PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR capital from liquidated timber resources is used to democratization, anticorruption campaigns can establish economic activities outside the forest boost opportunities for the rural poor to obtain a sector arger share of forest we ENABLING CONDITIONS AND withdrawal of concession holders. In many STRATEGIES countries, after concession holders ha This section identifies recent developments and overharvested timber, they have not renewed presents strategies that may improve the potential their concessions. Their withdrawal presents ar of forests to alleviate poverty opportunity for forest communities to intercede and compete for access rights prior to the ng con maturing of marketable timber stems The following changing socio-economic, political and environmental conditions present Growing markets. Rapidly growing urban opportunities to enhance the role of forests in markets provic new ating poverty. However, they do smallholders, especially those living in peri-urban guarantee a positive outcome If forests are to areas, to market forest products. The increased serve effectively in this regard, conscious and scarcity of some forest products, such as dedicated efforts must be made fuelwood, makes it more profitable to grow them on-farm Decentralization Decentralization of authority and resource control is now occurring in many Market deregulation and liberalization. Market developing countries. This process increases deregulation and liberalization can favour forest although by no means guarantees-the possibility based poverty alleviation in two ways. First, it can greater local access to forest rents. In some ons disappointing cases, mechanisms to exclude the that prevent tree growing on farms. (In the past, poor have merely been reconfigured such tree growing has been more controlled than the growing of annual crops. )Second, it can lead Forest tenure changes. As a result of extensive to the reform of forestry marketing regulations redistribution of forest resources in developing that have tended to discriminate against small countries, 22 percent of the total forest area in producers. However, trade liberalization does not these countries is now owned by or reserved for always favour the interests of the poor, and communities and indigenous groups(Scherr, government monopolies can easily be replaced by White and Kaimowitz, 2002; White and Martin, private ones. Government intervention is 2002). Again, this does not guarantee that poverty therefore needed to protect vulnerable people will be alleviated, but may improve the chances. against negative effects( Mayers and Democratization The trend towards democratization in many developing countries New technology. Small portable sawmills with ally increases the bargaining power of lower capital requirements should favour a more rural communities vis-a-vis the State and large decentralized production system for sawnwood, enterprises. In Indonesia, for example, rural which should in principle make it easier to villagers are now freer to stake a claim to forest involve local entrepreneurs. Technological land and resources than they have been in the smaller-diameter trees and more species. Thisor changes in the plywood industry could increase the commercial value of the less Anticorruption campaigns. Corrupt practices in valuable forests over which local communities ne forest sector tend to work against the interests have, at least in the past, had control. However, of the poor(e. g. Hill, 2000). Together with there is a risk that technologies that make new67 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART to used is resources timber liquidated from capital forest the outside activities economic establish .sector AND CONDITIONS ENABLING STRATEGIES and developments recent identifies section This potential the improve may that strategies presents .poverty alleviate to forests of conditions Enabling political, economic-socio changing following The present conditions environmental and in forests of role the enhance to opportunities not do they, However. poverty alleviating to are forests If. outcome positive a guarantee and conscious, regard this in effectively serve .made be must efforts dedicated authority of Decentralization. Decentralization many in occurring now is control resource and – increases process This. countries developing possibility the – guarantees means no by although some In. rents forest to access local greater of the exclude to mechanisms, cases disappointing .reconfigured been merely have poor extensive of result a As. changes tenure Forest developing in resources forest of redistribution in area forest total the of percent 22, countries for reserved or by owned now is countries these ,Scherr (groups indigenous and communities ,Martin and White; 2002, Kaimowitz and White poverty that guarantee not does this, Again). 2002 .chances the improve may but, alleviated be will towards trend The. Democratization countries developing many in democratization of power bargaining the increases potentially large and State the vis-à-vis communities rural rural, example for, Indonesia In. enterprises forest to claim a stake to freer now are villagers the in been have they than resources and land .years 30 past in practices Corrupt. campaigns Anticorruption interests the against work to tend sector forest the with Together). 2000, Hill. g.e (poor the of can campaigns anticorruption, democratization a obtain to poor rural the for opportunities boost .wealth forest of share larger many In. holders concession of Withdrawal have holders concession after, countries renewed not have they, timber overharvested an presents withdrawal Their. concessions their intercede to communities forest for opportunity the to prior rights access for compete and .stems timber marketable of maturing urban growing Rapidly. markets Growing for opportunities new provide markets urban-peri in living those especially, smallholders increased The. products forest market to, areas as such, products forest some of scarcity them grow to profitable more it makes, fuelwood .farm-on Market. liberalization and deregulation Market can it, First. ways two in alleviation poverty based￾forest favour can liberalization and deregulation regulations of elimination the behind force a be ,past the In. (farms on growing tree prevent that than controlled more been has growing tree such lead can it, Second.) crops annual of growing the regulations marketing forestry of reform the to small against discriminate to tended have that not does liberalization trade, However. producers and, poor the of interests the favour always by replaced be easily can monopolies government is intervention Government. ones private people vulnerable protect to needed therefore and Mayers. J (effects negative against .(unpublished, Vermeulen. S with sawmills portable Small. technology New more a favour should requirements capital lower ,sawnwood for system production decentralized to easier it make principle in should which Technological. entrepreneurs local involve of use the allow industry plywood the in changes This. species more and trees diameter-smaller less the of value commercial the increase could communities local which over forests valuable ,However. control had, past the in least at, have new make that technologies that risk a is there