic and social benefits to the
community from the land). It is common for communities with some degree of tenure
rights or ownership to initiate tree-planting programs and/or various forms of
agroforestry. Agroforestry practices can enhance crop production, diversify farm output,
stabilize or improve soils, and ameliorate existing ecological conditions (Clarke and

11

Thaman, 1993). This makes agroforestry a useful tool in many communities where land
has been degraded and limitations for uses are present.
Agroforestry is a viable system for many small-scale farmers . Its value increases
when farmers have secure long-term property rights. It can contribute to environmental,
economjc, and social success (Suyanto et al., 2005; Nautiyal et al., 1998; Olofson, 1985).
By growing multiple crops interrruttently with trees, it maintains an increased level of
biodiversity, which in tum contributes to the health of the entire ecosystem. A staggered
continual harvest may provide subsistence and income at times when monoculture
agricultural crops do not, therefore contributing to poverty reduction. Maintaining a
varied selection of trees and crops provides a security blanket for times of drought, insect
infestations, and disease. If one crop is affected or fails, there are other options to choose
from (Clarke and Thaman, 1993). An example of an agroforestry practice is planting
legurrunous trees and or shrubs whose roots fix nitrogen improving soil fertility for food
crops as opposed to purchasing expensive and polluting inorganic fertilizers. Another
example would be planting fruit trees to protect and shelter food crops that require shade
from the sun. In many communities, agroforestry practices may be used but not
specifically identified as such.
Agroforestry practices offer many benefits to the small-scale, poor rural farmer in
developing countries. For these benefits to be realized, support for community forestry
management in the form of comprehensive government policies, local consultation and
participation, technical support, education, and recognition of traditional property rights
are essential. Of particular importance to establishing agroforestry systems is traditional
farmjng techniques and indigenous knowledge about local ecology. Indigenous

12

knowledge about trees and plants is extensive, accumulated, and passed down through the
generations. This knowledge can be extremely useful but is frequently untapped when
decisions are made about projects without local participation or consultation (Clarke and
Thaman, 1993).
Many case studies of CBFM have focused on the importance of inclusion and
participation by all community members (Topp-Jorgensen et al., 2005; Wiggins et al.,
2004; Sokh and !ida, 2002; Becker, 2001; Sekher, 2001). If consultation meetings and
participation do not involve representation from all groups affected, perceptions
regarding the benefits received and the intentions of the government may be negative.
This can affect the willingness of members to further participate in the project. However,
women are often left out of the decision-making process despite the fact that they are
often the ones tending to the agricultural crops.
In many cases lack of financial, policy, educational, and/or legal support are
factors limiting CBFM success. Many countries have no formal policies or laws
supporting CBFM and many countries that do have them do not implement or enforce
them. This often leads to escalating conflict both within and outside of the communities.
In theory, participation and cooperation in decision-making, as well as equitable
distribution and sharing of the resources on the land base, empowers community
members to be a responsible and effective part of the development process. Studies have
shown that CBFM can be an effective way to ensure that the needs of forest dependant
communities and the environment are considered and managed in an equitable,
sustainable manner (Lynch and Talbott, 1985; Markopoulos, 1998; Suyanto et al., 2004).

13

1.3

Previous CBFM Studies and a Research Gap
Of the many case studies of CBFM from around the world that identify factors

influencing the outcome of CBFM in both developed and developing countries, almost all
are single case studies. There are few that examine and compare multiple cases (i.e., that
are "meta-studies"). I found only two meta-studies in the literature: Glasmeier and
Farrigan (2005) and Pagdee et al. (2006). These two studies provided the inspiration for
my project. Both are discussed below.
Glasmeier and Farrigan (2005) conducted a meta-study of community forestry
using cases from both developed and developing countries. Their purpose was to
"explore the extent to which community forestry can be adapted to the US context and
foster practices that lead to livelihood generation and if possible poverty reduction in US
rural communities". As the authors explain, there are differences between CBFM in
developing and developed countries that make comparison and translation of practice
difficult. In developing countries, the focus of CBFM is on subsistence for poor
populations, whereas in the United States and other developed countries, it is more
oriented towards markets. The goal of poverty alleviation is also different. The authors
explain that poverty in the US is different from that in the developing world. In the US,
poverty is coincidental and not necessarily a result of limited access to resources as in
many developing countries. Although Glasmeier and Farrigan undertake a meta-study of
community forestry, they do not attempt to develop a framework of factors influencing its
success or failure. Rather, they attempt to conceptualize and translate the success found
in both developed and developing world cases to the US. In addition, they highlight the
difficulty in comparisons between developed and developing countries.

14

Pagdee et al. (2006) analyzed 31 articles encompassing 69 cases of CBFM to
identify and extract factors ("significant independent variables") that influenced the
multi-dependant variable "success". By examining multiple single case studies of CBFM,
they investigated the associations between their independent variables and CBFM
success. They included cases from both developing and developed countries.
I used the method developed by Pagdee et al. (hereafter referred to as the "Pagdee
Method") as a template and starting point for my meta-study. There are two major
differences between my study and theirs. First, developed country cases are excluded in
my study. I focus solely on the developing world. As Glasmeier and Farrigan (2005)
clearly demonstrate, a legitimate comparison of CBFM between, for example, Canada
and Thailand is very difficult. Second, I use for the most part different cases (see
Appendix 1 for a listing of the cases used in this project). There are only two cases used
by Pagdee et al. that were used in this study (these two cases are noted in Appendix 1).
These two cases were identified by contacting Pagdee et al. for a list of case studies used.
My meta-study methodology consisted of five steps. First, case studies of CBFM
in developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America were identified through an
extensive literature search. The second step was to determine the definition of success
and how to measure it. The third step was to identify all of the independent variables that
influence success. To do this each of the developing country cases selected was assessed
for the presence or absence of variables that contributed to or hindered the development
of successful CBFM. Both successful and failed cases of CBFM were used in the metastudy analysis. If failed cases were excluded, important variables or attributes that factor

15

into the development of successful CBFM and sustainable forest management could be
missed. It is for this reason that failed cases are included in the study.
In the fourth step, I statistically analyzed variables influencing success and failure
in the developing country CBFM cases. To my knowledge, no one has done this type of
analysis focusing solely on developing country cases. Numerical analysis allowed me to
establish whether or not Pagdee et al. 's conclusions were valid when cases from
developed countries are excluded. In addition, it permitted me to assess whether there
exist previously unidentified factors that influence CBFM success.
The fifth and last step was to construct a "steps to CBFM success" based on the
variables found to be significantly related to the success of CBFM. My hope is that such
a framework can be used to guide the successful initiation and adoption of CBFM in
developing countries to aid them in their quest for sustainability in forest management
and development.
The rest of the paper is laid out as follows. Chapter 2 describes the methodology
used for my study, which, as briefly outlined above, employs a modified version of the
Pagdee Method. Also included in this chapter is a discussion of the design limitations of
the study. Chapter 3 presents the selected cases studies, the factors influencing their
success and failure, statistical analysis of the data, and key findings. The final chapter,
based on study results, offers the "steps to CBFM success", which, in essence, is a
compilation of lessons for sustainable forest management in developing countries.

16

CHAPTER2:METHODOLOGY
2.0

Introduction
This chapter explains the methodology used to answer my research question. Each

step of the methodology is introduced together with a discussion of the corresponding
methods used by Pagdee et al. Step one, identification of cases to include in this study, is
discussed in Section 2.1. Step two, definition of success and how it is measured, is
discussed in Section 2.2. Step three, determination of the independent variables
influencing success, is detailed in Section 2.3. Steps four and five, measurement of the
independent variables and data analysis, are explained in Section 2.4. The last section of
the chapter discusses research design limitations and data accuracy.

2.1

Selection of Cases
The first step of my methodology was to select the cases for inclusion in the meta-

study. An extensive search of the literature on community forestry programs turned up
many cases, all of which were reviewed to determine their suitability for inclusion in this
study. There were four selection criteria for inclusion:
•

the case had to be based on primary research on CBFM,

•

it had to be on a program in a developing country,

•

it had to include, in order to judge the comparability of the cases, a description
of the community as well as of the state of the land and forest resources, and

•

it had to include a description of management outcomes.

17

Cases that did not meet all four of the selection criteria were excluded from this study.
The selection criteria for the Pagdee et al. study were the same as those used here, with
the exception that they included cases from both developed and developing countries.
I found 34 cases derived from 23 publications that fit the above four selection
criteria. The cases cover 14 developing countries: Bolivia, Cambodia, Cameroon, China,
Ghana, India, Indonesia, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Senegal, and
Tanzania. They represent a wide range of outcomes; some were successful examples of
CBFM, some were failures, and others were a mix of success and failure. Of the 34 cases,
13 were from Africa (38 percent of total cases), 19 from Asia (56 percent), and two from
South America (6 percent). Of the Asian cases, six were from India and three from
Nepal; these nine represent approximately 25 percent of the total cases selected. Both
India and Nepal have a long history of successful CBFM. The Pagdee et al. study was
based on 69 cases from 31 publications, 17 percent from Africa, 67 percent from Asia, 10
percent from South America, and six percent from North America.

2.2

Defining and Measuring Success
The second step of my methodology was to define success and determine how to

measure it. Because success is a relative term it can be interpreted in different ways, on
different levels, and differently by different people. It is difficult to assess a CBFM case
as simply "successful" or "not successful".
I distinguished three domains of success for evaluation: (1) environmental, (2)
economic, and (3) social or cultural. These domains are explained below. They permit a
concise analysis of the effects of the independent variables that are related to success. In
addition to the three domains, I include a fourth domain, overall success. The use of
18

overall success provides an opportunity to extract more information during statistical
analysis by allowing a comparison of significance levels for each variable over all cases,
including all levels of success. That is to say, overall success is used as a control for
success in general. Table 1 displays the domain matrix used for evaluating success. Some
cases achieved success in all three domains (environmental, economic, social/cultural)
while others in only one or two. In this study, a case was judged an overall success if
success was achieved in one or more of the environmental, economic, and social/cultural
domains. It was judged a failure only if unsuccessful in all three domains.

