Forests in Transition

Multi-stakeholder processes

and forest politics in Cambodia

Forests in Transition

Multi-stakeholder processes

and forest politics in Cambodia

Community forestryearly 1990s

mid 1990s

• a few CFs

• ~ 40 CFs• units in 2 nat’l agencies• Network• Working Group• training team

nat’l MS platforms

Community forestryearly 1990s

mid 1990s

2001

• a few CFs -- int’l NGOs

• ~ 40 CFs -- int’l NGOs & IOs• support units in 2 nat’l agencies• Network• Working Group• collab. training team

• ~ 200 CFs (100,000 ha)• many organisations & locations• experience in MSP• need to clarify policy

Multi-stakeholder Task Force & ConsultationMajor stakeholders involved in community forestry

RGC Institutions

NGO’s

Communities

Others

CF Working Group

TASKFORCE

periodicmeetings

smallworkinggroups

work-shops

draftCommunity

ForestrySubdecree

Multi-stakeholder Process

Result: success !• draft Community Forestry Subdecree

(national policy that recognised pluralism)

• integrated CF & Forestry, overcoming ‘turf’ struggles

• elevated MSP (policy formulation)

• demonstrated MSP effectiveness for resolving contentious problems

Community Forestry Subdecree

• Task Force ► Forestry Dept / MAFF

• revised Subdecree -- important MSP agreements lost

• many stakeholders opposed revisions

• but the revised Subdecree was approved

• the MSP had not succeeded

Why had the MSP failed?• Immediate cause

RCG under pressure to demonstrate Forestry reform to donors, especially to the World Bank & IMF

• General cause

differences between CF & Forestry as ‘policy streams’

Policy streams: CF & Forestry

Community forestry• aim:

communities benefit from forests (CFs)

• main stakeholders– communities– NGOs, IOs, MoE– Forestry Dept

Forestry• aim:

improve large-scale forest concessions

• main stakeholders– Forestry Dept / RGC– donors / World Bank– concessionaires

Some commonality, but different ‘centers of gravity’

Forestryearly 1990s

1994-1997

• logging escalated rapidly

• rampant corruption & logging

• emblematic of Cambodia’s problems

Forestryearly 1990s

1994-1997

1998 -

• logging escalated rapidly

• rampant corruption & logging

• donors acted; World Bank took lead

• Forestry reform = improving large-scale forest concessions

Forestryearly 1990s

1994-1997

1998 -

• logging escalated rapidly

• rampant corruption & logging

• donors acted; World Bank took lead

• Forestry reform = improving forest concessions

• marginalised Community Forestry

Forestryearly 1990s

1994-1997

1998 -

2000 -

2003 -

• logging escalated rapidly

• rampant corruption & logging

• donors acted; World Bank took lead

• reform = improving forest concessions

• marginalised: CF “policy stream”

• IMF & World Bank conditionality: reform included new Forest Law

• RGC approved draft Forest Law (& ‘revised’ CF Subdecree)

policy streams, MSP, & power

Community forestry Forestry

MSP success MSP failure

differences between ‘policy streams’• aims & priorities• stakeholders (center of gravity)• relative power

‘Real-politic’ of forests

Cambodia in the 1990s:

• multi-dimensional transition

• intense political struggles

• leaders / factions: financial needs & desires

‘Real-politic’ of forestsForests as ‘currency’ in power struggles

‘Real-politic’ of forestsall leaders / factions: logging & log trade

“mutual accommodation of elites”

‘Real-politic’ of forestsRGC: promises vs. actions

“public transcript” vs. “shadow transcript”

‘Real politic’ of Forestry “Shadow transcript”

policy: enabling logging & timber trade;

controlling land

main stakeholders– elites / patrons– networks / clients

“Public transcript”

‘reform’ policy: improving forest

concessions

main stakeholders– Forestry Dept / RGC– donors / World Bank– concessionaires

‘Real-politic’ of Forestry “Shadow transcript”

policy: enabling logging & timber trade;

controlling land

since 1989, timber exported worthest’d $2.4 billion

“Public transcript”

reform policy: improving forest

concessions

2004: no credible evidence of reform

policy streams, power, & MSPCommunity

ForestryReal-politic of forests

Forestry

public transcript(‘reform’)

& shadow

transcript

commun-ities

benefit from

forests

shadowtranscript(forests as

political currency)

MSP seminar participants?