Geog 302 Teaching Notes (Strictly not for sale) Dr. J. Teye 2014

FOREST RESOURCES

Definition of Forest

Forest can be defined as “vegetation dominated by trees, without a grassy or weedy under-storey, and which has not recently been farmed” (Hall, 1987:33). Although forest vegetation covers about 30% of the world’s land area, this vegetation differs in structure and composition. Some of the common types of forests are the tropical rain forest, moist deciduous forest, coniferous forest etc. The Equatorial Moist Evergreen Forest (also referred to as Tropical Rainforest) has the highest biological diversity – biodiversity (i.e. the number and variety of living organisms). This forest is generally evergreen and located within the tropics. Spatially, it is extensive in the following regions: (i) South American Amazonian Basin (e.g. Brazil); (ii) Equatorial Africa (e.g. Ghana, Nigeria, Congo); (iii) South-East Asia (e.g. Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines).

Types of Forest Resources

Forest resources can be classified as timber products or non-timber products. As the name implies, non-timber forest products encompass all biological materials other than timber which are extracted for human use (Woodcock, 2002). Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in Ghana include: foods (e.g. bush meat, snails, fruit, seeds, mushrooms); spices; cola nut; medicines; cane used for making furniture and baskets; sponges, gum and rattan (Falconer, 1992; Kotey et al., 1998). Apart from contributing directly to the subsistence of forest communities, trading in these non-timber forest products is a very important economic activity in both rural and urban areas in Ghana.

Socio-Economic and Ecological Importance of Forests

Forests provide man with important food resources. In many parts of the world, people still depend on wild fruits and bush meat from the forests. According to Asibey (1987), about 80% of the rural population in Ghana regularly consume bush meat. Provision of shelter is another socio-economic importance of forests. Wood from forests is still important for the construction of houses. The export of wood is an important source of foreign exchange to many countries. In Ghana, the timber industry provides 11% of foreign exchange earnings and contributes 6% to Gross Domestic Product (Oduro, 2002). Forest is also an important source of fuel to most people in the developing world. For instance, almost all rural households and about 69% of all urban dwellers in Ghana use charcoal for heating. Forests also serve as source of raw materials for many industries. The important industries that are dependent on forest resources are paper industry, cardboard, plywood, furniture, matchbox etc. Again, some leaves supply materials for beverages and cosmetics. Forests also provide useful medicinal plants. You may be aware that most of the traditional medicines in Ghana are prepared from herbs obtained from the forests.

The recreational services provided by forests are also of economic importance to many countries. Indeed, protected forests and sanctuaries now attract millions of tourists which benefit a country’s economy in many ways. Native people can sell their

1

ware to the tourists, be their guides, and provide food and shelter to obtain much needed income. You may be aware that the Kakum National Park is an important tourist site in Ghana. The socio-cultural significance of forests cannot be over-emphasised. They provide intangible benefits, such as sacred sites and cultural symbols. Sacred groves in Ghana are sites for traditional prayers and rituals. Besides, forest products feature prominently in many cultural ceremonies and practices in Ghana. Drums are produced from particular woods and skins of animals (Falconer, 1992).

Forests also provide environmental and ecological benefits. Forests constitute one of the most important ecosystems is the world (Grainger, 1993; Potter et al., 2008). Forests have long been recognized as the reservoir and source of much of the species biodiversity on the planet. In other words, forests provide habitat for numerous species of flora and fauna, and generally help to maintain the biological diversity. They enhance rainfall intensity and frequency. Forests also play the role as a carbon “sink” (they absorb carbon) thereby regulating temperature on the planet (Betts et al., 2008). When forests are destroyed, the vast quantities of carbon dioxide that they contain are released into the atmosphere. This contributes to global warming. Forests also help to reduce soil erosion by holding soil firmly.

Spatial Distribution of Forest Resources in Ghana

The forest area of Ghana is estimated at 9.17 million ha, of which Closed Forest Zone (high forests) constitutes 8.1342 million ha. About 1.036 million ha is made up of the Transitional Forest Zone. The Closed Forests made up of large commercial timber stock are located in the south-western part of Ghana. As shown in figure 4.1, this zone is further divided into two parts, namely the dense evergreen forest and the semi-deciduous forest. The former is floristically the richest (Mensah-Ntiamoah, 1989; Hawthorne and Abu Juam, 1995). According to Hall and Swaine (1981), there are over 2,100 plant species (23 of which endemic) in the high forest zone of Ghana. The fauna of the high forest zone includes more than 200 species of mammals, many of which are rare or endangered (Mensah-Ntiamoah, 1989).

The Savannah Zone, which covers 14.66 million ha, is located at the northern part of the country. This zone does not support large commercial timber stock, but it is still a source of very useful livelihood resources (e.g herbs, fodder, fuel wood etc). For all practical purposes, formal forestry in Ghana has only been concerned with the high forest zones (Kotey et al., 1998).

2

Figure 4.1 Land cover map of Ghana

Source: Prah (1994)

Permanent forests estates and off-reserve forests in Ghana

Some parts of the high forest zone in Ghana are under reservation. This area is about 1.77 million hectares, of which 1.634 million ha is managed by the Forestry Department (MLF, 2001). Though agriculture is generally not permitted within these reserves, a few portions of them were alienated “as admitted farms” at the time of gazetting the reserves. Production of annual crops also takes place within some degraded reserves. This is part of the “Taungya system”, in which farmers are allowed to cultivate food crops on forest lands. In return, the farmers must plant trees on such farms for the Forestry Department.