Table 1: Domains of Success
Domains of Success

Yes/No (present/absent)

1. Environmental Success

2. Economic Success
3. Social/Cultural Success
Overall Success- if yes to
one or more of any of the
above three domains
Environmental success is defined as practices that improves or attempts to
conserve the natural environment. In order to be considered an environmental success, a
case had to mention one or more of the following: treeplanting and/or nursery
development, improved ecological conditions, reduced deforestation, active use of
agroforestry techniques, development of policies or Jaws supporting environmental
sustainability, or land rehabilitation.

19

Economic success is defined as increases in monetary benefits to the community
and or a reduction in spending on the part of government for forestry related
management. In order to be considered an economic success, a case had to mention one
or more of the following: time saved by efficient practices, increased capability for self
sufficiency, increased individual or community earnings, or decreased government
spending on resource management. When governments spend less on managing forests
and forest resources it means they have money that can be redirected to other areas for
example health care and or education.
Social or cultural success is defined as social and cultural benefits received by
community members. In order to be considered a social or cultural success, a case had to
mention one or more of the following: increases in education or healthcare, equality of
benefits, the use of efficient traditional practices, security in land tenure, active
participation in land and resource decisions, or a reduced level of conflict over land and
resources .
The Pagdee et al. definition of success is similar to mine. They divided success
into three similar domains: ecological sustainability, economic efficiency, and social
equity. However, despite breaking success down into these categories and noting the
frequency with which each domain was mentioned, in the end each variable was only
evaluated and analyzed against overall success. Pagdee et al. defined success as meeting
one of the measures of success from any of the three domains. By including the three
domains and overall success in my study, it provides a more comprehensive explanation
of the relationships between the different domains of success and the identified variables
than those used by Pagdee et al. It also provides an opportunity to confirm the

20

significance of variable relationships for each domain. The use of an "overall success"
domain provides additional information as to which independent variables are affecting
more than one domain of success.

2.3

Selection of Independent Variables
The third step of my methodology was to identify the independent variables to be

used in my meta-study. I initially extracted all possible independent variables from the 34
cases. There was a multitude to consider, ranging from very detailed to very general.
Many were interrelated. I identified the independent variables based on statements by the
author(s) of each study as to what was significant in the success or failure of the case and
based on my own judgment after a thorough reading of the study. The end result was a
long list of potential variables extracted from the 34 case studies. From this list, I distilled
47 individual variables which I further grouped into 13 categories containing clusters of
closely related independent variables (Table 2).
Many similarities exist between the variables chosen for this meta-study and those
used by Pagdee et al., but there are also differences . While my study contains 13 variable
categories containing 47 independent variables, Pagdee et al. distinguished nine variable
categories containing 43 independent variables. As an example of the differences
between our studies, Pagdee et al. group financial and human resource support into one
category while I divide it into two categories-supporting organization (e.g., NGO,
national agency, or international organization) and type of support (e.g., financial,
technical, or educational). I created four variable categories that were not included in
Pagdee et al.-type of agricultural systems used (with particular attention paid to the use

21

of agro-forestry practices), nature of national policy supporting CBFM, status of conflict
before and after CBFM initiation, and the role of women in participation.

Table 2: Independent Variables and Variable Categories
A. Management Plan and Project Objectives
1. Comprehensiveness of management plan I objectives
2. Support for ecotourism
3. Definition of boundaries
4. Cost benefit analysis
B. Land Tenure and Property Regimes
1. Degree of tenure and ownership

c. Land Type

1. Traditionally occupied
2. Land type (indication of value I quality of resources present).

D. External Support

1. From international/ multilateral governments
2. From an NGO ('s)
3. From an individual(s) or team(s)

E. Types of Support (financial, technical, educational)
1. Degree and range of support for CBFM in general
2. Efficient traditional practices
3. Subsidies and or equipment
4. Initiation of small scale income generation and or market introduction
5. Nurseries and or tree-planting
F. Participation in CBFM Activities
1. Encouragement for women to participate
2. Division of labor, tending the forests/agriculture?
3. Status of women with regard to participation?
4. Degree of active participation in CBFM.

G. Perceptions of Community

1. Confidence in the project
2. Tangible benefits
3. Trust of government intentions, social capital.
4. Security of tenure and property rights
5. Local concern about stopping degradation/deforestation
6. Equality of benefits

22

H. Agricultural Systems Used
1. Strengthening of agriculture by agroforestry interventions
2. Degraded/marginal land reclaimed/ reforested
3. Irrigation agriculture
4. Wet I rice
5. Mixed crop agriculture I livestock
6. Agroforestry
7. Slash and burn
8. Minor commercial
9. Major commercial
I. National Policies
1. National policy backing up, legalizing CBFM, land tenure, sustainable
development

J. Community governance and law

1. Rules and regulations (laws)
2. Penalty system
3. Effectiveness of enforcement and penalty system
4. Evaluation and monitoring

K. Community Size and Socio-economic Attributes
1. Community size
2. Changes in economic activity/benefits received
L. Degree of Decentralization
1. Establishment of user groups I committees
2. Management capabilities of community
3. National government support/advisement.
4. Final authority

M. Conflict
1. Conflict pre CBFM
2. Conflict reduced post CBFM

2.4

Measuring the Variables and Data Analysis Techniques
The fourth step of my methodology was to assess the level of success in each case

relative to each of the 47 independent variables determined in step three. Two
measurement techniques were used. One technique was simply to measure presence or

23

absence of the variable. The second technique was to measure the degree of presence; in
other words, to assign an ordinal degree to the variable. For example, there are different
levels of participation. To more accurately measure participation, this variable was rated
on a scale of high, medium, or low. Other variables which had characteristics that were
more complex were also rated on scales. In many cases, the value for an independent
variable was a judgment call based on a careful reading of the case study and a general
understanding of the concept of CBFM and its associated attributes and practices.
Appendix 2 lists the measurement technique used for each of the 47 independent
variables.
Once all the cases were assessed, the resulting data was entered into a spreadsheet
on a case by case basis for each of the 47 independent variables, as well as for the three
domains of success and overall success. Each cell in the resulting data matrix corresponds
to a specific case and a specific variable. Some cells were left blank because not all of the
variables were discussed in the cases or the discussion was not clear enough to make an
assessment of a given variable. The data matrix was to the basis for statistically analyzing
and determining the nature of relationships between the variables.
The fifth step of my methodology was to conduct the statistical analysis. A table
of correlation coefficients and corresponding significance between the variables was
determined using Spearman's Rho correlations. This table enabled the identification of
significant relationships. Relationships with significance in the range of 0.001 to 0.05
were singled out for further analysis.
The significant relationships were further analyzed by cross tabulations. This was
carried out between the independent and dependant variables and also between the

24

independent variables. The cross tabulations indicated whether relationships were
negatively, positively, or inversely correlated. The correlations, significance, and cross
tabulation results are discussed in Chapter 3.
Pagdee et al. used a similar method of analysis. They categorized measures of
success and factors influencing success, and then classified cases as success or failure
based primarily on the conclusions of the author(s) of each case study. Once cases were
classified, Pagdee et al. identified and tallied the factors present in the cases that
influenced success. They used dichotomous ratings, for example present/absent to
measure the independent variables. Once all cases were assessed, a data matrix was
created which was used to construct frequency distributions of results providing the most
often cited dimensions of success, and variables most frequently identified as important
to success. Chi-square tests of independence were conducted to identify statistical
associations of significance between variables and success but also between the
independent variables. I did not use Chi-Square analysis because it does not reveal the
strength of the relationship between the variables. Spearman's Rho calculations are used
for ranked or ordinal data, which is the method used for most of the data collection in this
project. Using cross-tabulations gives an indication of the strength of the relationship in a
percentage form, which is more representative if frequency distributions are low. That is,
if there are differences in sample size for particular variable, percentages facilitate the
comparison by standardizing the scale. Chi-square analysis is a more general
measurement, providing less information than the Spearman's Rho correlations and
cross-tabulations.

25

2.5

Research Design Limitations
There are three main limitations to the research contained in this project. The first

was the difficulty in defining and measuring successful community forestry. Because
cases were considered a success overall if they met only one of the success category
criteria, many of the cases are in fact a combination of success and failure. Thus, the
relative success or failure of cases can be debated, which could affect the reliability of my
interpretations. It is also possible that different patterns of relationships may have
emerged if the selection criteria for success were more stringent. For example, it is
possible that success could be broken down into more than three domains or conversely
that success could be deemed present only if found in all three domains.
A second limitation is the accuracy and comparability of the data. Data were
collected from a series of articles written by different authors about cases in different
countries. Each case study author interpreted their CBFM case(s) differently which
presents a challenge to comparing across cases. It is also possible that in some cases
interpretations were based on the case study author(s)'s observations while others may
have been based on the interpretations of the community. This was difficult to determine.
Differences between measurement judgments could play a factor in limiting the
reliability of the data collected and therefore the results of the study. However, these
differences cannot be measured and therefore remain a limitation in the study.
A final limitation is the sheer number of variables that could be influential m
determining community forestry success. Variables of significance in one case study may
not be so in another. This speaks to the great differences present within each CBFM case
and the importance of a thorough understanding of the factors affecting success in each

26

community specifically. The relatively small number of cases used, 34 from 23
publications, may also have had an impact on the accuracy of results.
The following chapter presents the statistical analysis results for the data
collected, the variables found to influence success and failure for the selected cases
studies, and the key findings. The key findings from the data analysis are used for the
development of the steps for successful CBFM discussed in Chapter 4.

