PART III: RAPID APPRAISAL RESEARCH METHODS

C: ASSESSING SOCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES

Fundamentally important to the sustenance of India's natural forests is the evolution of effective local resource management institutions. Over the past two decades, the failure to actively involve communities in social forestry and national park management has generally left forest resources unprotected and poorly maintained. The inability to effectively galvanize and sustain community participation in resource management has also placed a greater burden on Forest Departments. Not only are foresters deprived of community support, but they must spend considerable energy in defending the forest against the communities. Frequently, management success or failure is more influenced by FD-community relationships than by technologies, capital inputs, economics or ecological conditions.

Understanding the social and institutional needs and problems affecting human forest use behavior in order to reduce conflict situations may be the most critical element in any forest management research and extension program. Through diagnostic research methods, important institutional issues and questions can be pursued by teams working with FDs and community user groups (See Figure 24). Findings can help generate options which can contribute to the development of joint forest management programs.

With the promulgation of state and central government policies for JFM, a growing number of FDs are beginning to develop management partnerships with community groups. Since JFM presents a new form of forest management, more field experience is required to identify processes for the establishment of collaborative agreements. This involves developing methodologies to document and analyze emerging experiences with JFM and to identify policy and operational strategies for program improvement by implementing FDs. Process documentation techniques have proven to be useful in capturing emerging experiences with participatory forest management. Researchers who use this method can serve as the "eyes and the ears" of institutional change. They attend village and FD meetings, and hold in-depth interviews with staff and villagers to record the evolution of joint management systems. Detailed memos written after each meeting or interview describing problems, issues, and opportunities can include suggestions to improve programs. The memos are then used to formulate Working Group agendas, itemizing management options and decisions that need to be made by FD officers and support staff. Process documentation memos and Working Group agendas, also provide a historical record concerning the institutional development of new management systems.

Figure 24:

Institutional Management Issues, Research Questions, and Methods

1: Identifying Conducive Social Environments at the State and District Level

In designing a state or district level JFM program, it is important to identify Conducive social and institutional contexts where collaboration between FDs and communities is likely to be successful. In some areas, communities are already protecting natural forests through local formal or informal management institutions of their own. These groups require official acknowledgement and legitimacy from the FD. In other areas, Communities may be highly motivated to begin participating in forest management and will require information and encouragement from the FD or an NGO. By contrast, some communities or individuals may have little interest in forest management or may be too factionalized to take effective action as a cohesive group. By identifying and giving priority to sites that offer conductive social environments for participatory management, FD programs will be able to greatly enhance their success. Building on past traditions and existing indigenous efforts will allow programs to respond more naturally to community needs, as well as reduce costs and accelerate expansion. Frequently, the success of one community is the strongest force in encouraging others to emulate successful program initiatives.

While some Indian villages are encumbered by inter-caste conflicts and corrupt leaders, many communities possess capable leaders and families that are genuinely concerned about the forest environment. Current reports indicate that thousands of villages in many parts of the country have formed forest protection groups, both with and without the support of FDs. As pressures on the environment increase and strategic forest products become increasingly scarce, it is likely that other villages will be compelled to take action. It is this grassroots environmental movement, based on committed families, village leadership, and local management capacity, that provides the best hope for regenerating and sustaining India's natural forests. Community resource management initiatives often seem stimulated by such social and political changes as land reform, NGO activism, the replacement of leaders from elite groups by representative members of the community, and general trends towards greater decentralization and democratic processes.

From a sociological perspective, some communities will be more interested and capable in developing forest management institutions than others. Initial studies indicate that villagers take action for a variety of reasons, including a growing perception of scarcity of forest resources, particularly items important for their subsistence and cash income (roofing poles, wood for tools, fodder, fuel, medicines, and food). In many cases, communities are also concerned about undesirable environmental changes occurring as forests are disturbed and increasingly denuded. These may include such hydrological changes as declining water tables and accelerated run-off, modified micro-climate and soil moisture levels, or declining bird populations which control agricultural pests. Finally, some communities feel their sociocultural and religious belief systems are undermined as the forest becomes degraded. These concerns are often strong motivating forces in spurring communities to establish controls and regulations to protect the forest and reduce its use to more sustainable levels.

