Both ENDS offers a wide range of services to NGOs in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, and the Newly Independent States who are working in the field of environment, development and social justice.

Our standard information service includes Information packs on a wide range of topical environment issues. These packs have been written mainly for Southern NGOs. They are to enable (beginner) environmental organizations to get familiarized with an important environmental subject in a short period of time.

• a general overview of the theme

• details of relevant international treaties, guidelines and conventions

• some aspects of the current (international) debates on the topic

• case studies (mainly from Southern countries)

• a listing of useful contacts in North and South

• a list of publications

• a choice of websites

We are making an effort to regularly update the information included in these packs. But since people and developments are moving fast, we will inevitably lag behind somewhat. The information presented is meant as an introduction. If you require more specific information, please feel free to contact us.

You can download the information packs from our website or you can request an e-mail printed version. They are free of charge for NGOs in the South and the CEE countries

We welcome any suggestions or comments which help improve this information pack.

Introduction 

Local forest management at the frontier 
· Common patterns 
· Legal biases and the role of government 
· Legitimising the enclosure of forest commons 
· Free play for multinational corporations 
· Imposing global management master plans 
· Exporting forest destruction 
· The price of opposition 
· Opportunities and challenges 

Against all odds 
· Local forest management under scrutiny 

Lessons from the field 
· Conflicts and the use of action research 
· Legal rights 
· Self-organisation 
· Alliances 
· Addressing the underlying causes of deforestation 

Conclusions and recommendations 
· Reorienting the research agenda 
· Making the law work in favour of forest and local people 
· Self-organisation for equity, economic welfare and ecological stability 
· Alliances in support of forest and people 
· Addressing underlying causes of forest destruction and social hardship 

Successful initiatives 

Useful contacts 
· International 
· International multilateral organisations 
· Related to Multilateral financial institutions 
· Certification and sustainable forest management 
· Regional 

Bibliography 

Notes 

Boxes
· Case: Oku Montane Forest 
· Case: Lampoon Province 
· NTFP's 

Within and among local forest communities there exists a wealth of information and knowledge about forest management to be shared. People living in and depending on forests, have developed knowledge systems on rational land use and environmental protection. They have adopted very sophisticated norms for managing watersheds, catchment areas and fragile forest ecosystems. (Fisiy, 1989)

Local forest management systems in most parts of the world are however under increasing, physical and psychological, pressure. This information package addresses the following key questions, namely:

• How can local communities maintain the balance between their societies and forest environments when faced with rising populations, growing demands for basic needs and cash and increasingly stronger external pressures? 

• Which role can outsiders (NGOs, donors, scientists and governments) play to enhance local forest management? 

Local forest management takes place under very different ecological, political and economic circumstances. There is a shared experience of forest destruction and loss of local peoples' livelihoods and culture due to generally similar causes. Whereas a complex and infinite variety of direct and underlying causes undermine local forest management systems, one can discern some very dominant patterns. In view of the diversity of social and ecological environments we can also identify a number of unique responses, perceptions and practices by local people and other concerned parties. It is, however, possible to translate some of these into more general conclusions and policy recommendations.

The aim of this information package is to indicate how outsiders, like policy makers, donors and researchers, could open up more space as required to consolidate and enhance prudent and undisturbed management of forests by local people.

This document is organised in five sections. The first section identifies the main causes of collapse of local forest management. The second session deals with the, potential, social and institutional strengths and weaknesses of local forest management systems, and places prevailing scepticism about these systems in the wider context of power relations and natural resource management. The third section provides an overview of some of the key lessons to be learned from recent studies and some successful initiatives from the field. The fourth section draws some general conclusions and suggests for each group of players -e.g.: policy makers, NGOs donors, researchers - specific recommendations. The fifth section offers information on and addresses of organisations which have relevant expertise, information and advocacy support.

back to Table of Contents

Forest areas world wide host major reservoirs of minerals, metals, biomass and land for agricultural expansion and other resources. These areas are at the same time the home and source of livelihood for millions of people and harbour unique biodiversity. Unequal and unchecked access to forest resources is generally the most important cause of forest destruction and social marginalisation. Conflicts evolve over these resources since their national political and economic elite's are unwilling to forego the opportunity to tap these reservoirs, notwithstanding the often dramatic social and environmental consequences. Numerous studies and accounts also confirm that lack of security of land rights and user rights is a major cause of decline of local systems of forest management, resulting in local peoples' hardship and forest destruction. Sadly enough, even the democratically elected governments in most northern as well as southern countries are not enthusiastic about sharing control and rights over forests with local communities. NGOs from both northern and southern countries report that, in many instances, there is an overt collision between government agencies and powerful economic interest groups. One observes, for example, the granting of far going privileges (e.g. mining or logging concessions, subsidies and tax exemptions) to fewer and fewer industrial conglomerates.

Legal biases and the role of government

While taking away legal and political rights from local people was an inherent feature of colonial regimes, this process of marginalisation has been continued by the elite's of formerly colonised but now independent states. Many case studies describe that the national laws still largely benefit political and economic elite's, while denying millions of people access to natural resources with a majority of land claimed by the state or concentrated in the hands of a small elite. (O. Lynch, 1997) This, of course, reinforces uneven distribution of the fruits of natural resource utilisation and enhances forest destruction. If national laws and the way they are implemented remain an obstacle to sustainable forest management it reflects the absence of a vigilant and strong civil society, often in parallel with a lack of freedom to express different opinions and the state's disregard for other essential human rights.

Legitimising the enclosure of forest commons

NGOs and indigenous organisations expose the still persistent erroneous belief that forestry can generate revenues and raw material to trigger national economic development. Hence, a striking similarity is that governments from both the North and the South legitimise centralised large scale forest management and authorise intensive commercial exploitation by referring to the need to protect jobs and revenues in the forest industry and allied economic sectors. As an ironic consequence millions of local people are denied access to forest resources. Various case studies indicate that people loose their jobs or source of livelihood, as a result of the enclosure of forest commons, ongoing mechanisation and the depletion of forest resources. And hence, it is reiterated that their governments hold the key to many problems. In addition to legal shortcomings, one refers to the poor performance of governments in executing their task of auditing and controlling natural resource use. In many cases deep rooted corruption permeates all levels of government involvement with forest management and land use planning.

This trend is currently exacerbated by ongoing economic liberalisation. One outstanding reason is that economic liberalisation -both in the South and in the North- is rarely accompanied by socio-political liberalisation. Powerful economic interest groups penetrate the hinterland in search of land, bio-mass, cheap electricity and other raw materials. Yet, socio-economic disadvantaged groups generally lack the means and formal-legal support to claim and protect their control over natural resources.

back to Table of Contents

Free play for multinational corporations

The globalisation of economies and the emergence of a powerful corporate sector results in significant shifts in the geographic location, type and intensity of forest use. (Jeffrey Sayer, 1997)

Local people and NGOs face the intervention by multinational companies, unchecked by their own governments. They have to witness the dominant process of economic monopolisation. For example, world-wide a limited number of transnational corporations control an increasingly large share of the logging, processing and marketing operations. Extremely rapid exploitation of forests around the world occurs, with what is believed by many to be an intentional disregard for the future of the forest while the capital equipment of the industry is allowed to deteriorate once the timber resources are exhausted. These developments occur at a time when governments are being forced to scale down and are being pressured to deregulate in order to attract foreign investments. (J. Sayer, 1997)

The political power of the conglomerates makes the evolution of effective legal instruments to control the forest industry a near impossibility. (Taiga Rescue Network, 1995)

Consequently, one can see the pattern that transnational corporations - notably from Asia, North America and Scandinavia - rapidly move into new forest frontiers, where either a political vacuum exists or the ruling elite applauds such companies' arrival. Forest are squeezed for all the profits to be get with minimal expenditure to maintain the infrastructures, the forest or long term employment. Very soon, local communities are left behind empty handed.

Imposing global management master plans

This process of exploitation and social marginalisation is enhanced in countries, notably in the South and central-eastern Europe, which face the burden of foreign debt, economic depression or a process of economic transition. Their governments are under pressure from multilateral financial and trade institutions to open-up and adjust their economies. This pressure also extends to domestic land and forest policies. Many governments are advised to 'rationalise' their forestry sector; an advice which generally serves industrial and international trade interests rather than the forest and the local or the national economy.

If it comes to explaining the occurrence of high rates of deforestation, land-less farmers and traditional shifting cultivators are being used as scapegoat's by governments, representatives from the logging industry and, unfortunately, also by journalists and academics without in depth knowledge. Governments try to hide away the impact of "legal" extractive practices, and they continue to point out the "destructive" practices of the poor (especially agriculture), as the primary, if not the overwhelming, cause of national deforestation. (O. Lynch, 1997)

Unauthorised agricultural conversion bears indeed responsibility for much deforestation. Accounts from for example Paraguay, Indonesia and the Democratic republic of Congo, confirm that official, government registered programmes towards forest conversion for agriculture and large scale commercial cash crop plantations is by far the greatest cause of deforestation. (J. Sayer, 1997)

In the face of new economic opportunities and problems of forest loss and other environmental threats, the preferred response of many bankers, planners, politicians, development practitioners, conventional nature conservationists, civil servants and heads of industry lies in increasingly global forms of management. If one accepts current patterns of economic development and the institutions and premises on which they rely, the logic of "global environmental management" is impeccable. "Sustaining" this process through damage control requires an equivalent level of, top-down, surveillance and intervention. The physical environment becomes a terrain to be reordered, zoned, parcelled up, people to be removed or cajoled in "collaboration", according to some preconceived Master Plan. (Nick Hildyard, cs, 1997)

Through channels of aid and trade, funds are made available under the pretext of development, environmental restoration (for example CO2 sequestration) which often adversely impacts on forests and forest dependent people. The majority of such funds are, ironically enough, used to invade the countryside with monoculture plantations, infrastructural works or industrial zones.

back to Table of Contents

Exporting forest destruction

Until recently, the overwhelming focus of global concern about deforestation has concentrated on the tropics, to the conspicuous exclusion of temperate forest issues. Conflicts over forest exploitation in Canada and the United States call into question the widely-accepted believe that forestry practices in the industrialised countries are sustainable. They implicitly also question the theoretical foundations of both logging and tree plant operations in tropical countries, which are mostly based on temperate forestry principles. Another critic on conventional scientific forestry is that it emphasises that the prevailing monetary-economic bias in forest resource management is in conflict with the objective of cultural and ecological diversity. Such a bias is a denial of the fact that hundreds of millions of people are dependent for their well-being on non-monetary, ecological and socio-cultural, conditions. It seems to escape the notice of decision makers, bankers and their advisors that forest dependent communities which once enjoyed the comparative advantage of their skills and knowledge of a rich ecosystem, loose their culture and get pushed to the margins of society once the forest is destroyed or access to it is denied to them.