27

CHAPTER 3: ANALYTICAL RESULTS

3.0

Introduction
This chapter presents the results from the data analysis. Spearman's Rho

calculations and cross-tabulations between each of the variables were organized into a
large table containing the variations of correlations and significance. Relationships of
significance were identified and examined for patterns and relevance. Many significant
patterns and relationships were identified. Some were a confirmation of the Pagdee et al.
findings and some were new. Each of the variable categories is discussed with respect to
findings of interest and significance. Findings are then compared to those of Pagdee et al.
for similarities and differences.

3.1

Variable Category Findings
Correlations conducted using Spearman's Rho calculations revealed which of the

individual independent variables (Table 2) had relationships of significance with the
dependant variable, success (Table I). Relationships were considered to be significant at
either the 0.05 level or the 0.001 level. The independent variables calculated to have
significance with success are shown in Table 3. Cross-tabulations were conducted to
further determine the nature of the relationships. They allowed a more precise
examination of the relationship with success, particularly for variables that were
measured on scales.

28

Table 3: Independent Variables Significant in Influencing Success
(Spearman's Rho correlations with significance for the four domains of success)
Variable
category

Independent
Variable

Overall
Success

Environment
Success

Management
Plan and
Project
Objectives
Land Tenure
and Property
Rights
Types of
Support
Types of
Support

Management plan
objectives and
comprehension

0.486 **

0.417*

0.512 **

0.481 **

Degree of land
tenure and property
rig_hts
General degree of
support for CBFM
Support for
efficient tradi tiona!
practices
Support starting
small-income
generation/market
introduction
Support for
nurseries and treeplanting
Status of women
with regard to
participation
Degree of active
participation

0.565**

0.563 **

0.473 **

0.428*

---

0.427*

---

---

0.784**

0.784**

0.714**

0.724**

---

---

0.415 *

---

0.529**

0.529**

0.452*

0.429*

0.702*

0.702*

0.702*

0.661 *

0.763**

0.762**

0.643**

0.569**

0.821 **

0.935 **

0.649**

0.667**

0.825**

0.719**

0.833**

0.789**

0.592**

0.688 **

0.599**

0.555 **

0.598**

0.503**

0.613**

0.579**

0.688**

0.585 **

0.588**

0.541 **

Types of
Support
Types of
Support
Participation
inCBFM
Activities
Participation
inCBFM
Activities
Perceptions
Perceptions

Perceptions

Perceptions
Perceptions

Community
confidence in
project
Community
perception of
tangible benefits
received
Perception of
government
intentions I social
capital
Community
perception of land
tenure and security
Community
concern for
degradation I
deforestation

(Nl)

Economic
Success

(N2)

Social or
Cultural
Success

(N3)

(N4)

29

Perceptions

Type of
Agricultural
System used
Type of
Agricultural
System used
National
Policy
Community
Governance
and Law
Community
Governance
and Law
Community
Governance
and Law
Community
Size and
Socioeconomic
Attributes
Degree of
Decentralization
Degree of
Decentralization
Degree of
Decentralization

Community
perception of
equality of benefits
received
Strengthening
agriculture by
agroforestry
techniques
Rehabilitation of
degraded lands

0.503 **

0.568 **

0.699**

0 .604 **

0.645 **

0.645 **

0.564*

0 .579*

0.500*

0.500*

---

---

National policy
regarding CBFM
Enforcement and
penalty system in
place
Effectiveness of
enforcement

0.429*

0.577 **

0.408 *

0.433 *

0.457 **

0.405 *

0.424*

0.405 *

0.645 **

0 .683 **

0.588 **

0.553 **

0.722**

0.596 **

0.734 **

0.804**

---

---

0.372*

---

0.623 **

0.625 **

0.637**

0 .551 **

0.673 **

0.612 **

0.631 **

0.543**

-0.44 I*

-0.531 **

-0.428

---

Monitoring and
evaluation system
in place
Status of economic
activity since
CBFM initiation
Management
capabilities of
community
Level of
governmental
support and
advisement
Who has final
authority?

** Indicates significance at the 0.001 level
* Indicates significance at the 0.05 level

Indicates no significant association found
As can be seen in Table 3, the variables determined to be significant are: the

comprehensiveness and objectives of the management plan, land tenure and property
rights, types of support (by supporting organization, for efficient traditional practices, for
initiation of small-scale enterprises, for nursery and tree-planting programs), participation
(including that of women, and overall), perceptions (project confidence, perceived

30

tangible benefits, social capital, environmental concern, and equality between community
members), agricultural and land management systems used (strengthening by use of
agroforestry techniques, rehabilitation of degraded lands), national CBFM policy,
community governance and law (effectiveness of penalties and enforcement, monitoring
and evaluation), socio-economic attributes, and the degree of decentralization
(community capabilities, government advisement, and final authority). Each variable is
discussed below under its respective variable category. In addition, inter-independent
variable relationships of significance are discussed.
Management Plan and Project Objectives
The comprehensiveness of the management plan and objectives was measured on
a scale of one to five (Appendix 2), where one indicates no real plan or clearly stated
objectives and five indicates a long-term plan that includes community consultation and
input. Correlations of significance for this variable were found with all four domains of
success. Cross-tabulations (Table A3a of Appendix 3) indicate that the more
comprehensive the management plan and objectives, the more likely overall success will
occur. The data suggest that CBFM failure is more likely if the community is not
involved with the development of a long-term management plan. The importance of the
longevity of the management plan is most evident in environmental success.
Environmental success is less likely to occur when the management plan is not long-term
in nature. The cross-tabulations indicate a change in the rate of success, in all domains,
between scale three and scale four. The difference between three and four is community
consultation. This suggests the necessity for community consultation regarding
management plans.

31

Also measured under this variable category was support for ecotourism,
definitions of boundaries, and whether or not a cost-benefit analysis was conducted. None
of these variables were found to be directly or significantly associated with CBFM
success. It was difficult to assess for the support of ecotourism because it was discussed
in only two cases (both from Nepal). It may well be significant in those cases but due to
the small number of cases accurate determination could not be made.
Land Tenure and Property Rights
Land tenure and property rights was measured on a scale of one to five, where one
indicates no ownership but access to use of resources, two indicates ownership of
resources and rights to use but no ownership of land, three indicates shared tenure and
authority with other users, four indicates secure tenure with legal authority but
government intervention, and five indicates legally clear and secure long-term tenure and
ownership. This variable was found to be significantly correlated with all four domains of
success, but more so with overall and environmental success than economic and cultural.
Generally, the cross-tabulations (Table A3b of Appendix 3) show that the more secure
and clear land tenure and property rights, the more likely success will occur.
The cross-tabulations for overall as well as for social and cultural successes
indicate that success is greatly increased between scale one and scale two. In other words,
the likelihood of success is greater with ownership over resources than simply access to
use with no ownership. Note that scale two does not include any ownership of the land
itself, only over the resources. There is an even higher success rate for cases approaching
scale five. However, the bulk of the cases (23 out of 34) were assessed and rated as scale

32

one or two. Only three cases were rated at scale five; all three of these cases were
successful.
One notable observation from the data is that in some cases the actual degree of
tenure or ownership may be low even though community members perceive it to be
higher and may even state they feel secure. Even the perception of land security and
tenure seems to lead to better management of the land and resources. The findings from
the correlations support this and are further discussed under the variable category
"community perceptions".
In the environmental success domain, the cross-tabulations for land tenure and
property rights indicate that rights to access are insufficient for environmental success to
occur. There were two cases rated as scale two which under the overall success category
were deemed a success but which under the environmental success category were not
successful. This finding supports other studies (Nhantumbo et al., 2003; Suyanto et al,
2004) suggesting that investments in land preservation and conservation are less likely
when ownership is not secure. The same pattern can be seen for economic success. There
were only two cases which were deemed to be successful in all three domains of success,
both of which were rated as scale five (clear, secure, legal, long-term tenure with
ownership and authority).
Several strong positive correlations were found between land tenure and property
rights and other independent variables including, the strengthening of agriculture with the
use of agroforestry techniques (0.717), effective enforcement of laws (0.603), and
penalties and the presence of a monitoring and evaluation system (0.657). All three of
these variables were also found to be significantly related to CBFM success. Cross-

33

tabulations for these variables (Table A3c of Appendix 3) indicate that the presence of all
three is greater as the scale of tenure and property rights is increased.
Land Type
This variable category did not present any significant relationships. The variables
measured included whether or not the community in question was located wholly or
partially on traditional lands and also the physical state of the land. The physical state of
the land measured the degree of disturbance, which is an indication of the value and
quality of resources available to the community. Neither of these variables was correlated
with the success of CBFM.
External Support
The variables in this category showed no significant correlation with success.
Some correlations were found with types of support, in particular a strong correlation
(0.808) between developed country governments involvement and support in the form of
subsidies and supplies. However, interestingly, the variable "support for subsidies and
supplies" showed no significant correlation with success.
Types of Support
The variable category "types of support" was measured using a scale question and
several yes or no questions. The scaled question measured the cumulative effect of
national government and other external support for CBFM programs. A significant
relationship was indicated between a combination of national government and external
support with environmental success. The relationship shows that a high degree of support
(for example NGO support) translated into increased environmental success. No
significance was shown for the other domains of success.

