Profiling Local-Level Outcomes of Environmental Decentralizations: The Case of Cameroon’s Forests in the Congo Basin

Abstract

Since the mid-1990s, Cameroon has launched a process of decentralization of the management of its forests. Among other innovations, this decentralization process has transferred powers over forests and financial benefits accruing from their exploitation to local communities. This article explores and profiles such local-level outcomes. It shows that the experiment has not yet brought up expected positive results and very often generates internal conflicts, a new social stratification and the marginalization of traditional authorities. Second, the article argues that decentralized management is not producing positive economic results, as there is no significant economic change in the case study villages. Third, it demonstrates that the experiment is leading to negative environmental results, such as the degradation of many community forests in the forested Cameroon. The author recommends that policy makers, researchers, nongovernmental organizations, and the local communities design a monitoring framework for decentralized management.

Analyzing the Establishment of Community Forestry (CF) and Its Processes Examples from the South West Region of Cameroon

“…By creating new organizations (CIGs/VFMCs) for the local management of forest resources and benefits, rather than using indigenous institutions, the architects of decentralization have disabled the existing instruments of social regulation and cleared the way for damageable social distortions and conflicts (Oyono, 2005a). To crown it all, there are very weak enforcement institutions designed or put in place to punish or penalize defaulters of the CF regulatory implementation and no monitoring systems to evaluate the successes or failures of the decentralized forest resource management.…”

The State of Research on Effectiveness and Equity (2Es) in Forests Management Regimes in Cameroon and Its Relevance for REDD+

“…Forest management before the 1990s in Cameroon was characterized by a centralized system of management with the state having legal and hegemonic control over forest land with the rights of communities limited to user rights Oyono, 2005). Failures of the state authoritarian policies -injustice, marginalization, inequality, increase conflicts between stakeholders; declining contribution of forest sector to national economy and development; and growing threats to biodiversity (Assembe, 2006b;Ekoko, 1997Ekoko, , 2000, ushered in the 1990 forest policy reforms.…”

“…The key findings indicate that the distribution of parafiscal and community forests' revenues is surrounded by corruption, lack of accountability, transparency, elite capture and confiscation of community forest revenues and parafiscal compensations. It stresses that many community forests appears to belong to external elites and village chiefs (Oyono, 2005;Begombe, 2003). The aspect of elite capture and domination by village chiefs in benefit sharing was reported by other studies in parts of the South, East and North West Regions of Cameroon (Oyono, 2004).…”

“…The legislation stipulates that 10% of the 50% that goes to the councils where logging activities are carried out is allocated to the villages accommodating the logging companies (Oyono, 2005;Alemagi & Kozak, 2010). Fees were previously allocated in cash but they are presently allocated through community development projects (GOC, 1994(GOC, , 1995Cerutti et al, 2010).…”

Cameroon’s Environmental Impact Assessment Decree and Public Participation in Concession-Based Forestry: An Exploratory Assessment of Eight Forest-Dependent Communities

“…While several studies have been undertaken to examine public participation in community and council forest tenures (see, for example, Oyono, 2004;Oyono, 2005;Assembe Mvondo & Sangkwa, 2009;Brown & Lassoie, 2010;De Blas et al, 2011); biodiversity conservation and management initiatives (Nguinguiri, 1999;Jum & Oyono, 2005;Nchotaji, 2010), and even for benefit distribution and social development within concessions (see, for example, Bigombé Logo, 1994;Oyono et al, 2005;Oyono, 2005;Karsenty, 2007;Morrison, 2009;Foti & Silva, 2010;Cerutti et al, 2010), the implementation of participation provisions of the EIA Decree in concession-based forestry has not yet been studied (Note 2). In this paper, we examine public perceptions (Note 3) of public participation and decision-making -as outlined by the EIA Decree -in eight forest-dependent communities impacted by concession-based forestry in the Southwest Region of Cameroon.…”