STATE OF THE WORLD's FORESTs 2003 Recent trends in fiscal policies in the forest sector in africa A s interest in sustainable forest It concludes by suggesting how fiscal policies in anagement has grown, so ha as the the sector might be improved and offers importance of finding ways to finance it. Indeed, comments on the broader debate on financing one of the main points of agreement at various sustainable forest management. international meetings on forestry has been the need for support for it(UN, 2000). Little progress PUBLIC EXPENDITURE ON FORESTRY has been observed, however, and considerable Public expenditure on forestry is likely to be the differences of opinion remain as to how funding driving force for implementing sustainable forest can management in Africa. Although public funding The present chapter is based on 32 countr supports the management of protected areas and reports on forest finance produced by African a few small production forests, most public national experts between 2000 and 2002, with the expenditure is used to monitor and control assistance of a joint European Commission/FAo private sector operations. It is in this latter project on sustainable forest management in regard that an increase is particularly nee Africa(FAO, 2001, 2002a)(see Box for list of forest management is to improve on the if countries covered ). It presents recent trends in continent public expenditure on forestry and revenue Public expenditure on forestry usually comes collection from the sector, and then describes from two main sources: domestic financing, some recent innovations in related fiscal policies. including government revenue from taxes and Countries covered in the fao study on forest finance in Africa Guinea Burkina Faso Central African Republic South africa Chad Madagascar Sudan amoros Togo Cote d lvoire Mali Uganda Democratic Republic of the Congo Mauritius United Republic of Tanzania Gambia Niger Zimbabwe Ghana
2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 108 in trends Recent the in policies fiscal Africa in sector forest forest sustainable in interest As the has so, grown has management ,Indeed. it finance to ways finding of importance various at agreement of points main the of one the been has forestry on meetings international progress Little). 2000, UN (it for support for need considerable and, however, observed been has funding how to as remain opinion of differences .obtained be can forestry for country 32 on based is chapter present The African by produced finance forest on reports the with, 2002 and 2000 between experts national FAO/Commission European joint a of assistance in management forest sustainable on project of list for Box see) (2002a, 2001, FAO (Africa in trends recent presents It). covered countries revenue and forestry on expenditure public describes then and, sector the from collection .policies fiscal related in innovations recent some Benin Faso Burkina Burundi Republic African Central Chad Comoros Ivoire’d Côte Congo the of Republic Democratic Ethiopia Gambia Ghana Africa in finance forest on study FAO the in covered Countries Guinea Kenya Lesotho Liberia Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritius Namibia Niger Nigeria Senegal Seychelles Leone Sierra Africa South Sudan Togo Uganda Tanzania of Republic United Zambia Zimbabwe in policies fiscal how suggesting by concludes It offers and improved be might sector the financing on debate broader the on comments .management forest sustainable FORESTRY ON EXPENDITURE PUBLIC the be to likely is forestry on expenditure Public forest sustainable implementing for force driving funding public Although. Africa in management and areas protected of management the supports public most, forests production small few a control and monitor to used is expenditure latter this in is It. operations sector private if needed particularly is increase an that regard the on improve to is management forest .continent comes usually forestry on expenditure Public ,financing domestic: sources main two from and taxes from revenue government including
PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR duties, as well as government borrowing; and, reports, the average total public expenditure on in the case of developing countries, forestry in 1999 was USS0.82 per hectare(FAO international financing through grants and 2002a). However, international financing loans. In addition, an important component of accounted for about 45 percent, making the domestic financing in some countries is revenue average level of domestic financing only collected in the form of charges, fees and levies. US$0. 45 per hectare Figure 7 shows total public expenditure on Trends in total public expenditure on forestry forestry per hectare in countries where Faced with many demands for public services, information was available. The countries with most governments assign a low priority to the highest levels of public expenditure on financing of forestry. In fact, several country forestry per hectare were those with relatively reports noted that public expenditure on small forested areas(Lesotho and Burundi). forestry accounted for less than 1 percent of the Others with high levels of public expenditure total, and it seems likely that this is the case Ethiopia, Cote d'Ivoire an throughout Africa. On the basis of 24 country Ghana. In the Niger, the high expenditure is Public expenditure on forestry per hectare in African countries, 1999 - Chad Central African Republic Gambia.43 1.54 5.49 Ethiopia Liberia 0.04 Cote d'lvoire /Burkina Fa Kenya Democratic Republic 14.76 Rwanda Malawi Madagascar sector in USS per hectare: Zimbabwe hore than USS2/ha 4567 Lesotho ■USs1-2/ha less than USSl/ha