34

Cross-tabulations further indicate that when there is minimal support for CBFM
(support only within the community) environmental success does not occur (Table A3d
of Appendix 3). In many cases, developed country governments and NGOs increasingly
support CBFM in an attempt to stop deforestation and environmental degradation.
Keeping in mind that support in the form of subsidies and supplies was found not to be
significant in achieving success, it is important to determine what other types of support
are being provided by national and other international governments. Commonly, external
support is in the form of subsidies. It is important to recognize that subsidies alone are
not effective in achieving success.
Support was measured for the use of efficient traditional practices and was found
to be highly correlated with all four levels of success. This aspect of the support variable
provided one of the strongest correlations, particularly with overall success and
environmental success, showing 0.784 correlation and 0.001 significance level for both.
The cross-tabulations for environmental and general success show that failure always
occurred when there was no support for efficient traditional practices. When there was
support for efficient traditional practices, failure only occurred twenty-five percent of the
time.
Supporting efficient traditional agricultural practices allows community members
to participate and to utilize their traditional knowledge and expertise. The introduction of
westernized versions of farming and agriculture is often met with resistance and therefore
is of limited success due to their complexity compared to the simpler ways the people are
accustomed.

35

Because financial assistance in the form of subsidies is a common development
tool , it was expected that there would be a correlation between support for small-scale
income generation and market orientation, and economic success. There was a
correlation; however, it was not very strong (0.415) and was only significant at the 0.005
level. In addition, this variable did not produce any significant relationships with the
other domains of success. These results suggest that the western orientation of putting
economic development first will not always match the wants and needs of simple
subsistence communities in remote locations.
Support for tree-planting and nurseries for seedling production was significantly
related to all categories of success but more so with overall and environmental success. In
all four categories there was a one hundred percent failure rate when tree-planting and
nurseries were not supported. In many communities, poverty prevents the initiation of
growing and planting tree seedlings because it takes energy and resources away from
food crops. When tree-planting and nursery development are supported through technical
and financial assistance it is more likely to be embraced by the people and increase the
general and overall success of the project.

Participation
Although

no

meaningful

correlations

were

found

for

the

variables

"encouragement of women ' s participation" and "status of agricultural/forestry workload"
with CBFM success, some interesting inter-independent variable correlations were found;
notably, perfect positive correlations with the presence of a cost-benefit analysis and with
the involvement of international governments and the encouragement of women ' s
participation.

36

The status of women's participation in decision-making in CBFM programs is
mentioned in only 11 of the 34 cases, unlike the high frequencies of most other
independent variables of significance in the case studies. This variable was measured
using a scale of one to three, where one is indicates very little or no involvement with
decisions, two indicates moderate recognition in decision-making, and three indicates
relatively equal participation in decision-making. Although there were only 11 cases that
could be measured, there was a strong positive correlation with women's equal
participation and success in all four categories (Table A3e of Appendix 3). CBFM failure
was one hundred percent when women's participation was ranked as one. There was an
overall success rate of 83 percent when women's participation was ranked as three. These
results suggest that the degree of participation for women demands more careful scrutiny
because it may be more important than previously thought. More than 65 percent of the
cases selected did not address the status of participation or inclusion of women in CBFM
programs.
Several interesting and important inter-independent variable relationships
regarding women's status in participation in CBFM decision-making were found. Crosstabulations (Table A3f of Appendix 3) indicate a positive relationship and very strong
correlation with community concern for stopping land degradation and deforestation
(0.913) and a perfectly positive correlation with the reduction of conflict post CBFM
initiation. These two findings support the critical need for the inclusion and participation
of women in the development process and the importance of outside involvement in
encouraging women's participation.

37

General participation of the community showed a very strong significance in all
four measures of success. Participation was rated as high, medium, or low. Crosstabulations (Table A3g of Appendix 3) indicate that 14 of 34 cases were low, or passive,
participation. All 14 of these cases were rated as failures. Success is shown as greatly
increasing with even moderate participation. These results for general participation
variable reinforce the significance of that found for women's participation. The more
actively all community members are involved in CBFM the more likely success will
occur.
Positively correlated inter-independent variable relationships were found with
general participation and all of the other independent variables identified as significantly
affecting success, with the exception of the variable relating to final authority in decisionmaking. It is negatively correlated with this variable, suggesting that participation
decreases as government interventions and authority increase. These inter-independent
variable relationships support the notion that active participation by all community
members increases the likelihood of CBFM success. The most highly correlated and
significant relationships were between participation and support for efficient traditional
practices (0.678), strengthening of agriculture through use of agroforestry techniques
(0.740), and concern for stopping degradation and deforestation (0.709). As discussed
above, the correlation between women's participation and concern for stopping
degradation/ deforestation is high (0.913). This indicates that women are more concerned
with environmental conservation than men and further supports the importance of the
inclusion of women.

38

Community Perceptions
The perceptions variable was measured usmg s1x yes or no questions. As
expected, perceptions play a significant role in the outcome of CBFM. All perceptions
questions generated significant relationships with all categories of success. The
correlations for perceptions and success were the strongest of all the independent
variables measured. Perceptions were evaluated on: (1) whether tangible benefits were
felt, (2) if so were they equal, (3) if there was trust in the government (good social
capital), (4) if there was confidence in the project, (5) if there was concern for stopping
environmental damage, and (6) the relationship between deforestation and land tenure
security. The correlations indicate that when perceptions are positive, success is greatly
increased.
Of particular interest is the variable indicating the perception of land tenure
security. The perception of land security is often different than the actual state of land
security. By measuring both the actual and perceived state of land security a more precise
indication of the significance and impact of both variables on the success of CBFM can
be determined. The correlations and significance with success suggest that it is not the
real state of land tenure security that is most important but the perception of land tenure
and security. As the perception of security increases, the likelihood of CBFM success
increases. Provided the community receives appropriate guidance and support in the form
of communication and operating advice (creating good social capital) from government,
even in cases where tenure is limited success may still occur. This suggests that active
communication with and education of community members that works to elevate project
confidence will increase the prospects of CBFM success.

39

Another noteworthy relationship was found between the entire perceptions
variable category and support for efficient traditional practices. Many very strong
correlations were indicated (Table A3h of Appendix 3), in particular with overall project
confidence (G 1), tangible benefits felt (G2), good social capital (G3), and perceived
tenure security (G4). Because all of these variables are strongly correlated with success,
the importance of enhancing positive perceptions through support for community
traditions is reaffirmed.
Agricultural Systems
The independent variables in this category were selected to determine if there
were relationships with success and the size and type of farming and forestry practiced.
Because of the forest dependency and subsistence nature of most rural developing
country communities, the size and type of the farming and forestry practices before and
after CBFM initiation would intuitively have an effect on the success rate. Relationships
of significance were found between increased use of agroforestry techniques and
reclamation/reforestation of marginal/degraded lands, and all categories of success.
However, no significant relationships were identified for the other variables measured in
this category.
There were 19 cases in which a determination could be made as to use of effective
agroforestry techniques in strengthening agriculture. For the remaining 15 cases, it was
not clear if agroforestry techniques were used. Cross-tabulations indicate that 13 of the 19
cases utilized agroforestry techniques. The six cases in which agroforestry techniques
were not utilized show a one hundred percent rate of failure in all four categories of
success.

40

A weaker yet still significant relationship was found between reforestation and
rehabilitation of degraded lands and success. This suggests that success increases with
increased efforts to rehabilitate and reforest degraded and marginal lands. The
significance of this variable is further strengthened by the very strong correlation with
other independent variables including support for tree-planting and nurseries and
rehabilitation (0.791), support for efficient traditional practices (0.775), as well as with
strengthening of agriculture through the use of agroforestry techniques (0.877); all three
are also significantly correlated to success.
National CBFM Policy
The degree of political attention in national policy regarding CBFM was found to
be significant in all four measures of success, but most strongly correlated with
environmental success. When countries have formal, legal policies supporting CBFM,
success in all categories is more likely. When there is no national policy supporting
CBFM, success occurs only approximately 28 percent of the time. However, when there
is a national policy, success occurs 71 percent of the time. The percentage spread is wider
for environmental support, ranging from 14 with no national policy to 71 percent with a
national policy. The presence of national policy was determined also to be significantly
correlated with support for efficient traditional practices, suggesting that when legal
policies are in place they support traditional practices which in turn influences success.
Community Governance and Law
The variable category of community governance and law was measured using
four yes or no questions, three of which were found to be significantly correlated with
success. Interestingly, the mere presence of a set of rules and regulations (laws) was not

41

found to be significant for any measure. However, the existence of an enforcement and
penalty system and, especially, effectiveness of enforcement strongly influenced success.
Cross-tabulations indicate that for all measures of success, failure is one hundred percent
when there is no enforcement and penalty system. When enforcement was ineffective,
environmental success failed one hundred percent of the time, and similarly failed 91
percent of the time for the overall, economic and social/cultural success. Existence of
enforcement and its effectiveness is positively correlated with all measures of success as
well as with the strengthening of agriculture through use of agroforestry techniques
(0.707) and support for efficient traditional practices (0.822).
The presence of an evaluation and monitoring system was also found to be
significant. Failure was one hundred percent for both economic and social/cultural
successes with no monitoring and evaluation system, and 91 percent for overall and
environmental success. This suggests that when programs do not have effective
monitoring and evaluation feedback loops within the management plan success is less
likely to occur. This finding is reinforced by the positive correlation between
management plan comprehension and effective monitoring and evaluation (0.489). This
suggests that problems and inadequacies with CBFM programs cannot be addressed if
there is no monitoring and evaluation system. Having periodic assessments of community
progress is critical to addressing and mitigating obstacles to success.

