1. HESSEN-FORST Responsibility for Generations
Decentralization of forestry
Opportunities and challenges
by Oliver Scholz
State Forest Enterprise HESSEN-FORST
Istanbul, December 9-10, 2014
FLEG: Governance
One model for good (better) governance is decentralisation.
How can we create forests that are more sustainable than today?

2. What is decentralization? Aims and benefits of decentralization
Agenda
What is decentralization?
Aims and benefits of decentralization
Aspects and assumptions about decentralization of forestry
How do these relate to Central Asian countries - chances, challenges, obstacles, opportunities?
Make a number of assumptions, which – from my experience I believe – are central to decentralized management models.
How do these relate to your country + situation?
Where do you see opportunities, challenges, obstacles, …?
Do you agree with any of the assumptions or are there any that you would consider to be false? WHY?

3. Decentralization – what does it mean?
Decentralization: “Transfer of decision making power and assignment of accountability and responsibility for results.” (BusinessDictionary.com)
“Transforming the local institutional infrastructure for natural resource management on which local forest management is based.” (Ribot, J.,World Resource Institute 2002)
Subsidiarity: “The principle that decisions should be made at the lowest possible level where competencies exist.”
Decentralization does not mean doing away with controls.

4. Aims and Benefits of Decentralization
Protection of forests: increased sustainability – less deforestation
Best use of limited resources - forest personnel and existing expertise
Cost effectiveness, reduced costs
More transparent decision making and higher acceptability
Change of mindset (“Our forest” vs “a forest available to anyone at will”)
Defusion of (some) land use conflicts
Inclusion of local knowledge, skills and work force

5. Aspects and Assumptions
Giving land use rights to local communities will foster forest protection and sustainable management.
Whoever has a benefit (a regular income, revenue,…) from something, has an interest to protect the very thing.
Increase the regional share of income from forests.
Forest cooperatives, communal forest owners, shared ownership or rights.
Communes as equal partners, through transfer of authority, not only responsibility (e.g. HESSEN-FORST state foresters draft management plan, approval by mayors).

6. Aspects and Assumptions
Diversity of (communal) owners results in a diversity of management objectives and thus enhances biological diversity as well as the stability of ecosystems.
Different land users have different aims and situations, therefore reach different conclusions and implement different measures.
Obligation for the “common good” (forest law), special requirements for communal / public forests.
More diversified ownership can help the forests.

7. Aspects and Assumptions
State and local actors have complementary roles.
Need for a carefully designed and developed legal basis of decentralization to define roles, minimum standards (e.g. provision for reforesting after cuts), sanctions and grievance procedures.
The (local) responsibility to implement programmes has to encompass opportunity to define programmes and to be given adequate resources.

8. Aspects and Assumptions
TOP-DOWN approaches that do not take into account people’s priorities are bound to fail.
Many different visions what a forest should be for.
Transparency and ample (public) participation of stakeholders.
Varying degrees of participation (e.g. need to be informed / heard, majority vote, consensus, …)
Forums for coordination and negotiation, (e.g. forest committees at local, regional, national level, institutionalized in forest law; village council, community council…

9. Aspects and Assumptions
Decentralization increases the inclusion of local knowledge and local work forces.
Depending on the type of activity.
Depending on the stage of development of local structures and resources.
State foresters provide (different) services for state, communal (or private) forests of a region or local community.

10. Aspects and Assumptions
Integrated governmental structures for natural resource management need to be established.
Interplay between community-based organizations, companies, state agencies and local authorities (e.g. state forester as the CEO of a forest cooperative of farmers who collectively own and manage a village forest).
State forester responsible for a FMU (Leskhoze) gives extension services.
Obligatory forest management plans for communes can only be developed by a forester with state forest qualification.

11. Aspects and Assumptions
Local forest authorities can assume functions in the field of land use and nature protection.
The authority to perform control outside the forest (e.g. violations against landscape misuse, timber transports, activities in violation of environmental laws, …).
Warden for NTFP from state or communal lands.
Fire and pest control, unsustainable cuts, subsidies, work safety, …

12. Aspects and Assumptions
Decentralization requires and can provide tailored programmes for training.
Empower people to take over responsibilities and tasks.
Mobile Training School for Forest Farmers.
Extension services.
Regional Training Centres (e.g. HESSEN-FORST FBZ Weilburg).
Information exchange through networks, cooperatives and associations (e.g. Conference for managers of forest cooperatives, organized with Ministry).

13. Aspects and Assumptions
Forest certification can be an additional voluntary tool of control, public participation, awareness raising and communication.
Processes of forest certification are highly participatory.
International forest certification systems also include Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP).
Certifiers = independent controls.

14. Aspects and Assumptions
There are no “one size fits all” solutions.
Every country and every situation is different.
No approach can tackle and solve all problems.
Decentralization is a gradual and long-term process that needs to take people along.
Sudden change from a centralized system to a completely local system overnight, runs the risk of failing.
Need to recognise historical and cultural settings.
Level of competency to take over responsibilities changes over time: start in one area, e.g. use of firewood, grazing, …
“Rome was not built in a day.”
Give it some time.

15. Examples of decentralization models
Commune with (state trained) communal forester.
Several communes share one/several foresters together.
A state forester is the CEO of a forest cooperative - members have collective ownership rights.
A professional (private) forester is the CEO of a forest cooperative, under supervision of state forest service.
A governmental civil servant (forester) is responsible for the land use management of a city, incl. its forests. ….
As state foresters at HF ….
… we don‘t make the decisions for cooperatives and communes.
… we don‘t do all the planting, thinning, harvesting operations for these forests
… we only provide services to differing degrees.
… we only supervise communal/private forests for certain aspects (e.g. fire and pest control)
… we have to accept hat some of our forest cooperatives and communes manage their forests in a very different way than we would.
As long as the existence of a forest as such is not in jeopardy, that is o.k. and no problem.

16. Discussion
WHAT whould be the best structures in your situation / country / regions?
WHERE do you see major challenges / obstacles for the implementation of decentralized forest management?
WHICH opportunities / chances do you see as the most promising under the given circumstances?
WHAT would be central guide posts / minimum standards that need to be defined?

17. For more information: www.hessen-forst.de International Consulting
Thank you
for your attention
For more information:
International Consulting

18. References
Jo Anderson: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO, Rome, Italy, “Four considerations for Decentralized Forest Management: Subsidiarity, Empowerment, Pluralism and Social Capital”.
Ian Ferguson and Cherukat Chandrasekharan: ITTO Tropical Forest Update 14/3, “Paths and pitfalls for decentralisation”.
New Agriculturist: “Decentralisation of forestry”,
HESSEN-FORST: “Advisory Services”,