A significant proportion of Ghana’s forests lie outside reserves and these have mostly been converted to farming lands. Forest area outside reserves is, therefore, a mosaic of agricultural fields, fallow lands, settlements and patches of secondary forests. Much of the very little intact forests outside reserves are confined to sacred groves (forests used as sacred sites), sources of streams, and hill tops. Off-reserve forests are as

3

important as the on-reserve forests. The area (i.e. off-reserve) was a source of 70% of timber harvested between 1960 and 1972. This proportion declined to about 50% between 1974 and 1992 but rose again to nearly 80% in 1994 (Kotey et al., 1998).

THE LUMBERING INDUSTRY

Factors Influencing the Development of the Lumbering Industry

The factors that influence the development of the lumbering industry are: nature of the forest; preference for tree species; climate; infrastructure; capital and demand for wood. Let me now explain these factors. Nature of the forest: Logging is relatively easier in forests in which trees belonging to the same species grow together (i.e. the trees are in pure stands) than those in which trees belonging to the same species do not grow together. When trees are not in pure stand, logging companies, need to undertake thorough surveys to look for preferred tree species before harvesting can take place. This increases the cost of production and therefore affects the development of the lumbering industry. As will be discussed later, logging is more difficult in the tropical forests than the temperate forests because trees in the tropical forests are not in pure stands. Logging is also quite difficult in forests with thick undergrowth.

Preference for tree species: The development of the lumbering industry in any region also depends on the utility value of the tree species available in that region. Compared with temperate softwood, tropical hardwood cannot be used in paper or match box industry. This may also help to explain why the lumbering industry is more developed in temperate regions than tropical regions.

Climate: In some regions of the world, it is not easy to extract trees throughout the year. For instance, logging is difficult in most parts of the tropical world during the rainy season when the ground becomes muddy. In contrast, it is possible to harvest trees in most parts of the year in the temperate regions. Even in winter, the trees are dragged by mechanical means over the slippery, frozen ground

Infrastructure: The level of development of the lumbering industry is also determined by availability of infrastructure, particularly railways, roads and water transportation facilities. Timber is heavy and needs to be transported as cheaply as possible. Rivers are the cheapest means of transporting timber to the factories and ports. The timber logs may be thrown into a river and floated downstream to sawmills or ports. In Ghana, most of the timber was originally floated down the Ankobra and Tano rivers to Axim and Half Assini respectively. Timber logs can also be carried cheaply by means of railway wagons. Again, adequate supply of cheap power is needed to support the development of a lumbering industry.

Capital: The timber industry requires heavy investments in various types of machines. Consequently, developed countries, which have adequate capital, have a more developed lumbering industry. In developing countries like Ghana, capital is sometimes not available locally to promote a well developed lumbering industry. The

4

ability of poor countries to develop their lumbering industry depends significantly on the willingness of foreign companies to invest in these countries.

Demand for wood: The timber industry develops better in countries that can find a bigger market for timber products. In general, developed countries tend to have a larger market for timber products than developing countries. Any poor country that wants to expand timber production may have to first find an export market. Differences between Lumbering in Temperate and Tropical Regions

Despite the fact that the tropical forests have higher variety of tree species than the temperate forest, the lumbering industry is more developed in the temperate region than in the tropics. In fact, nearly 80% of global lumbering products are obtained from temperate coniferous forest spread over North America and Europe (Roy, 1997). In the presentation that follows, I shall discuss the differences between lumbering in the tropics with that in the temperate region. The presentation will essentially discuss the favourable conditions that account for a well developed lumbering industry in the temperate countries, and also explain the main problems facing the lumbering industry in the tropics.

I want to stress that the main differences between lumbering in the temperate and tropical regions can largely be discussed under the same factors identified as having influence on development of the lumbering industry. As explained already, these factors include: the nature of the forests; preference for tree species; demand for timber; availability of capital; climate and infrastructure.

In relation to the nature of the forests, tree species in temperate region are more homogeneous (in pure stands). Harvesting can take place with little preliminary survey. The absence of undergrowth in the temperate forest also makes extraction much easier. In contrast, the tropical forest is heterogeneous (tree species do not form pure stands). Valuable trees are scattered over extensive areas. In addition, there is dense undergrowth. These factors make lumbering in the tropics more difficult. Again, most big trees in the tropics have buttress root system. Cutting of such trees is difficult as platforms will have to be raised in order to cut the trees.

As noted already, preference for tree species and demand for timber also have significant influence on the development of the lumbering industry. I have already explained that compared to temperate softwood, tropical hardwood cannot be used in paper or match box industry. Another reason why the demand for temperate soft wood is high is the fact that the adjacent countries of temperate region are highly developed and industrially prosperous. People in these climatic areas have great purchasing power, and great requirement of wood. In contrast, significant proportion of wood produced in poor tropical countries like Africa is used as fuel.