Community Size and Socio-economic Attributes
A weak correlation exists between the status of economic activity from inception
of a CBFM program and economic success. This suggests that increased involvement in
the general country economy and/or markets by CBFM communities is not paramount in

42

the goals of the community, nor ts it necessary for success to occur. There were no
significant relationships found for the size of the community.

Degree of Decentralization
The degree of decentralization was measured using one yes or no question and
three scaled questions. To measure the community capabilities for management the
formation of community user groups or committees was measured and a rating of the
community capabilities in general was determined. No significant relationships were
found between the formation of community user groups or community management
capabilities and success. The degree of decentralization is often contingent upon the
community capabilities for management and how organized or involved community
members are. The scaled question rating community capabilities for management
indicated significance with strong correlations in all four categories of success. The
highest correlation was for economic success. This suggests the more capable the
community, the more likely success will occur.
The last two scaled variables measured the involvement of the government in
terms of support and guidance and the locus of final decision-making authority. The first
variable was significant and had a strong positive correlation, suggesting that success
increased when governments work with the community to provide assistance in the form
of advice, education and general support. A negative correlation was found between
overall, environmental, and economic success and the final authority variable. The
correlations reveal that when the government is the final authority regarding CBFM
decisions success was less likely.

43

Negative correlations between final authority and almost all of the other
independent variables were found. This suggests that when the government has
intervening authority on final decisions this negatively affects many of the variables that
positively affect success. To be successful, community members must have final say in
decisions regarding CBFM management.

Conflict
This variable was introduced to determjne the relationship between CBFM
initiation and the reduction of conflict both within and outside of communities. There was
no significant correlation between conflict reduction and success. However, as mentioned
above, there was a perfectly correlated relationship between increased women's
participation and the reduction of conflict (Table A3f of Appendix 3).

3.2

Summary: Factors Explaining Success and Failure
The results of the data analysis provided considerable information about the

factors that most affect the success and failure of CBFM in developing countries. The
factors determjned to be significant in explaining CBFM success were:
•

the presence of a long term, comprehensive management plan with clear
objectives, developed with community input;

•

the presence (or perception) of secure land tenure, ownership and property
rights;

•

the presence of various forms of support (national, international and NGO
types, and for efficient traditional practices, for initiation of small-scale
enterprises, for nursery and tree-planting programs);

44

•

active participation (in particular that of women, and overall);

•

positive perceptions regarding project confidence, tangible benefits, social
capital, environmental concern, and equality between community members;

•

the use of agroforestry techniques;

•

the presence of a national CBFM policy, as well as community governance
and laws that incorporate effective penalty and enforcement, and monitoring
and evaluation systems;

•

the presence of a decentralized local government (with strong community
capabilities, government advisement).

3.3

Comparison with Pagdee et al. findings
My meta-study confirms many of the findings of the Pagdee et al. meta-study, as

well as reveals new relationships. Relative to the Pagdee et al. study, I wanted to answer
two questions: Were the results the same when developed country cases were excluded?
Were there additional variables present that were not identified by Pagdee et al.?
The answer to the first question is that the exclusion of developed country cases
from my meta-study did not affect the results as determined by Pagdee et al. This is
perhaps not surprising because only six percent of Pagdee et al.'s cases (four out of 65
cases) were from developed countries. Despite differences in the method of measuring of
the variables, as well as slight variations in the variables themselves, common themes
remain between the two studies. Some of the variables used in this study are measured
more precisely than those used in the Pagdee et al. study and others were measured more

45

precisely in Pagdee et al.'s study. The following variables were found to be the most
significant in influencing success by both studies:
•

property rights and its corresponding attributes of well-defined tenure security
and legal, long-term ownership;

•

active participation;

•

effective enforcement of laws and regulations as a result of strong leadership
and management by communities accompanied by government support in the
form of education and advisement;

•

monitoring and evaluation feedback;

•

perceptions of community, including benefits to be received and confidence in
the project; and

•

degree of decentralization; in particular, local and decentralized management
authority.

There were also commonalities between the studies regarding variables deemed
not to significantly influence the success of CBFM, as follows:
•

involvement in market and technologies; and

•

physical features including community size, resource attributes, state of the
land, and presence of conflict.

In addition to confirming results for the variables identified, and indicated as
significant in influencing success in the Pagdee et al. study, 10 new variables were
identified which were shown to significantly influence CBFM success in developing
countries, as follows:

46

•

support for and use of efficient traditional practices;

•

presence of a comprehensive management plan and objectives;

•

support for tree-planting and nurseries;

•

status of women with regard to participation;

•

perception of land tenure and security;

•

perception of government intentions (degree of social capital);

•

community concern for stopping degradation/deforestation;

•

strengthening of agriculture through use of agroforestry techniques;

•

rehabilitation of degraded land; and

•

status of national policy regarding CBFM.

Of particular interest are the factors related to the type of agricultural systems
used, including traditional practices and knowledge, agroforestry, and tree-planting.
These factors are frequently discussed in case studies of CBFM yet seldom mentioned as
significantly related to CBFM success. The importance of these factors seems evident
considering that it is successful community-based forest management that we are
examining. Overlooking the importance of traditional land management systems suited to
the ecology of the area is likely to lead to the failure of a program.

3.4

Conclusion
The results presented in this chapter confirm the general findings of the Pagdee et

al. study. In addition, new factors not identified by Pagdee et al. as significant in CBFM
success were uncovered. Identification of new factors was achieved using a more precise
measurement of variables. Together, the collection of variables identified in both this and

47

Pagdee et al.'s study provided valuable explanation of the factors that influence the
success and failure of CBFM in developing countries. In the following final chapter, the
factors positively related to CBFM success in this study are used to develop a "steps to
CBFM success" framework. These steps provide a valuable tool for use by those wishing
to initiate CBFM.

48

CHAPTER 4: STEPS TO SUCCESS
4.0

Introduction
In this chapter, I construct "steps to CBFM success" based on the results of the

analysis in Chapter 3. The steps are intended to be a guide to the initiation and
development of successful CBFM programs in developing countries. It is essentially a
compilation of lessons learned about CBFM success.
Many well-intended CBFM programs fail despite earnest support from national
governments, NGOs, and developed country governments. If CBFM is to become a
viable solution to the problem of unsustainable use of land and resources occurring in
many developing countries, a thorough understanding of the factors influencing success
is required. This understanding is of use not only to the developing country governments
and communities but also to developed country governments and international
development agencies wishing to support CBFM programs in developing countries.

4.1

Steps to Success for Implementation of CBFM in Developing Countries
The steps to success have been developed for application at the local or

community level and at the national or international levels. Each level is explained
below.

Community Level Framework
At the community level, there are three main steps to success: (1) initial meetings
and community consultation, (2) thorough assessment of community needs and resources,
followed by (3) formulation of a comprehensive management plan. These steps should be
followed in order, as each step builds on the previous one. Each step is discussed.

49

Initial Meetings
Because of the strong correlations I found between perceptions and CBFM
success, I recommend that the first step at the community level is ensuring the
community in question has been given ample opportunity to meet with government and
other supporters before a project is initiated. In particular, I found that "positive
perceptions regarding project confidence, tangible benefits, social capital, environmental
concern, and equality between community members" was a significant factor in success.
Thus, involving the community before commencement of the project shows a
comrrtitment to the community and helps creates positive perceptions within the
community.
It is critical that community members actively participate in the development of
the project and that the project is developed specifically for the community in question.
Initial meetings should include as many members as possible to discuss project
objectives, which should be clearly and simply laid out. It

IS

important that

communication with the community is m terms that they can easily understand and
appreciate. Community members should be encouraged to speak and provide ideas and
concerns regarding the program. These meetings should be conducted jointly by national
governments and any external supporters. The greater the level of participation at all
levels, the greater the likelihood of success.
Based on the results of my study, initial meetings should specifically include
discussion of (a) stopping degradation and deforestation while meeting the community
needs, (b) utilizing and improving on efficient traditional practices, (c) ensuring equality
of benefits and participation, (d) creating effective enforcement plans, (e) creating

50

security in land tenure, and (f) lending support in the form of education and financial
assistance for carrying out sustainable land management.
Assessment
After initial consultations and project introduction, the next step should be a
thorough assessment of the land and resource attributes within the community. In part,
the assessment is a method for determining if various factors of success are present or
absent in the community and what degree; factors such as land tenure, agroforestry
techniques practices, degree of participation by women. These assessments should be
carried out through a series ground surveys and interviews. There should also be a
corresponding examination of community needs, making note of which are currently
provided for and which are not. Future needs must also be assessed.
Interviews with community members should be conducted through a series of
one-on-one or group-on-group meetings and should include young and old, and men and
women. Separating into groups for interviews allows women, for instance, a chance to
voice their opinions more openly. This, I believe, is crucial because I identified the
participation of women as a significant factor contributing to CBFM. I found that the
equal participation of women was highly correlated with elevated environmental concern
and reduced presence of conflict.
Formulation of Plan
Once an assessment has been conducted with respect to community level needs, a
management plan to achieve project objectives can be developed. This step addresses the
key factor for success identified in my study of: "presence of a long term, comprehensive
management plan with clear objectives, developed with community input." It is necessary

51

to have community user groups and local level government work together to formulate
the plan. Management and community governance personnel can be appointed or elected
and CBFM supporters should be available to advise communities on the establishment of
community level governance. Well-organized user groups and community leaders, along
with encouragement and advice from government and external supporters, can ensure
development of a successful management plan.
Another important component identified in my study is a focus on rehabilitating
degraded land through reforestation. Many of the communities selected for CBFM
programs have already experienced severe environmental degradation and deforestation.
To reverse this, increased incentives need to be provided for long-term projects like
treeplanting and land rehabilitation. The management plan should, for instance, address
the need for development of tree nurseries.
In addition, because of the high correlation between "use of agroforestry
techniques" and CBFM success, these need to be encouraged and should be into the
management plan. Similarly, support for efficient traditional land management
techniques should also be addressed within the plan. This factor was also very strongly
correlated with CBFM success. Many communities are not interested in undertaking new,
complicated, large-scale westernized versions of agriculture and forestry. It is important
to tap into the wealth of traditional knowledge possessed by communities. Sudden and
large changes in techniques and technology are often met with resistance.
Finally, an essential component within the management plan, as identified in my
study, is the need for a monitoring and evaluation system. The best laid plans on paper
often translate poorly to the land without a monitoring and evaluation system in place.

