Incorporating Local Knowledge in Decentralization Policy

5.1. Incorporating Local Knowledge in Decentralization Policy

The ability of local communities to define local CI implies a belief in devolution. Devolution or democratic decentralization means transferring rights from central governments to local stakeholders including local communities. The complexity of the ecosystem and social system in each site and the capacity of local communities makes devolution a necessary policy condition for SFM at a national level. Here, we name decentralization as a general term of decentralization and devolution. The available literature provides little empirical evidence about whether decentralization is good for forests and people who depend on them. A possible advantage of decentralized natural resource management mentioned in the literature is management decisions can incorporate local knowledge about the resource base Brandon and Wells 1992; Carney 1995; Poffenberg 1990; Utting 1993 in Kaimowitz et al. 2002. Dubois 1999 described the imbalance of power relationships and conflict of interest between states, private sectors and local communities in forest management. Colfer et al. 1999 mentioned local knowledge as one of six dimensions in determining the relative importance of forest stakeholders. Therefore, incorporating local knowledge in the management of forest can increase the power of local communities in managing forests. Ignoring the role of traditional knowledge in the decentralization policy in Zimbabwe caused the failure of that policy Lalonde 1993. Zimbabwe has recently undertaken an innovative wildlife co-management program. The program recognizes and includes traditional indigenous knowledge Thomas 1991 in Lalonde 1993. Dubois 1999 stated that local people’s participation alone is not sufficient to induce sustainable development. It needs to be accompanied by their adequate representation in decision-making bodies and their empowerment. Both are necessary to ensure local communities have enough bargaining power in negotiation over resources and the establishment of partnerships. It would, however, be misleading to suggest that existing indigenous knowledge is sufficient for rural development. Combining knowledge of local circumstances with modern science and technology is a crucial prerequisite for developing more efficient, sustainable infrastructure Ostrom et al. 1993. Empowering local communities through stating clearly that traditional knowledge of sustainable forest management or local CI, shall be incorporated into forest management strategies will enhance the possible success of the decentralization or devolution policy. Figure 5.1 shows the plausible connections and influences related to a decentralization policy that incorporates the use of traditional knowledge. The degradation of forests the poverty of local communities surrounding the forests enforces the need for the formulation and implementation of decentralization policy. The negative loop indicates that there is a stable level of decentralization. The management of forest means a lot more, however, than the knowledge of forest management, defined in the SFM CI list. It includes the institutional capacity to manage forests. In relation to this, the capacity of local or traditional institutions needs to be examined. Adat, a primary traditional institution varies from site to site. Adat rules and norms are inherited from ancestors without change or question. The younger generation of local communities now behaves in a different way to the older generation. They do not implement adat rules and norms in their daily activities. They know and only use them for ceremonial purposes such as the celebration of marriage, harvesting paddy, death ceremonies etc. The reform of adat rules and norms is required to make them more relevant to the fast-changing world. The adaptability of adat is quite low. Level of decentralization devolution Level use of traditional knowledge Level of power balance Local community power + + Level of possible collaboration in managing of forest Sustainability level + + + Forest degradation + - Negative loop delay Figure 5.1. Plausible connections in a decentralization policy that incorporates traditional knowledge One possible reform of adat is in the way of elites step into power. Seldom do local communities elect adat elites. The adat elites are in power because of their blood. If someone is the head of adat, then his sons will become the adat head or elite for the next generation. This likes components that are arranged or modeled serially. In the serial arrangement, if there is a person who behaves badly then the total output caused by those components is also bad. This means the probability of having a good result from this arrangement is very low. From those arguments, let communities themselves manage forests to meet full production capacity of forests should be carefully recommended. This is not caused by a lack of knowledge of sustainable forest management, but by a lack of power or influence in local institutions, and a capacity to change it. Empowering local institutions, including democratization of them, is a way to help local communities manage forests in an appropriate way.

5.2. Collaborative Forest Management