The price of opposition

Under such circumstances, the state-sanctioned, "legal", usurpation of natural resources at the detriment of forest dependent rural people often goes un-interrupted since many local communities do not fully understand their legal rights and options (O. Lynch). Moreover, many local constituencies who wish to voice their interests, or seek legal assistance, face major practical (logistic, financial) and socio-cultural obstacles to approach decision-makers or the judiciary in the national and provincial capitals. In many instances, public participation has been the result of local mobilisation against an unwanted "development" activity. For local communities and supporting NGOs, their opposition has often claimed high sacrifices, as they face violence, recurrent intimidation and land deprivation (O. Lynch)

Opportunities and challenges

The failure of most governments to recognise the role of local forest management has not necessarily terminated local peoples' management of, and local tenure over, forest resources. In fact, despite expansive claims of ownership, many national governments exercise relatively little control over large areas of forest. Few governments have the staff needed, and the commitment, to survey and effectively manage vast areas classified as state-owned (O. Lynch). Under these circumstances, many governments merely tolerate local peoples presence in the forest, although their systems of natural resource management are often brandished as backward, unsustainable or 'encroachment'. There is however a growing range of initiatives and opportunities to foster collaboration between local people, state authorities and other parties in support of local sustainable forest management. Yet, like in other parts of the world, local forest dependent communities and their supporters face the dual challenge of: 1) effectively countering external forces which threaten local access to, and management of, forest; and 2) proving that their local system of forest management is viable and full of potentially.

back to Table of Contents

Against all odds

Local forest management under scrutiny

Unsurprisingly, forest industries and other powerful commercial interests have invariably opposed the consolidation and legitimisation of forest management by local communities. But also government authorities, media and academic institutions have questioned the ability of local people to manage their resources prudently. Critics express their scepticism by pointing out that: 1) local forest users are not capable of coping with changing social-demographic and economic circumstances and the new demands on forest management; 2) local forest management does not adequately safeguard conservation interests; 3) local forest users are unable to resist external sources of degradation and fail to restore degraded forest land; 4) local communities feature social and economic inequalities and institutional weaknesses, which together frustrate sustainable local forest management. (L. Lohman, 1991; M. Colchester,1992; C.J. Jepma,1995)

All these doubts can be translated back to the question whether local communities are able to manage the forest for basic needs and economic benefit and at the same time ensure the forest' integrity. Hence, it is important to explore shortcomings and failures and their possible causes and to look for ways to surmount these problems.

Firstly, poverty and population growth and the corresponding demand for food and other basic needs certainly increased pressure on the local forest environment in many regions. But areas which are deemed "overpopulated" are often the marginal lands where peasants have been forced unto, following displacement of these same people from their own land, which is being taken over by intensive export-oriented agriculture, mining operations and so forth. (N. Hildyard) In many countries, overpopulation is a misleading concept, if one takes the land distribution into account. Ecological stress on forest land would be better relieved by reclaiming "high potential areas" for peasant agriculture. (N. Hildyard, 1997) It is also undeniable that taxation, schooling, the need to "satisfy" government officials with bribes and fees, labour saving technology, new fashions and consumerism have generated a demand for cash. Therefore, cashing natural resources is the only option for most communities. This is then further complicated by external pressures to market the forest resources, which often results in over-exploitation of these resources.

Secondly, it is impossible to generalise about the commitment and capacity, or the absence of it, of local people to preserve the local biodiversity. Among the hundreds of millions of villagers who live in close connection with their local forest, it is often the indigenous peoples who tend to maintain a relatively non-agricultural, non-market-influenced relationship with the forest. Hunters and gatherers, such as the Durva in central India, whose custom and tradition it is to pass their lands on, unharmed, to the generations that follow them, cautiously manage their resources in order to ensure a sustained yield. The idea that present generations are merely stewards who hold the lands of the ancestors in trust for the future generations is echoed in many indigenous cultures around the world, and influences day to day behaviour. Shifting cultivation practices by indigenous communities, for instance, reveal not only the extreme variability and complexity of these traditional technologies, but also the enormous reserve of knowledge on practices to restore soil fertility and to preserve biodiversity. (L. Lohman, W. Perpongsaqcacharoen, 1989 and M. Colchester,1992)

Not all forest dependent peoples are members of ethnic minorities. Most often they are villagers who rely on a patch of secondary forest as part of the subsistence guarantee for the poorer section of the village. The forest provides fodder, cropland, protein, medicine, firewood, mushrooms, vegetables, building materials or any number of other products. However, many of these peoples share with indigenous groups both a lack of land security and a politically marginal status. These peoples are, so to speak, on the "front lines". They face similar or comparable conditions and problems with regard to balancing forest exploitation and conservation. They are often torn between maintaining a forest area for their own and communal use (e.g. as a watershed for their fields, to collect firewood and medicine) and market pressures to cut timber for profit. In addition they are often faced with government regulations to move out of forest areas to other areas, where they are forced by circumstances to encroach again. (W. Permpongsacharoen, p.3, 1989)

back to Table of Contents

However, not unlike the indigenous groups, many peasant peoples - even those whose main economic activity is permanent agriculture - have a very long history of using forest produce and regulating access to forest resources. There exists an enormous variety of structured ownership arrangements, within which management rules are developed, group size is known and enforced, incentives are in place for co-owners to follow the accepted institutional arrangements, and sanctions work to ensure compliance. (Cernea,1989 in:Colchester, p.120, 1992)

It needs to be acknowledged that local natural resource management is selective and in varying degrees manipulates the forest environment to suit their needs and hence it affects the pristine state of the forest's ecology. Critically, however, local people, unlike the staff of government departments, international agencies or corporations- have an immediate and long term stake in defending and evolving practices that conserve some level of biodiversity and self-reliance. (N. Hildyard, 1997)

One reason why local control is so essential to conservation is "that nature itself diversifies to make niches", and consequently, "enduring human adaptations must also be quite local. (O'Conner, R., 1998, in N. Hildyard, 1997)

Biological diversity is best preserved by societies which nourish those local differences - in which the traditions and natural history of each area interact to create distinctive systems of cultivation and water and forest use. It is also reiterated that such local customs, knowledge and practices do not only help preserve forest biodiversity in the tropical countries but, as case studies from amongst others Canada and the United States exemplify, is still guiding local management of forest areas in northern countries as well. Thirdly, environmental decline in forest areas inhabited by or adjacent to local communities often occurs where local social institutions and the environment are simultaneously under heavy pressure from the outside. (IUCN H.Q. Newsletter) For many forest dwellers and those who directly rely on the forest for their livelihood, the forest has many functions: securing water supplies, the availability of fodder for their animals, medicines for friends or family, firewood, the home they provide for local deities, a hiding place for army patrols and numerous other functions. In other words the forest is a source of well-being, dignity and independence, security and health. Defending their forest against degradation is therefore often a matter of life and death. (N. Hildyard, 1997)

However, in situations where governments leave local people empty handed -legally, technically, financially and politically- one can expect that sooner or later they will yield to outside forces beyond their control. Local people are often in great need of economic alternatives. Without other options, they may sooner or later succumb to the pressures of logging firms and other commercial interests and loose their resources, or trade them for very meagre and short term returns. The majority of recent studies, however, refer to the role of local communities as gate keeper and watch-dog over their forest, in response to external pressures. Yet, only in a few instances the studies mention government acceptance of the importance of local communities in controlling external use of the forest. Given the fact that their own survival and cultural values are at risk, local forest dependent communities have the strongest motivation to effectively check the number and the impact of illegal loggers, miners, poachers, colonists and other intruders. Besides that, efforts by the government to restore and manage degraded forest environments are often non-existent or costly and ineffective. 

One rightly cautions against a romantic view of local forest management. It is unwise to portray local forest dependent communities as being homogeneous. For example, the situation from an indigenous communities in India will be different from the situation of wood workers and their families in Canada. Apart from differences between regions, local management regimes are also not free from internal inequalities (particular gender inequities), social injustices or environmental destructive practices. (N. Hildyard,1997) However, for the vast majority of rural people, common management systems are an every day reality. For example grazing grounds, forests, irrigation systems or fishing territories are often managed by the community. Successful management of those resources depends on equitable power relations. Various case studies explain that, for all their inequalities, local management regimes exhibit "an uncommon equity". (Netting, R.1997) An equity that results from the "inability of a small community's elite to eliminate the bargaining power of any one of its members ..." (The Ecologist, 1992) 

More often than not, local forest users are bound to each other by a high degree of mutual dependence and values about treatment and sharing of the forest. This is backed by socialisation and enforcement. The vigilance and strength of local institutions is therefore so vulnerable for external forces, since external forces may lead to internal social and economic changes. These can undermine local authority, norms and values and increase inequalities among community members. Community based forest management systems and user rights derive their legitimacy and strength from the community in which they operate, rather than from the nation-state in which they are located (Lynch, 1997). The centralisation of forest management weakened -or even abolished- local management institutions. This is most tangible where land tenure is concerned. Tenure systems are complex and specify under what circumstances and to what extent certain resources are available (to inhabit, to harvest, to inherit, to hunt and gather on) to individuals and communities. Many NGOs, scientists and indigenous peoples' organisations report that the government denies the recognition of private, community based, rights over forest. Whereas in some cases the government grants certain tenure rights, they are vulnerable to arbitrary cancellation (O. Lynch, 1997) and as such discourage the recipients of such "privileges" to invest in careful, long term, use and management.

Another common problem is that forest dependent communities predominantly witness negative "role models", as they are played by government authorities, the industry and other non-locals. These communities are regularly experiencing 'hit and run' practices by outsiders (e.g. timber merchants, traders, poachers, corrupt government officials) who roam the forest in search of quick profit. Or they witness the conversion of forest by companies for large monoculture plantations (such as oil palm) and the use of forest by migrant colonists. These and other cultural, economic and political interventions undermine the norms and values which traditionally directed local peoples' attitude towards the forest.

Lack of understanding of the existing local culture and management traditions also hamper local forest management. Most claims about land and forest degradation are made by outsiders who are at a disadvantage of in making accurate observations. (Simon Rietbergen, ed., 1993) This is, for example, illustrated by a number of studies which describe how women and men have distinct skills and knowledge relating to the use of natural vegetation. Such differences being often the direct result of gender differences in household responsibilities. In both forest and agricultural based economies, it is primarily women who use and manage the produce of forests and trees. For this reason, women are critical for managing the diversity of the forest. (Shiva, V, 1989)

These differences in natural resource knowledge are thus crucial when defining directions for future actions. Thus women play a key-role as forest managers. And yet, past and current attempts to understand and acknowledge this have been and still are inadequate. More insight in these traditions may facilitate an interaction between Western and indigenous forestry. This, in turn, may contribute to a critical examination of conventional forest management. Where this is desirable, it may also help in the establishment of collaborative management systems which could bring forestry officials and communities together.

One should also caution against uncritically accepting outsiders' claims about local forest management as many times they themselves require the forest (or the land!) for other purposes than satisfying local peoples' needs. Hence, the argument of local peoples' inability is used to take and maintain control over forest lands and institutions. Lack of control and responsibility for maintaining resources by local communities, hampers motivation for the preservation of these resources. (Colchester, p.16-17:1992)

Without exception, local stakeholders reject a process whereby participation is a mere "tool for engineering consent for projects and policies whose framework have already been determined in advance." (N. Hildyard, 1997)

The local forest dependent communities share one common denominator: they do not argue for a blueprint for change. (See also N. Hildyard, 1997) But they all express, in their various ways, attempts by local people to reclaim the political process and to re-root it within the local community: in those who rely on the forest for their livelihood.