52

Outside support and advisement should be utilized where necessary to develop an allencompassing set of laws and rules for the governance of the community and to ensure
that an effective penalty and enforcement system is in place. My study revealed a strong
correlation between presence of an effective enforcement system and CBFM success. The
presence of laws and regulations alone was not shown to be significantly correlated with
CBFM success. Effective enforcement is key.
Summary

The findings from this study indicate that following the above general steps at the
community level will ensure a greater likelihood of CBFM success in developing
countries. The key elements of these steps are equal participation; well-planned
development with a focu s on land security and health of the environment; use of efficient
traditional practices are used, including agroforestry techniques; imposition of new and
westernized ideas regarding forestry and agriculture practices only to enhance or improve
existing efficient practices; and construction of rules and enforcement mechanisms.

The National and International Level Framework
At the national and international level there are al so three main steps to success:
(1) development of national Jaws and policies supporting CBFM, (2) national and

international support and advisement, and (3) promotion of a shift towards legitimate
decentralized local governance, with secure tenure and ownership creating the incentive
for sustainable management of land and resources. Each step is discussed below.

53

Development of National Laws and Policies Supporting CBFM
In order for CBFM to be successful it must be legally supported by the national
government in the form of policies and laws and by foreign governments and
organizations in the form of support to the national government. If there are no national
laws in place, my study demonstrates that CBFM is more likely to fail. Many developing
countries do have laws recognizing CBFM and tenure systems; however, they are
frequently limited in scope and therefore ineffective in practice. Although the
involvement of developed country governments and NGOs was not found to be directly
related to the success of CBFM, several significant indirect relationships were found.
They can both pressure and support developing countries to create effective laws and
policies supporting decentralization and recognizing traditional land ownership and
tenure.
The failure of state management is clearly evident in the degraded condition of
the environment and the soaring levels of poverty experienced in most developing
countries. It is with external encouragement and assistance for more equal and beneficial
laws that legitimate support systems for CBFM, land tenure, and sustainable development
can be created. Returning ownership to the people is the first step in creating the security
and incentive to manage land and resources in a manner that ensures the needs of both
present and future generations are meet.
Support Consistent with Management Plan
The involvement of developed country governments and international aid
organizations in CBFM success is indirect, according to my study. One of the most
common indirect links is external support in the form of financial assistance. Even though

54

financial assistance

IS

not significantly correlated with success, correlations of

significance were found for specific areas of financial assistance.
One method of financial assistance found in this study to be a factor in successful
CBFM is support for tree-planting and development of tree nurseries. This often
translates into the increased use of agroforestry techniques to maximize the
complimentary value of both forestry and agriculture combined. The ability to learn
about and grow trees has been linked to the successful rehabilitation and reforestation of
degraded lands leading to increased efficiency in agricultural outputs. Similarly, support
for efficient traditional practices was revealed to be important. I found a significant
relationship, for instance, between support for education regarding treeplanting and
nursery establishment and successful development of CBFM.
In general, financial assistance must be directed. With no direction, it can in fact
contribute to conflict and failure. National and international supporters should refer to the
community management plan for guidance in directing financial assistance. There should
be a clear outline within the community level management plan for how and where to
utilize funds provided by external supporters.
External support for equal participation, especially by women is another crucial
dimension of success. In many developing countries women are regarded as second class
citizens. The recognition of women's rights and equality will help ensure the successful
establishment of CBFM. A significant link was indicated in this study between the
presence of international support and the encouragement of women to participate in
CBFM and CBFM success.

55

Shifting Towards Decentralization
Decentralization of ownership and authority is a key determinant of successful
CBFM, according to my research findings. By conferring responsibilities for land and
resource management to communities, it frees up government resources and personnel to
be directed to other areas. For many developing country governments, resources and
personnel are in short supply. Governments in developing countries must recognize that
the state appropriation and management of land and resources has largely failed. Many
developing countries governments have taken on too much with regard to forest
management and are unable to successfully manage in many areas. By transferring
ownership and authority of traditional areas back to the people and communities, more
attention can be paid to, for example, healthcare or education. If the government has final
authority on decisions regarding the community, especially if those decisions are not
consistent with the community developed management plan, failure will occur. The
interference of governments translates to decreased security in community ownership and
authority, resulting in a reduced incentive to manage sustainably. Support and authority
transferred to communities must be authentic.

Summary
The findings from this study indicate that applying the above steps at the national
and international level will ensure a greater likelihood of CBFM success in developing
countries. The key elements of these steps are: the importance of creating and
implementing effective national laws and policies supporting CBFM, targeting financial
assistance, and decentralization of decision-making.

56

4.2

Steps to Success: Conclusion
CBFM is a relatively new concept that is receiving increased attention as a

solution to unsustainable forestry practices that are occurring m many developing
countries. In this study, I identified key factors influencing the success and failure of
CBFM. I then used those factors that most significantly determine success as the basis for
constructing the "steps to CBFM success" described in this chapter. It is my hope that by
using these steps as guideposts, an increased number of successful CBFM projects can be
implemented that will in turn contribute to sustainable management of the world's
forests.

57

REFERENCES
Barraclough, S.L., and Ghirnire, K.B., (2000) Agricultural Expansion and Tropical
Deforestation; Poverty, International Trade and Land Use. Earth Scan Publications Ltd.
London.
Becker, L.C., (2001) Seeing Green in Mali's Woods: Colonial Legacy, Forest Use, and
Local Control. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 91 (3), p. 504526.
Brown, D., and Schreckenberg K., (1998) Shifting Cultivators as Agents of
Deforestation: Assessing the evidence. ODI Natural Perspectives No. 29.
Chew, S.C., (2001) World Ecological Degradation, Accumulation, Urbanization and
Deforestation 3000 B.C.- A.D. 2000. Altamira Press, California.
CIFOR (Center for International Forestry Research) (2007)
http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/Publications/Corporate/FactSheet/community_forestry.htm.
Clarke, W.C., and Thaman, R.R., (1993) Agroforestry in the Pacific Islands; Systems for
Sustainability. United Nations University Press, Tokyo.
Dauvergne, P., (2001) Loggers and Degradation in the Asia-Pacific; Corporations and
Environmental Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
de Lopez, T.T., (2005) Resource Degradation, Property Rights, Social Capital and
Community Forestry in Cambodia. Cambodian Research Center for Development
(CRCD).Taken from:
http://www.camdev.org/Publications/Community%20Forestry%20Cambodia%20May%2
02005.pdf.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (2005) Global Forest Resources Assessment:
Progress Towards Sustainable Forest Management. Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations
Rome, 2005. Taken from: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/A0400E/A0400E03.pdf
----- (2007) State of the Worlds Forests 2007. Taken from:
ftp ://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0773e/a0773e02. pdf
Gauld, R., (2000) Maintaining centralized control in community-based forestry: Policy
Construction in the Philippines. Development and Change, Vol. 31 (1), p. 229-255.
Glasmeier, A.K., and Farrigan, T., (2005) Understanding Community Forestry: A
Qualitative Meta-Study of the Concept, the Process, and its Potential for Poverty
Alleviation in the United States. The Geographical Journal, Vol. 171(1), p.56-69.

58

Glastra, R., ( 1998) Cut and Run : Illegal Logging and Timber Trade in the Tropics.
International Development Research Centre (Canada) Publications.
Hiller, M.A., Jarvis, B.C., Hikma, L., Paulson, L.J., Pollard, E.H.B., and Stanley, S.,
(2004) Recent Trends in Illegal Logging and a Brief Discussion of Their Causes:
A Case Study from Gunung Palung National Park, Indonesia. Haworth Press, Inc.
http://www .haworthpress .corn/web/JSF
Kajembe, G.C., and Monela, G.C., (2000) Empowering Communities to Manage Natural
Resources: Where Does the New Power Lie? A Case Study of Duru-Haitemba, Babati,
Tanzania. Proceedings from the I st University Wide Scientific Conference, 5th-7th April,
2000: Vol. 3. Sokoine University of Agriculture Morogoro, Tanzania.
Lindayati, R., (2000) Community Forest Policies in Selected Southeast Asian Countries.
In: Working Paper of International Development Resource Center. Taken from:
http://www.idrc.ca/uploads/user-s/111711295116lindayat.pdf
Lynch, O.J., and Talbott, K., (1995) Balancing Acts: Community-Based Forest
Management and National Law in Asia and the Pacific. World Resources
Institute.
Markopoulos, M.D., (1998) The Impacts of Certification on Community Forest
Enterprises: A Case Study of the Lomerio Community Forest Management Project,
Bolivia. Oxford Forestry Institute (OFI), United Kingdom. Taken From: http://www.techinform.de/taller_regional/bi bliografia/markop-2. pdf
Nautiyal, S., Maikhuri, R.K., Semwal, R.L., Rao, K.S. and Saxena, K.G., (1998).
Agroforestry Systems in the Rural Landscape- A Case Study in Garhwal Himalaya,
India. Agroforestry Systems, Vol. 41, p. 151-165.
NGO Statement to the 2000 Consultative Group Meeting on Cambodia, (2005) Taken
from:
http://www .ngoforum. org.kh/Development/Docs/ngo_statement_2000/forestry_reform.htm
Nhantumbo, 1., Norfolk, S. and Pereira, J. , (2003) Community Based Natural Resource
Management in Mozambique: A Theoretical or Practical Strategy for Local Sustainable
Development? The Case Study of Derre Forest Reserve. Sustainable Livelihoods in
Southern Africa Research Paper 10. Taken from: http:// www.ids.ac.uk/slsa.
Owubah, C.E., LeMaster, D.C. , Bowker, J.M. and Lee, J.G., (2001) Forest Tenure
Systems and Sustainable Forest Management: The Case of Ghana. Forest Ecology and
Management, Vol. 149, p. 253-264.
Olofson, H., (1985) Traditional Agroforestry, Parcel Management, and Social Forestry
Development in a Pioneer Agricultural Community: The Case of Jala-Jala, Rizal,
Philippines. Agroforestry Systems Vol. 3, p.317 -337.