In operationalizing these management systems, some communities achieve greater success than others. Studies indicate that both strong leadership and social homogeneity are associated with success in establishing management activities. In areas where concerns about forest deterioration are limited or absent, and where factionalism or a lack of leadership at the community level exists, the emergence of effective JFM systems may be much less likely.

Interviews with FD staff and NGOs who have worked in different parts of the state can help a research team identify areas where communities are already involved or have managed forest resources in the past. Using a state map, regions can be delineated where there are forest protection committees or where more conductive environments for collaborative forest management exist. A review of secondary information (e.g. census data, historical records and gazetteers, socio-political studies) can also help identify favorable contexts. For example, districts with large tribal populations characterized by historical traditions of forest management may be good targets. Once broader geographical regions are identified, compiling data on more specific ecological and social conditions in different ranges can help Fds identify priority areas. The Checklist of Indicators can guide forest officers in rapidly evaluating information on relevant conditions for JFM (see Appendix 1). With experience, better methods of assessing site feasibility can be developed.

2: Community Level Diagnosis

JFM is based on the creation of a management partnership between the FD and community groups. Ideally, decisions are made jointly between the department and affected communities after an open dialogue generates consensus. However, despite efforts to encourage a participatory process, it is inevitable that some communities are excluded. The process of empowering community groups and equitably allocating forest lands is critical to the success of the program. If inappropriate communities are involved, or territorial management responsibilities are not divided fairly, or strategic communities are excluded, conflicts can arise which will weaken and potentially destabilize the program. It is important to understand the types of resource allocation patterns that are appropriate in different contexts within India and develop procedures to ensure that this designation process is carried out in an open, participatory manner.

As a first step, all forest user communities should be identified during diagnostic activities. The research team can assist local FD staff and villagers clarify those groups that should logically be brought into a dialogue regarding future management systems. This may include those communities in or near the forest, migratory graziers, and other outsiders that come from greater distances to utilize the resources. It is also important to identify commercial users of forest resources, including contractors, middlemen, and mill operators.

Information on user groups can be collected through key informant and group interviews. Community members can usually name with accuracy the surrounding villages, especially those who rely on certain forest products. Use patterns indicating the identity, sex and number of collectors, products collected, and time of collection can be indicated on a map. For example, twenty women may come to the forest every morning from a village to collect headloads of fodder or fuelwood for 8 months of the year.

A useful way to illustrate user groups and their rights or authority over forest resources is to draw a social Systems Diagram indicating forest users and managers (see Figure 25 and Box 4). The figure shows the significant dependence of the Banjara community on fiber grass and the Jat community on fodder grass, while also identifying the roles and interactions of contractors, FD field staff, and the paper mill near Pinjore. During the process of diagramming, the research team can also clarify through informant interviews the special rights and responsibilities different groups may hold over forest resources. Drawing this type of diagram and collecting user group specifics can help outside facilitators involve different groups and factions in a discussion to reach consensus regarding new management systems.

Figure 25: Systems Diagram of Forest Users and Mangers in Pinjore, Haryana

Box 4: Forest User Group Interactions in Pinjore, Haryana

The FD normally formalizes a collaborative agreement with specific communities by designating clearly defined territories for management. The decisions regarding which communities and management areas are often shaped by considerations of proximity to the forest, degree of forest dependency, prior rights, and interest level. It is important to clarify the boundaries of the management territory in question. In some cases, the community or the FD may wish to gradually place increasing quantities of forest land under community management as village capacity is demonstrated.