109 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART ,and; borrowing government as well as, duties ,countries developing of case the in and grants through financing international of component important an, addition In. loans revenue is countries some in financing domestic .levies and fees, charges of form the in collected forestry on expenditure public total in Trends ,services public for demands many with Faced to priority low a assign governments most country several, fact In. forestry of financing on expenditure public that noted reports the of percent 1 than less for accounted forestry case the is this that likely seems it and, total country 24 of basis the On. Africa throughout on expenditure public total average the, reports ,FAO (hectare per 82.0$US was 1999 in forestry financing international, However). 2002a the making, percent 45 about for accounted only financing domestic of level average .hectare per 45.0$US on expenditure public total shows 7 Figure where countries in hectare per forestry with countries The. available was information on expenditure public of levels highest the relatively with those were hectare per forestry .(Burundi and Lesotho (areas forested small expenditure public of levels high with Others and Ivoire’d Côte, Ethiopia, Niger the included is expenditure high the, Niger the In. Ghana 7 FIGURE 1999, countries African in hectare per forestry on expenditure Public 16.2 Senegal Gambia 43.1 Guinea 30.2 Liberia 10.2 70.5 Ivoire’d Côte 94.4 Ghana 64.0 Faso Burkina 12.1 Mali 54.1 Nigeria 56.5 Niger Chad 35.0 04.0 Republic African Central 01.0 Republic Democratic Congo the of 66.0 Namibia Lesotho 67.45 18.0 Zimbabwe 56.1 Malawi 76.14 Rwanda 01.1 Tanzania of Republic United Madagascar 99.0 88.0 Uganda Kenya 08.1 Ethiopia 49.5 government of level Average forest the on expenditure :hectare per$ US in sector ha/2$US than more ha/2–$1$US ha/1$US than less
110 STATE OF THE WORLDS FORESTS 2003 explained by high levels of international up with inflation, so that in real terms total public financing, but this is not the case in Ethiopia expenditure on forestry grew in only five and Cote d'Ivoire. In general, there is little correlation between total public expenditure on forestry and the level of international Trends in international fi financing Further details about the sources of financing About half the countries in the study also for public expenditure on forestry in Africa are presented information about recent trends in total given in Table 12. Although this table shows a publicexpenditure on forestry As Table 11 shows, wide variation in international financing among it has increased in all countries except two countries countries tend to fall into three However, increases in most countries failed to keep categories A few countries with relatively large and well-developed forest sectors have high levels of public expenditure on forestry and TABLE 11 relatively low levels of int vernation Trends in total public expenditure on forestry financing(e.g. Cote d'lvoire and Ethiopia) in selected African countries A few more countries have quite high levels of public expenditure on forestry but have Average financing as well (e.g. Madagascar, Mali and (%) the United Republic of Tanzania) Most countries have generally low levels of At current prices At constant prices public expenditure on forestry with Burkina Faso 1996-1999 proportionately high levels of international Burundi 1990-2000 financing. In most, the forest sector is not a of the market e 1996-2000 forests have enormous value for subsistence 1991-2000 and for social and environmental benefit Cote d'lvoire These priorities are generally reflected in the 1997-1999 es of project and programme that Gambia 1995-2000 international agencies tend to finance The average contribution of international Ghana 1990-1999 financing to total public expenditure on forestry in 1999 was 41 percent. On the basis of limited 1990-1999 information about trends in international financing since 1990, it appears that this figure 1996-2000+6 has varied by an average of 35 to 40 percent over the past decade and that it declined from a 1991-1999 peak of US$132 million in 1995 to US$110 1993-1999 million in 1999. a fall consistent with broader 1990-1999 global trends, as reported by Madhvani(1999) 1996-2000 +25 and the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development(OECD, 2000) Notes: The figures for Ethiopia are an underestimate because the most penditure figures do not include all the states. The figures for the Central African public, Ghana and Malawi exclude expenditure supported by international financing Activities supported by public expenditure on The figures for Nigeria include estimates of spending on forestry by State forest forestry Ministrations, based on the country report plus information about State budgets in Nigeria(IMF, 2000). An important aspect of public expenditure, in
2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 110 international of levels high by explained Ethiopia in case the not is this but, financing little is there, general In. Ivoire’d Côte and expenditure public total between correlation international of level the and forestry on .financing also study the in countries the half About total in trends recent about information presented ,shows 11 Table As. forestry on expenditure public .two except countries all in increased has it keep to failed countries most in increases, However public total terms real in that so, inflation with up five only in grew forestry on expenditure .countries financing international in Trends financing of sources the about details Further are Africa in forestry on expenditure public for a shows table this Although. 12 Table in given among financing international in variation wide three into fall to tend countries, countries .categories and large relatively with countries few A• high have sectors forest developed-well and forestry on expenditure public of levels international of levels low relatively .(Ethiopia and Ivoire’d Côte. g.e (financing levels high quite have countries more few A• have but forestry on expenditure public of international of levels higher much and Mali, Madagascar. g.e (well as financing .(Tanzania of Republic United the of levels low generally have countries Most• with forestry on expenditure public international of levels high proportionately a not is sector forest the, most In. financing although, economy market the of part major subsistence for value enormous have forests .benefits environmental and social for and the in reflected generally are priorities These that programme and project of types .finance to tend agencies international international of contribution average The forestry on expenditure public total to financing limited of basis the On. percent 41 was 1999 in international in trends about information figure this that appears it, 1990 since financing percent 40 to 35 of average an by varied has a from declined it that and decade past the over 110$US to 1995 in million 132$US of peak broader with consistent fall a, 1999 in million (1999 (Madhvani by reported as, trends global .(2000, OECD (Development and operationCo Economic for Organisation the and on expenditure public by supported Activities forestry in, expenditure public of aspect important An contribution the is, amount total its to addition total in increase annual Average period Time Country forestry on expenditure public period time specified the over (%) prices constant At prices current At 11 - 6 - 1999–1996 Faso Burkina 5 - 4 + 2000–1990 Burundi 11 - 8 + 2000–1996 Republic African Central 1 + 10 + 2000–1991 Chad 4 - 5 + 1999–1990 Ivoire’d Côte 5 - 3 + 1999–1997 Ethiopia 3 - 1 + 2000–1995 Gambia 8 + 37 + 1999–1990 Ghana 18 - 7 - 2000–1995 Kenya 4 - 26 + 1999–1990 Malawi 6 + 16 + 1999–1992 Mali 3 - 6 + 2000–1996 Mauritius 1 + 8 + 1999–1991 Niger 18 - 16 + 1999–1993 Nigeria 0 6 + 1999–1990 Senegal 25 + 59 + 2000–1996 Zimbabwe .2002a, 2001, FAO: Source recent most the because underestimate an are Ethiopia for figures The: Notes African Central the for figures The. states the all include not do figures expenditure .financing international by supported expenditure exclude Malawi and Ghana, Republic forest State by forestry on spending of estimates include Nigeria for figures The in budgets State about information plus report country the on based, administrations .(2000, IMF (Nigeria 11 TABLE forestry on expenditure public total in Trends countries African selected in
PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR 111 it makes to sustainable forest management. than to investment(86 percent in 1999) Based on information provided by 17 countries, Most current expenditure covers staff costs the following general observations can be made. About half the countries reported that these Most public expenditure from domestic costs accounted for more than 70 percent of financing goes to current expenditure rather TABLE 12 Sources of public expenditure in the forest sector in selected African countries, 1999 Country Forest revenue Total public expenditure Sources of funds SUS000F Externa Forest xternal financing 2328 Burundi 193 1198 Central African Republ 1030 na Chad 3960 4431 41561 7566 40538 Democratic Republic of the Congo 03 1277 0 15 Ghana 12559 31294 <4 7362 8551 1054 18461 10 119 7317 Madagascar 2734 4385 7255 11641 3992 Mali 321 4830 5603 5603 Namibia 2548 2787 5335 2572 8241 1579 2835 10578 13413 Uganda 2386 United Republic of Tanzan 2763 31773 39340 Zimbabwe 908 2132 1254 3386 27 otes: Although figures were not available it should be noted that both Ghana and Malawi receive significant levels of external financing for the forest sector. It hould also be noted that intermational financing might be higher than shown because these figures may not include support to forestry under more general rural development and environmental projects in some countries
111 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART .management forest sustainable to makes it ,countries 17 by provided information on Based .made be can observations general following the domestic from expenditure public Most• rather expenditure current to goes financing .(1999 in percent 86 (investment to than .costs staff covers expenditure current Most• these that reported countries the half About of percent 70 than more for accounted costs .total the funds of Sources expenditure public Total revenue Forest Country (%) a)000’US($ External Government Forest Total External Domestic (net (revenue financing financing 51 31 17 530 4 328 2 201 2 780 Faso Burkina 86 10 4 391 1 198 1 193 50 Burundi .a.n. a.n 541 030 1. a.n 030 1 566 5 Republic African Central 89 9 1 431 4 960 3 471 60 Chad 19 21 -103 538 40 566 7 971 32 561 41 Ivoire’d Côte 0 37 63 277 1 0 277 1 803 Congo the of Republic Democratic 15 76 9 209 25 865 3 345 21 283 2 Ethiopia 65 2 33 686 445 242 225 Gambia .a.n. a.n 40 < 294 31. a.n 294 31 559 12 Ghana 54 41 6 913 15 551 8 362 7 902 Guinea 6 84 10 461 18 054 1 407 17 845 1 Kenya 19 75 7 639 119 521 44 Lesotho 0 58 42 317 7 0 317 7 100 3 Liberia 62 14 23 641 11 255 7 385 4 734 2 Madagascar .a.n. a.n 3 < 992 3. a.n 992 3 110 Malawi 67 31 2 726 14 896 9 830 4 321 Mali 0 86 14 603 5 0 603 5 770 Mauritius 52 46 1 335 5 787 2 548 2 68 Namibia 90 6 5 385 7 612 6 773 351 Niger 40 48 12 821 20 241 8 580 12 572 2 Nigeria 79 9 12 413 13 578 10 835 2 579 1 Senegal 65 14 21 668 3 386 2 282 1 763 Uganda 81 12 7 340 39 773 31 567 7 763 2 Tanzania of Republic United 37 36 27 386 3 254 1 132 2 908 Zimbabwe .2002a, 2001, FAO: Source .available not. = a.n a .rates exchange 1999 At It. sector forest the for financing external of levels significant receive Malawi and Ghana both that noted be should it, available not were figures Although: Notes rural general more under forestry to support include not may figures these because shown than higher be might financing international that noted be also should .countries some in projects environmental and development 12 TABLE 1999, countries African selected in sector forest the in expenditure public of Sources
112 STATE OF THE WORLDS FORESTS 2003 In contrast, nearly all expenditure supported products, non-wood forest products by international financing was spent on (NWFPs)and forest services investment(73 percent in 1999), mostly or Forest charges are reviewed every three to relatively small and specific areas four years on average, but four countries Only five countries reported investment had not reviewed their charges since 1990 programmes supported by domestic Since 1990, charges had increased by more financing of more than USSI million per than the rate of inflation in only four of the year in the forest sector. Given that public expenditure covers a wide Governments set most forest charges by range of activities in forestry, most countries using market-based formulae or by could not easily identify how much was consulting with interested parties. When devoted to sustainable forest management. Only market-based methods have been used community forestry and protected area forest charges have tended to increase. management were distinguished. The most consultation, often with the forest industry ommonly reported areas for investment were has tended to restrict increases projects related to infrastructure and to Of the 22 countries that provided adequate reforestation for community forestry, data on the total revenue collected 17 had commercial forestry and desertification increased it since 1990, although only 13 control had done so by more than the rate of inflation. Given that forest charges generally Revenue collection fell over the period, most countries have Where forests are owned by the State, it has become more efficient in revenue collection been suggested that one way to increase public (O.L. Ajewole, in preparation) expenditure is to increase forest charges and The average revenue collected per cubic metre revenue collection However, a number of was calculated by dividing total revenue studies have shown that the forest revenue collected by total production Using total collected is low in many countries(FAO, 1983; roundwood production, the average revenue Repetto and Gillis, 1988 Grut, Gray and egli, collected in Africa in 1999 was USS019 per cubic 91). Low forest revenue not only has a metre. However, excluding woodfuel negative impact on total government revenue production, the figure is US$2. 