59

Pagdee, A., Kim, Y. and Daugherty, P. J., (2006) What Makes Community Forest
Management Successful: A Meta-Study From Community Forests Throughout The
World. Society and Natural Resources, Vol.19, p.33-52.
Rainforest Information Center (RIC) Good Wood Guide, (1998) What is Community
Forestry? Taken from: http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/welcomegw.htm
Sekher, M., (2001) Organized Participatory Resource Management: Insights from
Community Forest Practices in India. Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 3. p. 137-154.
Sokh, H., and Iida, S., (2002) Community Forestry for Sustaining Forest Resources and
Securing Forest Foods in Cambodia: An Ongoing Evaluation of a Community Forestry
Project. From International Symposium Sustaining Food Security and Managing Natural
Resources in Southeast Asia- Challenges for the 21st Century, January 8-11, 2002 at
Chiang Mai Thailand. Taken from: http://www.uni-hohenheimde/symposi um2002/pa_full/full-pap-s2-l_sokh. pdf
Suyanto, S., Permana, R.P., Khususiyah, N. and Joshi, L., (2004) Land Tenure,
Agroforestry Adoption, and Reduction of Fire Hazard in a Forest Zone: A Case Study
from Lampung, Sumatra, Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems, Vol. 65, p. I-ll.
Topp-Jorgensen, E., Poulsen, M.K., Lund, J.F. and Massao, J.F., (2005) Communitybased Monitoring of Natural Resource use and Forests in Miombo Woodlands of
Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol.14, p. 2653-2677.
UN (United Nations) (1992) Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development Taken from: http://www.un.org/documents/galconfl51/aconf151263annex3.htm
----- (2001) Population, Environment and Development: The Concise Report. Department
of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Taken from:
http://www. un.org/esalpopulati on/publications/concise200 1/C200 1English. pdf
Wiggins, S., Marfo, K. and Anchirinah, V., (2004) Protecting the Forest or the People?
Environmental Policies and Livelihoods in the Forest Margins of Southern Ghana. World
Development, Vol. 32 (11), p.l939-1955.
Williams, M., (2003) Deforesting the Earth from Prehistory to Global Crisis. University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, 715 p.
Wiley, L., (1999) Moving Forward in African Community Forestry: Trading Power, Not
Use Rights. Society and Natural Resources, Vol. 12, p. 49-61.
World Bank (2004) Sustaining Forests: A Development Strategy. The World Bank.
Washington, D.C.

60

WWF (World Wildlife Federation) (2006) Problems: lllegallogging. Taken from:
http://www. panda.org/about_wwf/w hat_we_do/forests/problems/i llegal_l ogging/index .cfm.

61

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF CASE STUDY LITERATURE USED IN THIS STUDY
* - Cases used by Pagdee et al.
Adhikari, B., Williams, F. and Lovett, J.C. , (2007) Local Benefits from Community
Forests in the Middle Hills of Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 9 (3), p. 464-478.
Becker, L.C ., (2001) Seeing Green in Mali ' s Woods: Colonial Legacy, Forest Use, and
Local Control. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 91 (3), p. 504526.
de Lopez, T.T. , (2005) Resource Degradation, Property Rights, Social Capital and
Community Forestry in Cambodia. Cambodian Research Center for Development
(CRCD).Taken from:
http://www.camdev.org/Publications/Community%20Forestry%20Cambodia%20May%2
02005.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1995) Participatory Approaches to Planning
Community Forestry: Results and Lessons Learned from Case Studies Conducted in Asia,
Africa and Latin America. Forests Trees and People Program- Forestry Department
Working Paper No.2. Taken From:
http://www .fao.org/docrep/006/x21 03e/x21 03eOO.htm
Goldman, M. , (2003) Partitioned Nature, Privileged Knowledge: Community-based
conservation in Tanzania. Development and Change Vol. 34 (5), p. 833-862.
Kajembe, G.C., and Monela, G.C., (2000) Empowering Communities to Manage Natural
Resources: Where Does the New Power Lie? A Case Study of Duru-Haitemba, Babati,
Tanzania. Proceedings from the 1st University Wide Scientific Conference, 5th-7th April,
2000: Vol. 3. Sokoine University of Agriculture Morogoro, Tanzania.
Kohlin, G., and Amacher, G.S. , (2005) Welfare Implications of Community Forest
Plantations in Developing Countries: The Orissa Social Forestry Project. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol. 87 (4), p.855-869.
*Long, C. and Zhou, Y., (2001) Indigenous Community Forest Management of Jinuo
People' s Swidden Agroecosystems in Southwest China. Biodiversity and Conservation
Vol. 10, p. 753-767.
Markopoulos, M. D. , ( 1998) The Impacts of Certification on Community Forest
Enterprises: A Case Study of the Lomerio Community Forest Management Project,
Bolivia. Oxford Forestry Institute (OFI) , United Kingdom. Taken From: http://www.techinform.de/taller_regional/bibliografia/markop-2.pdf

62

Maskey, V., Gebremedhin, T.G. and Dalton T.J., (2006) Social and Cultural
Determinants of Collective Management of Community Forest in Nepal. Journal of
Forest Economics Vol. 11, p. 261-274.
Mehta, J. N., and Kellert, S. R., (1998) Local Attitudes Toward Community-based
Conservation Policy and Programs in Nepal: A Case Study in the Makalu-Barun
Conservation Area. Environmental Conservation Vol. 25 (4), p.320-333.
Mvondo, S.A. and Oyono, P.R., (2004) An Assessment of Social Negotiation as a Tool of
Local Management: A Case Study of the Dimako Council Forest. Scandinavian Journal
of Forest Resources, Vol. 19 (4), p. 78-84.
Nino-Murcia, A., (2006) Investing in Natural Capital: A Financial Assessment of Social
Forestry in Northern India. The Journal of Environment and Development, Vol. 15 (3), p.
317-331.
Nautiyal, S., Maikhuri, R.K., Semwal, R.L., Rao, K.S. and Saxena, K.G., (1998).
Agroforestry Systems in the Rural Landscape- A Case Study in Garhwal Himalaya,
India. Agroforestry Systems, Vol. 41, p. 151-165.
Nhantumbo, 1., Norfolk, S. and Pereira, J., (2003) Community Based Natural Resource
Management in Mozambique: A Theoretical or Practical Strategy for Local Sustainable
Development? The Case Study of Derre Forest Reserve. Sustainable Livelihoods in
Southern Africa Research Paper 10. Taken from: http:// www.ids.ac.uk/slsa.
*Owubah, C.E., LeMaster, D.C., Bowker, J.M. and Lee, J.G., (2001) Forest Tenure
Systems And Sustainable Forest Management: The Case of Ghana. Forest Ecology and
Management, Vol. 149, p. 253-264.
Olofson, H., (1985) Traditional Agroforestry, Parcel Management, and Social Forestry
Development in a Pioneer Agricultural Community: The Case of Jala-Jala, Rizal,
Philippines. Agroforestry Systems Vol. 3, p.317 -337.
Pulhin, J.M., (2000) Community Forestry in the Philippines: Paradoxes and Perspectives
in Development Practice. Paper presented during the Eighth Biennial Conference of the
International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP), Bloomington
Indiana, USA, May 31-June 4 2000.
Sekher, M., (2001) Organized Participatory Resource Management: Insights from
Community Forest Practices in India. Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 3. p. 137-154.
Sokh, H., and Iida, S., (2002) Community Forestry for Sustaining Forest Resources and
Securing Forest Foods in Cambodia: An Ongoing Evaluation of a Community Forestry
Project. From: International Symposium on Sustaining Food Security and Managing
Natural Resources in Southeast Asia- Challenges for the 21st Century, January 8-11,

63

2002 at Chiang Mai Thailand. Taken from: http://www.uni-hohenheimde/symposium2002/pa_full/full-pap-s2-l_sokh.pdf
Suyanto, S., Pennana, R.P., Khususiyah, N., and Joshi, L., (2004) Land Tenure,
Agroforestry Adoption, and Reduction of Fire Hazard in a Forest Zone: A Case Study
from Lampung, Sumatra, Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems, Vol. 65, p. 1-11.
Topp-Jorgensen, E., Poulsen, M.K., Lund, J.F. and Massao, J.F., (2005) Communitybased Monitoring of Natural Resource use and Forests in Miombo Woodlands of
Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol.l4, p. 2653-2677.
Wiggins, S., Marfo, K. and Anchirinah, V., (2004) Protecting the Forest or the People?
Environmental Policies and Livelihoods in the Forest Margins of Southern Ghana. World
Development, Vol. 32 (11), p.l939-1955.

