Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T16:39:45.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Community, forestry and conditionality in The Gambia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2011

Richard A. Schroeder
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article seeks to explain the resurgence of the ‘community’ scale as a central organising principle guiding contemporary environmental initiatives in Africa. It sets policies centred on the notion of community-based natural resource management in their regional political-economic context, demonstrating that fiscal constraints have forced environmental managers to rely more heavily on community efforts to accomplish environmental objectives. In effect, it argues that environmental managers confronted with increased expectations on the part of donors and their government superiors have seized the opportunity to devolve responsibility for environmental management to ‘the community’ as a means of expanding programmes while incurring minimal additional costs. The case study involves a German-funded community forestry project in the Gambia. In 1991, in order to speed up the implementation of ‘scientific’ management on state-controlled forest land, the Gambian-German Forestry Project, a branch of the national Forestry Department, began granting rural communities leasehold rights to community forestry reserves. In each instance, however, community representatives were required by contract to commit their constituencies to a rigorous set of management tasks. Participatory rhetoric notwithstanding, the project offered communities little more than graduated sovereignty over forests. Programme conditions ensured that project personnel would control the finest details of forest management, not despite, but because of, the evolution of tenure rights to the community.

Résumé

Cet article cherche à expliquer la résurgence de la dimension “communaute” en tant que principe organisateur central gouvernant les initiatives environnementales contemporaines en Afrique. II situe dans leur contexte politico-économique régional des politiques centrées sur la notion de gestion communautaire des ressources naturelles, en démontrant que les contraintes fiscales ont forcé les responsables de l'environnement à s'en remettre plus largement aux efforts des communautés pour réaliser des objectifs environnementaux. Dans le fond, il suggère que les responsables de Penvironnement, confrontés aux attentes croissantes des organismes de financement et de leurs superiéurs hiérarchiques, ont saisi l'occasion de déléguer la responsabilité de la gestion environnementale à “la communauté” afin d'étendre les programmes à moindres frais. Cette étude cite le cas d'un projet communautaire d'exploitation forestière en Gambie financé par l'Allemagne. En 1991, afin d'accélérer la mise en oeuvre d'une gestion “scientifique” sur les terres forestières régies par l'Etat, le projet intitulé Gambian German Forestry Project, sous la tutelle de l'Office National des Forêts, a commencé à accorder aux communautés rurales des droits de bail afférents aux réserves forestières communautaires. Or, dans chacun des cas observes, les représentants des communautés étaient tenus par contrat d'engager leurs administrés à respecter un programme rigoureux de tâches de gestion. En dépit de la rhétorique de participation, ce projet n'offrait aux communautés guère plus qu'une souveraineté graduée sur les forêts. En vertu de leurs termes, ces programmes veillaient à ce que le personnel du projet contrôle le moindre détail de gestion des forêts, non pas en dépit du transfert des droits de bail à la communauté, mais en raison de celle-ci.

Type
Who's to control the forests?