42 per cubic and expenditure, but also sends incorrect pricemetre signals to the market about the value of forests These results show little improvement in this and wood. Such messages are damaging to area Forest charges remain low, complicated sustainable forest management in that low and difficult to collect Countries suggested a prices can result in overharvesting and number of reasons for this, including staff undervaluing of the resource, both of which shortages, poorly motivated staff, infrequent ontribute to deforestation and forest revision of charges and poor governance degradation. However, in some cases, low revenue collection Analysis of the data from Africa reveals the is a deliberate policy of governments that want ollowing to subsidize wood consumption-in the form of Forest charges are complicated and woodfuel, for example -for social reasons duplicated in many countries. If general taxes and levies are included, it is quite NEW FISCAL ARRANGEMENTS common for producers to pay more than ten Given the limitations of public finances, many different taxes and charges African countries are attempting ne Most countries levy charges on several types innovative ways of drawing or retaining of forest output from among, for exan finance. The most notable of these are a move woodfuel, industrial roundwood, processed towards greater decentralization and financial
2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 112 supported expenditure all nearly, contrast In• on spent was financing international by on mostly), 1999 in percent 73 (investment .areas specific and small relatively investment reported countries five Only• domestic by supported programmes per million 1$US than more of financing .sector forest the in year wide a covers expenditure public that Given countries most, forestry in activities of range was much how identify easily not could Only. management forest sustainable to devoted area protected and forestry community most The. distinguished were management were investment for areas reported commonly to and infrastructure to related projects ,forestry community for reforestation desertification and forestry commercial .control collection Revenue has it, State the by owned are forests Where public increase to way one that suggested been and charges forest increase to is expenditure of number a, However. collection revenue revenue forest the that shown have studies ;1983, FAO (countries many in low is collected ,Egli and Gray, Grut; 1988, Gillis and Repetto a has only not revenue forest Low). 1991 revenue government total on impact negative price incorrect sends also but, expenditure and forests of value the about market the to signals to damaging are messages Such. wood and low that in management forest sustainable and overharvesting in result can prices which of both, resource the of undervaluing forest and deforestation to contribute .degradation the reveals Africa from data the of Analysis .following and complicated are charges Forest• general If. countries many in duplicated quite is it, included are levies and taxes ten than more pay to producers for common .charges and taxes different types several on charges levy countries Most• ,example for, among from output forest of processed, roundwood industrial, woodfuel products forest wood-non, products .services forest and) NWFPs( to three every reviewed are charges Forest• countries four but, average on years four .1990 since charges their reviewed not had more by increased had charges, 1990 Since the of four only in inflation of rate the than .studied countries by charges forest most set Governments• by or formulae based-market using When. parties interested with consulting ,used been have methods based-market .increase to tended have charges forest ,industry forest the with often, Consultation .increases restrict to tended has adequate provided that countries 22 the Of• had 17, collected revenue total the on data 13 only although, 1990 since it increased of rate the than more by so done had generally charges forest that Given. inflation have countries most, period the over fell collection revenue in efficient more become .(preparation in, Ajewole. I.O( metre cubic per collected revenue average The revenue total dividing by calculated was total Using. production total by collected revenue average the, production roundwood cubic per 19.0$US was 1999 in Africa in collected woodfuel excluding, However. metre cubic per 42.2$US is figure the, production .metre this in improvement little show results These complicated, low remain charges Forest. area a suggested Countries. collect to difficult and staff including, this for reasons of number infrequent, staff motivated poorly, shortages .governance poor and charges of revision collection revenue low, cases some in, However want that governments of policy deliberate a is of form the in – consumption wood subsidize to .reasons social for – example for, woodfuel ARRANGEMENTS FISCAL NEW many, finances public of limitations the Given and new attempting are countries African retaining or drawing of ways innovative move a are these of notable most The. finance financial and decentralization greater towards
PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR 113 autonomy for forest administrations, forest charges to be applied across the experiments with cost and benefit sharing with stakeholders, increased use of forest funds and Centralized administration with revenue privatization of forest resources e central a maintains control over forest management Fiscal decentralization and financial autonomy and revenue collection but shares some of In terms of fiscal decentralization, most African the revenue with local authorities. This countries have followed one of three models model has been applied in Uganda and Complete decentralization. In a few Zambia, and to a lesser extent in Ghana. It countries, notably Ethiopia and Nigeria, seems to have few benefits, except that t forestry has been almost entirely might create a stronger link between forest decentralized to the state government level. protection and the collection and use of Both countries report some disadvantages, revenue for local services and facilities such as wide variations among states in At a recent workshop on forest finance in forest charges and revenue collection Abuja, Nigeria(FAO, 2002a), countries reported However some states in these countries have that the current trend towards decentralization implemented effective models of forest was generating some concern about the future financing for forest financing. In brief, it was felt that if Decentralization within a common national local and regional governments collected framework. Many of the Sahelian countries revenue and had authority for spending it, even (e.g. Mali and the Niger)have partly less attention would be paid to the need for decentralized fiscal policy in the forest sector. public expenditure on forestry Thus, for example, local communes are involved in the development of areas for forest harvesting and revenue collection and keep a share of the revenue collected. At Most African countries levy charges on several types of forest the national level, the government determines the rules and regulations for forest harvesting and sets the level of is sometimes a deliberate policy