Availability of infrastructural also explains why the lumbering industry is more developed in the temperate region than the tropical region. The temperate region has developed networks of roads and railways to promote lumbering. Again, there is a regular supply of power. In contrast, the road and rail networks are poorly developed in the tropics. Again, due to inaccessible nature of the terrain, it is quite difficult to use large vehicles and machines in some areas within the tropics. The use of rivers to

5

transport timber in the tropics is also greatly affected by the fact that most of the rivers in the region are not very suitable for navigation. Their volumes fluctuate during the dry season, thus becoming too shallow for heavy logs to be floated. Some of the rivers are also characterised by rapids and falls. Most areas of the tropics also do not have access to power and this means that sawmills can be located only in big towns.

Variations in climatic conditions also partly explain why lumbering is more developed in the temperate regions than the tropics. Some parts of the tropical forest are moist, swampy and contain great variety of pests and insects. These make the extraction of trees very difficult.

Availability of capital partly contributed to the development of the lumbering industry in temperate countries in North America and Europe. As capital is readily available, advanced technology is employed in the lumbering industry. On the other hand, most tropical countries lack the necessary capital to invest in the lumbering industry. As a result, timber companies still depend on simple and traditional methods of timber extraction. It is important to state also that the low level of mechanization of the lumbering industry in the tropics is also partly caused by inaccessibility of the terrains.

Differences in forest management practices also explain why the lumbering industry in temperate countries is more developed than that in tropical regions. As will be explained later, Illegal logging is very pervasive in the tropical world, due to a combination of ineffective government policies, poverty and corruption. It is feared that the lumbering industry in some tropical countries may collapse in the near future, if illegal logging is not controlled.

Based on the presentation above, I hope you can easily identified the problems facing the lumbering industry in the tropical world.

Problems Facing the Lumbering Industry in Ghana

As Ghana is a tropical country, the problems facing its lumbering industry are basically the same as the general problems facing the lumbering industry in the tropics. For the sake of clarity let me emphasise these problems, with reference to Ghana:

Heterogeneous nature of the forests: Trees in the Ghanaian forest do not grow in pure stands. Accessibility of the high forests in south-western Ghana is also quite difficult, due to the presence of dense undergrowth, epiphytes and lianas. These factors make wood harvesting very difficult and costly. Most big trees in the Ghanaian forests also have buttress root system and are thus difficult to cut.

6

Unfavourable climate: Logging in the in Ghana is sometimes impeded by high temperatures, heavy rainfall (which makes the ground swampy and muddy) and the presence of pests and insects.

Poor infrastructure: Poorly developed networks of roads and highways make transportation of timber to wood processing factories and ports very difficult. The use of rivers to transport timber in Ghana is also greatly affected by the fact that the volumes of some rivers fluctuate during the dry season, thus becoming too shallow for heavy logs to be floated. Some of the rivers also have water falls or rapids along their courses.

Unreliable supply of power: Ghana has been facing acute energy problems in recent years. The country heavily relies on Hydro Power produced from the Akosombo dam. The hydro power supply is not reliable due to fluctuations in the volume of water in the Akosombo dam. Consequently, many factories including sawmills sometimes operate below capacity due to the inadequate power.

Inadequate capital: Most local timber producing firms in Ghana are unable to raise adequate capital to purchase advanced logging equipments and vehicles. This partly contributes to the use of traditional methods of timber extraction. The same problem contributes to inability to add value to timber before export.

High level of illegal logging: As hinted already, Illegal logging is also another major problem that affects the lumbering industry in Ghana. It has been estimated recently that about 70-80% of industrial wood produced annually is from illegal sources (Ghana News Agency, 2008). High level of illegal logging is partly responsible for high forest loss. More than 46% capacity of the forest has been exceeded during the period from 1990 and 2000 (Birikorang, 2001).

DEFORESTATION

The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has been estimating the rates of deforestation in several parts of the world. Annual rate of global forest loss in the 1990s was 2.4% (Potter et al, 2008). In a recent assessment reports (2000-2005), FAO concludes that net deforestation rates have fallen since the 1990-2000 period, but amount of forest loss each year is still quite huge.

In absolute terms, South America suffered the largest net loss of forests between 2000 and 2005. Africa suffered the second largest loss. However, as shown in Table 5.1, in terms of percentage forest loss per year, Africa has the highest deforestation rate of 0.6%, while South America has the second highest rate of deforestation of 0.5%. Regarding deforestation rates in individual countries, Brazil loses the largest area of forest annually. However, in terms of percentages, Nigeria and Sudan were the two largest losers of natural forest during the 2000-2005 period. From the above, it is clear that developing countries in the tropics have a higher level of forests loss than temperate countries in North America and Europe. Table 5.1 Change in forested land by region, 2000-2005

7

Region Percentage Change in forest area per year Africa - 0.6Asia 0.18Europe 0.07Caribbean 0.90North and Central America - 0.05Oceania -0.17South America -0.50World -0.18Source: FAO (2006)

Note: Negative figures in the table imply net forest loss, while positive figures denote net forest gain. Forest gain is a result of tree planting activities.