Various studies emphasise that where communities have a long and still vital tradition of community management, the need for the rapid re-establishment of community control is clear. However, where such traditions have long been lost due to the destruction of traditional institutions, the transition back to communal tenure and management might also prove to be destabilising and disruptive. (Colchester, M., p.21:1992) Many communities face the challenge to reassert values and to develop new methods to administer their forest lands. Given these problems and opportunities, it is useful to describe the approaches chosen by local people and their supporters (e.g. NGOs, concerned scientists, government officials) to maintain - or regain - a balance between local needs and aspirations, outside pressures and the forest environment.

back to Table of Contents

The fact that more evidence evolves that in many regions the economic value of NTFPs far outweigh that of wood products has also negative repercussions. Since NTFPs have become the object of further commercialisation, marginalised groups are at risk to loose their access to NTFPs to more powerful economic groups. Already in a number of countries we see monopolies over NTFPs - either by the state or by private industry - emerging, with local people being marginalised to a mere role of collectors. This brings us back to the cause of securing local peoples' land rights and forest user rights. It also draws our attention to the position of women who play a key role in NTFP management, since they require NTFPs in order to take care of their families' health, food and shelter. It all boils down to the need for a strengthened bargaining position of local people vis a vis middle men, government officials, pharmaceutical companies etc.

Donors, government agencies, NGOs and scientists should give priority to: 

· removing legal obstacles which hinder local people to manage and benefit from NTFPs; 

· technical and institutional strengthening (administrative, marketing); 

· sustainable extraction of NTFPs from the wild and cultivation of NTFPs when appropriate; 

· strengthening the position of women, notably those women who belong to marginal groups; 

· information sharing.

Whereas over the last couple of years more research is undertaken and increasingly more information is available internationally on the economic potential of NTFPs, much more can and needs to be done by donors, NGOs, scientists and governments to make relevant information available to local people. Exchange of experiences among local communities at a national or regional level has proven to be a useful mechanism of inspiration and mutual strengthening. An attempt towards identifying the best local practices, sharing information and experiences and assist with the development of community self-monitoring and inventory, has begun with the NTFP Exchange Programme for South and South East Asia (see also: http://www.ntfp.org). Some successful examples of the usefulness of NTFPs are given in the chapter "successful initiatives".

Alliances in support of forest and people

Local forest dependent communities, their support organisations and NGOs find themselves often trapped in a vicious circle of isolation and lack of contacts, information, financial means, recognition and political support. Unless this circle is broken, local forest management practices will not have an opportunity to prove their potential as a more sustainable alternative to present dominant systems of forest exploitation.

External agents, such as governments, consultants, aid agencies and NGOs have much to contribute to help break through this isolation. At the legal level and the management level, these agents have probably most to offer in the field of redistribution and regulation of access to natural resources. It is about enhancing possibilities for marginal groups to claim and protect their access to these resources. This requires new political partisanship and sensitivity for the needs and priorities of forest dependent people and their local resource management systems.

It calls for funds and other means of support to be offered in the spirit of active solidarity - not in order to co-opt stakeholders to a preconceived agenda (N. Hildyard, 1997). Such active solidarity may take many forms. Those who wish to collaborate with local stakeholders should also be prepared to make a long term commitment to built trust and partnership. At least, development agencies and other external agents should make hard choices as to whom they work with. Moreover, only if genuine attention is given to strengthen the position of politically marginalised groups, it can be avoided that external interventions add, unwillingly, to the down going spiral of poverty and environmental degradation. In that respect, bilateral donors and multilateral financiers are urged to make community forestry and non-displacement of local people conditional upon their funding.

Pressure on governments to open-up space for local forest management - as an alternative to bureaucratic centralised management- has certainly benefited the cause of forest dependent communities. Given the enormous drive for liberalisation, there is, however, reason for a word of warning. Critique on governments, notably the forest services, for their inefficiency and corruption, has proved useful for those seeking to privatise forest management. In the end, whose agenda gets heard, and implemented, will not depend on rational debate but on the relative bargaining power of the various interest groups. Failing to be aware of the different agendas being pursued could result in marginalising those for whom political struggle is a matter of defence of livelihood. (N. Hildyard, 1997)

The fact that NGOs are being faced with increasingly complex options, offered at the initiative of international agencies, the corporate sector and governments - e.g. "Debt-for-Nature-Swaps", "Joint Implementation", "Joint Forest Management", convenants with the industry, Global Environment Facility projects - also warrants caution. Embracing such projects simply because of practical considerations ("at last there is a chance to make some practical progress"), or because an involvement offers an opportunity to put one's case to those in power, may be misguided.

Rather than "participating" in programmes that have been mapped out by institutions with little or no commitment to structural change and which fail to reflect the political demands of marginal groups, a better route may well be to avoid involvement in them. NGOs and others, whose co-operation is needed by such agencies to implement their projects, might be better off forming alliances in support of structural change with genuine allies whose politics they share. Such alliances might well include sympathetic individuals within government departments and industry, just as they may include a wide range of other NGOs. Critically, however, it is their own agenda that such alliances seek to press rather than someone else's. (N. Hildyard, 1997) In sum, it is important for NGOs and others to take a more political-committed approach to participatory projects - and to press donors, governments and researchers to do likewise. (Source: IUCN Forest Conservation Programme Newsletter No. 19)

More than ever there is a need to built partnerships: between local people, human rights organisations, conservation and environmental NGOs, trade unions, scientists, government officials and donors. At the same time, it is essential to ensure that partnerships are not dominated by one group, such as funding agencies. It also requires a willingness to suspend rank and material power by more powerful players, such as government agencies and donors (Steven E. Daniels cs, 1997). Notably forest departments should adapt a role as service providers and, if need be, as arbiters. These agencies still have a role to perform as policemen and regulators. But this should entirely serve the purpose of protecting the forest and supporting forest dependent communities to defend their environment against outsiders. NGOs and other partners should also be prepared to be accountable to their constituencies and to step aside whenever local people see an opportunity to express their concerns and priorities themselves.

Whereas recognition of tenure rights is essential, it is in itself not sufficient. Governments and donors should pay much greater attention to the provision of technical assistance, along with credit and health programmes, which respond to the needs and perspectives of local communities. Notably in the interface between agriculture and forest. Local people, NGOs, scientists, governments and donors face the challenge of choosing approaches which bring the objectives of food security, economic welfare, sustainable management and conservation together.

back to Table of Contents

Addressing underlying causes of forest destruction and social hardship

Causes of deforestation and hence also it's solutions lie most often outside the forest and go beyond the community, the district or even the nation state. Halting deforestation demands action on interrelated aspects of trade, environment and social justice - at different levels. It requires a reorientation of the relationship - of rights and responsibilities -between states and their citizenry and between states and the private sector industry. At the highest international level we see a fierce contradiction between global legislation on trade, environment and human rights. To a great extent this contradiction overlaps with the economic conflict between north and south, which surfaced most strongly during the lead up to the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 and which still blocks common action to solve the planet's ecological crisis, deforestation and biodiversity loss in particular.

The unwillingness of OECD country governments to give in to appeals from the South to relieve debt, offer better terms of trade and provide more financial and technical assistance meets with the refusal of Southern governments to give up their sovereignty over natural resources. This conflict, which continues until this day, has also conveniently misused by the political and economic elite's in the South as well as in the North to obscure the facts that deforestation in the North is no less critical as it is in the South and that blatant materialism and greed of the elite's in the North as well as in the South is satisfied with little consideration for sharing the benefits of economic progress and technological advance with the marginalised groups of society.

Over the last decade international agreements evolved which are designed to facilitate 'free trade', mostly manifested by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and recent negotiations of a new Multilateral Agreement of Investment (MAI). A second, much weaker, set of international legal standards developed, which deal with human rights, minorities and indigenous peoples. A third set of international environmental agreements emerged, such as the Convention on Biodiversity and a non-legally binding Agreement on Forests. Whereas the afore mentioned trade agreements introduce effective enforcement mechanisms and penalties for non-compliance, no such mechanisms exist to give teeth to the international human rights and environmental agreements.

"The result of this lack of a holistic vision has been a patchwork of international laws which not only fail to intersect effectively but actually work against each other. On the one hand, the environmental negotiations pursued through Earth Summit (UNCED) have established the internationally agreed legal principle that forests and most natural resources are matters of national sovereignty; off limits to international intervention, regulation or control. On the other hand, parallel international negotiations to promote the liberalisation of trade, pursued through the GATT, have simultaneously made illegal unilateral action by states to restrict trade in products produced by environmentally destructive means." (M. Colchester, 1997)

Opportunism is the rule and hence we can witness unique alliances between such countries as Indonesia, Malaysia and Canada pushing for a trade biased forest convention to pursue their forestry sector industry and to keep environmental pressure groups at bay. Another manifestation of such North South alliances is the APECs (a platform of Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation) forest products sector agreement, called the Early Voluntary Sectoral Liberalisation (EVSL), which could become a Global Free Trade Agreement on Forests. It's major features will be to remove all tariff and non-tariff barriers (such as national social and environmental regulations), which could impede market access and distort trade

An increasing number of people are at risk of loosing their livelihood, without any assurance that one will enjoy access to the opportunities and facilities offered by modern society. For indigenous communities, small and marginal farmers, land-less labourers and wood workers - access to and control over natural resources offers the best guarantee for well being and survival. Therefore, governments, donors and international economic institutions (e.g. the IMF, the European Union, the OECD) need to prepare an answer to the fact that the current wave of unchecked economic liberalisation is rapidly undermining the basis of livelihood of millions of vulnerable groups and has unprecedented environmental consequences. This calls for fiscal reforms, adapted trade agreements and formal investment policies and regulations.

It also assumes that one links up with local initiatives and that one gives priority to the needs and political demands of marginalised and oppressed groups. This may require them to take measures that actively disempower dominant groups, for example by promoting agrarian reform and by enhancing the position of women. The primary goal of forest management and reforestation programmes should be to benefit people who depend on forests as a source of income and for their shelter, food, firewood, fodder, medicine, and other basic needs and to enable forests to perform the many vital ecological functions. Commercialisation of forest resources should only be pursued if, and to the extend that, it does not compromise the well-being of local people and the integrity of the forest ecosystem. Those enterprises, which do not accept the primacy of local communities' needs, and that do not respect them as their equal partners in development and conservation activities, must not be permitted to operate in such areas. This calls for more transparency to enable the general public to increase their participation in the control and protection of the nation's forest wealth.

Growing numbers of citizens perceive their governments as serving clients with vested interests, and in response demand less of it or even abrogate their democratic responsibilities altogether. The more this occurs, the more isolated the government becomes from its citizenry and the more it finds itself catering to special interests. It is vital, however, that citizens do not allow themselves from being alienated from their governments since it is: 'the only public force they have purchase on." (the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, 1996) Hence it is essential that the public is "educated". There is sufficient justification to conclude that a wealth of experiences and examples still exists around the world which proves that enhancing local forest management can be the solution for achieving the sustainable use and protection of forests. It remains that there is a potential conflict between local control over forest resources and over-exploitation, which is mainly due to external pressures. A continuous investment in local people is needed to consolidate or strengthen their ability to defend and sustain the forest for their own immediate benefit, and for society at large.

Since the Earth Summit (UNCED), the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) has managed to keep forest on the political agenda by creating an International Forum on Forests which produced at least consensus on 135 practical actions to address the forest crisis. Another important initiative is the Commission on Sustainable Development and Forests which conducted a series of regional hearings with the specific purpose of surfacing underlying conflicts and causes of deforestation.

The hearings once again emphasised the cross-sectoral linkages and confirmed that, for example, politics of energy, agriculture and transport directly bear on forests and forest dependent economies and cultures. Other inventories and studies explain how IMF and World Bank structural adjustments programmes (SAPs), in for instance Costa Rica, the Philippines, Chile and Ghana led to forest destruction. These analysis point out that the experience of countries subject to SAPs should remind us that "by signing the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Uruguay Round Agreement we have in effect subjected the entire world to one vast structural adjustment programme"(Edward Goldsmith, 1997).

