Outlook: will the woodland value be sustained?
5
.
5
. Indi6idual property and collecti6e management
We have observed no cleavage of behaviour or opinion between the owners of relatively large
pieces of land ten owners currently possess more than 1 hectare each in the Bois de Bouchereau
and those who possess smaller areas of land, 2 to 10 ares for example. In all cases, being an owner
in the wood seems to enhance one’s social stand- ing. It enables one to take an active role in the
community of Bromeilles, and, on a broader level, in the neighbouring villages. For example, for
those who do not possess agricultural land, the possession of wooded plots may be a means of
becoming member of the Bromeilles hunting asso- ciation, which remains a strong social element
within the community.
If collective identity is important, the partici- pants remain, nonetheless, fierce supporters of
private property. In response to the final question of our enquiry, which asked them to envisage
collective management policies for the wood viz. ‘Do you think that people other than its current
owners may eventually manage the Bois de Bouchereau?’, only nine people felt that this was
desirable, 22 replied that it would not be desirable and three felt that it depended on the extra costs
generated. The general discourse showed an in- transigence of the participants regarding respect
for property rights. The collective feeling concern- ing the wood does not displace the respect for
individual property rights. The two dimensions are complementary and reinforcing. The free ac-
cess allowed throughout almost the entire wood only one owner has fenced his plot and the
public nature of certain activities walking, flower- picking, etc. ought not to lead anyone to believe
that the owners are ready to abandon their prerogatives.
5
.
6
. A shared regional heritage The very strong sentimental attachment to the
wood of some of the participants is fed by nostal- gia for past uses of the wood, those of their
youth. Here can also be found legends persisting from far back in history the role of the wood in
the Middle ages, the supposed presence of a con- struction in the centre of the wood, the existence
of underground passages. Also having a clear historical dimension is real knowledge of the
wood, whether it concerns identifying the plot boundaries, the memory of certain family transac-
tions, maintenance and woodcutting techniques, or the historical or legendary background to the
wood. This is considered by the participants as being the reserve of the older members of the
community and inseparable from the patrimony. Some express very clearly the need to pass this
knowledge on, at the same time as the wooded plots, from generation to generation, because
‘without the knowledge that goes with it, the wood is nothing’.
The proximity of the wood, either geographic or in terms of the role it fulfils within a family,
seems to play an important role in the enhance- ment of the wood’s value. To a large extent
interest or indifference in the wood is a function of geographic distance from the ownerfamily
members. Outside Bromeilles and the neighbour- ing communities, it is difficult to visit the wood on
a regular basis; and indifference soon sets in. This is without doubt one of the keys to the future of
the Bois de Bouchereau. Departures from the region are leading to the disappearance of the
historically and geographically rooted knowledge.
6. Outlook: will the woodland value be sustained?
The high value ascribed to the Bois de Bouchereau finds its basis in a culture of patrimo-
nial meaning and investment. This is not just investment of effort but also, more particularly,
investment with meaning. The woodland as a whole, and the bits individually, are carriers of
meaning — as elements of family and communal heritage — proudly inherited from the previous
generations and, as such, destined to be passed on to future generations.
In this study, we sought to understand the specific terms in which ‘value’ is attributed to the
forest, and, in particular, the ways that this value may be transmitted, or lost, through time. The
survey-interview research has shown, on the one
hand, that most of the owners had a fairly precise idea of the monetary value of their plots and, on
the other hand, that non-commercial aspects are predominant in the constitution of a value for the
woods.
These are not profit-making assets and holding on to them is explained by other determinants. A
sense of family heritage accounts in large part for why families hold on to their plots. In summary:
the low number of transactions is explained by the fact that they normally take place only
when resolving an inheritance or during divi- sions for ending joint ownership;
the vast majority of owners declare vehemently that they would not sell their plots;
those who acquire plots go on to adopt the same attitude a reluctance to sell as those
who inherit plots;
tradition is predominant in the ownership of plots, since ownership has survived even
though the practices which supported and justified it e.g. providing families with fire-
wood and food have greatly diminished.
Beyond these generic patrimonial determinants, the enquiry was able to distinguish distinct ‘gener-
ations’ of viewpoints within the community. The oldest inhabitants more than 70 years old look
back with nostalgia at traditional uses of the wood, which for them is in progressive decline.