Magnitude of Ghana’s Forest Loss There is no agreement on the magnitude of forest loss in Ghana. Most conventional estimates suggests that forest cover fell from about 8 million ha in the late 1890s to about 2 million ha contemporary (Frimpong-Mensah, 1989; Ebregt, 1995). To these researchers, deforestation in Ghana is a recent phenomenon, brought about by the expansion of farming activities. Fairhead and Leach (1998) argued that most of these conventional estimates of forest trends were inaccurate because they were based on a wrong assumption that the entire southern Ghana was forested in the 1890s. They asserted that the forests before the 1890s may have just covered 5.5 million ha, of which 2 million ha still remain. Thus, forest loss in the twentieth century was only about half of that suggested in the conventional literature (Fairhead and Leach, 1998). However, even these researchers agree that the rate of deforestation was quite high during the 20th Century.

According to FAO (2003) deforestation in Ghana was about 1.7% per annum between 1990 and 2000. One sad aspect of the deforestation in Ghana is the fact that even forest reserves have been destroyed. In fact, only 2% of the total area of forest reserves is in a “very excellent” condition. in fact, of 214 forest reserves assessed in 1993 by Hawthorne and Abu Juam, 121 (representing about half of the entire reserves area) are seriously degraded or without forests at all (Hawthorne and Abu Juam, 1995).

Causes of Deforestation in the World

The causes of deforestation are complex and quite poorly understood (Grainger, 1993). However, it is generally acknowledged that certain factors are responsible for the rapid forest loss in many parts of the world. In the presentation that follows, therefore, I will take you though these factors. The causes of deforestation can be put into two categories, namely direct or proximate and indirect or underlying or fundamental factors. The direct/proximate factors are the direct human activities that cause forest loss. These are: agricultural activities, logging, mining, fuel wood production, bush fires and expansion of human settlements. The indirect/underlying/fundamental causes are those factors which trigger the direct causes (Teye, 2005; Potter et al, 2008). They include: rapid population growth,

8

poverty, inappropriate property rights, weak forest policies and corruption. Let us now discuss these factors.

Direct Causes of Deforestation

Agriculture: The need for greater food production to meet rising population has led to massive increase in cropland at the expense of forests. By the early 1990s, almost 40% of earth’s land surface had been converted to cropland and permanent pasture. This conversion has occurred largely at the expense of forests and grassland (Roy, 1997). In Ghana and elsewhere in Africa, expansion in land under cultivation is the commonest means of increasing agriculture production, as farmers hardly use intensive techniques. In the Brazilian Amazonia forest region, forest loss is significantly caused by cattle ranching.

Bush fires: High incidence of bush fires also causes destruction forests. As you learned during your study of Geog 103, the bush farrowing system of farming, which is very common in the tropical world, is associated with the “slash and burn” farming method. Sometimes these fires get out of hand to destroy large areas of forests. Hunting is another cause of bush fires in Ghana. Fires are used for directing the game in the hunting process.

Timber Production: If well organized, logging may not cause serious deforestation. However, in most tropical countries, the level of timber extraction is far beyond the sustainable capacity of the forests. A major cause of this problem is the high level of Illegal logging and lack of comprehensive tree planting programmes. Globally, illegal logging constitutes 80% of wood harvested annually. As noted already, about 70-80% of industrial wood produced annually in Ghana, for instance, is from illegal sources (Ghana News Agency, 2008). Similarly, 80% and 73% of wood produced in Brazil and Indonesia respectively are from illegal sources (EU Forest Watch, 2001).

Fuel Wood: As you may be aware, fuel wood is an important source of energy for most people in the developing world. For example, almost all households in rural Ghana use either charcoal or fuel wood as the main source of energy. Even in urban areas in Ghana, about 69% of all households use charcoal (Kotey et al, 1998; Teye, 2005). The cutting of trees to meet this high demand for fuel wood is therefore a major cause of the depletion of forest resources in many developing countries.

Mining: Mining activities have significant effects on the environment. Extensive areas of forest lands are excavated leading to the loss of forest cover. In Ghana, most of the mineral deposits (gold, bauxite, diamond and manganese) are located within the main forest belt. The extraction of these minerals has therefore led to the clearing of large hectares of the forests.

Settlement growth and other development projects: As a result of the high rate of population growth, human settlements are expanding rapidly and this has led to the clearing of forests to build houses. Forests are also cleared for road construction. Again, development projects such as dam construction can lead to the destruction of forests. For instance, a significant portion of the area covered by the Volta Lake in

9

Ghana was originally covered with forest. After the construction of the Akosombo dam, most of the plants and animal species have been destroyed by the water.

Indirect Causes of Deforestation

Rapid population growth: As more people are being added to the population, the exploitation of forests for commodities such as fire wood and timber increases. Again population increase is the underlying cause of settlement expansion and the conversion of large areas of forest lands to farms. While, the link between population growth and deforestation is obvious, there is no evidence to suggest that population increases inevitably causes forest loss. In fact, cases have been reported in parts of Kenya where increase in population densities has rather led to sophisticated sustainable farming systems, thereby controlling forest loss (Tiffen et al. 1994).