113 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART ,administrations forest for autonomy with sharing benefit and cost with experiments and funds forest of use increased, stakeholders .resources forest of privatization autonomy financial and decentralization Fiscal African most, decentralization fiscal of terms In .models three of one followed have countries few a In. decentralization Complete• ,Nigeria and Ethiopia notably, countries entirely almost been has forestry .level government state the to decentralized ,disadvantages some report countries Both in states among variations wide as such .collection revenue and charges forest have countries these in states some, However forest of models effective implemented .financing national common a within Decentralization• countries Sahelian the of Many. framework partly have) Niger the and Mali. g.e( .sector forest the in policy fiscal decentralized are communes local, example for, Thus for areas of development the in involved collection revenue and harvesting forest At. collected revenue the of share a keep and government the, level national the for regulations and rules the determines of level the sets and harvesting forest the across applied be to charges forest .country revenue with administration Centralized• administration central The. sharing management forest over control maintains of some shares but collection revenue and This. authorities local with revenue the and Uganda in applied been has model It. Ghana in extent lesser a to and, Zambia it that except, benefits few have to seems forest between link stronger a create might of use and collection the and protection .facilities and services local for revenue in finance forest on workshop recent a At reported countries), 2002a, FAO (Nigeria, Abuja decentralization towards trend current the that future the about concern some generating was if that felt was it, brief In. financing forest for collected governments regional and local even, it spending for authority had and revenue for need the to paid be would attention less .forestry on expenditure public levy countries African Most forest of types several on charges ,woodfuel including output collection revenue low although policy deliberate a sometimes is fuelwood subsidize to reasons social for consumption 19344/FAO
114 STATE OF THE WORLDS FORESTS 2003 Another innovation that is becoming more However, it is too early to tell whether these common is the granting of greater financial schemes will be successful utonomy to forest administrations. More independent and, in some cases, self-financing Cost and benefit sharing forest administrations have been launched or are Thirteen countries reported that they had under consideration in several countries developed or implemented various mechanisms to cluding Ghana, Uganda and Zambia. A increase the involvement of local communities in number of countries have also experimented the management of forests, including sharing some with having regional or state forestry offices of the costs and benefits from forest harvesting retain a proportion of the revenue they collect, A few countries have given communities for use in implementing local forestry projects complete control over forest resources, including nd responsibility for collecting revenue(e.g. the Many countries reported problems with access Gambia). In return, they must return a share to treasuries,so greater autonomy in collection and must spend some of the money on fores to agreed budget allocations from State the forest administration and in some cases retention of revenue may improve the management. However, most countries have administration of public finances in the sector. introduced simpler systems, under which the Forestry Outlook Study for Africa The recently completed Forestry Outlook Study for Africa(FOSA cerated by its provides a 20-year perspective and long-termplanning framework distribution, accentuating poverty and therefore dependenceon for development of the sector. The main outputs are an overview natural resources such as forests and five subregional reports that address issues pertaining to Cen- .the high debt burden, declining development assistance, low tral, East, North, Southern and West Africa. These reports identify levels of foreign direct investment and declining terms of trade; driving forces, describe policies and institutional scenarios, assess . emerging opportunities and constraints arising from global- implications for the future of forestry and present possible ways of increasing its contribution to sustainable development. Key find. insufficient diversification of economies and the predominance ings and conclusions are summarized in the following of the informal sector inadequate investment in human resources and technology FACTORS AFFECTING FORESTRY The overall institutional environment is marked by inadequate Factors expected to have an impact on the forest sector over the and rapidly declining capacity in public sector institutions, a poorly next 20 years include: developed market mechanism that is unable to provide a lev the varying pace of political and institutional changes, espe- playing field, and agrowing informal sector which, although critical cially democratization, decentralization and the involvement for livelihoods, is unable to manage resources sustainably In addi tion, most people are not empowered and hence lack the freedom persistent contlict and war, to bring about positive change demographic changes, including an estimated population increase of around 400 million or 50 percent by 2020, as well IMPLICATIONS as such factors as urbanization, population movements and In the absence of any fundamental change, the forestry situation in HIV/AIDS Africa will be marked by
