The Mexican model of community forest management: The role of agrarian policy, forest policy and entrepreneurial organization

Published Date
June 2006, Vol.8(4):470–484, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2005.08.002
Community-based forestry in the developing world: Analyses from an agrarian perspective

Author 

David Barton Bray ^a,,

Camille Antinori ^b

Juan Manuel Torres-Rojo ^c

aDepartment of Environmental Studies, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, United States

bDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3310, United States

cDivision of Economics, Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económica, Carret. Mexico-Toluca 3655, Lomas de Santa Fe, Mexico City C.P. 01210, Mexico

Available online 26 September 2005.

Abstract

In Mexico, the “democratization of natural assets” through an agrarian reform process laid the territorial foundation for the establishment of a large community forest sector. The common property regime and agrarian policies established by the Mexican Revolution also created a common form of governance for all of rural Mexico. Concepts from common property theory and social and natural capital are used to analyze this sector and its emergence. It is argued in this paper that agrarian reform laws have been more crucial in creating a large CFE than specific forest legislation. Agrarian reform distributed forest lands to communities and provided a template for community governance that could later serve as an institutional platform for the development of CFEs. Forest laws and programs have been important in different places and periods in developing this potential, by providing subsidies, training, and markets for incipient CFEs. Forest legislation also served, at different periods, to empower communities to take more responsibility for managing their own forests. More recently, major new funds have been directed at subsidizing some aspects of community forest management. The agrarian governance platform has shown flexibility in being able to develop and adapt more entrepreneurial organizational forms. However, there are a wide range of forms that have evolved, ranging from making the enterprise directly dependent on the community governance structures to creating a clear division between community and entrepreneurial governance through Community Councils and Managers, and to dissolution of the single CFE model into subcoalition enterprises. This variety shows that it is possible to combine community governance forms and entrepreneurial organizational forms to compete successfully in the marketplace. The Mexican case provides a model for the world-wide devolution of forest lands to local communities, and shows that community initiatives and policy support can result in common property regimes that can organize to compete in the marketplace and deliver social, economic and ecological benefits.

Keywords

Agrarian policy

Forest policy

Community forest enterprises

Governance

Mexico

---

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

• ⁎ 
  Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 305 348 6236; fax: +1 305 348 6137.
  
  

For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934109001877

Do “stakeholders” represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany

Published Date
May 2007, Vol.9(8):1018–1030, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2006.10.002

Author 
Peter Elsasser ^,

Institute for Economics, Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products (BFH), Leuschnerstr.91, D-21031 Hamburg, Germany
Received 28 April 2006. Revised 18 September 2006. Accepted 11 October 2006. Available online 22 November 2006. 

Abstract

Participatory National Forest Programmes (NFPs) intend to democratise forest sector policy, but they may suffer from a fundamental democratic legitimisation deficit since the stakeholders involved are neither democratically authorised nor accountable to the population. In order to scrutinise the empirical relevance of this problem in the case of the German NFP, it is analysed how the German population on the one hand and the NFP participants on the other hand assess central forest policy aims of the NFP, and how far both assessments coincide. Two surveys based on identical questionnaires are used as the data base. The respondents assessed the importance of the respective aims as well as at their implementation. Results show that the population considers the majority of the NFP aims to be generally relevant, but assesses the majority of the aims significantly differently from the stakeholders. The formal legitimisation deficit of the German NFP therefore also matters in terms of content. Discussing the NFP among the elected representatives and in the public seems indispensable.

Moreover, the differences in the assessment of some policy aims are significantly dependent on how people judge the image of forest enterprises between the opposing poles of profit orientation and nature protection. Public acceptance of those aims could be furthered more appropriately by adjusting the partly incorrect image of forestry rather than by providing more information about the particular aims and their background.

Keywords

National Forest Programme

Participation

Assessment of forest policy aims

Attitudes toward forestry

Public preferences

Germany

Stakeholders

---

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

 Table 1

Table 1.

 Table 2

Table 2.

 Table 3

Table 3.

 Table 4

Table 4.

 Table 5

Table 5.

• ⁎ 
  Tel.: +49 40 73962 309; fax: +49 40 73962 399.