Microplanning and participatory sketch-mapping can bring foresters, NGO staff, FD and villagers together to develop more appropriate management plans for forest areas. Sketch-mapping techniques to determine user groups and access routes were discussed in the PRA Community Profiling section. Mapping activities may include sketching a use map on the ground or on paper, indicating access routes, areas which are specially controlled by certain members in the village, and areas that are open access. The mapping should also indicate areas used by outside groups, whether they be migrant graziers or artisans from other villages. Walking through the forest with village members can also aid the research team in cross-checking information about the proposed management area. Key informant interviews with FD field staff, village leaders, and representatives of different user groups can highlight diverse perspectives, including misunderstandings that may exist regarding territorial rights and responsibilities.

If communities are to assume a formal role in forest management, some inn of community-based institution is required to coordinate the activities of village members. Specialized forest management organizations, such as the Forest Protection Committees of West Bengal, seem to function more effectively as forest protectors than other multi-purpose organizations such as village panchayats. Smaller, homogeneous groups representing a single forest-dependent settlement are also proving among the most effective operational units for organized protection and management. While thousands of informal village protection groups have been formed by communities in Bihar and Orissa, those with the sanctioned support of the FD or local NGOs may prove to have more long-term stability. Diagnostic studies are needed to determine how informal local groups can be strengthened. More experience is also necessary to determine how single product-oriented groups effectively function as forest managers. These include tree growers' cooperatives, dairy groups, or associations of fuelwood headloaders.

While some village institutions may not be appropriate for overseeing the forest management program, they may be able to provide support to certain components of the system. For example, a Mahila Mandal may support the activities of women leaf plate-makers, while a milk marketing cooperative may facilitate a shift to stall feeding which reduces open grazing in the forest. To determine which village institutions might play a lead or support role in establishing a participatory management system, the research team should work with a representative group of villagers to draw an organizational chart of community institutions, listing their membership, primary activities, and leaders. A Venn Diagram for Limbi panchayat indicates the presence of three major local user groups, including older settlers with greater forest usufruct rights, new and displaced migrants with heavy fuelwood headloading dependencies, and bamboo artisans. In such a situation, a management institution is needed that can facilitate an agreement regarding the different needs and prior rights of all user communities (see Figure 26 and Box 5).

Figure 26

Box 5: Institutional Issues in Forest Management, Limbi

In designing and developing a community forest management system, the FD, villagers, and research support team need to consider mechanisms for forest protection, benefit-sharing and distribution, and dispute arbitration. If prior forest protection and resource harvesting systems exist, these should be described and a detailed list of the rights, rules, fines and fees utilized in controlling forest exploitation should be recorded. Past problems and successes of the organization can be noted, with suggestions of alternative strategies for designing a better management institution.

Disputes over access to scarce and valuable resources can often stimulate social conflict. Transparent planning processes can reduce conflict by helping affected groups reach a consensus about important decisions regarding the sharing of resources. Yet, even with consensus-based decision-making, conflicts can emerge. When disagreements and injustices arise, they need to, be resolved as quickly and equitably as possible. Given the burdens on the legal system, formal judicial systems rarely facilitate a rapid resolution. Community councils and informal dispute arbitration systems currently operate in some areas in India, effectively settling disputes arising in JFM programs. In other cases, FD staff has worked with village committees to negotiate disagreements. A summary and evaluation of current approaches to dispute arbitration in the area would help FDs and NGOs to facilitate their development. During a group interview, a matrix can be drawn indicating protection mechanisms, benefit-sharing arrangements, and dispute arbitration systems. Under each column, the participants can list the system of operation, specifying problem areas and appropriate conflict resolution mechanisms.

3: Forest Department and Support Group Level Diagnosis

If senior officers and field staff are to play an effective role in supporting a transition from custodial to participatory management, they must have confidence that their organization will support their efforts. Since JFM is a new approach, and not yet fully understood, some officers may be uninformed or unsupportive regarding its function within the larger management system. JFM also implies some fundamental changes in staff attitudes, gender orientation, and norms and procedures if it is to be effectively integrated into the department. To that end, FDs may need to systematically feed more information on the program to their officers, actively encouraging field staff to experiment with new management systems through professional incentives, promotions and other acknowledgements of achievement. The department will also need to modify procedures 'and norms to respond to community priorities, and participate in reciprocal trainings and reorientation sessions with community groups and NGOs.

