The Concept of Natural Resource Management - Essay Example

COMMUNITY BASED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT By [Name] Presented to the Committee on Degrees in [Your department] In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of [Your course] [Your college] September 7, 2011 Executive Summary This paper will be looking at two examples of community-based natural resource management from Indonesia, Cambodia, Guatemala and Namibia. The paper will explain how community resource management create or restrict economic, political and social opportunities for its local people whose livelihoods depend on access to natural resources. The paper delves into community based natural resource management in the countries of Indonesia, Cambodia, Guatemala and Namibia and their critical analysis into their importance. In light of this, it ideally looks at the pros and cons of implementation of community based natural resource management. Community based natural resource management According to Reo, Nelson and Sandbrook, 2009, p17) “CBNRM, Community based natural resource management generally refers to the empowering of the community where the resources are found by the central government”. This is mainly the empowerment of the local organizations to better manage their own resources. This is done in various ways though the most common is through active collaboration with the state agencies, with innovative projects for implementation on formerly idle lands (Reo, Nelson and Sandbrook , 2009). For example, through funds from the central government, local community can co-operate with forestry officials to ensure protection of the forests through community tree planting exercises (Reo, Nelson and Sandbrook , 2009). This paper therefore seeks to adequately critically analyze two examples of community based natural resource management from four states namely: Indonesia, Cambodia, Guatemala and Namibia. In light of this, the paper will compare the application of community based natural resource management on the diverse countries in efforts to synchronize the creation or restriction on economic, political and social opportunities for local people whose daily existence depend on availability of natural resources. Case Study summary A high percentage of the Cambodian population especially those residing in the rural areas depend largely on natural resources (Fabricius, 2004). Focus in this paper will be directed towards two community based natural resource management known as Kompong Phluk flood forest and Bos Thom Community Forest (Marschke, 2005). This forests play host to the natural ecosystem that makes it easy for the aquatic ecology for fish species (Marschke, 2005). In this regard, the fisheries provided a vital recipe for development of the Cambodian natives (Marschke, 2005). However, a capitalist ideology soon emerged resulting to inequitable distribution of natural resources by the high and financially mighty persons in the society (Marschke, 2005). This led to depletion of the forests thus adversely affecting the livelihoods of the financially crippled members of the community. In mitigation, the Kompong Phluk and the Bos Thom communities joined hands to avert further forest depletion through embracement of community based natural resource management projects (Marschke, 2005). In Indonesia, the Krui damar agro forests are the essential ingredients of social, economic and environmental success (Casson, 2005). The damar tree remains an essential asset that the Krui forests produce although there are other types of fruits, wood and fiber (Casson, 2005). According to Casson (2005, P.130) the damar tree represents approximately 65 percent of the tree species in the vast agro forests. This is because, its products, the resin is an economically viable product traded across the globe for purposes of dyes, adhesives and medicine (Casson, 2005:130) According to Casson (2005), the Krui people have been able to establish, maintain and cultivate a healthy, diverse plantation that offers economic, social and environmental benefits. They have also developed a regulatory framework that promotes sustainability, equity and social cohesion (Casson, 2005). According to Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari (2006) the Indonesian government in collaboration with other non governmental organizations effectively recognize the significance of the community based natural resource management and thus provide the necessary aid such as financial and training facilities. In this regard, the Krui people develop the right to plant; harvest and market products derived from their agro forests. Moreover, this predisposition also enables them to prevent, protect and sustain their natural resources, in this case, the forests (Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari, 2006). Guatemala is a physically diverse country with many areas that are isolated (Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari, 2006). The country boasts of substantial distinct geographical zones such as forests and fertile lands among others. However, an upsurge in the population numbers arguably seeks to threaten the natural ecosystem. For example, instances of erosions and deforestation characterize the huge landscapes thus making physical unity a heinous task since most homesteads are isolated as a result of poor road infrastructure (Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari, 