2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 114 more becoming is that innovation Another financial greater of granting the is common More. administrations forest to autonomy financing-self, cases some in, and independent are or launched been have administrations forest ,countries several in consideration under A. Zambia and Uganda, Ghana including experimented also have countries of number offices forestry state or regional having with ,collect they revenue the of proportion a retain projects forestry local implementing in use for .programmes and access with problems reported countries Many State from allocations budget agreed to and collection in autonomy greater so, treasuries the improve may revenue of retention .sector the in finances public of administration these whether tell to early too is it, However .successful be will schemes sharing benefit and Cost had they that reported countries Thirteen to mechanisms various implemented or developed in communities local of involvement the increase some sharing including, forests of management the .harvesting forest from benefits and costs the of communities given have countries few A including, resources forest over control complete the. g.e (revenue collecting for responsibility to share a return must they, return In). Gambia ,cases some in, and administration forest the forest on money the of some spend must have countries most, However. management the which under, systems simpler introduced (FOSA (Africa for Study Outlook Forestry completed recently The framework planning term-long and perspective year-20 a provides overview an are outputs main The. sector the of development for identify reports These. Africa West and Southern, North, East, tralCen to pertaining issues address that reports subregional five and assess, scenarios institutional and policies describe, forces driving of ways possible present and forestry of future the for implications .following the in summarized are conclusions and ingsfind Key. development sustainable to contribution its increasing FORESTRY AFFECTING FACTORS the over sector forest the on impact an have to expected Factors :include years 20 next involvement the and decentralization, democratization ciallyespe, changes institutional and political of pace varying the• ;stakeholders of ;war and conflict persistent• population estimated an including, changes demographic• well as, 2020 by percent 50 or million 400 around of increase and movements population, urbanization as factors such as ;AIDS/HIV unequal very its by exacerbated, income in growth low the• on dependence therefore and poverty accentuating, distribution ;forests as such resources natural low, assistance development declining, burden debt high the• ;trade of terms declining and investment direct foreign of levels ;izationglobal from arising constraints and opportunities emerging• predominance the and economies of diversification insufficient• ;sector informal the of .technology and resources human in investment inadequate• inadequate by marked is environment institutional overall The poorly a, institutions sector public in capacity declining rapidly and level a provide to unable is that mechanism market developed critical although, which sector informal growing a and, field playing freedom the lack hence and empowered not are people most, tionaddi In. sustainably resources manage to unable is, livelihoods for .change positive about bring to IMPLICATIONS in situation forestry the, change fundamental any of absence the In :by marked be will Africa Africa for Study Outlook Forestry
PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR 115 lany African countries haz implemented mechanisms to increase the involvement of local communities harvesting of their products; these Burkino Faso process the muts of Butyrospermum parkii to btain shea butter continued land-use conflicts and loss of forest cover at roughly alleviating poverty, byemphasizing the production of basic good he current rate and services and by generating income to meet basic needs slow progress in applying sustainable forest management; .protecting the environment, by conserving and rehabilitating deterioration in the state of the environment, particularly watersheds, arresting land degradation and desertification and acerbation of the water crisis, increasing land degradation conserving biological diversi This involves empowering key actors and enhancing positive continued dependence on wood as a source of energy, in- action by creasing woodfuel consumption from about 635 million cu- .redefining the responsibilities of the public sector and enabling it bic metres in 2000 to about 850 million cubic metres in 2020; to play a leading role in creating conditions for all stakeholders depletion of NWFPs, most importantly medicinal plants to function effectively; increased conflicts in wildlife management, undermining the .supporting the development of an effective and transparent mar- otential of wildlife as a source of bushmeat and protein for et mechanism rural diets and impeding the expansion of wildlife-based improving the efficiency of the informal sector by providing legal, tourism: institutional and other support mechanisms a significant decline in productivity and in purchasing capac- The FOSA reports outline how these priorities and strategies could ity on national and local markets as a result of HIV/AIDS. be adapted toeach subregion. Follow-upwill focus on incorporating the findings into national forest programmes. Specific attention will PRIORITIES AND STRATEGIES be paid to improving strategicplanning capacities at the national and ges in priorities and strategies are needed over subregional levels thenexttwodecadesifcurrenttrendsaretobereversedespeciallyThefulltextsareavailableontheInternetatwww.faoorg/forestry/ with a view toy