One of the primary institutional issues in developing a JFM system is to define who among the FD staff are the critical players operating at the interface of the program's implementation. Identification will involve key individuals at three levels in the organization's hierarchy: 1) policy decision-making, 2) mid-level management, and 3) daily field operations. While support for the transitions required by JFM is ultimately necessary on all levels, those most crucial to initiating such changes are presumably situated at both the top and bottom of the institutional chain of command. Case studies reveal that field staff who approach their job with flexibility and sensitivity in responding to community needs have been most effective in establishing stable working relationships and laying the foundation for collaborative management. A supportive DFO who effectively encourages his field staff to reorient its approach toward listening to, and working collectively with communities, including women, can be a decisive factor in a program's progress. However, it is equally essential that a clear understanding and support of the program's objectives, as well as endorsement of reforms as field learning is documented and analyzed, emanate from the highest levels of the FD and Ministry, and is supported and communicated by mid-level managers.

Through group and individual interviews with a range of FD staff, an organizational chart of key actors can be developed to illustrate the relationships of staff involved in JFM and, the relative strengths of their interactions with each other. The primary objective of this methodology is the identification of individuals within the FD at various levels who win assume strategic roles in the implementation of the JFM program. Once the major actors have been identified, it is important to understand their attitudes and knowledge regarding the program's philosophy, objectives and implementation. The psychological culture within the FD strongly influences the values and worldview of its staff. A thorough investigation should be made into the staff's perceptions of the roles and capabilities of both 1) communities to organize, protect and manage forest resources sustainably and 2) the FD to shift from custodial authority to cooperative management partner and facilitator. Small group discussions supplemented by individual staff interviews can reveal attitudes, uncover confusions, biases and contradictions, and assess the staff's need and institutional potential for psychological and behavioral modification toward the process of empowering communities. The qualitative information and impressions stemming from these staff interviews can then be compared with outside informants, such as village leaders and other local NGO and GO agency staff, who may offer their own differing opinions concerning the values, receptivity, and behavior toward the community of forestry field staff and senior decision-makers.

In addition to the importance of values and attitudes, the organizational opportunities and constraints involved in reorienting field staff to work intensively with communities must be understood in the context of the staff's daily work regime. Given the time constraints imposed by its standard workload and responsibilities, including numerous procedural requirements such as program reporting and monitoring, the actual staff time available to assist communities in JFM field activities needs to be carefully evaluated. A logical first approach to this assessment might involve working together with operational staff to develop a Daily Activity Schedule by season (Figure 27). The schedule of time allocations for various activities could be followed by a scoring exercise in which staff rank their tasks by perceived usefulness in improving forest management. The combination of these methods would help identify the less relevant and more time-consuming tasks, which might be modified or substituted in exchange for community management activities which were considered higher priority by the implementing staff.

Figure 27

Related to formalized work schedules of field staff are the broader agency norms and procedures which influence staff motivation and priorities, drive decision-making, and dictate the channelling of feedback from the field. The creation of incentives and professional growth opportunities such as promotions, public recognition, opportunities for specialized study and tours, and training courses, are prerequisites for successful long-term integration of JFM into agency operations. The historical institutional bias which marginalizes gender issues and works against greater recruitment and involvement of women, both at higher and lower field levels, needs to be seriously addressed.