Such studies warn against the irreversible social and environmental effects of increased economic competition and deregulation. It is essential that the findings of these and similar national and international studies and forums are widely disseminated and discussed. e.a. similar findings. As "only a well informed and enfranchised public will be concerned enough to see the flaws in the present system and demand alternatives". (Edward Goldsmith,1997)

back to Table of Contents

Around the world, local communities and civil society organisations have been successful in managing their forests. Non Timber Forest Products (NTFP's) and land rights were part of the process to come to successful management. Successful local initiatives about NTFPs and about land rights are described in the Encyclopedia of Sustainability, a project of Both ENDS and can be downloaded: http://www.bothends.org/encycl/encycl.php Digital- or hardcopies can also be requested for at: encylopedia@bothends.org. The following are short summaries of some of these initiatives:

Non-Timber Forest Products Exchange Programme (NTFP-EP) 

Linking economics to conservation in South and South-East Asia 

The NTFP Task Force, Both ENDS and Profound have set up the 'NTFP- Exchange Program', which enables communities that have lost the qualities of sustainable extraction of forest products to recreate these traditions. In some countries, such as Sri Lanka, sustainable practices have to be reintroduced as traditions for the harvest of NTFPs have been forgotten. In Indonesia and several parts of India, a highly evolved culture for the judicious use of forest products still flourishes and these lessons can be used in other countries in the region. http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=4&id=24&id_language=1 (English, Spanish)

Women, Politics and NTFPs 

The changing role of tribal women in Bastar - India 

This initiative, organized by the organization Mahila Arthik Samooh, provides an example of how a group of indigenous women claimed their territorial and user rights. The women refused to let the Forest Department take control over the forests by claiming control over the collection of NTFPs, and by demanding an equal opportunity in the trade of these NTFPs. The success of the Bastar women continues until today. This has considerably improved the well-being

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=4&id=91&id_language=1 

Economic development and Ecosystem conservation 

Sustainable use and management of Amazonian Natural Fibres in the Brazilian Amazon 

The fibre project from the Amazon demonstrates the possibility to use NTFPs as part of a large-scale industrial production line, attending an international market with competitive products, but simultaneously assist the poor rural communities in improving their basic living conditions and develop entrepreneurial and producing skills. POEMA brought together a large array of actors with various interests in concrete collaborative action, this initiative proved the possibilities of building on global trade and economic trends, such as the social and environmental responsibility of public companies and the development of alternative consumption trends. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=4&id=94&id_language=1

Counter Mapping - World Wide 

Maps powerful tools in reclaiming ancestral lands 

Responsible organisation: Local Earth Observation. Governments have never accepted traditional methods, such as songs or poetry, as valid demarcations of a territory. Thus, not being able to proof their land rights by geographical maps, indigenous peoples lost control over their territories. By using Power Mapping (developed by Local Earth Observation), indigenous communities can develop geographical maps of their territories, applying appropriate information technologies that are user friendly and flexible. Furthermore, it consolidates cultural survival by creating an information base. These data can be used also to develop long term resource management plans. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=9&id_language=1

The Struggle for Indigenous Rights 

Claiming ancestral lands and territories in Palawan - Philippines 

Indigenous peoples face the threat of being displaced from their ancestral territories by a constant influx of newcomers searching for minerals and timber and by governmental policies that are often in favor of such exploitation. NATRIPAL is a federation of 80 villages on an island in the Philippines (Palawan). They have assisted indigenous people in securing a Certificate for Ancestral Domain Claims (CADC) and in developing management plans for these areas. They are involved in a whole range of activities: from providing alternative means (e.g. trade and extraction of NTFPs) to getting government departments to recognize tribal councils. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=25&id_language=1 (English, Spanish, Bahasa Indonesia)

From Spectators to Managers of Tropical Forests 

Co-operation between communities and the Forest service as key issue - Ghana 

Ghana has the most advanced law on community forest management, formulated to halt the illegal logging of forest. Since 1995 the forests are managed by the Forest Service, certified timber firms and communities. Rudeya supplies information to communities on the Forest Law. Now, communities have a decision making role, a right to veto, and they share in the revenues through contracts with logging companies. For the communities claims to be honoured a management plan for their forest is a precondition, and this is also set up. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=36&id_language=1 (English, Spanish, French)

The Politics of Environment 

Environmental coalitions in the tropical rainforest of Nigeria 

Coalitions with local, national and international NGOs are often needed to enable communities to gain control over forests and to halt or diminish the effects of destructive (export) logging activities. The NGO Ikom Conscience, with the help of a broad coalition, mobilised public opinion and filed cases in court against the logging company WEMPCO. Nowadays, they have set up a successful coalition that lobbies at local, national and EU parliamentary level, and supports NGOs in setting up Village Forest Committees. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=55&id_language=1 (English, Spanish, Bahasa Indonesia, French)

Intangible Zones 

2.7 million acres of indigenous territory declared an intangible zone - Ecuador 

Two national parks, inhabited by indigenous people, in the north of Ecuador faced the extraction of oil, timber and minerals by the industry. Acción Ecológica, and local NGOs, sought the total protection of this indigenous territory and its resources. A campaign by environmental and indigenous organisations resulted in forbidding commercial exploitation in the park (only eco-tourism is now allowed), respect for the collective territorial rights, and management of the parks by indigenous organisations. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=15&id_language=1 (English, Spanish, Bahasa Indonesia)

Sustainable Management of Natural Resources 

Law Reforms in Indonesia 

The Indonesian state laws are accelerating natural resource exploitation, without any public consultation. Ownership and control of land and natural resources needs to be legitimized by government bodies. Due to this dominant state system, traditional customary law is increasingly disobeyed, and the manner of interacting with nature is forgotten. In order to strengthen community based management, ELSAM (Lembaga Studi dan Advokasi Masyarakat) initiated a program to increase the quantity and quality of Community Law Facilitators (CLFs). By increasing the pool of CLFs, local communities are strengthened in their legal argumentation, thereby achieving a stronger position vis-à-vis the state legal system. HuMa (Association for Community and Ecologic-Based Law Reform) gave the program a more formal structure. 

http://www.bothends.org/encycl/cases/viewcase.php?cat=5&id=95&id_language=1 (English, Spanish)

back to Table of Contents

ANPED - The Northern Alliance for Sustainability 

PO Box 59030, 1040 KA Amsterdam, the Netherlands 

Tel: +31-20-4751742 

Fax: +31-20-4751743 

E-mail: anped@antenna.nl 

Website: http://www.anped.org

The alliance is a cooperation between grassroots-groups, organisations and networks dealing with environment and development issues in Europe, the Russian Federation and North America. The work of the alliance focuses on a.o. the relationship between energy, climate change and deforestation.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) a.k.a. Milieudefensie 

PO Box 19199, 1000 GD Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Visit address: Damrak 26, Amsterdam) 

Tel: +31-20-6221369 

Fax: +31-20-6392181 

E-mail: foei@foei.org 

Website: http://www.foei.org

FoEI runs the secretariat for the world-wide federation of national Friends of the Earth organisations. Campaigns, facilitated by FoEI and conducted by the national chapters, address issues such as climate change, deforestation, high dams, ozone and air pollution, the impacts of the depletion of marine resources, biotechnology, eco-taxes and multilateral development bank loans. FoEI supports political lobbying, citizens' actions and networking with environmental, consumer and human rights groups.

Greenpeace International 

Keizersgracht 176, 1016 DW Amsterdam, the Netherlands 

Tel: +31-20-5236222 

Fax: +31-20-5236500 

E-mail: greenpeace.international@ams.greenpeace.org 

Website: http://www.greenpeace.org

Greenpeace campaigns to prevent the destruction of the world's climate, rainforests and oceans, by aiming to halt industrial, nuclear and toxic pollution as well as over use of natural resources. Greenpeace draws attention to environmental problems and solutions via the media and direct lobbying of government and industry officials.

ICRAF - The World Agroforestry Centre 

United Nations Avenue, Gigiri PO Box 30677-00100 GPO Nairobi, Kenya 

Tel: +254-20-524000 

Fax: +254-20-524001 

E-mail: ICRAF@cgiar.org 

Website: www.worldagroforestrycentre.org

The World Agroforestry Centre is an international research organization supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). They are engaged in strategic and applied research and development activities, leading to more sustainable and productive land use. They do this in close partnership with national agricultural research systems, universities, NGOs and private organizations in both the South and the North. Their four primary themes are: Land and People, Trees and Markets, Environmental Services and Strengthening Institutions. Regional offices are in Peru, India, Indonesia, Mali and Zimbabwe.

International Alliance of Indigenous Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forest (IAITPTF) 

14 Rudolf Place, Business Estate, Miles Street, SW8 1RP London, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-171-5873737 

Fax: +44-171-7938686 

E-mail: morbeb@gn.apc.org 

Website: www.iaip.gn.apc.org

The alliance tries to gain recognition and respect for indigenous peoples vis-a-vis development banks through the dissemination of information regarding indigenous peoples and by the organisation of workshops.

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) 

IUCN World Headquarters, Rue Mauverney 28, 1196 Gland, Switzerland 

Tel: +41-22-9990000 

Fax: +41-22-9990002 E

E-mail: mail@iucn.org 

Website: www.iucn.org

The IUCN Mission is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.

Taiga Rescue Network (TRN) 

P.O. Box 116, 962 23 Jokkmokk, Sweden 

Tel: +46-971-17039 

Fax: +46-971-12057 

E-mail: ifo@taigarescue.org 

Website: www.taigarescue.org

TRN is an international network of NGOs and Indigenous Peoples and Nations working for the protection and sustainable use of the Boreal Forests. It was founded in 1992 at an international conference in Jokkmokk, Northern Sweden. Their main activities are education and advocacy, campaigning, research and policy analysis. 130 organisations, primarily in the boreal countries (Canada, Russia, US Alaska, Scandinavia) and main consumer countries (Germany, UK, the Netherlands, US, Japan) are formal participants of the network today. TRN has one international Coordination Center located in Jokkmokk, Sweden and regional nodes.

Third World Network (TWN) 

228 Macalister Road, 10400 Penang, Malaysia 

Tel: +60-4-2266728 / 2266159 

Fax +60-4-2264505 

E-mail: twn@po.jaring.my 

Website: www.twnside.org.sg

The Third World Network is an independent non-profit international network of organizations and individuals involved in issues relating to development, the Third World and North- South issues. Its objectives are to conduct research on economic, social and environmental issues pertaining to the South; to publish books and magazines; to organize and participate in seminars; and to provide a platform representing broadly Southern interests and perspectives at international fora such as the UN conferences and processes.

World Rainforest Movement (WRM) - Forest Peoples Programme 

International Secretariat 

Maldonado 1858, Montevideo 11200, Uruguay 

Tel: +598-2-4132989 

Fax: +598-2-418 0762 

E-mail: wrm@wrm.org.uy 

Website: http://www.wrm.org.uy

WRM Northern Office 

1C The Fosseway Business Centre Stratford Road, Moreton-in-Marsh, GL 56 9NQ United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-1608-652895 

Fax: +44-1608-652878 

E-mail: info@fppwrm.gn.apc.org

WRM was formed, as an informal network, in 1986 by NGO leaders and policy analysts in the rainforest movement to co-ordinate international campaigns to preserve the world's rainforests. WRM collaborates on issues ranging from tree plantations for pulp and paper to indigenous land rights. WRM's international secretariat is based in Uruguay with a advocacy and support node in the UK.

