THE SECOND MEETING OF THE
ASEAN SOCIAL FORESTRY NETWORK (2ND ASFN) 27-29 AUGUST 2008
CHAOPHYA PARK, BANGKOK, THAILAND COUNTRY REPORT ON COMMUNITY FORESTRY
DEVELOPMENT IN THAILAND ---
OUTLINE OF STATUS REPORT
Forest dependence, to a certain extent, creates a relationship between community and the resources which responds to ecological and socio-economic changes. A self-defined community creates local forest management groups who negotiate and define among members an equitable sharing of the resources and claim the right to share resource management power and responsibility with the state to assure community access and use of the resources (McCay and Acheson, 1987). The community also develops a set of rules and regulations both formal and informal, and enforces such rules and regulations to ensure that user rights and benefits are fairly distributed among members and are not reaped by outsiders or members who do not contribute to the group’s activities.
1. Current laws and policies that facilitate the flow of benefits between government and community
- Thailand’s economic has to a long extent been based on the destruction of nature resources. To improve utilization and management, the sixth and Seventh National Economic and Social Development Plans (1987-1996) include decentralized environmental assessment and natural resource management and planning, delegating authority to provincial and district levels. Early experience found there was a lock of unless standing of the issues and of the interdisciplinary approach required and also lack of information. The program will concentrate on participation of local people and improving personal skill, information systems and technical assistance.
- The changes in forest policy from the founding of the Royal Forest Department in 1896 when the emphasis was on regulation of forest harvesting , to the present emphasis on cooperation with local people. The current written forest policy (1985) and describes recent measures adopted since the logging ban in 1986, including the Forestry Sector Master plan, Zoning of forestland use closes envelopment of local people and improved measures for forest protection include improvement in cooperation and procedures of government agencies, training of forestry field official and farmers and improve information.
- Community forest have long been with Thailand’s rural communities. Forests are considered life supporting in terms of community settlement, socio-cultural development, life maintenance. Simultaneously systems are sustained by community practices e.g., respect and reciprocity. Villagers believe that Community subsistence is not possible if the forest is not taken good case of. In Thailand, community forestry was officially recognized as a tool for sustainable forest management.
- After Royal Forest Department approved of community forestry area by RFD Director General according to Forest act B.E. 2507 (1964) and Nation Reserved Forest act B.F. 2484 (1941) to inform government officer, future officer, people in local area. Local groups with forestry officers demarcate forest boundaries and post community forestry signs, including rules and regulation sanction, and forest produces restricted to use, plantation, form forest protection groups to patrol and inform community of implementing progress. The forestry office will provide a progress report to RFD
- So forestry officers work with communities as technical assistants to ensure program effectiveness and forest sustainability.
2. The kinds of benefits that are being generated from community forestry.
- The kinds of benefit that are being generated from community forestry in Thailand are as follows:
- The people were very well awards of the importance of forest and there was high tendency of people to get benefit from the community forest because of the need to depend on the natural system including to make use of the forest in daily life. In Thailand, there are 2 kinds community forest (in Nation forest reserved areas, B.E 2507 (1964), forest act B.E. 2484 (1941) public area, the other government agency, private area etc.) which the community forest for use a benefit and dispense that arrive at the space from cut. The wood is sold and brought to develop a village (only public area and private area). The other one, the community forest is the Original forest and develop for the purposes in conservation and household consumption, the forest area where is being for the natural and wildlife, it is the area to be fit for learning and research in the part of the forest and wildlife.
1. Direct benefit
- Two major types of forest product use for household consumption and income generation. Non-Timber Forest products (NTFPs) are harvested by wild vegetables for supplement diets. People ‘s forest resources utilization are food, medicinal plant, fuel wood, wild vegetable , mushrooms, herb, material for their handicraft, wild fruits, insects, resin, bamboo and bamboo shoot, rattan and wildlife, And also the money earn by each household from sell NTFPs. But the timber for the commercial propose is prohibited due to 1989 National logging Ban.
2. Indirect benefit
3. Government support for equitable distribution of benefits within and between communities
- The Community government arrangement, The study in CF areas indicated that most community members moderately participated in CF development but highly participated in utilization but quite low in decision making, but the participatory making at the community level was relate with other sector are the member of family, position in local development group, meeting with RFD officials because The people need regulation of community forest. There are some local people who did not know clearly about forest system, and what they are able to take from community forest, those people afraid of the forest law, so that cannot support participatory decision making.
- The capacity of local government to implement benefit sharing arrangements found to be high level but they should be frequently visit people and encouraged of project activities alerted to develop for a better of their own community
4. Current and future Challenges
The major challenges which see in promoting equitable benefit flow and benefit sharing in Thailand
1. The majority of the CF project proposed tend to focus on resource conservation rather than an integrant management strategies that consider both the rehabilitation and sustained productivity of the resources.
2. All the CF project will require the cooperation of the local people and most will only be successful with their comment, action, action participate, and share in the benefits.
3. Thai forestry policy has evolved to meet the changing social and economic condition of the country, there were changes in the measures and tools in forestry, such as law, legislation , and the structure of the organization.
4. Extension on Community forestry Management to all stakeholders especially to local people
5. Develop the Community Forestry Plan in Thailand.
6. Agro-forestry system must be implement in Community forestry to increase sustained productivity of the resources, family income and benefit sharing between the local people. 7. To monitor and evaluate all community forestry programs and