Through group discussions with both male and female field staff, a matrix of incentives and disincentives for working more directly with communities can be developed (See Figure 28 and Box 6). Brainstorming sessions with field staff can pinpoint institutional constraints to community participation in forest management perceived by field staff, mid-level and senior officers. Identify the advantages and disadvantages of JFM for field staff can lead to a discussion of ways to improve the incentives, norms and procedures to make them more supportive of staff efforts to work intensively with villagers. At the same time, FDs will need to open communication channels to allow a greater flow of information and suggestions from experienced field staff to senior officers. Feedback from the field will be instrumental in allowing the agency to adapt program strategies as learning emerges through trial and error experience. Currently, many FDs hold regular meetings of senior officers to coordinate administrative activities and project planning and implementation. Few FDs, however, have routine meetings with forest communities or field-staff to feedback field-level management problems and experiences to senior department officers. As a result, there is little upward flow of information from those directly involved in field-level forest management. By diagramming existing channels for communication and decision-making, it is possible to identify weaknesses and suggest measures to facilitate the exchange of information. Figure 29 indicates how existing information flow mechanisms in the Haryana Forest Department might be enhanced through proposed monthly meetings at the community and forest block level.

Figure 28:

Incentives and Disincentives of JFM:
Perceptions of Guards, Haryana Forest Department

Box 6:

Analyzing Organizational Constraints to JFM with
Haryana Forest Department Field Staff

Figure 29

One of the most important institution-building strategies to operationalize the JFM program will require improvement of the current staff training program, in terms of its stature, structure, social reorientation and curriculum. While national and state-level forest training is typically imparted by a rotating staff without specialized expertise as trainers, curricula also tend to be highly technical and uni-disciplinary in nature. In contrast, JFM programs will require revised approaches and curriculum which focus on human values, organizational and motivational behavior, interpersonal skill-building, gender sensitivity, dispute resolution techniques, and a range of interdisciplinary fields of study which encompass the socioeconomic and ecological dimensions of forest management systems. As a first step to understanding appropriate local training needs, an analysis of the current training curricula received by FD staff at different levels could be undertaken to identify its gaps and weaknesses. A logical secondary step would be to interview both trainers and field trainees concerning the perceived relevance of their training vis-a-vis its efficacy in enabling staff to facilitate community-driven JFM. A scoring and ranking exercise could develop a list of priority training needs and strategies for reorientation.

Another important issue involves the facilitative role of support institutions, such as NGOs, university researchers, outside specialists and other government agencies, in strengthening both FD and community capacity to implement JFM. Through diagnostic research, experienced NGOs and other researchers can assist the FD and communities in generating the knowledge to understand the ecological, institutional and economic parameters that need consideration in the design of sustainable forest management systems. Interviews with local NGOs, researchers, and allied GO agency staff would help identify their particular institutional strengths which could directly contribute to JFM program activities. Developing an inventory of current activities by FD, NGOs, other GOs and donors would highlight overlapping efforts and areas for potential collaboration. Convening a workshop could provide a forum for these groups to discuss programming and coordinate respective activities in support of JFM.

Experiences from Haryana, West Bengal, and Gujurat indicate that outside resource teams can offer valuable assistance to the FD and communities as facilitators in training, process documentation, ecological research, and communication flows, all of which are designed to capture field learning and rapidly inform program management. Assisting the senior FD officers in conducting periodic Working Group meetings to review program progress and make strategic policy decisions based on diagnostic studies and field feedback has been a major contribution of these resource teams. In the final analysis, it is the commitment of dynamic and dedicated individuals inside FD institutions who are the valuable contributors to program innovation. After identifying a small core group of leaders, an advisory committee could be established to plan strategies, secure time commitments, and define responsibilities for program development.

Given the context of increasing pressures and competing demands on state forest lands throughout India, it has become essential to reorient the goals of forest management toward building cooperative, stable relationships between community forest users and departmental managers. Diagnostic research, through methods such as process documentation, can contribute to understanding the range of socio-institutional factors which motivate behavior and influence forest use patterns. Issues need to be addressed at the state level (e.g., identifying priority geographic areas for JFM), community level (e.g., delineating appropriate management groups, clarifying access controls, rights and benefit-sharing) and FD level (e.g. normative procedures, attitudes, training). Support groups comprised of NGOs, university researchers and other specialists can facilitate the strengthening of both FD and community management capabilities, while helping to catalyze a more stable and synergistic relationship between parties. Ultimately, the success of forest management will depend upon the development of local management institutions which are empowered and supported by the FD to manage forest resources equitably and sustainably.