64

APPENDIX 2: INDEPENDENT VARIABLES AND VARIABLE CATEGORIES
A.
Management Plan and Project Objectives
1. Comprehensiveness of management plan
5= Written document (plan and objectives long-term) involved community input
4= Written document (plan and objectives short-term) involved community input
3= Written document (plan and objectives) no community input
2= Stated objectives only no management plan, minimal community input
1= No real plan or clearly stated objectives
0= not stated
2. Is there support for ecotourism?
3. Are boundaries defined?
4. Has there been a cost benefit analysis?
B.
Land Tenure and Property Regimes
1. Degree of tenure
5= Clear secure (legal) long-term tenure (ownership) and authority
4= Secure tenure, (legal) authority, but government may intervene.
3= Shared tenure and authority of land and resources with other users
(companies/government)
2= Ownership of resources and rights to use but not ownership of land itself
1= No ownership, only access to use of resources

C.
Land Type
1. Is it a local traditionally occupied area (any part of it)?
2. Land type (indication of value I quality of resources present).
5= Frontier forest I largely undisturbed I not heavily logged
4= Protected area I largely undisturbed I not heavily logged
3= Protected area I moderate-high disturbance
2= Moderate/average level of disturbance for area
1=Marginal or degraded land
D.
External Support
1. Is there support from international/ multilateral governments?
2. Is there support from an NGO ('s)?
3. Is there support from an individual(s) or team(s)?
E.
Types of Support (financial, technical, educational...)
1. Degree and range of support for CBFM in general
3= high degree of support (must include government and min. 1 external support
(see above)
2= medium degree of support (national government)
1= low, very little or no support (mostly within community)
2. Is there support for efficient traditional practices?
3. Is the community receiving subsidies and or equipment?

65

4. Is there support for initiation of small scale income generation and or market
introduction?
5. Is there support for nurseries and or tree-planting?
Participation in CBFM Activities
F.
1. Are women encouraged to participate?
2. Who carries out the bulk of work tending the forests/agriculture?
3= women work more than men
2= women and men work equal amounts
1= men work more than women
0= not stated
3. What is the status of women like with regard to participation?
3= well respected relatively equal with men with regard to decisions
2=partial recognition with minor involvement in decisions
1= very little I no respect no say in decisions
0= not stated
4. Degree of active participation in CBFM.
3 =high most in community involved actively, including women
2 = medium about half the community involved
1 =low very few involved, passive participation
Perceptions of Community
G.
1. Is there confidence in the project?
2. Are any tangible benefits felt?
3. Is there a trust of government intentions? In other words, is there good social capital?
4. Is security of tenure and property rights perceived?
5. Are locals concerned about stopping degradation/deforestation?
6. Are benefits equal?
H.
Agricultural Systems Used
1. Is agriculture strengthened by agroforestry interventions? i.e. Sustainable subsistence
agriculture?
2. Has degraded/marginal land been reclaimed/ reforested?
Beforeffraditional After CBFM initiated
3. irrigation agriculture
4. wet/rice
5. mixed crop agriculture I livestock
6. agroforestry
7. slash and burn
8. minor commercial
9. major commercial
I.
National Policies
1. Is there national policy backing up and legalizing CBFM?

J,

Community governance and law

66

1. Is there an established set of rules and regulations (laws)?
2. Is enforcement and penalty system in place?
3. Is enforcement and penalty system effective?
4. Is there an evaluation and monitoring program to provide feedback for improving?

K.

Community Size and Socio-economic Attributes

L.

Degree of Decentralization

1. What is the community size (population)?
Large = 10000+
Medium= 1000-10000 (assume if not mentioned)
Small = Less than 1000
2. Has economic activity/benefits or income _ _ since CBFM initiation?
3= remained the same
2= increased
1= decreased
1. Have local user groups and or committees been established in the community?

2. Is community capable of management?
3= highly capable, educated strong leaders, well developed authority I
management system.
2= average capabilities, some outside advisement required
1= poorly organized management no clear leadership
3. National government support/advisement.
3= High with active government participation
2= Moderate (assume if not mentioned)
1= Low or selected involvement
4. Where does the final authority lie?
3= with the state
2= shared between community and government
1=with the community

M.
Conflict
1. Was there conflict over resources and access to use pre CBFM?
2. Was the conflict reduced post CBFM?

67

APPENDIX 3: CROSS-TABLULA TIONS
Table A3a. Management Plan Objectives and Comprehension (Al )
A1 *Overall Success (N1)
N1

yes

no
A1

Total

1

3

1

4

2

1

1

2

3

9

2

11

4

2

5

5

1

6

7
7

16

15

31

Total

A 1 * Environmental Success (N2)
N2

yes

no
A1

Total

1

3

1

4

2

1

1

2

3

9

2

11

4

4

3

5

1

6

7
7

18

13

31

Total

A1 *Economic Success (N3)
N3

yes

no
A1

Total

1

3

1

4

2

2

0

2

3

9

1

10

2

5

2

5

7
7

18

12

30

4
5
Total

A1 *Social I Cultural Success (N4)
N4

yes

no
A1

Total

Total

1

3

1

4

2

2

0

2

3

9

2

11

4

2

5

7

5

2

5

7

18

13

31

68

Table A3b: Land Tenure and Property Rights (Bl)
81 * Overall Success (N1)
N1

no

Total

yes

81

11

2

13

2

4

5

9

3

0

4

4

4

2

3

5

5

Total

0

3

3

17

17

34

81 * Environmental Success (N2)
Total

N2

no
81

0

yes
11

2

13

3

9

3

6
0

4

4

4

2

3

5

5

0

3

3

19

15

34

2

Total

81 * Economic Success (N3)
N3

Total

0
81

11

2

2

5

3

8

3

0

4

4

4

2

3

5

2

3

14

33

5

Total

19

13

81 * Social /Cultural Success (N4)
N4

no
81

1

11

2

5

3
4

2

5

Total

20

ves

2

Total
13

4

9

3

4

3

5

2

3

14

34

69

Table A3c: Inter-Independent Variable Correlations of significance with Land Tenure
and Property Rights (B 1)
81 *Strengthening agriculture through use of agroforestry techniques (H8)
H8

yes

no
81

Total

6

2

8

2

0

5

5

3

0

2

2

4

0

3

3

5
Total

0

1

6

13

19

81 * effective enforcement of laws and penalties (J3)
J3

yes

no
81

Total

9

4

13

2

3

5

8

3

0

4

4

0

4

4

4
5
Total

0

3

3

12

20

32

81 *presence of monitoring and evaluation system (J4)
J4

yes

no
81

Total

9

10

2

4

4

8

3

0

3

3

4

5

0

2

2

14

14

28

4
5
Total

Table A3d: Cross-tabulation for Degree of Government and External Support (El)
E1 * Environmental Success (N2)
N2

yes

no
E1

Total

9

Total
0

9

2

3

5

8

3

7

10

17

19

15

34

70

'

;
Table A3e: Cross-tabulations for the Status of Women's Participation In CBFM
deci sion-making (F3)

.

N1
Total

0
0

3
2

~

3

1

1

2

6

;

5

5
6

11

:

3
Total

~

F3 • Environmental Success (N2)
N2
3
2
3

1

Total

Total

yes

no
F3

5

0

3

1

2

5
6

11

6

F3 • Economic Success (N3)
N3
Total

yes

no
F3

3

0

3

6

5

5
6

2

2

3
Total

11

F3 • Social/Cultural Success (N4)
N4

yes

no
F3

Total

~

!

F3 • Overall Success (N1)

F3

l

Total

3

0

3

2

2

0

2

3

2

4

6

7

4

11

71

Table A3f: Inter-Independent Variable Cross-tabulations for women 's status in
participation in CBFM decision-making (F3)
F3 *Community concern for stopping land degradation/deforestation (G5)

G5

yes

No
F3

Total

1

3

2

0

1

1

3

0

6
7

6
10

Total

0

3

3

F3 * Reduction of conflict post CBFM initiation (M2)

M2
F3

Total

1

0
1

2

0

2

3

0

3

3

2

3

5

Total

Table A3g: Cross-tabulations for General Participation of Community Members
F4 * Overall Success (N1)

N1

yes

no
F4

1

14

2

1

3

0
6
11
17

2

Total

Total

17

14
7
13
34

F4 * Environmental Success (N2)

N2
F4

Total

yes

no

Total

1

14

2

3

4

7

3

2

11

13

19

15

34

0

14

72

F4 * Economic Success (N3)

N3
F4

Total

1

0
1

14

0

14

2

1

5

6

3
Total

4

9

13

19

14

33

F4 * Social/Cultural Success (N4)

N4
F4

Total

1

0
1

14

0

2

1

6

7

3

5

8

13

20

14

34

Total

14

Table A3h: Spearman's Rho Correlations for Perceptions (G 1-6) and Support for
Efficient Traditional Practices (E2).

G1

Spearman's Rho
Correlation Coefficient

E2
.840(**)

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N
G2

Correlation Coefficient

23
.757(**)

Sig . (2-tailed)

.000

N
G3

Correlation Coefficient

25
.713(**)

Sig . (2-tailed)
N
G4

Correlation Coefficient

.000
24
.748(**)

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N
G5

Correlation Coefficient

25
.452(*)

Sig. (2-tailed)

.030

N
G6

Correlation Coefficient
Sig . (2-tailed)

23
.497(*)

N

.013
24

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.

73