For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934109001877

Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland

Published Date
March 2010, Vol.12(3):213–222, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2009.10.006

Author 

A. Kangas ^a,,

N. Saarinen ^a,

H. Saarikoski ^b,

L.A. Leskinen ^c,

T. Hujala ^c,

J. Tikkanen ^d,

aDepartment of Forest Resource Management, P.O. BOX 27, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland

bThe Finnish Environmental Research Institute, Oulu unit, P.O. BOX 413, 90014 Oulu University, Finland

cFinnish Forest Research Institute/Joensuu Unit, P.O. BOX 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland

• dOulu Applied University, Unit of Natural Resources, Metsäkouluntie 4-6, 90650 Oulu, Finland

Received 17 October 2008. Revised 17 August 2009. Accepted 28 October 2009. Available online 24 November 2009. 

Abstract

Participation is seen as an important aspect of sustainable forest management (SFM). Especially important are the policy processes, where the effectiveness of the policy is determined by the commitment of the stakeholders to the selected policy. There are, however, different opinions as to what constitutes a successful participatory process. In this study, we analysed the stakeholder perspectives about proper participation process in Regional Forest Programme preparation in Finland using Q-methodology. We found four different perspectives: pragmatic consensus-seekers, reformers, expertise-oriented actors and participation sceptics. The pragmatists seek for consensus, but purely on traditional forestry issues. The reformers, on the other hand, wanted to introduce other aspects into the process and opposed the dominant position of the traditional forestry network in the RFP process. The expertise-oriented group was ready to discuss different aspects, but wanted to promote the power of experts. The sceptics wanted to allocate the minimum effort to participation. The results suggest that framing and organizing the process, reaching commitment, roles of different information, and the ways of taking into account the views of general public should be emphasized in future RFP's.

Keywords

Commitment

Consensus

Public participation

Finland

Forest policy

Framing

---

Fig. 1.

 Table 1

Table 1.

 Table 2

Table 2.

 Table 3

Table 3.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

.

• ⁎ 
  Corresponding author.

For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X11001920

Biodiversity and ecosystem services: Complementary approaches for ecosystem management?

Published Date
October 2012, Vol.21:123–133, doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.021
Challenges of sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services

Author 

• Anik Schneiders ^,
• Toon Van Daele
• Wouter Van Landuyt
• Wouter Van Reeth

• INBO, Research Institute for Nature and Forest, Kliniekstraat 25, 1070 Brussels, Belgium

Available online 17 September 2011.

Abstract

The concept of ecosystem services introduced a new view on the relationship between biodiversity and human well being. But are both concepts, biodiversity and ecosystem services, mutually beneficial? We will try to unravel part of this much debated question in three steps.

Firstly, a general hypothesis describing the present link between biodiversity, ecosystem services and land use intensity is tested for the region of Flanders (13.682 km²). The spatial exercise illustrates that even in a densely populated area as Flanders (539 inhabitants/km²), scores for biodiversity and ecosystem services show a clear decline with an increase in land use intensity. Despite the overall congruence of the rough indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services used in this exercise, the need for new indicators integrating key structural and functional aspects of the ecosystem is highlighted.

In a second step a target scheme is proposed describing the relation between biodiversity and land use intensity, for the long-term future. In this conceptual framework the need for the conservation and restoration of biodiversity hot spots is emphasized. At the same time the importance of the search for an environmental ‘bottom line’ is stressed. What is the minimum amount of biodiversity needed to reach sustainable use? And what is the critical point for human impact beyond which society will largely depend on the import of ecosystem services to sustain or increase its well-being?

In a third step, ecosystem management is used as a concept to bridge the gap between the present and the target scheme. Ecosystem management is divided into three focal zones. (1) For the remaining zones with a high biodiversity and a low intensity of land use, a biodiversity conservation based approach is needed. (2) For most rural areas with multifunctional uses and a good state as a future perspective, a focus on ecosystem services is a good point of departure. (3) In the built-up areas and intensively used agricultural sites, beyond the minimum standards for land use intensity, a technological service based approach will be necessary.

A division of ecosystem management into these three zones confirms the complementarity of biodiversity and ecosystem services for policy and management strategies. The concept of this triple division can help to facilitate the discussion of a joint achievement of the goals for biodiversity and ecosystem services in the field.

Keywords

Biodiversity

Red List

Land use intensity

Ecosystem service

Ecosystem management

Sustainable use

---

Fig. 1.

 Table 1

Table 1.

 Table 2

Table 2.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7.

.

• ⁎ 
  Corresponding author. Tel.: +32 2 525 02 90.
  
  

For further details log on website :
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934103000091