Poverty: Widespread poverty, especially among rural people who depend directly on forests for fuel wood, food and game, partly accounts for several forms of environmental degradation including forest loss. Durning (1989) noted that the poor not only suffer disproportionately from environmental damage caused by the richer; they have become a major cause of environmental decline themselves. Pushed to the marginal lands by population growth and inadequate development patterns, they raze plots in rain forests, steep slopes and overgraze fragile rangelands. It is important to mention that the argument that poverty causes environmental degradation (including deforestation) has been contested. It has been argued that the poor lack the ability to pay for the materials and labour needed to clear forest. Movik and others have argued that the major cause of environmental degradation may not lie in the presence of poverty itself, but institutional failure and the absence of a functioning property rights system, which act as primary incentives to adopt unsustainable land use practices (Movik et al. 2003, 16).

Corruption: Corruption has also been identified as a major cause of forest loss in many parts of the developing world (Winbourne, 2005). Corrupt forestry officials often connive with timber companies and chainsaw operators to harvest wood illegally (Callister, 1999). Commenting on this problem, the Transparency International (2008: 1) states that: “Forestry officials and law enforcement officers who are in the pockets of corrupt logging firms often turn a blind eye to illegal activities that threaten the sustainable management of the forest’s biodiversity”. We shall discuss the various levels of corruption later.

Inappropriate Forest Policies and Property Rights Systems: Inappropriate forest policies and or poor enforcement of forest laws also account for rapid forest loss in many tropical countries. In fact, policy weaknesses have been identified as a major cause of high rate of forest loss in most African countries, including Ghana (Grainger and Konteh, 2007; Teye, 2008). Before 1994 when the newest Forest and Wildlife Policy was passed in Ghana, local communities were not actively involved in forest management. Again, fines for illegal logging were too low to scare illegal loggers. For instance, the amounts imposed as property marks and fines in 1974 were not revised until 1994. In such circumstances, the property marks and the fines were

10

always far below the actual market price of the timber. This made it lucrative for people to harvest timber illegally because even if they were caught, they could still pay the fine and pocket huge profits. Again, royalty levels were often very low, because of the desire to help local timber firms. The World Bank Mission, in 1986, noted that forest resources in Ghana could be considered a “free good” because of the exceptionally low royalty and fees levels (IBRD, 1986). Awudi and Davies (2001) estimated that the state and landowning communities received only 13% of the actual value of timber (after logging costs were deducted). Total uncollected timber revenue is about $100 million per annum (Forest Watch, 2006; Teye, 2008). Poor revenue collection affects forest management as it means the forestry institutions cannot purchase equipments for forest protection. In fact, enforcement of forest protection laws in Ghana has also been poor, due to combined effects of resource constraints and corruption.

Inappropriate property rights systems have also contributed to rapid deforestation in Ghana and other developing countries. Poor farmers are sometimes reluctant to make the investments in forest management because they do not have secure legal rights to forest land (Wilson, 2003). In Ghana, the forests are actually owned by local communities, but management and utilisation rights are held by the Forestry Department on behalf of the government. Traditional authorities and District Assemblies are given the communities’ share of forest revenue. However, in most cases, the farmers are not the actual owners of the land on which they farm. Such farmers, who actually nurture the trees, may not get any share of forest revenue. Consequently, these farmers do not have any incentive to protect trees on their farms. Due to anger towards timber contractors who have been destroying the crops of farmers without paying any compensation to them, some farmers have deliberately been destroying young trees on their farms. This is because, they knew that if those trees grow up, chainsaw operators would come and cut them, thereby destroying their farms (Teye, 2008).

Effects of Deforestation

The common ecological and environmental effects include: climate change, drying up of water bodies, soil erosion, silting of rivers and biodiversity loss. First, the depletion of tropical forests tends to lead to the emissions of carbon dioxide, thereby causing global warming. Second, the combined effects of the high evaporation due to rising temperatures and declining amount of rainfall has led to significant fall in the volume of water in many water bodies. Deforestation also generally increases rates of soil erosion, by increasing the amount of runoff and reducing the protection of the soil from tree litter. The eroded may be deposited onto the beds of many big rivers, thereby causing silting of rivers. Another ecological effect of deforestation is biodiversity loss. Forests provide habitat for wildlife. When they are destroyed, some of these animals also go extinct.

With regards to socioeconomic effects, deforestation leads to loss of employment and revenue from the sale of forest products. Declining amount of rainfall as a result of forest loss also affects crop production. The disappearance of forest animals and trees affects ecotourism as the aesthetic qualities of tourist sites are significantly reduced by the loss of biodiversity.

11

Measures of Controlling Deforestation

Given that the causes of deforestation are complex, measures of controlling it differ from place to place. Ideally, any strategy of controlling forest loss must tackle both the direct and indirect causes of the problem. Some of the measures are listed below:

Aforestation: As you learned during your study of GEOG 103, tree planting is one of the direct methods of controlling deforestation. Governments and international organisations are supporting the tree planting activities in the developing world.

Improved farming methods: Deforestation can also be reduced if farmers use methods that are environmentally friendly. One of such farming systems is agro-forestry. In this system of farming, farmers cultivate crops and raise commercial trees at the same time.

