Abstract
Social forestry (SF) has the potential to improve rural livelihoods and alleviate poverty among forest-dependent people. It can also help to protect forests against encroachment and illegal felling. Many actors are involved in the implementation and execution of SF, which is inherently political because of competing access to and control over forests embedded within social and power relations. Consequently, SF entails an emblematic struggle for dominance and power between diverse actors. A study was undertaken in Teknaf peninsula, which contains highly degraded forests, to examine the extent of power and livelihood assets of actors engaged in social forest management. Seventeen actors were identified in relation to SFs in Teknaf, which contributed to the program’s complex and imbalanced power dynamics. The forest administration retained the most power at each level and played a dominant role in decision-making and other management activities. The analysis of livelihoods revealed that the SF program has had positive impacts on the livelihood capital of beneficiaries, indicating that it is an appropriate managerial approach for improving livelihoods within local communities while simultaneously protecting forest cover. Based on the study’s findings, decentralization of power and a reduction of the actors involved in SF are highly recommended. Further, there is a need for more intensive training and the development of appropriate technologies for tree-crop cultivation in Teknaf SF.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Agrawal A, Ostrom E (2008) Decentralization and community-based forestry: learning from experience. In: Web EL, Shivakoti GP (eds) Decentralization, forests and rural communities: policy outcomes in South and Southeast Asia. Sage Publication, New Delhi, p 44
Barrow E, Clarke J, Grundy I, Jones KR, Tessema Y (2002) Analysis of stakeholder based natural resource management: creating space for local people to participate and benefit? Natural resource perspectives. University of California Press, Berkeley, p 320
Bowler DE, Buyung-Ali LM, Healey JR, Jones JPG, Knight TM, Pullin AS (2012) Does community forest management provide global environmental benefits and improve local welfare? Front Ecol Environ 10:29–36
Brown FP (2009) Participatory forest management (PFM) discourse in South Africa: ecological moderation in the developing world [dissertation]. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban
Castro AP, Nielsen E (2001) Indigenous people and co-management: implication for conflict management. Environ Sci Policy 4:229–239
Coleman EA, Fleischman FD (2012) Comparing forest decentralization and local institutional change in Bolivia, Kenya, Mexico, and Uganda. World Dev 40(4):836–849
Devkota M (2010) Interests and power as drivers of community forestry: a case study of Nepal [dissertation]. The University of Gottingen, Gottingen
Devkota M (2011) Dimension of community-based forest management in the Philippines. Int For Rev 8(4):377–394
FD (Forest Department) (2014) Protected areas of Bangladesh. Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of Bangladesh [Internet]. [last cited 13 March 2015]. Available from: http://www.bforest.gov.bd/
Fisher RJ (2007) Participatory forest management, sustainable livelihoods and poverty reduction: experiences from community forestry in Asia. Paper presented at: international conference on participatory forest management, biodiversity and livelihood in Africa, 17–19 March. Addis Abba
Gardener A, De-Marco AJ, Asanga AC (2001) A conservation partnership: community forestry at Kilum- ljim, Cameroon. Rural development forestry network. Network Paper 25h. Overseas Development Institute
Hobley M (2004) Players in the sector-civil society, private sector and donor agencies [Internet]. [cited 12 June 2014]. Available from: http://www.cambodia-forestsector.net/docs-part2.htm
Islam KK, Sato N (2012a) Participatory forestry in Bangladesh: has it helped to increase the livelihoods of Sal forests dependent people. South For J For Sci 74(2):89–101
Islam KK, Sato N (2012b) Deforestation, land conversion and illegal logging in Bangladesh: the case of the Sal forests. iForest 5:171–178
Islam KK, Sato N (2013) Protected Sal forests and livelihoods of ethnic minority: experience from Bangladesh. Sustain For 32(4):412–436
Islam KK, Ullah MO, Hoogstra M, Sato N (2012) Economic contribution of participatory agroforestry program to poverty alleviation: a case from Sal forests, Bangladesh. J For Res 23(2):323–332
Itubo AF (2011) Power dynamics within community forestry: examples from Kenya. MSc, dissertation, Gottingen University
Jonas N, Pfisterer L. (2010) Measurement of concentration and market power. In: seminar report, the University of Kaiserslautern, Germany [Internet]. [cited 12 June 2014]. Available from: http://www.wiwi.unikl.de/dekanat/blank/Segelseminar2010/11/Marktmacht.pdf
Krott M (2005) Forest policy analysis. Springer, Dordrecht
Krott M, Bader A, Schusser C, Devkota R, Maryudi A (2014) Actor-centered power: the driving force in decentralized community based forest governance. Forest Policy and Econ 49:34–42
Larson AM, Ribot JC (2007) The poverty of forest policy: double standards on an uneven playing field. Sustain Sci 2(2):189–204
Maryudi A (2011) The contesting aspiration in the forests: actors, interests and power in community forestry in Java, Indonesia [dissertation]. The University of Gottingen, Gottingen
Muhammed N, Koike M, Haque F, Miah MD (2008) Quantitative assessment of people oriented forestry in Bangladesh: a case study from Tangail Forest Division. J Environ Manag 88(1):83–92
Nygren A (2005) Community-based forest management within the context of institutional decentralization in Honduras. World Dev 33(4):639–655
Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New York
Parasad R, Kant S (2003) Institution, forest management, and sustainable human development- experiences from India. Environ Dev Sustain 5:353–367
Peluso NL, Tumer M, Fortman L (1994) Introducing community forestry: annotated listing of tropics and readings. FAO, UN, Rome
Ribot JC (2004) Waiting for democracy: the politics of choice in natural resource decentralization. World Resource Institute, Washington, DC, p 140
Rosyadi S, Birner R, Zeller M (2005) Creating political capital to promote devolution in the forestry sector – a case study of the forest communities in Banyumas district, Central Java, Indonesia. Forest Policy Econ 7:213–226
Schmidt VA (2000) Democracy and discourse in an integrating Europe and a globalizing world. Security 24(4):5–38
Schusser C (2013) Comparative analysis of community forestry: theoretical and methodological requirements [dissertation]. the University of Gottingen, Gottingen
Shackleton S, Campbell B, Wollenberg E, Edmunds D (2002) Devolution and community based natural resource management: creating space for local people to participate and benefit? Natural resource. Perspective 76:1–6
Shahbaz B (2009) Dilemmas in participatory forest management in northwest Pakistan: a livelihoods perspective. Hum Geograph Ser 25:15–16
Sharma NN, Acharya B (2004) Good governance in Nepal’s community forestry: translating concepts into action. In: Kanel KR, Mathema P, Kandel BR, Niraula DR, Sharma AR, Gautam M, (eds) Proceeding of the 4th national workshop on community forestry, 2004, August 4–6, Kathmandu
Siry JP, Frederick WC, Ahmed MR (2005) Sustainable forest management: global trends and opportunities. Forest Policy Econ 7:551–561
Webber M (1964) Basic concept of sociology. Free Press of Glencoe, New York
West WF (2004) Formal procedures, informal processes, accountability, and responsiveness in bureaucratic policy making: an institutional policy analysis. Public Adm rev 64(1):66–80
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Islam, K.K., Sato, N. (2018). Actors and Their Power in Social Forest Management. In: Tani, M., Rahman, M. (eds) Deforestation in the Teknaf Peninsula of Bangladesh. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5475-4_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5475-4_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5474-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5475-4
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)