WWF - Forests For Life Programme 

c/o WWF International Avenue du Mont Blanc, 1196 Gland, Switzerland 

Tel: +41-22-3649111 

Fax: +41-22-3648836 

Website: http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/forests/index.cfm

Offices with a particular interest in forest work include: WWF Cameroon, WWF Germany, WWF Indonesia and WWF Mediterranean (for contact details see website). The WWF is an international conservation NGO, with 28 national organisations, active in over 50 countries. WWF is working to provide solutions to the threats facing the world's forests which could potentially undermine forest conservation. Of particular concern to WWF are illegal logging and forest crime, conversion of forests to plantation crops of palm oil and soy, forest fires and climate change. WWF's 'Forests for Life' programme is attacking many of these problems and is working to protect, manage and restore the world's forests. It concentrates both on the ground efforts and at policy work to conserve the world's forests. WWF works through specific projects in threatened areas, education programs, international law and treaties and lobbying on national and international policy.

back to Table of Contents

International multilateral organisations

ITTO/ITTA - The International Tropical Timber Organisation 

International Organisations Center, 5th Floor, Pacifico-Yokohama1-1-1 Minato-Mirai, Nishi-ku, Yokohama, 220-0012 Japan 

Tel: +81-45-2231110 

Fax: +81-45-2231111 

E-mail: Itto@itto.or.jp 

Website: www.itto.or.jp

The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) was created by treaty in 1983 and its headquarters was established in Yokohama, Japan, in late 1986. The primary idea is to provide an effective framework for consultation among producer and consumer member countries on all aspects of the world timber economy within its mandate.

Secretariat of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UN-CSD) 

United Nations Plaza, Room DC2-2220, New York, New York 10017, United States 

Tel: +1-212-9633170 

Fax: +1-212-9634260 

E-mail: dsd@un.org

The CSD is a semi-permanent commission of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), with 53 members. The Commission ensures the high visibility of sustainable development issues within the UN system and helps to improve the UN's coordination of environment and development activities. The CSD also encourages governments and international organisations to host workshops and conferences on different environmental and cross-sectoral issues. The results of these expert-level meetings enhance the work of CSD and help the Commission to work better with national governments and various non-governmental partners in promoting sustainable development worldwide.

United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) 

Secretariat of the United Nations Forum on Forests DC2-2286, 2 UN Plaza, New York, NY 10017, United States 

Tel: +1-212-9633160 / 9633401 

Fax: +1-917-3673186 

E-mail: unff@un.org 

Website: www.un.org/esa/forests

In October 2000, the Economic and Social Committee of the United Nations (ECOSOC), established the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF), a subsidiary body with the main objective to promote "… the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end…" based on the Rio Declaration, the Forest Principles, Chapter 11 of Agenda 21 and the outcome of the IPF/IFF Processes and other key milestones of international forest policy. As an intergovernmental policy forum, the UNFF is composed of all States Members of the United Nations and specialized agencies and meets in annual sessions.

World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development (WCFSD) 

c/o International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) 161 Portage Avenue East, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4, Canada 

Tel: +1-204-9587700 / 9587756 

E-mail: akrish@iisd.ca 

Website: www.iisd.org/wcfsd

Following the Earth Summit in 1992 it was agreed that solutions to forest degradation are likely to be more political than technical. Accordingly, the InterAction Council, a group of some former heads of government and State, decided to establish an independent commission with the aim to increase awareness of the dual function of world forests in preserving the natural environment and contributing to economic development. It aims to broaden consensus on the data, science and policy aspects of forest conservation and management and to build confidence between North and South on forest matters with emphasis on international co-operation. The WCFSD will present its report and recommendations for consideration by the UN, National Governments and the public at large. Its report will include: A global vision of forests in the 21st Century including recommendations for further strengthening scientific and environmental policy research on issues of worldwide concern.

back to Table of Contents

Related to Multilateral Financial Institutions

Bank Information Center (BIC) 

733 15th Street, NW, Suite 1126, DC 20005 Washington DC, United States 

Tel: +1-202-7377752 

Fax: +1-202-7371155 

E-Mail: info@bicusa.org 

Website: www.bicusa.org

BIC is an NGO which provides information to international NGOs on projects funded by multinational development banks (MDBs) and monitors MDB activities and policies that have negative impacts on the environment and local populations. BIC focuses on MDB policy regarding access to information, public participation and environmental assessment. BIC works primarily at the direction of Southern partners.

Central and Eastern Europe Bankwatch Network (CEEBN) 

Kratka 26, 100 00 Praha 10 the Czech Republic 

Tel/Fax: +420-2-74816571 

E-mail: main@bankwatch.org 

Website: www.bankwatch.org

CEEBN monitors national and international bank policies on environment and NGO involvement.

Certification and sustainable forest management

Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) 

P.O. Box 6596 JKPWB, 10065 Jakarta, Indonesia 

Tel: +62-251-622622 

Fax: +62-251-622100 

E-mail: cifor@cgiar.org 

Website: www.cifor.cgiar.org

CIFOR has a special programme on the testing of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management.

Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) 

FSC International Center Bonn Goerresstr. 15 / II a, 53113 Bonn, Germany 

Tel: +49-228-367660 

Fax: +49-228-3676630 

E-mail: fscoax@fscoax.org 

Website: www.fscoax.org

An independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation. FSC was founded in 1993 by representatives from the environmental movement, forest industry, indigenous peoples and certification organisations from 25 different countries. FSC's mission is to work for long-term sustainable forest practices in all parts of the world. It provides an umbrella organisation and structure within which qualified independent certifier can operate according to clear guidelines and using agreed standards covering social, environmental and economic aspects of forest management drawn up by professionals in forestry as well as in ecology and in rural and social development. Certified products are legally authorised to carry the FSC trademark that works as an incentive in the marketplace for good forestry practice.

Forest Certification Resource Centre 

Website: www.certifiedwood.org 

Maintained by: Metafore The Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center, 721 N.W. Ninth Avenue Suite 300, Portland, Oregon 97209, United States 

Tel: +1-503-2242205 

Fax: +1-503-2242216 

E-mail: info@metafore.org

Rainforest Alliance - SmartWood Program 

Goodwin-Baker Building, 60 Millet Street, Richmond, VT 05477 United States 

Tel: +1-802-4345491 

Fax: +1-802-4343116 

E-mail: info@smartwood.org 

Website: www.smartwood.org

SmartWood is a certification program that provides objective evaluation of forest management practices, forest products, timber sources and companies. SmartWood certification requires sustainable forest management that both promotes the security of the forest and provides long-term economic benefits for the certified forest manager and related wood-buying manufacturers.

Scientific Certification Systems- Forestry 2000 

Powell Street, Suite 1350, Emeryville, CA 94608, United States 

Tel: +1-510-4528007 

Fax: +1-510-4528001 

E-Mail: rhrubes@scscertified.com 

Website: www.scscertified.com/forestry

Soil Association Woodmark Programme - Woodmark Scheme 

86 Colston Street, Bristol BS1 5BB, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-117-9290661 

Fax: +44-117-9252504 

E-mail: wm@soilassociation.org 

Website: www.soilassociation.org

back to Table of Contents

Regional

Africa

AFAN - African Forest Action Network 

PO Box 2503, Yaounde, Cameroon 

Tel: +237-239702 

Fax: +237-230768

AFAN is a gathering of African NGOs working in the field of conservation of forest resources with a mission of improving communication between its members and strengthening their institutional and managerial capacities. AFAN has national focal point in Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Burkina-Faso, Gabon, C.A.R., Nigeria, Burundi, Congo and Ghana.

IUCN Regional Offices for Africa 

Bureau regional de l'UICN pour l'Afrique de l'Ouest 

B.P. 1618, Ouagadougou 01, Burkina Faso 

Tel: +226-307047 

Fax: +226-307561 

E-mail: brao@iucn.org 

Website: www.iucn.org/brao

Bureau regional de l'UICN pour l'Afrique Centrale 

B.P. 5506, Yaoundé, Cameroon 

Tel: +237-2216496 

Fax: +237-221-6497 

E-mail: iucnbrac@iucn.org 

Website: www.iucn.org/places/brac

Regional Office for Eastern Africa 

PO Box 68200, Nairobi, Kenya 

Tel: +254-2-890606 

Fax: +254-2-890615 

E-mail: mail@iucnearo.org 

Website: www.iucn.org/places/earo

Regional Office for Southern Africa 

PO Box 745, Harare, Zimbabwe 

Tel: +263-4-728266 

Fax: +263-4-720738 

E-mail: postmaster@iucnrosa.org.zw 

Website: www.iucnrosa.org.zw

Besides the Regional offices, IUCN also has Country and Project offices in Africa; several of these offices have their own websites which can be found at: www.iucn.org/ourwork/africa.htm

Center for Environment and Development (CED) (FoE Cameroon) 

Samuel Nguiffo, B.P. 3430, Yaoundé, Cameroon 

Tel: +237-2223857 

Fax: +237-2223859 

E-mail: infos@cedcam.org 

Website: www.africa-environment.org/ced

Works to promote sustainable forest management in co-operation with the local population. It tries to enhance the protection and conservation of the biodiversity and does research in the use of non-timber forest products. It works to strengthen local communities, also in the field of legal tenure aspects, and is involved in lobby activities.

Dodoma Environmental Network (DONET) 

PO Box 1414, Dodoma, Tanzania 

Tel: +255-61-324750 

Fax: +255-61-324750 

E-mail: donet@maf.org

An environmental NGO with the aim to create an exchange forum on environmental conservation issues between DONET and others, within and outside Tanzania. It tries to create awareness among people for the environment and the conservation of nature by the publishing of a newsletter.

Forest Action Network (FAN) 

PO Box 21428, Magiwa Estate, House 34, Mbagathi Road, Off Mbagathi, Nairobi, Kenya 

Tel: +254-2-718398 / 350139 

Fax: +254-2-718398 

E-mail: fan@fanworld.org 

Website: www.fanworld.org/fan/fan.htm

A NGO that was established in 1995 to work closely with local communities in utilising forest resources on a sustainable basis. FAN works together with the Forests, Trees and People Programme (FTPP) to strengthen local peoples' ability to manage and use their natural resources sustainable. The Network works mostly with national and community based organisations.

Friends of the Earth Ghana 

Private Mail Bag, General Post Office PO Box 3794, Accra, Ghana 

Tel: +233-225963 

Fax: +233-227993

An environmental NGO works on forest issues on different levels: it promotes local forest management and the user rights of indigenous peoples, it stimulates the use of non-timber forest products and initiates afforestation programs. The organisation is involved in lobbying and tries to improve the communication between NGO's in Ghana.

FoE has also local offices in Benin, Cameroon, Mali, Mauritius, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, and Togo. 

Website: www.foei.org/groups/index.html

Nigerian Conservation Foundation (NCF) 

PO Box 74638, Victoria Island, Lagos, Nigeria 

E-mail: enquiries@ncf-nigeria.org 

Website: www.africanconservation.org/ncftemp

A NGO that works on a national level on themes like forest degradation, local forest management and biodiversity. AFAN member.