Forest Policies: The formulation and implementation of appropriate forest policies can also reduce deforestation. Land tenure systems and systems for sharing forest revenue must be reviewed to ensure that local farmers who nurture trees receive some rewards. This line of thinking has prompted intense international pressures on the governments of the tropical world to adopt sustainable forest policies. Such attempts by international actors to influence the environmental policies of developing countries are termed “eco–imperialism” (Lal, 1990). Such pressures, in recent years, have taken the form of “financial aid conditionalities”, in which developing countries are required to adopt sustainable and participatory forest policies in return for bilateral and multilateral donor grants (World Bank, 2000; Agrawal, 2007). It is argued that involvement of local people in forest management will ensure the protection of forests and also bring about equal distribution of forest revenue, thereby reducing poverty among rural people. Many developing countries claim that they have adopted such decentralised forest policies (Carney and Farrington, 1998). In reality, however, these forest decentralisation programmes are poorly implemented, since central governments are unwilling to handover the management of lucrative timber to local people (Ribot 2007).

Controlling population, poverty and corruption: Measures aimed at controlling population growth and rural poverty can also help to reduce forest loss. Population growth can be reduced by promoting female education and encouraging modern contraceptives use. Rural poverty can be controlled by training rural people in alternative income generating activities, such as dress making, soap making etc. This will reduce their direct reliance on land-based resources for survival. These programmes are being promoted under what is usually referred to as social forestry programmes. Controlling of corruption in the forestry sector will also go a long way to help reduce deforestation. As a way of controlling corruption in the award of timber harvesting permits, international donors are pressurising governments of the developing world to adopt competitive bidding systems for awarding timber harvesting contracts. It is, however, important to mention that even where competitive bidding systems are used, the political elite can still award contracts to companies they prefer, since the criteria for selecting “best firms” may be adjusted to fit the qualifications of specific firms.

12

Principles of Natural Resource Governance

Natural resource governance entails the formulation and implementation of natural resource policy. For instance, Ghana has policies that govern the extraction and use of forest resources, minerals etc. A natural resource governance system must also have in place rules governing the distribution of revenue (Teye, 2013). Various principles of good natural resource governance have been suggested in the literature. Most of these principles have been made with respect to the management of forests, fisheries and mineral deposits. One of the most important principles of good governance system is that it must ensure that the roles of the various stakeholders are recognised and accepted (Woodcock, 2002). Second, the interest groups must be actively involved in the formulation and implementation of natural resource policy. A good natural resource governance system must also ensure that the rights of local people are protected (Agrawal, 2007). It is also expected that the management system must create incentives and disincentives for sustainable natural resource management (Larson, 2002). On the other hand, weak natural resource governance is also associated with high level of corruption and this may loss of forest revenue (Callister, 1999; Winbourne, 2002; Owusu, Nketiah, Aggrey, & Wiersum, 2010; Teye, 2013). Weak natural resource governance system also brings about conflicts. This occurs when the rights of local communities have been violated in the extraction of resources. It may also occur when central government officials fail to develop the regions where resources are extracted. The situation whereby there are serious conflicts over natural resource management is pervasive in Africa (e.g. Nigeria, Liberia, Sierra Leone etc). This situation is referenced to as resource curse.

Corruption and natural resource management: The case of forests

As noted already, one of the results of a weak natural resource management system is corruption, which usually causes loss of revenue. According to Marmon (2009:1), corruption is the misuse of entrusted powers for private gain. This definition suggests that corruption has many faces. It encompasses misconduct by state officials such as embezzlement, bride-taking, political payoffs, cronyism, influence peddling, nepotism, patronage, extortion (Mock, 2003:1). Some scholars have suggested that natural resource riches breed corruption (Sachs and Warner, 2001), which negatively affects economic performance (Isham et al., 2005; Dietz et al. 2007). Corruption has been identified as one of the many forms of rent-seeking (Torvik, 2002). As a result of their high commercial value, natural resources offer a rich opportunity for corrupt politicians and bureaucrats (Mock, 2003). Corruption in the natural resource management sector is promoted by a combination of social, economic, and institutional factors (Robbins, 2000; Wilson and Damania, 2005). According to Mock (2003), in many poor countries, low salaries for civil servants, who are responsible for the day to day protection of natural resources, increase the motivation to earn additional income through corrupt practices. He argued further that high wages for public officials create incentives for not being corrupt. Treisman (2000) has, however,

13

shown that the correlation between bureaucratic pay increases and the reduction of corruption is very weak.

In resource studies, corruption operates at three levels, namely grand corruption, mid-level corruption and petty corruption (Winbourne, 2005). Lets now explain these in relation to forest resources.

Grand corruption involves large illegal transactions between high-level public officials (usually politicians) and private individuals or firms. Top politicians may allow ‘party men’ to exploit timber without acquiring the necessary permits. In some cases, contracts are awarded without competitive bidding. Davis (2004) reported scenarios of this nature in Cambodia where stated regulation for timber contracts were set aside because of pressure from the government to ensure that the political elite benefits. In the oil and gas sectors, grand corruption is very pervasive. Oil companies may be allowed to operate without paying the actual taxes. The booty is then shared between ministers and the companies.

Mid-level corruption, which is also widespread in the forestry sector, is manifested in many ways as bribes, gifts, nepotism, kickbacks and embezzlement. Top forestry officials who receive kickbacks may ignore illegal activities of “big timber men”.