115 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART have countries African Many increase to mechanisms implemented communities local of involvement the the and forests of management the in these; products their of harvesting the process Faso Burkino in women to parkii Butyrospermum of nuts butter shea obtain FAIDUTTI. R/CFU000183/UNIT FORESTRY COMMUNITY FAO roughly at cover forest of loss and conflicts use-land continued• ;rate current the ;management forest sustainable applying in progress slow• degradation land increasing, crisis water the of acerbationex particularly, environment the of state the in deterioration• ;diversity biological of loss and, desertification and ;2020 in metres cubic million 850 about to 2000 in metres biccu million 635 about from consumption woodfuel creasingin, energy of source a as wood on dependence continued• ;plants medicinal importantly most, NWFPs of depletion• the undermining, management wildlife in conflicts increased• for protein and bushmeat of source a as wildlife of potential based-wildlife of expansion the impeding and diets rural ;tourism .AIDS/HIV of result a as markets local and national on itycapac purchasing in and productivity in decline significant a• STRATEGIES AND PRIORITIES over needed are strategies and priorities in changes Fundamental especially, reversed be to are trends current if decades two next the :to view a with goods basic of production the emphasizing by, poverty alleviating• ;needs basic meet to income generating by and services and rehabilitating and conserving by, environment the protecting• and desertification and degradation land arresting, watersheds .diversity biological conserving positive enhancing and actors key empowering involves This :by action it enabling and sector public the of responsibilities the redefining• stakeholders all for conditions creating in role leading a play to ;effectively function to ;mechanism ketmar transparent and effective an of development the supporting• ,legal providing by sector informal the of efficiency the improving• .mechanisms support other and institutional could strategies and priorities these how outline reports FOSA The incorporating on focus will up-Follow. subregion each to adapted be will attention Specific. programmes forest national into findings the and national the at capacities planning strategic improving to paid be .levels subregional /forestry/org.fao.www at Internet the on available are texts full The .outlook
116 STATE OF THE WORLDS FORESTS 2003 Impact of HIV/AIDS on forestry With an estimated 40 million people infected globally and . high absenteeism and declining productivity of the 3 million deaths in 2001(UNAIDS and WHO, 2001), HIV/ workforce, undermining the economic viability of forest AIdS has become a major development problem in all sec- tors, including forest -Saharan Africa has been reduced public sector investment in sustainable forest larly hard hit, accounting for 70 percent of the worlds total anagement as a result of additional resource require- infected. In countries where more than 20 percent of adults ments for combating HIVJAIDS re infected, life expectancy has declined considerably (UN, Ashortageof labour stemming from AIDS-related deaths has 2001). To date, AIDS has killed about 7 million agricultural already increased the use of forests and tree systems. Instances workers in the 25 most-affected African countries. Another of people reverting to the use of wild, uncultivated resources in 16 million could be lost by 2020(FAO, 2002b). sub-Saharan Africa have been documented( Barany et al. Although the overall effects of Hiv/AIdS have been 2001). In Malawi, a survey of microenterprises and small en documented (ILO, 2000), no comprehensive study has been terprises, including those in the forest sector, indicated a de- undertaken on the direct and indirect effects of HIV/AIDS on cline in the number of enterprises as a consequence of Hiv/ forests and forestry. As increasing numbers of people suc- AIDS(National Statistical Office, Malawi, 2000) cumb to the disease, however, the severity of the problem is The forest sector is developing comprehensive strategies becoming more evident. Implications include to address the problem of HIV/AIDS, and opportunities for a drastic decline in the human and financial resources of collaborating with other sectors have been identified. Little useholds, undermining labour-and capital-intensive can be done to address short-term agricultural production land uses and leading to increased dependence on and nutrition issues, but secure land tenure, labour-extensive forests productionsystems andemphasisoncertain medicinal plants the loss of traditional knowledge and skills, with devas- and tree species can make significant contributions in the tating consequences for the social, economic and cul- longer term. Forestry training andeducation, including youth tural stability of communities; and continuing education, also have a part to play in raising the loss of qualified professionals and technicians, se- HIV/AIDS awareness, promoting safety measures and verely limiting the capacity of governments and commu- hancing income opportunities for junior workers, women nities to implement sustainable resource management; There has not been any specific study on the impact of HIV/AIDS in the forestry sector but we lose staff almost every week in the department alone. Workers suffer different degrees of the illness, thereby reducing their availability to work. Since HIv-related illnesses tend to be long term, measured in years most of the time, the impact is quite significant. The other dimension is the amount of resources used for treatment or for facilitating funerals. Our tradition is that one is buried in the home village. A lot of money is spent to buy coffins and transport the dead home Even without a systematic assessment, we know the impacts in terms of human loss, lost hours lue to illness, and funeral costs are high m Kainja, Deputy Director of the Forestry Department, Malawi
2003 FORESTS S’WORLD THE OF STATE 116 and globally infected people million 40 estimated an With /HIV), 2001, WHO and UNAIDS (2001 in deaths million 3 total s’world the of percent 70 for accounting, hit hard larlyparticu been has Africa Saharan-Sub. forestry including, torssec all in problem development major a become has AIDS adults of percent 20 than more where countries In. infected ,UN (considerably declined has expectancy life, infected are agricultural million 7 about killed has AIDS, date To). 2001 Another. countries African affected-most 25 the in workers .(2002b, FAO (2020 by lost be could million 16 well been have AIDS/HIV of effects overall the Although been has study comprehensive no), 2000, ILO (documented on AIDS/HIV of effects indirect and direct the on undertaken is problem the of severity the, however, disease the to cumbsuc people of numbers increasing As. forestry and forests :include Implications. evident more becoming of resources financial and human the in decline drastic a• intensive-capital and- labour undermining, households on dependence increased to leading and uses land ;forests ;communities of stability turalcul and economic, social the for consequences tatingdevas with, skills and knowledge traditional of loss the• ;management resource sustainable implement to nitiescommu and governments of capacity the limiting verelyse, technicians and professionals qualified of loss the• the of productivity declining and absenteeism high• forest of viability economic the undermining, workforce ;industries forest sustainable in investment sector public reduced• .AIDS/HIV combating for mentsrequire resource additional of result a as management has deaths related-AIDS from stemming labour of shortage A Instances. systems tree and forests of use the increased already in resources uncultivated, wild of use the to reverting people of ,.al et Barany (documented been have Africa Saharan-sub /HIV of consequence a as enterprises of number the in clinede a indicated, sector forest the in those including, terprisesen small and microenterprises of survey a, Malawi In). 2001 .(2000, Malawi, Office Statistical National (AIDS strategies comprehensive developing is sector forest The for opportunities and, AIDS/HIV of problem the address to Little. identified been have sectors other with collaborating production agricultural term-short address to done be can extensive-labour, tenure land secure but, issues nutrition and plants medicinal certain on emphasis and systems production the in contributions significant make can species tree and youth including, education and training Forestry. term longer raising in play to part a have also, education continuing and women, workers junior for opportunities income hancingen and measures safety promoting, awareness AIDS/HIV .children and forestry on AIDS/HIV of Impact we but sector forestry the in AIDS/HIV of impact the on study specific any been not has There“ the of degrees different suffer Workers. alone department the in week every almost staff lose long be to tend illnesses related-HIV Since. work to availability their reducing thereby, illness is dimension other The. significant quite is impact the, time the of most years in measured, term is one that is tradition Our. funerals facilitating for or treatment for used resources of amount the .home dead the transport and coffins buy to spent is money of lot A. village home the in buried hours lost, loss human of terms in impacts the know we, assessment systematic a without Even “.high are costs funeral and, illness to due Malawi, Department Forestry the of Director Deputy, Kainja Sam
PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR 117 forest administration retains control and gives a some cases these are supplemented from other share of the revenue it collects to communities or sources forest funds in africa are used for the local government. various purposes, including: forest industry Most of these schemes have been introduced development; monitoring of forest operations; recently, driven by specific pilot projects that were research, training and education; conservation; donor-funded and -managed. Thus, the purchase of equipment; and wildlife institutional capacity to sustain them is often management. More general funds have also lacking. Other problems noted in the reports been established to support revenue sharing include: identifying who should benefit from and self-financing forest administrations, as revenue sharing the lack of capacity in already noted communities to manage funds; obtaining funds Fifteen countries reported that they had at held at the central level; the lack of publi least one forest fund. However, most also awareness; and reporting, monitoring and indicated that these funds had done little to accountability. As with decentralization, it is still improve access to timely and adequate perhaps too early to tell whether cost- and benefit- amounts of public finance to support sharing arrangements will do much to improve operations. This finding was confirmed by a the financing of sustainable forest management. statistical analysis of trends in revenue collection and public expenditure on forestry, which showed that in countries without forest The third way in which countries have recently funds, roughly 52 percent of past increases in ed to improve the financing of sustainable the revenue collected were returned to the forest management is through forest funds forest administration in the form of higher These can be organized in many ways osenbaum and Lindsay, 2001)but they are generally raised through contributions from specific sources and are to be used only for specific purp Forest funds are often derived fees or levies in the forest sector, although in Forest funds in Africa are used for warious purposes, including forest industry development
117 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART a gives and control retains administration forest or communities to collects it revenue the of share .government local the introduced been have schemes these of Most were that projects pilot specific by driven, recently the, Thus. managed -and funded-donor often is them sustain to capacity institutional reports the in noted problems Other. lacking from benefit should who identifying: include in capacity of lack the; sharing revenue funds obtaining; funds manage to communities public of lack the; level central the at held and monitoring, reporting and; awareness still is it, decentralization with As. accountability improve to much do will arrangements sharingbenefit and- cost whether tell to early too perhaps .management forest sustainable of financing the funds Forest recently have countries which in way third The sustainable of financing the improve to tried .funds forest through is management forest ways many in organized be can These are they but) 2001, Lindsay and Rosenbaum( from contributions through raised generally for only used be to are and sources specific .purposes specific special from derived often are funds Forest in although, sector forest the in levies or fees other from supplemented are these cases some for used are Africa in funds Forest. sources industry forest: including, purposes various ;operations forest of monitoring; development ;conservation; education and training, research wildlife and; equipment of purchase also have funds general More. management sharing revenue support to established been as, administrations forest financing-self and .noted already at had they that reported countries Fifteen also most, However. fund forest one least to little done had funds these that indicated adequate and timely to access improve support to finance public of amounts a by confirmed was finding This. operations revenue in trends of analysis statistical ,forestry on expenditure public and collection forest without countries in that showed which in increases past of percent 52 roughly, funds the to returned were collected revenue the higher of form the in administration forest for used are Africa in funds Forest forest including, purposes various development industry JENKIN. P/17996/FAO