WWF 

The WWF has offices in Cameroon, Central African Republic, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Madagascar, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Tunisia, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Contact details: www.panda.org/about_wwf/who_we_are/offices/offices_africa.cfm

WWF has divided it's work in Africa in 6 regions, these are: Central Africa Programme Office (CARPO), Eastern Africa Programme Office (EARPO), Madagascar and West Indian Ocean Programme Office, Southern Africa Programme Office (SARPO), Western Africa Programme Office (WARPO), Mediterranean Programme Office 

Website: www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/africa/where/index.cfm

back to Table of Contents

Asia & the Pacific

Academy of Development Science 

Kashele PO, Karjat Taluka, Raigad District, Maharashtra, 410 201 India 

Tel: +91-2148-24007 / 24008 

Fax: +91-2148-22479 

E-mail: pn3@vsnl.net.in

Promotion of scientific and cultural life in rural areas. Collaborating with rural tribal people on the protection and uses of local flora, in particular medicinal plants.

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) 

41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi. India - 110062 

Tel: +91-11-29955124 / 6110 / 6394 

Fax: +91-11-29955879 

E-mail: cse@cseindia.org 

Website: www.cseindia.org

Independent public interest research organisation, founded in 1980, which aims to increase public awareness of issues in science, environment and development through dissemination of information in publications, pamphlets, newspapers, films and other media.

Centre of Minor Forest Products (COMFORPTS) 

HIG 2, No. 8, Indirapuram, General Mahadev Singh Road, P.O. Majra, Dehradun 248 171. Uttaranchal, India 

Tel: +91-135-2621302 / 9936 (O), 2627318 (R); 

Fax: +91-135-2629936

A research organisation that focuses on the enhancement of the production of forest products for mobilising and assisting people in meeting their subsistence needs, boosting income and generating employment activities particularly to disadvantaged groups of people. They are involved in local forest management and biodiversity.

Chipko Information Centre 

P.O. Silyara via Ghansali Tehri-Garhwal, U.P., 249155 India 

Fax: In New Delhi: +91-11-4364914 In Tehri-Garhwal: +91-1376-84566 

A grassroots movement that is the result of hundreds of decentralised and locally autonomous initiatives to save the peoples means of subsistence and their communities by the non-violent resistance to the destruction of forests notably in the Himalayas.

Foundation for Ecological Recovery 

409 Soi Rohitsuk, Pracharatbampen Rd., Huaykwang, Bangkok 10320, Thailand 

Tel: +62-2-6910718 / 19 / 20 

Fax. +66-2-6910714 

E-mail: terraper@ksc.net.th 

Website: www.terraper.org/index.html

Towards Ecological Recovery and Regional Alliance (TERRA) was established in 1991 to focus on issues concerning the natural environment and local communities within the Mekong Region. TERRA works to support the network of NGOs and people's organisations inBurma, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Vietnam and Thailand, encouraging exchange and alliance-building and drawing on the experience of development and environment issues inThailand. Their sister organisation, Project for Ecological Recovery (PER) was established in 1986 to support local communities within Thailand in protecting rivers, forests, land and livelihoods. TERRA and PER are registered together in Thailand as the Foundation for Ecological Recovery.

Haribon Foundation for the Conservation of Natural Resources 

4/F Fil Garcia Tower, 140 Kalayaan Avenue Cor Mayaman St., Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines 

Tel: +63-2-9207430 / 4348237 / 4333476 

Fax: +632-2- 9248976 

E-mail: info@haribon.org.ph act@haribon.org.ph 

Website: www.haribon.org.ph

Started in 1972 it has become the largest research, advocacy and conservation group in the Philippines. Haribon tries to preserve biodiversity, tackle deforestation and governmental land-use policies, community forestry and works on environmental and human rights legislation and aims to protect natural resources.

Individual and Community Rights Advocacy Forum (ICRAF) 

PO Box 1104, Boroka, NCD, Papua New Guinea 

Tel: +675-325-1537 

Fax: +675-325-1537 

E-mail: icraf@datec.com.pg

A Legal Support Forum that advocates human rights and environmental justice for the people of Papua New Guinea. The organisation focuses on the rights of landowners to determine resource development. Thereto it supports the NGO community with legal, advocacy and tactical training to monitor and bring to court cases of environmental and human rights abuse.

Institute for Environment and Development Studies - FoE Bangladesh IEDS 

G.P.O.Box 3691, 1000 Dhaka, Bangladesh 

Tel: +880-2-863307 

Fax: +880-2-863797 

E-mail: gbs@dhaka.agni.com

Concerned with national development through educational, academic, research publication and scientific efforts.

IUCN Asia Regional Office 

# 63 Sukhumvit 39 Soi Prompong, Sukhumvit Road, Wattana, Klongtan 10110 Bangkok, Thailand 

Tel: +66-2-2607681.5 

Fax: +66-2-6624387 / 88 

E-mail: iucn@iucnt.org 

Website: www.iucn.org/places/asia

IUCN has over thirty Regional, Country and Project offices in Asia; several of these offices have their own websites: www.iucn.org/ourwork/asia.htm

Japan Tropical Forest Action Network - FOE Japan (JATAN) 

3-17-24-2F Majiro Toshima-ku, 171-0031 Tokyo, Japan 

Tel: +81-3-39511081 

Fax: +81-3-39511084 

E-mail: okazaki@foejapan.org 

Website: www.foejapan.org/en

Network concerned with the preservation of tropical rainforests. Conducts surveys, awareness-raising and advocacy activities regarding Japan's responsibility in the destruction of tropical rainforests.

Konsorsium Nasional Untuk Pelestarian Hutan dan Alam Indonesia (KONPHALINDO)

Jalan Teluk Jakarta No. 1, Komp. TNI AL, Rawabambu - Pasar Minggu Jakarta Selatan 12520, Indonesia 

Tel: +62-21-7804158 

Fax: +62-21-7804158 

E-mail: konphal@rad.net.id

This National Consortium for the Conservation of Indonesia's Environment was formed in 1991 to study environmental issues and disseminate information on appropriate technologies and consists of several research groups, focusing a.o. on Indonesian forest management, indigenous use of forest resources and government forest policies. Research is published and made available to NGOs, the government, media and development institutions.

Korean Federation for Environmental Movement (KFEM) 

251, Nuha-dong, Jongro-gu, 110-806 Seoul, South-Korea 

Tel: +82-2-5073003 

Fax: +82-2-7411240

E-mail: : kimchy@kfem.or.kr 

Website: english.kfem.or.kr

Citizen's group (network, campaign, and lobby organisation) which aims to change the present socio-economic structure to an environmentally sound one by mobilising (local) people and organisations. Focus on local and global environmental issues, such as pollution and waste, logging of rainforests, greenhouse effect. Provides: support to local environmental movements, legal & political assistance to victims of pollution, environmental information & education. Monitors pollution and mobilises public pressure and builds (inter)national communication and solidarity networks.

Legal Rights and Natural Resources Centre - FoE-Philippines (LRC) 

3rd floor Puno Building No. 47, Kalayang Avenue, Diliman, Quezon-City, Philippines 

Tel: +63-2-9279670 

Fax: +63-2-9207172 

E-mail: lrcksk@mnl.sequel.net 

Website: www.lrcksk.org

This legal rights centre (1987) aims to empower rural peoples to implement their own development strategies. The centre has a focus on land tenure rights and legal advocacy with regard to commercial logging and forest development plans. It provides legal services to communities, evaluates laws and policies, organises campaigns and develops a network of contacts in areas with environmental problems.

Nature Conservation Movement (NACOM) 

House 116, Lane 6, Eastern Road, New Dohs, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1206 Bangladesh 

Tel: +880-2-988-5258 

Fax: +880-2-988-5248

Conservation of nature and natural resources, promotion of conservation as part of economic development, research on endangered flora and fauna and their rehabilitation, integrated management of wetlands and nature education.

Pacific Heritage Foundation (PHF)

PO Box 546, Rabaul, Papua New Guinea 

Tel: +675-982-1316 

Fax: +675-982-1381 / 1317 

E-mail: phf@global.net.pg

Supports local community based sustainable forest management.

Pelangi Indonesia 

Jl. Pangeran Antasari No.10, 12150 Jakarta, Indonesia 

Tel. +62-21-72801172 

Fax +62-21-72801174 

Website: www.pelangi.or.id

Pelangi is a research institution and networking organisation, which was formed in 1992 to conduct research and policy analysis on sustainable development issues and to build information networks among local communities and NGOs seeking to influence policy makers.

Proshika Manobik Unnayan Kendra 

I/1-Gha, (Section-2), Mirpur, Dhaka-1216, Bangladesh 

Tel: +880-2-8013398 / 5812 / 6015 / 6759 / 9005795 / 97 

Fax: +880-2-801.5811 

E-mail: proshika@bdonline.com 

Website: http://www.proshika.org

A national NGO that endeavours to engender a participatory process of development and puts human development at the centre of its vision.. Proshika is a acronym of three Bangla words, training, education and action. They are involved in forestry education.

Sekretariat Kerja Sama Pelestarian Hutan Indonesia (SKEPHI) 

Kompleks Llga Mas Blok E1No3, 12760 Jakarta, Indonesia 

Tel: +62-21-7981766 

Fax: +62-21-7981766 

E-mail: skephi@indo.net.id 

Website: www.skephi.com

Network of national NGOs concerned with forest conservation. As an umbrella group for human rights, environmental, citizen and student groups throughout Indonesia, Skephi is working to stop rainforest destruction and to support communities' rights to control their forest resources. Skephi's programs focus on educating the public and reforming Indonesia's forest policy through campaigns and demonstrations and by providing local communities access to government officials and to national and foreign media.

Society for the Promotion of Wasteland Development (SPWD) 

14-A, Vishnu Digambar Marg, 110 002 New Delhi, India 

Tel: +91-11-3236440 

Fax: +91-11-3236387 

E-Mail spwd@vsnl.com 

Website: www.spwdindia.org

A professional society, actively involved in restoration of productivity to the wastelands of India through suitable integrated developmental projects.

Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI) (FoE Indonesia) 

Jl. Tegal Parang Utara 14, 12790 Jakarta, Indonesia 

Tel: +62-21-79193363 

Fax: +62-21-7941673 

E-mail:info@walhi.or.id 

Website: www.walhi.or.id

WALHI Indonesian Forum for the Environment is a forum of NGOs (1980) which promotes decentralised authority over and management of natural resources. The primary function is to facilitate the exchange of information among NGOs, communities and the government. In co-operation with other networks WALHI conducts research, policy reviews and campaigns (a.o. against paper and pulp industries, mining) related to biodiversity conservation, environmental management and justice. Programs: Forest Advocacy Program, Biodiversity Program, Environmental Law Program.

World Wildlife Fund for Nature 

WWF-India 

WWF-India Andhra Pradesh State Office, House No. 10-5-23/4/1, Ground Floor, 1st Lancer Road Hyderabad 500028, India 

Tel: +91-40-23393653 

Website: www.wwfindia.org

It is the largest conservation NGO in India with a network of affiliated offices spread across the country. It promotes nature conservation and environmental protection through field (demonstration) projects, education and communication programs, networking and mobilising financial and scientific resources.

WWF Forest Futures Programme 

Jl. Hayam Wuruk 179, 80235 Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia 

Tel: +62-361-247125 / 236864 

Fax: +62-361-236866

back to Table of Contents

Latin America & the Caribbean

Acción Ecológica 

Casilla 17-15-246-C, Alejandro de Valdez N24 33 y Av. La Gasca, Quito, Ecuador 

Tel/Fax:+593-2-2527583 / 2547516 

E-mail: verde@accionecologica.org 

Website: www.accionecologica.org

An environmental and appropriate-technology support and lobby organisation which is lending technical assistance to indigenous groups. They publish a monthly magazine and has a documentation and information centre on appropriate technology and the environment. The organisation is very active in the field of local forest management in the north-eastern region of Ecuador, as well as on the impact of oil.