Information
Africa , Volume 69 , Issue 1 , January 1999 , pp. 1 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © International African Institute 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, D., and Grove, R. (eds). 1987. Conservation in Africa: people, policies and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bassett, T. 1993. ‘Introduction: the land question and agricultural transformation in sub-Saharan Africa’, in Bassett, T. and Crummey, D. (eds), Land in African Agrarian Systems, pp. 3–34. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Beinart, W. 1984. ‘Soil erosion, conservationism and ideas about development: a southern African exploration, 1900-60’, Journal of Southern African Studies 11 (1), 52–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biodiversity Support Program. 1993. African Biodiversity: foundation for the future. Washington DC: World Wildlife Fund, Nature Conservancy and World Resources Institute with the US Agency for International Development.Google Scholar
Bojang, F. 1994a. ‘Application of Community Forest Management Agreement: the Gambian experience’. Paper presented to the third Review of Policies in the Traditional Energy Sector (RPTES) workshop, Dakar, 31 October-4 November.Google Scholar
Bojang, F. 1994b. ‘Forest History of the Gambia’. Unpublished mimeograph.Google Scholar
Bonner, R. 1993. At the Hand of Man: perils and hope for Africa's wildlife. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Brinkerhoff, D. 1996. ‘Process perspectives on policy change: highlighting implementation’, World Development 24 (9), 1395–401.Google Scholar
Brosius, J. P., Tsing, A. L., and Zerner, C. 1998. ‘Representing communities: histories and politics of community-based natural resource management’, Society and Natural Resources 11 (2), 157–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cason, J. 1997. ‘The US: backing out of Africa’, Review of African Political Economy 71, 147–53.Google Scholar
Cline-Cole, R. 1997. ‘Promoting (anti-)social forestry in northern Nigeria?’ Review of African Political Economy 74, 515–36.Google Scholar
Cunningham, A. Forthcoming. ‘Profits, prunus, and prostatitis: international trade in tropical tree bark’, in Zerner, C. (ed.), People, Plants and Justice: resource extraction and conservation in tropical developing countries. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dumbuya, F. 1994. ‘Decentralization and Natural Resource Management in the Gambia: a case study of the Kasila Community Forestry Programme’. Banjul: Ministry of Natural Resources, Policy Analysis and Planning Unit.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. 1995. Encountering Development: the making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Fairhead, J. and Leach, M. 1996. Misreading the African Landscape: society and ecology in a forest-savanna mosaic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, G. 1994. ‘The Gambia Energy Sector Review: woodfuels and household energy, new and renewal energy sources, rural electrification’. Copenhagen, Oslo and Stockholm: Nordic Consulting Group.Google Scholar
Forestry Department/Gambian German Forestry Project. 1995. ‘The Gambian Forest Management Concept (GFMC)’. Manuscript, Banjul: Forestry Department/GGFP.Google Scholar
Forster, H. 1983. Evaluation of the National Forest Inventory of the Gambia. GGFP Report 10, Feldkirchen: GTZ/Deutsche Forstservice.Google Scholar
Fortmann, L., and Bruce, J. (eds). 1988. Whose Trees? Proprietary dimensions of forestry. Boulder CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Freudenberger, M. 1993. Institutions and Natural Resource Management in the Gambia: a case study of the Foni Jarrol District. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Land Tenure Center.Google Scholar
Freudenberger, M. 1994. Tenure and Natural Resources in the Gambia: summary of research findings and policy options. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Land Tenure Center.Google Scholar
Freudenberger, M., and Sheehan, N. 1994. Tenure and Resource Management in the Gambia: a case study of the Kiang West District. Madison WI: University of Wisconsin Land Tenure Center.Google Scholar
Freudenberger, M., Carney, J., and Lebbie, A. 1997. ‘Resiliency and change in common property regimes in West Africa: the case of the tongo in the Gambia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone’, Society and Natural Resources 10, 383–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambia, Government of the. 1994. ‘Forest Policy, Republic of the Gambia, 1993-2003’. Draft. Banjul: Forestry Department.Google Scholar
Gambian-German Forestry Project. N.d. CFMA award form. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Groombridge, B. (ed.). 1992. Global Biodiversity: status of the earth's living resources. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, D. 1995 ‘The Politics of Gender, Ethnicity and “Development”: images, interventions and the reconfiguration of Maasai identities in Tanzania, 1916-93’. Ph.D. thesis, Madison WI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
International Institute for Environment and Development. 1994. Whose Eden? An overview of community approaches to wildlife management. London: IIED.Google Scholar