2006). Moreover, most lands in the country have been deprived of the necessary agricultural fertility thanks to deforestation (Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari, 2006). In light of this, community based natural resources management organizations in the locality have greatly ensured realization of the country’s agenda on food security. This is through forestry enterprises that have led to massive sale of timber not only in local but also overseas markets. This is augmented by non governmental organizations among other community owned enterprises not forgetting the government (Lockwood, Worboys, and Kothari, 2006). Characterized by a conglomerate of natural resources such as desert dunes, woodland savannah, open plains and river valleys, Namibia is among the rich countries in the African continent (Roe, Nelson, and Sandbrook, 2009). In light of this, Namibia is home to approximately 1.8 million people, a representation of a dozen ethic groups. In this paper, (Roe, Nelson, and Sandbrook , 2009) focus remains on the natural resources such as the wildlife that in the early 1980s faced extinction as a result of increased poaching of elephant ivory, endangered black rhino and the lion among others. In this regard, the plummet in poaching necessitated the establishment of community based natural resources management program that aimed at reducing and eventual cessation of the activity (Roe, Nelson, and Sandbrook, 2009). Pioneered by Garth Owen-Smith, the African country was headed conservation of the wildlife. According to (World Resources Institute in collaboration with, United Nations Development Programme, et al. 2005), this was actualized through employment of community game guards to work in close collaboration with local non governmental organizations. The employment of the local community members was geared towards the realization of the importance of maintaining game for the benefit of the community and the country at large (World Resources Institute in collaboration with, United Nations Development Programme, et al., 2005). Impacts of community based natural resource management: pros and cons According to World Resources Institute (2008), Community based natural resource management contributes both positively and negatively to the local people in reference to their livelihoods. At this point, the paper will highlight the pros and cons that emanate as a result of the establishment of the CBNRM. Of importance, is that most of the contributions are positively inclined since them to a great extent lead to a community metamorphosis from poverty to self reliance (World Resources Institute, 2008). This is common in Cambodia, Indonesia, Guatemala and Namibia. The contributions range from social, political and economic perspectives. Employment opportunities The ever increasing projects in the community arguably result to job creation thus leading to realization of job opportunities. According to World Resources Institute (2008) maintenance and subsequent utilization of forests gradually transformed the local community from illegal loggers to actual eco-entrepreneurs. For example, earlier the natives were cutting down trees in the forests thus jeopardizing climate thus posing a threat to food security (World Resources Institute , 2008. However, the natives became full time labor force leading to growth and overall community empowerment. For instance, timber sales in Guatemala had reached an all time high of US$ 4.7 million in 2007 (World Resources Institute, 2008). “The success of Guatemala’s community forestry enterprises is reflected in growing income and employment among the desperately poor villages scattered through the remote northern forests and lowlands” (World Resources Institute 2008:134). In light of this, the employments of individuals to the timber enterprises generate income that helps in the improvement of their quality of life (World Resources Institute, 2008. Conservation The training and awareness that comes in hardy with community based natural based management has effectively enhanced conservation efforts by the local community (World Resources Institute, 2008). In light of this, the local community embraces new ways of dealing with their natural resources instead of wasting it aimlessly. Strengthening civil society According to World Resources Institute (2008), the positive gesture of the community based natural resources management arguably led to the establishment of more non governmental organization thus strengthening the civil society. In response, most rural communities reported development cases and eventually coming out of the jaws of poverty (World Resources Institute, 2008). Moreover, community-based natural resource management is one of the most important manifestations of true decentralization and control of natural resources (World Resources Institute, 2008). CBNRM, if successful, can be models of local empowerment, permeating communities with greater authority over the use of natural resources. In many countries, for example, Cambodia, Indonesia and Namibia, community-based management of forests and other natural resources such as fisheries and improved social, political and economic for the less privileged members of the society. For instance, in Cambodia, community management of forests has created new jobs, including forest watchers, as well as wage labor for tree planting and weeding. Improved Resource Condition According to Marschke (2005), the most important element of the community based management lies in the community’s potential in the improvement of the condition of the resources. This is especially in lien with the resources being managed. A good example is the Krui people who reside in southwestern-Sumatra in Indonesia Casson (2005). They have greatly practiced a complex form of agro forestry for generations. The Krui people community based management have supported more than ten times of biodiversity than any other conventional palm plantations in the area (Casson , 2005). In addition, these communities have economic such as in resin tapping and timber sales. Improvement of community infrastructure In some communities, a portion of the revenues from community based enterprises has been directed to investments in key infrastructure needs, such as the construction of schools and advancement in farming through irrigation systems, and extension of electricity service (Marschke, 2005). Decision-making roles Community based natural resource management empowers the poorest members of communities by engaging them in decision making process that benefit the whole community. Their contribution is much felt and their decisions are respected. This benefits the community equally without any discrimination. A good example of this practice is found in Krui people from Indonesia (Casson (2005). This is expressed where the forest management committee includes representation of the local community in decision making. This committee partners with representatives from the government and any interested nongovernmental organization. This makes all decisions regarding forest use to be made by every member. According to World Resources Institute (2008), CBNRM has played a significant social change within the community itself. This is manifested by local communities turning from less courteous to incumbent leaders. These communities eventually replace the underperforming committee members who are mean and make sure they replace them with the dedicated members who serve the interests of the community. Conclusion Community based natural resource management are vulnerable to problems. This is common as the local members of a certain community are also engaged with other community management organizations. Devolving decision-making power to the local level does not guarantee the poor a role in the process. An examination of Indonesia’s effort to allow the community to be involved in the management of their forests revealed that the process did create new opportunities for marginalized groups to gain control of local resources and capture more of the economic benefits (Casson, 2005). However, only the better-organized groups have thus far been competent to take advantage on the process; elsewhere, decentralization has simply strengthened the local elites. Forest-user communities are often socially and politically diverse, with a range of different income levels represented (Casson, 2005. Unless these problems are taken seriously, community based natural resource management will often end up favoring the more powerful. Gaps in access to information about resource rights can also cause community forestry programs to work against people they ought to assist. In a transparent handling of the system in Cameroon, local elites in one region used community forestry laws to gain management rights over forests in another region, taking advantage of communities that were not yet conscious of how to use the forestry law to protect their rights (World Resources Institute in collaboration with, United Nations Development Programme, et al., 2005). In conclusion, high transaction costs and complicated application and management requirements can deter communities from participating in CBNRM programs or make it financially unsustainable for them to do so. In most countries across the globe the application procedure to gain legal recognition of a community forest is lengthy and centralized. The costs for communities are significant because management rights are granted for only a ten-year period. List of References Casson, A. (2005). ‘Cat's Eye Forests: the Krui Damar Gardens’, In Search of Excellence. [Online] Available from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae54 2e/ae542e07.pdf [Assessed September, 7, 2011] Fabricius, C. (2004). Rights, resources and rural development: community based natural resource management in southern Africa, UK: Earthscan Lockwood, M, Worboys, G, and Kothari, A. (2006). Managing protected areas: a global guide, UK: Earthscan Marschke, M. (2005). ‘Kompong Phluk and Bos Thom Communities’: Asserting Local Rights. In Search of Excellence: Exemplary Forest Management in Asia and the Pacific, [online] ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae542e/ae542e05.pdf) [Assessed September 7, 2011] Roe, D, Nelson, F, and Sandbrook, C. (2009). Community management of natural resources in Africa: impacts, experiences and future directions, London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development World Resources Institute (2008). Green Livelihoods: Community Forestry Enterprises in Guatemala. World Resources. Washington D.C., World Resources Institute: 126-141. World Resources Institute in collaboration with, United Nations Development Programme, et al. (2005). Nature in Local Hands: The Case for Namibia's Conservancies. World Resources. Washington D.C., World Resources Institute: 114-123. Read More