Asociación Interetnica para el Desarrollo de la Selva Peruana (AIDESEP) 

Apartado Postal 140267, Lima 14, Peru 

Tel: +51-1-4726621 

Fax: +51-1-4724605 

E-mail: aidesep@infonegocio.net.pe 

Website: www.aidesep.org.pe

The Interethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Forest is a confederation of 21 regional indigenous organisations formed to protect indigenous lands and culture in the Amazon. It works to obtain land demarcation for Indian lands and conducts bilingual education, traditional medicine and university scholarships programs for Indians.

Associação de Preservação do Meio Ambiente do Alto Vale do Itajai (APREMAVI) 

Caixa Postal 218, SEP 89160-000, Rio do Sul - SC, Brazil 

Tel/Fax: +55-47-5210326 

E-mail: apremavi@rsol.com.br 

Website: www.unidavi.rct-sc.br/~apremavi

An organization that works on the Atlantic rainforests of Brazil in the field of reforestation, agro-ecology and environmental education. They introduce economical valuable species of wood and develop alternative models for sustainable agriculture, forestry and forest management.

Centro de Investigación y Documentacion para el Desarrollo del Beni (CIDDEBENI) 

Casilla 159, Av. 6 de Agosto s/n esquina 27 de Mayo, Trinidad, Beni, Bolivia 

Tel: +591-46-22824 / 52037 

Fax: +591-46-52038 

E-mail: ciddebeni@sauce.ben.entelnet.bo

A research and information centre on the Beni region's natural resources and Indigenous populations. It plans alternative development strategies and builds public support for Indigenous rights. It assesses the impact of land-use policies on the local forests and gives lectures and workshops on Indigenous rights, natural resource use, conservation and development. They are active in the field of agroforestry.

Comité Nacional Pro Defensa de la Fauna y Flora (CODEFF) 

FOE-Chile Luis Uribe 2620, Ñuñoa, Santiago, Chile 

Tel: +56-2-2747461 

Fax: +56-2-2691978 

E-mail: secretaria@codeff.cl  presidencia@codeff.cl 

Website: www.codeff.cl

CODEFF seeks to educate the public on the importance of preserving natural resources. It is involved in environmental research and seeks to improve environmental conservation legislation and its enforcement. It promotes the conservation of forests and its sustainable management and runs among others programs on forests, marine resources, biodiversity, desertification and environmental education.

Conselho Nacional dos Seringueiros (CNS) 

Parque da Cidade, Est. 12 70610-300 Brasilia DF , Brazil 

Tel: +55-61-3229291 

Fax: +55-61-3234600 

E-mail: claudiacns@brnet.com.br 

Website: www.cnsnet.org.br

CNS "The National Council of Rubber Tappers" was founded in 1985 to improve the social and economic development of rubber tappers. An integral part of its policy is to save the rainforest from destructive practices so that it can survive and continue to support the people who depend on it. CNS supports decentralised community-based projects, tries to improve marketing capabilities, health and education within extractive reserves and tries to build an alliance of all the peoples of the forest with environmentalists, scientists and human rights advocates.

Consolidation of the Colombian Amazon (COAMA) 

c/o Fundación Gaia Bogota, Carrera 4 No. 26B-31 Of. 301 Santafé de Bogotá, Colombia 

Tel: +57-1-2814984 / 3414377 

Fax: +57-1-2814945 

Website: www.coama.org.co

A network of NGOs that cooperates with indigenous communities in the Colombian Amazon to preserve the region's cultural and biological diversity. It believes that the consolidation of indigenous territories is one of the most viable strategy for the preservation of tropical forests. It works to reinforce the indigenous self-administrative capacities and collaborates with indigenous communities to adapt government programs. Through research and publications it tries to raise understanding of the Amazon region and to influence national and international policies.

Coordinadora de las Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazonica (COICA) 

Casilla Postal 17-21-753, Calle Luis Beethoven No. 47-65 y Capitán Rafael Ramos, Quito, Ecuador 

Tel: +593-2-2407759 / 2812098 / 2814611 

E-mail: info@coica.org 

Website: www.coica.org

Ultima COICA was founded in 1984 by national indigenous organisations from 9 Amazon countries. COICA focus of action lies on the international level and acts as the co-ordinating body for its member organisations and its activities are aimed at benefiting the roughly four hundred indigenous peoples of Amazonia. It is oriented to defending Indigenous land rights, self-determination and the observation of human rights. It is the regional co-ordinator for the International

Alliance for Indigenous Tribal People of the Tropical Forest. 

Fundación Iriria Tsochok (Fundación para la Defensa de la Tierra)

Apartado 555-2100, San José, Costa Rica 

Tel: + +506-255091 

Fax: +506-536446 

E-mail: firiria@sol.racsa.co.cr

An NGO established in 1992 with the aim to contribute to the conservation and development of the Cordillera de Talamanca and its indigenous communities, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. They try to promote local participation in the protection of the environment and in sustainable development through projects on agriculture, forests, education and health.

Fundação SOS Mata Atlantica (co-ordinator of Rede M.A.) 

Rua Manoel da Nobrega, 456 04001001, Sao Paolo, Brazil 

Tel: +55-11-30557888 

Fax: +55-11-38851680 

E-mail: m.fonseca@conservation.org.br 

Website: www.sosmatatlantica.org.br

The prime objective is to defend what remains of the Atlantic Rainforest and associated environments and to support the physical and cultural identities of the local communities. SOS comprises of environmentalists, scientists and journalists involved in various projects.

Grupo de Trabalho Amazonico (GTA) 

SCLN 202 Bloco B Sala 105, 70832-525 Brasilia - DF, Brazil 

Dados do Secretário Executivo: Fábio Abdala (fabio@gta.org.br) 

Tel: +55-61-3467048 

Fax: +55-61-3223055 

E-Mail: gtanacional@gta.org.br 

Website: www.gta.org.br

GTA is a network of 150 organisations and groups in the Amazonian region, including trade unions, fishermen, indigenous peoples and rubber Tappers. It was founded to organise, monitor and co-ordinate activities related to the Pilot Program for the Brazilian Amazon. Regional offices can be found at: www.gta.org.br/contato.php

Instituto de Manejo e Certificação Florestal e Agricola (IMAFLORA) 

Estrada Chico Mendes 185, cx. postal 411, Cep. 13400-970, Piracicaba - SP, Brazil 

Tel: +55-19-34144015 

E-mail: imaflora@imaflora.org 

Website: www.imaflora.org

An NGO with the objective of conserving the natural environment through the sustainable management of forests and agriculture, using as their main tool the certification of forest and agricultural products. It has training programs and informs the press and the government on certification issues.

Instituto Socioambiental (ISA) 

Avenida Higienopolis, 901, 01238-001, Sao Paulo, Brazil 

Tel: +55-11-36607949 

Fax: +55-11-36607941 

E-mail: isa@socioambiental.org 

Website: www.socioambiental.org

Founded to propose integrated solutions to social and environmental problems. Its purpose is the defence of social, collective and general assets and rights in the fields of environmental, cultural heritage, and human rights. It undertakes studies, research, projects and programs that promote socio-environmental sustainability and safeguard the country's cultural and biological diversity. They work on local forest management and sustainable use of forest products and they fight illegal logging practices.

Instituto del Tercer Mundo (ITeM) 

Jackson 1136, Montevideo 11200, Uruguay 

Tel.: +598-2-4196192 

Fax: +598-2-4119222 

E-mail: item@item.org.uy 

Website: www.item.org.uy

A NGO which promotes South-South information exchange and hopes to contribute to democracy, equity and environmnetal sustainability. They act as Latin American secretariat of the World Rainforest Movement.

IUCN (UICN) Oficina Regional para Mesoamérica 

(Regional Office for Central America and the Caribbean) 

Moravia, Apartado Postal 0146-2150, San José, Costa Rica 

Tel: +506-2410101 

Fax: +506-2409934 

E-mail: correo@orma.iucn.org 

Website: iucn.org/places/orma

IUCN (UICN) Oficina Regional para América del Sur 

(Regional Office for South America) 

Av. De Los Shyris 2680 y Gáspar de Villarroel, Edificio Mita-Cobadelsa, Penthouse, PH, Casilla 17-17-626, Quito, Ecuador 

Tel: +593-2-2261075 

Fax: +593-2-2261075 ext. 230 

E-mail: samerica@sur.iucn.org 

Website: www.sur.iucn.org

Organizacion de Pueblos Indigenas de Pastaza 

Apartado Postal 16-01-790, Puyo, Pastaza, Ecuador 

Tel: +593-3-885461 

Fax: +593-3-885461 

E-mail: allpamanda@yahoo.es 

Website: www.unii.net/opip/intro.html

A federation of 13 regional associations of indigenous peoples that has as their main goal the defence of the rights of forest people and the demarcation of indigenous territory. They work towards sustainable agriculture and sustainable development of the rainforest. They foster educational programs, local development and ecological projects.

Unidad Ecológica Salvadoreña (UNES) 

Calle Colima 22, Colonia Miramonte, San Salvador, El Salvador 

Tel.: +503-2601447 / 1465 / 1480 

Fax: +503-2601675 

E-mail: unes.info@telesal.net 

Website: www.unes.org.sv

UNES is an umbrella group for 10 environmental organisations in El Salvador. They seek to promote conservation and the rational use of resources and is involved in reforestatation activities. They have collected seeds and begun tree nurseries. The organisation promotes a revision of existing environmental legislation for a better protection.

Vitae Civilis 

Praca 10 de Agosto No. 51, Caixa Postal 1908, Sao Lourenco da Serra, São Paolo, CEP 06890-970, Brazil 

Tel: +55-11-46861814 

Fax: +55-11-46861851 

E-mail: vcivilis@vitaecivilis.org.br 

Website: www.vitaecivilis.org.br

An NGO with the objective of promoting the elaboration and dissemination of new perspectives and approaches to the issues of human development and environmental protection. It promotes and conducts action research and implements projects towards sustainable development notably in the Atlantic Rainforest. It raises awareness among the public, organisations and governments on environmental issues in particular on legislation, land tenure, Intellectual Property Rights, indigenous knowledge, forest conservation and medicinal plants. It actively participates in various international fora. It is involved in projects on sustainable forest management and biodiversity.

back to Table of Contents

Europe

Agir Ici 

17 place de l'Agronne, 75091 Paris, France 

Tel: +33-1-40350700 

Fax: +33-1-40350620 

Website: www.agirici.org

Lobbies decision-makers in France and the EU for the establishment of equal North-South relations in favour of the development of the people. Focuses a.o. on French timber exploitation in Central and Western Africa.

Both ENDS

Nieuwe Keizersgracht 45, 1018 VC Amsterdam, the Netherlands 

Tel: +31-20-6230823 

Fax: +31-20-6208049 

E-mail: info@bothends.org 

Website: www.bothends.org

The general objective of Both ENDS is to contribute to responsible management of nature and the natural environment by strengthening NGOs and community groups working on these issues, especially in developing countries. Direct support to NGOs is provided through the exchange of information, as well as through the assistance in fund raising for environmentally sound activities. Direct services are also provided by facilitating the exchange of knowledge on specific technical and strategic issues. Besides networking and organising meetings and workshops, Both ENDS publishes books and brochures on specific topics.

