|
Follow-up the UNFF Country-led Initiative on Decentralization in AFP Context
Jurgen Blaser, Intercooperation - Swiss
Asian Forest Partnership (AFP-4)
Tokyo Japan - 8 December 2004
This presentation :
Glimpse on the Interlaken workshop, April 2004
- Further steps (global, regional, country level)
- AFP Work Plan Sheet
- Seeking feedback (on a number of questions)
Interlaken Workshop on Decentralization in Forestry: Summary of the issues, findings and proposals for considerations
Setting the stage
- Forestry sector lacks behind in many countries in respect to decentralization _ Learning phase
Pedagogic and information value
www.intercooperation.ch; www.cifor.cgiar.org
Book (Earthscan) in preparation (CIFOR, launching UNFF-5)
- Policy and Process Value
setting first stage of structuring the issues for future debate
Setting the stage: Definitions
Decentralization
- Administrative (deconcentration): upward accountability
- Political, democratic: representative, downwardly accountable actors with important autonomous decision-making powers (e.g. locally elected governments)
Devolution
- Includes the option of non-governmental transfers of power, such as local communities
Delegation
- Includes transfer of managerial responsibility to other public organizations, including provincial and local governments and para-statal organizations
Setting the stage: Goals in theory
A tool for development
- Efficiency
- Equity
- Democracy
Increase participation and responsibility in natural resource management
Setting the stage: Goals in practice
- Cost reduction
- Increasing revenues
- Secure property rights
- Improved government legitimacy
- Economic or political crisis as a starting point
Official rhetoric?
Increase central control over forest management?
Large array of reasons for decentralization: e.g.
- cost-cutting versus
- securing local livelihoods and building a civic culture for democracy
Setting the stage: Objections
Often failure to implement decentralization as a democratic process in forestry
- The "technical objection": forest management applied in large-scale forest concessions
- The "political objection": political and economic interest groups want to keep things the way they are
Setting the stage: how?
- Who should have powers over resource management?
- What is the appropriate configuration of powers among central government, (state government), local government and local actors, given each particular context?
Not many examples in the world of decentralization that truly empower local communities/local governments
(in general, and in forestry in particular)
Setting the stage: how?
- Decentralization is a complex and dynamic process
- evolves over time
- adjusting and adapting to changing contexts
- shall take into account the characteristics of each country.
Workshop: structured according to 6 major themes
Allocation of Roles and Responsibilities and Coordination at Different Levels and Across Sectors
- As the forest sector intersects with many domains of development, and sectors of economy, decentralization and other related policy areas can have significant influences.
- Conversely, decentralization in the forest sector may give the local community a lever to stake their interest in other areas (in particular in forest-rich countries).
Major themes
Policy, Regulatory Frameworks and Equitable Benefit Sharing
- It is not essential to devolve all functions of the forest sector at the same time;
- decentralization may be accomplished in gradual, sequential phases in a mutually agreed and equitable manner at all levels.
Decentralization is a gradual, long-term process that need time (and digestion).
Participation, Conflict and Multi-Stakeholder Processes
- Critical to reach consensus
- Adaptive perspective, monitoring, learning from experience
- revising plans accordingly
Financial Incentives, Promoting Investment and Private Sector Partnership
- Financial policy, subsidies, incentive policies are crucial
- Lack of quantification of costs and benefits of decentralization
- Difficult and costly transition period (financially and economically)
- Ambivalent role of the private sector
Capacity Building, Technical Skills and Information
- Decentralization should be based on, as well as enhance
- information flows,
- transparency, and
- accountability at all levels
Maintaining Ecosystem Functions, Sustaining Forest Productivity, and Appropriate Application of Knowledge and Technology
Decentralization can
- produce sustainable environmental benefits,
but can also
- lead to significant environmental problems
Lessons learned: Central governments
The transfer to local governments of significant, autonomous decision-making authority regarding forest resources (especially in forest-rich areas) is rare
- No discretionary powers
- Powers over a small area
- Powers over resources with little value
Authority or responsibility is rarely transferred to representative and downwardly accountable local institutions
- Branch offices
- Parallel institutions
Central governments often block decentralization or manipulate it to their own ends
Lessons learned: Local governments
- Local governments may be representative authorities, accountable to their constituents,
- or they may constitute another local interest group in competition for forest resources
Local governments often have little motivation to take forestry-related initiatives, especially where they have little real authority over, or receive few tangible benefits from forest resources;
when they do, their initiatives may emphasize obtaining economic/financial benefits
Lessons learned: Social outcomes
- Decentralization policies have positive social effects when those receiving powers are accountable to local people and when they seek to empower local people
- Decentralization policies have negative social effects when they seek to extend state control over local people, when they fail to address equity concerns and/or when those receiving powers are not accountable to local people
Downward accountability does not always lead to positive ecological effects
Lesson learned: Other actors (at decentralized level)
Other actors play a key role: the will to make decentralization happen with the right kind of institutions
Donor assistance is key to decentralization but can also be detrimental if managed inappropriately
- Central government oversight is important and necessary
- Forest department support can help make decentralization work
Conclusions
- (Decentralized) forest management happens in a more multi-faceted, integral sphere;
- Forestry professionals need to be trained accordingly
How do we overcome the obstacles, the lack of accountability, the failure to decentralize in favor of the poor?
- Recognize multiple interests
- Build a favorable political climate: coalitions, empowerment
- Recognize opportunities; use flexible, adaptive responses
- Progress through working on the major challenges that makes SFM difficult to attain (e.g. illegal logging, fire, rehabilitation)
Interlaken Workshop - Further steps on Decentralization in Forestry
Follow-up in Indonesia (informing regional/local gvtm.)
- Information (done)
- Capacity-building (supported ev. through an ITTO project)
Official UN document submitted by Indonesia and Switzerland to UNFF-5 (re-introduction of the theme, discussions of proposed recommendations to UNFF)
Regional initiative on decentralization, in particular in Asia
AFP Work Plan: Forest Governance and Decentralization in the context of the priorities of the AFP (illegal logging, forest fire, rehabilitation)
Objectives:
- Overcoming constraints for effective SFM
- Enlarged understanding of decentralization within the three priority areas of the AFP
- Coordinated policy responses
- Information exchange, capacity building
What is proposed?
- Process
- Mind setting exercise
- Mix of capitalizing on existing experience and new adopted approaches to the various contexts
- Concrete outputs (e.g. toolkit)
Questions to AFP members:
- Interest on topic within AFP?
- Host country for conceptual workshop (Aug. 05)
- Country interests for further involvement
-
Financing
Back To Top
|