Petty corruption (also known as survival corruption) usually involves small payments to officials at the lower level of an organisation, such as tax collectors and policing officials who are grossly underpaid or depend on small payments from the public to feed their families (Callister, 1999). This is common in many developing countries, including Ghana where guards are poorly paid (Teye, 2013). The implication of these forms of corruption is that the forestry officials involved may fail to enforce laws that have been enacted to protect the forests. Ironically, these same corrupt actors may pretend that inability to protect the forests is due to lack of resources.

Decentralised vrs centralised natural resource management: The case of forests

The management of common property resources, such as forests, fisheries, pasture, has been a source of debate in the literature. In particular, there have been several theoretical perspectives on the ability of local communities to manage their common property resources. Within the realm of theory, Hardin’s thesis, The Tragedy of the Commons, was one of the earliest writings on the subject. He likens common property or common pool resources (resources own by a group of people, e.g. community) to a finite pasture that is opened to all herdsmen in an area. He then argued that each rational herdsman will want to increase the number of his animals to get more income. This will consequently lead to the degradation of the common pasture (Hardin, 1968). The implication of Hardin’s argument is that when a group of people are in a situation where they could mutually benefit, if all adopted a rule of restrained use of a common resource, they are not likely to do so unless they are coerced by an external force. The reason why each individual will not adopt

14

conservative methods is the fear that if he/she adopts conservative methods, others will continue to use the resource indiscriminately. Based on these arguments, it has been suggested that the only way to prevent the ultimate destruction of the common resource base is control by the state or an external organisation (Smith, 1981).

Critics of this perspective argued that it is possible for local communities to manage their resources without any problem (Wade, 1988). Common property resources are open only to those within specific communities, governed by strict rules of social conduct and collective responsibility. It is only when the traditional control mechanisms break down that resource degradation may set in (Perrings, 1987).

In recent years, debates over local communities’ ability to manage common pool resources have been rekindled by contests over the prospects of decentralised management systems. Although the term decentralisation is contested, it broadly refers to the transfer of power from central governments to local actors (Agrawal and Ribot, 1999). As far as the management of natural resources is concerned, decentralisation must give decentralised bodies a higher degree of autonomy. As hinted already, international donors have, in recent years, been pressuring governments of the developing world to adopt forest decentralisation programmes.

What are the main arguments in favour of decentralised forest management? One argument in favour of decentralised natural resource management is based on the belief that the plural participation that goes with decentralisation will reduce management cost due to proximity to local resource managers, and reliance on local knowledge and labour. It is also argued that since local people are located very close to resources ( e.g forests), they can supervise forest management better than central government officials, who have legal authority over vast areas (Carney and Farrington, 1998). Decentralisation can also lead to equitable distribution of the benefits from naturals resources (World Bank, 2000; Ribot, 2001). This will lead to an improvement in the livelihood of forest users. Proposals based on such arguments usually call for the integration of conservation and development programmes in which local communities are encouraged to design their own methods of forest conservation and undertake development projects at the same time (Becker, 2003). It has also been argued that decentralisation will enable marginalised local groups to take part in the formulation and implementation of forest policy. This will give them a greater sense of ownership over the resources, and also ultimately increase their willingness to observe stated rules on forest conservation.

Almost all the points raised to support decentralised forest or natural resource management have come under attack. One point that has come under strong attack is the argument that decentralisation will make it possible for local knowledge to be tapped for resource management. The same argument, when reversed, implies that resource management will not be effective where appropriate local knowledge is lacking. According to Larson (2002) technical expertise on the management of natural resources is generally uncommon in rural areas where these resources are usually located and hiring specialists may be expensive for local governments. Local resource managers may also not be willing to enforce strict laws of regulation, due to tribalism and nepotism.

15

It has also been argued that advocates of decentralised forest management usually seem to ignore inequalities and related intra - and inter-community resource struggles. They, therefore, treat local communities as homogenous entities that are capable of maintaining socially and ecologically sustainable natural resource management systems. In the real world, there are many conflicts within local communities about natural resource use (Larson, 2002). Boundary conflicts have also been cited as one problem that is associated with decentralised forest management. Shah and Shah (1995) reported that a decentralised community based approach to forest management in parts of India resulted in a situation where forest dependents in some communities raided the forest reserves of nearby weaker communities in order to allow for the regeneration of their own forest.

Further, unequal power relations at the community level imply that decentralisation may not give everybody the same level of opportunity to influence forest policy. Decentralisation may rather hinder equitable distribution of the benefits of forest resources, since powerful local politicians may dominate powerless citizens in the sharing of such a local cake. The process may benefit local elites at the expense of marginalised social groups such as women. Recent scholarship, however, demonstrates that both centralised and decentralised management systems may be appropriate within different contexts (Ostrom, 2005; Argrwala, 2007). In fact, while there are some examples where decentralisation has led to better forest management, there are other equally good cases where decentralisation did not achieve good results (see Teye, 2008). One good example where local people have demonstrated their ability to manage forest resources was documented by Turker (2004) in his study of Mexico’s Monarch Butterfly Reserve. On the other hand, a study by Lachapelle, Smith and McCool (2004) in three forest communities in the middle hills of Nepal revealed that the government decentralised forest management to enhance community participation, but traditional power structures, such as caste and gender, made it difficult for the members of the local community to work together for the preservation of the forests. In view of these and other empirical cases, some researchers have argued that the success of community management systems depend on various factors, including the characteristics of a natural resource, the political organisation of the local community, levels of trust among various actors, and the rules in use (see Ostrom, 2005; Agawal, 2007).