FERN 

1c Fosseway Business Centre, Stratford Road, Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire GL56 9NQ, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-1608-652895 

Fax: +44-1608-652878 

E-mail: info@fern.org 

Website: www.fern.org 

FERN is a NGO created in 1995 by the World Rainforest Movement. NGO representatives from different European countries make up its board and it work closely with many national and international NGOs. FERN promotes the conservation and sustainable use of forests and respect for the rights of forest peoples in the policies and practices of the European Union. We co-ordinate several NGO networks and works co-operatively to achieve change. Currently, the main 

campaign areas are climate change, forest certification, export credit agencies, WTO & trade agreements, intergovernmental agendas, aid & development co-operation and rights of forest peoples.

FIVAS - Association for International Water and Forest Studies 

Osterhausgt. 27, 0183 Oslo, Norway 

Tel: +47-22-989325 

Fax: +47-22-989301 

E-mail: fivas@fivas.org 

Website: http://www.fivas.org

FIVAS is mainly concerned with dam projects in developing countries. It has a working group on World Bank/GEF issues and lobbies companies, governmental agencies and the World Bank.

Forest Movement Europe (FME) 

Coordinated by FERN

The Forest Movement Europe is an informal network of more than 45 European NGOs working on forest-related issues - to promote strong and effective campaign networks and accelerate positive results. The movement has been in existence, although under different names, for nearly ten years. Its purpose is to share information, to develop joint strategies and a wider European perspective on forest issues. The FME also supports NGOs and Indigenous Peoples Organisations in the South in their activities to protect forests.

GAIA Foundation 

18 Well Walk, Hampstead, London, NW3 11D, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-71-4355000 

Fax: +44-71-4310551 

E-mail: gaia@gaianet.org 

Website: www.thegaiafoundation.org

Focuses on indigenous peoples, tropical forests, bio-diversity and bio-technology. Dialogue and lobby vis a vis the EU, companies and governments.

KWIA (Steungroep Inheemse Volkeren) 

Breughelstraat 31-33, 2018 Antwerp, Belgium 

Tel: +32-3-2188488 

Fax: +32-3-2304540 

E-mail: kwia@kwia.be 

Website: www.kwia.be 

A support organisation for indigenous peoples that lobbies governments and companies concerning indigenous peoples and related environmental issues.

Netherlands Committee for IUCN 

Plantage Middenlaan 2B, 1018 DD Amsterdam, the Netherlands 

Tel: +31-20-6261732 

Fax: +31-20-6279349 

E-mail: mail@nciucn.nl 

Website: www.nciucn.nl

Members include Dutch nature conservation and environmental organisations as well as educational and scientific organisations and government institutions, as well as government departments. IUCN's working principles are the conservation of ecosystems and biological diversity, and the sustainability of their use by man. Forests form a field of specific interest. The committee administers a Small Grants Programme for Tropical Rainforests with financial support of the Dutch Government (BUZA-DGIS).

Overseas Development Institute - Forest Policy and Environment Group 

111 Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7JD, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-20-79220300 

Fax: +44-20-79220399 

E-mail: forestry@odi.org.uk 

Website: www.odi.org.uk

FPEG seeks to inform the processes of policy change in tropical forestry by conducting independent policy-orientated research on forestry issues; providing policy and institutional advice; and by organizing workshops, information exchange and dissemination activities.

Pro-Regenwald 

Frohschammerstr. 14, 80807 Munich, Germany 

Tel: +49-89-3598650 

Fax: +49-89-3596622 

E-mail: info@pro-regenwald.de 

Website: www.pro-regenwald.org

Campaigns on tropical forests issues in collaboration with Southern NGOs and grassroots organisations.

Rainforest Foundation UK 

Suite A5, City Cloisters, 196 Old Street, London, EC1V 9FR, United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-20-72516345 

Fax: +44-20-72514969 

E-mail: rainforestuk@rainforestuk.com 

Website: www.rainforestfoundationuk.org

The organisation supports indigenous people and traditional populations of the world's rainforests in their efforts to protect their environment and fulfil their rights over their natural resources.

Survival International 

6 Charterhouse Buildings, London, EC1M 7ET United Kingdom 

Tel: +44-20-76878700 

Fax: +44- 20-76878701 

E-mail: info@survival-international.org 

Website: http://www.survival-international.org

Support organisation involved in awareness raising and lobby on indigenous issues.

Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) 

Box 4625, Åsögatan 115, 11691 Stockholm, Sweden 

Tel: +46-8-7026500 

Fax: +46-8-7020855 

E-mail: info@snf.se 

Website: www.snf.se

Large membership organisation with over 270 local organisations throughout Sweden. The Society is active in the entire field of environmental protection and nature conservation and works with organisations in some twenty developing countries. It addresses issues like debt, sustainable agriculture and development.

Tropenbos International 

PO Box 232, 6700 AE Wageningen, the Netherlands 

Tel: +31-317-495500 

Fax: +31-317-495520 

E-mail: tropenbos@tropenbos.nl 

Website: www.tropenbos.nl

A research, nature conservation and co-financing organisation that contributes to the conservation of tropical rainforests and promotes their wise use by generating knowledge and developing methodologies and involves and strengthen both local research institutions and capacity in relation to tropical rainforests. Co-operates with Dutch universities and local counterpart organisations in Colombia, Guyana and Ecuador.

URGEWALD e.v. Kampagne für den Regenwald 

Von Galenstrasse 4, 48336 Sassenberg, Germany 

Tel: +49-25-831031 

Fax: +49-25-834220 

E-mail: urgewald@urgewald.de 

Website: www.urgewald.de 

A small environment and development NGO focusing on advocacy work and on Germany's bilateral and multilateral aid policies. Their main avenues for their work are alerting the media and the public as well as lobbying the German parliament and government. Their campaign work includes forests and forest peoples issues.

North America

Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) 

1367 Connecticut Ave. NW Suite 300, DC 20036, Washington DC, United States 

Tel: +1-202-7858700

Fax: +1-202-7858701 

E-mail: info@ciel.org 

Website: www.ciel.org

Lobbies with international trade organisations and GATT, runs campaigns on trade and environment and offers training and support for lawyers and social activists.

Rainforest Action Network (RAN) 

221 Pine St., Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94104, United States 

Tel: +1-415-3984404 

Fax: +1-415-3982732 

E-mail: rainforest@ran.org 

Website: www.ran.org

RAN is a grassroots organisation with 45,000 members dedicated to halting the rapid destruction of the world's rainforests. RAN works with local communities and organisations in over sixty countries to pressure corporations, governments, aid agencies and banks to stop funding destructive projects. RAN relies on hard-hitting media and letter writing campaigns and demonstrations to respond quick to the forces that threaten the rainforests.

back to Table of Contents

Bibliography

A Guide to Dutch Organisations on Tropical Forest and Nature Management,

Bos Foundation, 1996. 

Benett, B.C., 

Forest products and traditional peoples: Economic, biological and cultural considerations, 

in: Natural Resource Forum 26, pp 293-301, Blackwell Publishers, U.K., 2002. 

Carrere, R. and Larry Lohman, 

Pulping the South: Industrial Tree Plantations & the World Paper Economy, 

Zed Books, London, 1996. 

Chambers, R., 

Putting the Last First, 

Intermediate Technology; 2nd edition, 1997. 

Colchester, M., 

Sustaining the forests: The community-based approach in South and South-East Asia, 

Geneva, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Discussion Paper no. 35. 33 pp, 1992. 

Colchester, M., 

Beyond participation: Indigenous peoples, biodiversity, conservation and protected area management, 

In: Unasylva (4), 1996. 

Colchester, M., 

National Sovereignty, Free Trade and Forest Peoples' Rights: breaking an international logjam? 

Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh, 1997. 

Daly, H.E. and John B. Cobb, Jr., 

For the common good. Redirecting the economy toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future, 

Beacon Press, Boston, 1989. 

Daniels, Steven. E. and Gregg B. Walker, 

Rethinking Public Participation in Natural Resource Management: Concepts from Pluralism and Five Emerging Approaches, 

Paper presented to the Workshop Pluralism and Sustainable Forest management, FAO, Rome, 1997. 

De Beer J. and M.J. MacDermott, 

The Economic Value of Non-Timber Forest Products in South Asia, 

Netherlands Committee for IUCN, 1997. 

Fisiy, C.P., 

The Death of a Myth: System and Land Colonisation on the Slopes of Mount Oku - North West Province of Cameroon, 

pp.1-7, 1989. 

Glowka, L., Francoise Burhenne-Guilmin, Hugh Synge et al, 

A Guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity, 

in: Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 30, IUCN, 1994. 

Goldsmith, E., 

Can the Environment Survive the Global Economy?, 

in: The Ecologist, Vol 27 No. 6 Nov/Dec 1997. 

Hildyard, N., Pandurang Hegde, Paul Wolvekamp and Somasekhare Reddy, 

Same Platform, Different Train. Power, Politics and Participation, 

Paper for the FAO Working Group Meeting on Pluralism and Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development, Rome, December 1997 

Jepma, C.J. 

Tropical Deforestation: A Socio-Economic Approach, 

Earthscan Publications, London, 1995. 

Lynch, O.J., 

Securing Community-Based Tenurial Rights in the Tropical Forests of Asia: An Overview of current and prospective Strategies, 

Issues in Development, World Resources Institute, Washington, 1992. 

Lynch, O.J., 

Legal Aspects of Pluralis and Community-Based Forest Management: Contrasts between and lessons learned from the Philippines and Indonesia, 

Centre for International Environmental Law, Paper for the FAO Working Group Meeting on Pluralism and Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development, Rome, December 1997 

Netting, R., 

Unequal Commoners and Uncommon Equity: Property and Community among Shareholder Farmers, 

in: The Ecologist, Vol. 27, No 1. 1997. 

Non-Timber Forest Products from the Tropical Forests of Africa, A Bibliography, 

Netherlands Committee for IUCN, Amsterdam, 1997. 

Perpongsacharoen, W. and L. Lohman, 

Some thoughts on Action on the Tropical Forest Crisis, 

1989. 

Peters, C.M., 

Sustainable Harvest of Non-Timber Forest Products, 

World Bank Technical Paper No.322, Washington DC, 1996. 

Pierce Colfer, C.J. with Ravi Prabhu and Eva Wollenberger, 

Principles, Criteria and Indicators: Applying Ockham's razor to the People-Forestry Link, 

CIFOR Working paper No. 8, oct. 1995. 

Posey, D.A., 

Traditional Resource Rights. International Instruments for Protection and Compensation for indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, 

IUCN, 1996. 

Sachs, W., Reinhard Loske, Manfred Linz et al., 

Greening the North. A Post-Industrial Blueprint for Ecology and Equity, 

A Study for the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Zed Books, London, 1998. 

Sayer, J.,

Changing roles in forest research, 

Key-note address at the occasion of the Tropenbos seminar 'Research in tropical rainforests, Wageningen, 1997. 

Shiva, V., 

Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development 

in: Simon Rietbergen, ed., The Earthscan reader in tropical forestry, Earthscan Publications, London, 1989. 

Sloan Denslow, J. and Christine Padoch, 

People of the Tropical Rainforest, 

University of California Press, 1988. 

The Taiga Trade: A report on the production, consumption and trade of boreal wood products, 

Taiga Rescue Network, 1995. 

Westoby, J. 

The purpose of Forest, 

Blackwell, Oxford, 1987. 

Wolvekamp, P. (ed), 

Forests for the Future: Local Strategies for Forest Protection, Economic Welfare and Social Justice,

Zed Books, London, 1999.

back to Table of Contents

© Both ENDS 2000 (updated 02/2004)                                                                     

Both ENDS Information Package nr. 10 Local Forest Management