No abstract

Clear land ownership and community involvement in managing forests are key determinants in securing sustainable land management. A recent study in Lampung in the province of Sumatra, Indonesia revealed that, even with the use of military force, forest policy and management has largely failed to protect forest resources when local communities were not involved. In contrast, with less government intervention but more secure land rights (as perceived by farmers), local communities have successfully rehabilitated degraded land, including that designated as state forest area, through establishment of coffee based agroforestry. The main incentive for local communities to manage land more sustainably was the expectation of secure land rights on state forest land through which livelihood and income could be realized. The study indicated that under such circumstances there is room for negotiation between the government forestry department and local communities to better manage state forest land. This not only can generate income for local communities but can also improve the overall environment through reduction of fire incidence. This indicates that legal land use rights for local communities on state forest land could be used as a 'reward' for upland farmers for their role in maintaining environmental services of forest land.

Abstract:Rewards for environmental services (RES) link global priorities on poverty reduction and environmental sustainability and are designed to balance effectiveness and efficiency with fairness and pro-poor characteristics. Yet, emerging RES approaches tend to focus primarily on the efficiency in provisioning the environmental services and often neglect the perspectives of various actors involved in natural resource management, their livelihood strategies and the multi-dimensional nature of poverty. This paper assesses some key issues associated with the design and implementation of RES in various Asian pilot sites by developing and exploring two propositions related to conditions required for RES to effectively contribute to poverty alleviation, and to preferred forms of pro-poor mechanisms. Our first proposition is that only under specific circumstances will actual cash incentives to individual RES participants contribute substantially to poverty alleviation in ES provider communities. The second proposition is that non-financial incentives to ES providers will contribute to reducing poverty by linking the community (participants and non-participants) to access to various types of capital (human, social, natural, physical and financial). A review of key ratios of relative numbers and wealth of service providers and beneficiaries supports the first proposition and rejects the notion of widespread potential for reducing upstream rural poverty through individual cash payments. Results of community focus Can rewards for environmental services benefit the poor? Lessons from Asia 83 group discussions support the second proposition through context-specific preferences for mechanisms by which RES can help trigger conditions for sustainable development.

This paper discusses the terminology and approaches that surround research on local knowledge, which reveal important differences in the emphasis of research following anthropological, as opposed to natural science, traditions. Results from three case studies undertaken in Nepal, Ghana and Indonesia were used to illustrate key points about local knowledge concerned with soil classification, soil fertility and below-ground interactions. Local knowledge of soils can be useful in agricultural development through building on local practice, recognizing the sophistication of local knowledge and realizing its limitations. These aspects are cemented by the integrating principle of effective communication and empowerment. In addition, formal methods for knowledge acquisition, as well as exploration and use of local knowledge with regard to respect, ethics and intellectual property rights, are discussed.

No abstract