Assessing Decentralised Forest Policy in the Developing World

The belief that decentralised forest management can help protect trees and reduce poverty has prompted intense international pressures on the governments of the tropical world to adopt decentralised forest policies (Gupta and Asher, 1998; World Bank, 2000; Poore, 2003). Such pressures, in recent years, have taken the form of “financial aid conditionalities”, in which developing countries are required to adopt participatory forest policies in return for bilateral and multilateral donor grants (Agrawal, 2007; Teye, 2011).

In response to such pressures, many developing countries claim that they have adopted decentralised forest policy (Latif, 2002; Amanor and Brown, 2003). However, deforestation rates are still quite high (FAO, 2003a, 2005; Agrawal, 2007).

16

Some researchers have called for an examination of the actual extent of decentralised forest management in various countries. Various theories have emerged for such assessment. One very useful theory for analysing decentralised forest management is the Actors, Powers and Accountability Framework, propounded by Agrawal and Ribot (1999). The authors argued that decentralisation only works when powers are transferred to local representatives who are downwardly accountable to their constituents (Agrawal and Ribot, 1999). Any analysis of forest decentralisation programmes must, therefore, focus on three distinct dimensions, namely actors, powers and accountability. Analysis of actors must examine whether those receiving devolved powers are the true representatives of the local people. If for instance, power is transferred to the government’s own field staff posted to the rural areas, we cannot talk of decentralisation because they are not representing the local people. Analysis of powers must examine the types of power that have been transferred. This involves an examination of whether local people have power to: create rules; make decisions; ensure compliance and adjudicate disputes. Finally it must also be established if representatives are downwardly accountable to the citizens (Agrawal and Ribot, 1999). Downward accountability means the representatives must always report to the local people and the local people should be able to fire any representative that is found to be corrupt. In this sense, only local representatives that have been elected can be downwardly accountable. Traditional rulers are not downwardly accountable because their positions are inherited (see Ribot 2001).

Using this and other related frameworks, the nature of decentralised forest policy has been examined in many developing countries. For instance, forest decentralisation programme in Uganda was examined by Bazaara (2003). Ribot (2008) also examined forest decentralisation programme in Senegal, while Cline-Cole (1997) examined decentralised forestry in Northern Nigeria. Similarly decentralised forest policy in Ghana was critically examined by Teye (2011).

All these assessments showed that there are very few cases in the developing world where local people have actually been given the total power to exclusively manage forests. The African governments have usually intentionally formulated decentralised forest policy just to get funds from international donors. Once they get the funds, they do not implement these decentralised forest policies. The few cases where local people are exclusively managing their forests can be found in India and Nepal. In reality, most decentralised forest management systems in the developing world actually emphasise collaborative forest management. The reason is that, in view of the economic importance of forests, most governments in the developing world are reluctant to transfer total management powers to local people. The governments rather prefer to collaborate with the local people. Collaborative natural resource management (also known as participatory management or co-management) provides institutional and legal frameworks for relevant stakeholders to participate in resource management. In the forestry sector, co-management entails the sharing of responsibilities and rights between state and local communities (Woodcock, 2002). Local communities may provide labour to support forest management.

Examination of the Status of Decentralised Forest Management in Ghana

17

In response to international pressures, the 1994 forest and Wildlife Policy, which was formulated to replace the 1948 forest policy, emphasised decentralised forest management. However, critical analysis of the outcome of this policy clearly shows that the extent of local community participation in forest resource management in Ghana is very limited. Using Actors, Powers and Accountability Framework, Teye (2011) has demonstrated that Ghana’s decentralised forest management does not conform to the true decentralisation.

In terms of Actors, the framework assumes that those managing the forests should be representatives of the local people. In Ghana, however, the main actors responsible for forest management in the communities are employees of the forestry department. Forest policy is still formulated at the national level and local people do not have any meaningful power to make rules on forest management. They are sometimes consulted by the officials of the Forest Services Division but their proposals are usually not incorporated into stated policy. Within the communities, forest guards appointed by the government are responsible for day to day forest management. Farmers have recently been encouraged to form Community Forestry Committees to provide free labour to support the activities of the forest guards. However, these committees have not been functioning properly, since members are not given any powers.

In terms of powers, the local people do not have any meaningful power over forests within their communities. Forest Services Division still retains rights over both lucrative timber and non valuable forest resources. Farmers are required to obtain permission from the forest officials before they can harvest timber on their own farms for personal use. Farmers see these as a restriction of their rights and therefore have no incentives to help manage forests. The forest fringe communities actually do not get any share of timber revenue. The Forest Services Division pays a small stream of timber revenue (usually about 10%) to top traditional rulers and the District Assemblies. However, this revenue does not actually get to the local people.

With regards to downward accountability, the forestry officials are not downwardly accountable to farmers. Again, traditional rulers and district assembly officials who receive part of forest revenue are actually not downwardly accountable to local people. Thus, it is clear that forest management powers in Ghana has not been transferred to local people.

Read the following article:

Joseph K. Teye (2011): Ambiguities of Forest Management Decentralization inGhana, Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 3:4, 355-369

18