Laird, S., Cunningham, A., and Lisinge, E. Forthcoming. ‘Forests, drugs, and benefit sharing: putting the formula to the test in the Cameroon case of Ancistrocladus korupensis’, in Zerner, C. (ed.), People, Plants and Justice: resource extraction and conservation in tropical developing countries. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Leach, M. 1994. Rainforest Relations: gender and resource use among the Mende of Gola, Sierra Leone. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, for the International African Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madge, C. 1995. ‘Ethnography and agroforestry research: a case study from the Gambia’, Agroforestry Systems 32, 127–46.Google Scholar
McNeely, J. (ed.). 1995. Expanding Partnerships in Conservation. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
McNeely, J., Miller, K., Reid, W., Mittermeier, R., and Werner, T. 1990. Conserving the World's Biological Diversity. Gland, Switzerland, and Washington DC: IUCN, WRI, Conservation International, WWF-US and World Bank.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. 1996. ‘Promoting policy reforms: the twilight of conditionality?’ World Development 24 (9), 1551–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, R. 1992. ‘The political ecology of wildlife conservation in the Mount Mem area, northeast Tanzania’, Land Degradation and Rehabilitation 3 (2), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, R. 1995. ‘Ways of seeing Africa: colonial recasting of African society and landscape in Serengeti National Park’, Ecumene 2, 149–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, R. Forthcoming. ‘Primitive ideas: protected area buffer zones and the politics of land in Africa’, Development and Change.Google Scholar
Peet, R., and Watts, M. (eds). 1996. Liberation Ecologies: environment, development, social movements. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, P. 1987. ‘Embedded systems and rooted models: the grazing lands of Botswana and the “commons” debate’, in McCay, B. and Acheson, J. (eds), The Question of the Commons: the culture and ecology of communal resources, pp. 171–94. Tucson AZ: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Peters, P. 1987. 1996. ‘Who's local here? The politics of participation in development’, Cultural Survival Quarterly 20 (3), 22–5.Google Scholar
Ribot, J. 1995a. ‘From exclusion to participation: turning Senegal's forest policy around?’ World Development 23 (9), 1587–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribot, J. 1995b. Local Forest Control in Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal and the Gambia: a review and critique of new participatory policies. Review of Policies in the Traditional Energy Sector (RPTES) Discussion Paper series, Washington DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Ribot, J. 1998. ‘Forest rebellion and local representation: a struggle to participate in Makacoulibantang, Senegal’, in Zerner, C. (ed.), People, Plants and justice: resource extraction and conservation in tropical developing countries. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Ridder, R. 1991. Land Use Inventory for the Gambia on the Basis of Landsat-TM Scenes, including a comparison with previous investigations. Feldkirchen: GTZ/Deutsche Forstservice.Google Scholar
Sachs, W. (ed.). 1993. Global Ecology: a new arena of political conflict. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Schindele, W., and Bojang, F. 1995. Gambian Forest Management Concept I, The Forest Sector of the Gambia. GGFP Report 29, Feldkirchen: GTZ/Deutsche Forstservice.Google Scholar
Schindele, W., and Thoma, W. 1995. Gambian Forest Management Concept II, The Development of the Gambian Forest Management Concept (GFMC). GGFP Report 30, Feldkirchen: GTZ/Deutsche Forstservice.Google Scholar
Schroeder, R. 1995. ‘Contradictions along the commodity road to environmental stabilization: foresting Gambian gardens’, Antipode 27 (4), 325–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibert, K. 1989. Possibilities of Introducing Community Forestry in the Gambia II. Gambia-German Forestry Project, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ). Feldkirchen: Deutsche Forstservice.Google Scholar
Smith, N. 1990. Uneven Development: nature, capital and the production of space, second edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
United States Agency for International Development. 1992. Program assistance approval document. Agriculture and Natural Resources (ANR) program and Agriculture and Natural Resources (ANR) support project. Banjul: USAID.Google Scholar
United States Agency for International Development. 1996. Making a Difference in Africa: a report on USAID assistance to Africa. Washington DC: USAID.Google Scholar
Watts, M. 1995. ‘“A new deal in emotions”: theory and practice and the crisis of development’, in Crush, J. (ed.), Power of Development, pp. 44–62. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Western, D., Wright, R., and Strum, S. (eds). 1994. Natural Connections: perspectives in community-based conservation. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
World Bank. 1995. Mainstreaming the Environment: the World Bank Group and the environment since the Rio Earth Summit. Washington DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
World Bank. 1996. Toward Environmentally Sustainable Development in sub-Saharan Africa: a World Bank agenda. Washington DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar