PART II SELECTED CURRENT ISSUES IN THE FOREST SECTOR be raised as additional reasons for natural forest Desmond, H. Race, D. 2001. Global survey a conservation, and that the forest-dependent poor analytical framework for forestry out-growver are a potentially important constituency in the arrangements. Final report submitted to FAO mobilization to conserve forests. In some cases Canberra, Australia, Australian National University. giving poor people a greater voice assists not only the poverty alleviation goal, but also forest deforestation and development. Environmental Conservation, 20(1): 17-24. Finally, it is important to recognize that much Dyson, T. 1996. Population and food: global trends and own future prospects. London New York, Routledge. between forest resources and rural livelihoods. Evans, L.T. 1998. Feeding the ten billion: plants and Developing such knowledge is crucial for population growth. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge designing forest-based poverty alleviation University Press programmes that are effective, equitable and FAO. 1987. Small-scale forest-based processing enterprises long-lasting. Greater understanding is FAO Forestry Paper No 79. Rome particularly needed in three areas: how forests FAO. 1995. World agriculture: towards 2010, function as safety nets; ways of increasing forest N Alexandratos, ed. Rome, FAO& Chichester, UK, income; and the significance of cross-cutting John wiley issues and political trends. FAO. 2001a. State of the World's Forests 2001. Rome FAO. 2001b. Forests and people: 25 years of community forestry, by J.E. M Arnold. Rome. FAo DFID. 2001. How forests can reduce poverty REFERENCES Rome, FAO London, Department for International Development. Arnold, J.E. M. 2001. Forestry, poverty and aid. CIFOR Ferraro, P.]. 2000. Global habitat protection: limitations of Occasional Paper No 33 Bogor, Indonesia, Center development interventions and a role for conservation for International Forestry Research(CIFOR) erformance payments. Department of Arnold, M. Townson, I. 1998. Assessing the potential Economics and Management Working Paper No of forest product activities to contribute to rural incomes 2000-03. Ithaca, NY, USA, Cornell University. in Africa. Natural Resource Perspectives No 37. Gilmour, D A. 1994. Conservation and development London, Overseas Development Institute. Barham, B L, Coomes, O.T. &t Takasaki, Y. 1999. Ra hent of Rainforests in Asia. University c forest livelihoods: income generation, household Oslo, 23-26 March. Oslo, Norway, University of wealth and forest use. Unasyloa, 50(198): 34-42 Oslo Bass, S, Dubois, O Moura Costa, P, Pinard, M., Gordon, J.C., Berry, J K& Schmidt, R. 1999. Forests, wilson. C. 2000. Rural poverty, and this book. In R. Schmidt, J K Berry carbon management. IIED Natural Resources Issues J C. Gordon, eds Forests to fight poverty: creating Paper No. 1. London, International Institute fo national strategies, Pp. 8-22. New Haven, Environment and Development(IIED) Connecticut, USA London, Yale University Press. Byron, R.N.& Arnold, J E M. 1999. What futures for Grieg-Gran, M. 2000. Fiscal incentives for biodiversity the people of the tropical forests? World conservation: the ICMS Ecologico in Brazil. Development, 27(5): 789-805 Environmental Economics Programme Discussion Calibre Consultants Statistical Services Centre Paper No. DP 00-01. London, International Institute 2000. Number of forest-dependent people: a feasibility for Environment and Development(IIED) study for dFID's Forestry Research Programme Gurung, C.P. Coursey, M. D. 1994. Nepal ading, UK, University of Reading Cutter Information Corporation. 2000. Focus report Conservation Area Project: an applied experiment in ving the forest with a timber lease. Global integrated conservation and development. Rural Environmental Change Report, 12(19): 1-2. Extension Bulletin, 571 SECTOR FOREST THE IN ISSUES CURRENT SELECTED II PART forest natural for reasons additional as raised be poor dependent-forest the that and, conservation the in constituency important potentially a are ,cases some In. forests conserve to mobilization not assists voice greater a people poor giving forest also but, goal alleviation poverty the only .conservation much that recognize to important is it, Finally relationship the about unknown remains .livelihoods rural and resources forest between for crucial is knowledge such Developing alleviation poverty based-forest designing and equitable, effective are that programmes is understanding Greater. lasting-long forests how: areas three in needed particularly forest increasing of ways; nets safety as function cutting-cross of significance the and; income ◆ .trends political and issues REFERENCES CIFOR. aid and poverty, Forestry. 2001. M.E.J, Arnold Center, Indonesia, Bogor. 33. No Paper Occasional .(CIFOR (Research Forestry International for potential the Assessing. 1998. I, Townson. & M, Arnold incomes rural to contribute to activities product forest of .37. No Perspectives Resource Natural. Africa in .Institute Development Overseas, London Rain. 1999. Y, Takasaki. & T.O, Coomes., L.B, Barham household, generation income: livelihoods forest .42–34): 198(50, Unasylva. use forest and wealth ,.M, Pinard., P, Costa Moura., O, Dubois., S, Bass and livelihoods Rural. 2000. C, Wilson. & R, Tipper Issues Resources Natural IIED. management carbon for Institute International, London. 1. No Paper .(IIED (Development and Environment for futures What. 1999. M.E.J, Arnold. & N.R, Byron World? forests tropical the of people the .805–789): 5(27, Development .Centre Services Statistical & Consultants Calibre feasibility a: people dependent-forest of Number. 2000 .Programme Research Forestry s’DFID for study .Reading of University, UK, Reading :report Focus. 2000. Corporation Information Cutter Global. lease timber a with forest the saving .2–1): 19(12, Report Change Environmental and survey Global. 2001. D, Race. & H, Desmond grower-out forestry for framework analytical .FAO to submitted report Final. arrangements .University National Australian, Australia, Canberra tropical of view revisionist A. 1993. M, Dove Environmental. development and deforestation .24–17): 1(20, Conservation and trends global: food and Population. 1996. T, Dyson .Routledge, York New & London. prospects future and plants: billion ten the Feeding. 1998. T.L, Evans Cambridge, UK, Cambridge. growth population .Press University .enterprises processing based-forest scale-Small. 1987. FAO .Rome. 79. No Paper Forestry FAO ,2010 towards: agriculture World. 1995. FAO ,UK, Chichester & FAO, Rome. ed, Alexandratos. N .Wiley John .Rome. 2001 Forests s’World the of State. 2001a. FAO community of years 25: people and Forests. 2001b. FAO .Rome. Arnold M.E.J by, forestry .poverty reduce can forests How. 2001. DFID & FAO for Department, London & FAO, Rome .Development International of limitations: protection habitat Global. 2000. J.P, Ferraro conservation for role a and interventions development Applied of Department. payments performance .No Paper Working Management and Economics .University Cornell, USA, NY, Ithaca. 03-2000 :development and Conservation. 1994. A.D, Gilmour on Symposium International. linkages the seeking of University. Asia in Rainforests of Management of University, Norway, Oslo. March 26–23, Oslo .Oslo ,Forests. 1999. R, Schmidt. & K.J, Berry., C.J, Gordon & Berry. K.J, Schmidt. R In. book this and, poverty creating: poverty fight to Forests. eds, Gordon. C.J ,Haven New. 22–8. pp, strategies national .Press University Yale, London & USA, Connecticut biodiversity for incentives Fiscal. 2000. M, Gran-Grieg .Brazil in Ecológico ICMS the: conservation Discussion Programme Economics Environmental Institute International, London. 01-00 DP. No Paper .(IIED (Development and Environment for ,Nepal. 1994. D.M, Coursey. & P.C, Gurung Annapurna The. tourism sustainable pioneering in experiment applied an: Project Area Conservation Rural. development and conservation integrated .5, Bulletin Extension