The group of younger retired people from agricul- ture those aged around 60 have, by contrast,
turned their backs en masse on the wood and the uses associated with it, having been absorbed by
the development of large-scale industrial farming cereals, beetroot, viz. of high-productivity mech-
anised
agriculture. And
then, amongst
the younger generation of people who have remained
to work the land, we now find some who attach a strong symbolic importance to the wood and de-
clare themselves as potential buyers of plots.
Yet, the sustaining of the forest value into the future is by no means assured. If, in the patrimo-
nial tradition, the tending of the forest is a sort of metaphor for the maintaining of human commu-
nity, it also follows that both forest and human community are vulnerable to neglect, decay and
decline. The majority of the owners interviewed believe
in the
durability of
the Bois
de Bouchereau. But they have some difficulty to
imagine it as being any different than its present appearance. For example, they do not analyse
acutely, or they do so in contradictory ways, the links between the currently practised forestry
techniques, changing patterns of non-timber use, and the evolution of the woodland’s characteris-
tics, among others, its recreational interest, scenic qualities and internal accessibility. They do not
yet discuss or, at least, not openly the uncertain future of the highly-mechanised and subsidised
regime of agricultural production notably, the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy.
All these elements point to a clear link between the evolution of the wood and vicissitudes of
French rural society in general. Departure to the towns for most though not all of the young
generation has brought in its wake a loss of familiarity and knowledge linked to the wood, a
loss which can go as far as total ignorance regard- ing the boundaries of the plots.
In the patrimonial tradition, the investments of time, thought and effort in wood-lot maintenance,
trail clearing and replanting and so on are in- vestments in a social whole. These are largely
traditional practices that, for the most part, have been based on a communal logic of reproduction
and renewal rather than a logic of individual interest and profit. Put in other terms, the individ-
uals’ interests and evaluations are conditioned by the social whole. Their ‘preferences’ are recipro-
cally sustained through the shared meanings and activities sustained within the local communities.
Notwithstanding the evident ‘private’ dimen- sions of the wood-lot property as an exploitable
resource, we are presented with a wealth-held-in- common: this is the significance value of the
forest to the members of the community. It is a value as a whole, and it is not easy to see how it
could be made divisible. The investments of time, thought and effort in wood-lot maintenance, trail
clearing and replanting would be unlikely to take place on an individualistic basis: they depend for
the meaning and justification on the membership appartenance of each person to the social
groups and networks that constitute this way of life.
Yet, this patrimonial tradition may be weaken- ing, and the forest value with it. In view of the
ageing and diminishing economic vigour of the community of interested local users and owners,
the local socio-economic basis for maintenance of the woodland may be at risk. The risk can be
appraised in the following terms. As the local population ages and diminishes, the number of
persons active in wood-lot and pathway mainte- nance may fall. Community leaders in the district
have, spontaneously, expressed concerns of this sort.
This risk can be expressed in the following way. Suppose, hypothetically, that the option be ex-
plored of having an external agency assume some of the responsibilities for maintaining the wood-
land as an amenity value. Can it be expected that the ‘demand’ for the forest values will be high
enough to justify the expense? Will a new genera- tion of ownersusers, not having the same sorts of
communal roots, be willing to pay money through, for example, taxes or access fees paid to
the local or regional authorities? in scale equiva- lent to the embodied-time willingness-to-pay of
the traditional owners? Suppose not. A standard economist’s form of explanation would be that
the new aggregate WTP is lower than in the past because, in aggregate, the population’s prefer-
ences have changed — that is, the demand for the forest values is lower than before. A different
form of explanation, in keeping with the patrimo- nial tradition, would be that the forest-community
symbiosis as a structure of lived and shared mean- ing and a form of local economic life has died
out.
Both forms of explanation may be allowed. Their relative pertinence depends partly on the
theoretical reference points preferred, and this in turn is connected to the visions held about possi-
ble and desirable futures in the French society. Is the cost-benefit appraisal or the patrimonial tradi-
tion the more relevant perspective for helping to decide about agricultural policies, rural and re-
gional development goals, and nature conserva- tion policies? The Bois de Bouchereau case study
has not tried to give the definitive answer to this question, but does give some indications about
how it may intelligently be posed.