Our People, Our Resources

2.2 The local environment - natural resources, protected areas and carrying capacity for human populations

This section briefly illustrates the management status of some natural resources of great importance for human populations. Ideally, sound management incorporates both preservation and sustainable use, i.e., the maintenance of viable ecosystems capable of sustaining biodiversity and providing resources for future generations, coupled with uses of such resources to satisfy today's needs (IUCN et al.,1991).

Water

The current world supply of renewable fresh water per capita is only 60 percent of what it was in 1970 (Engelman and LeRoy, 1993). Water is becoming scarce due to growing populations, increasing demands for agricultural and industrial use and inefficient water management. At the local level, specific causes may include man-made changes in watersheds (e.g., dams, irrigation systems), changes in vegetation coverage (deforestation, erosion), increased pumping of underground water (lowering the water table), and waste in water distribution systems (including losses due to leakage).

Decreased availability of water is coupled to worsening of water quality. Excessive exploitation of surface and underground water for irrigation purposes may lead to salinization (i.e., abnormal concentration of mineral salts in the topsoil) and water logging due to poor drainage. Increased use of surface water by human and livestock populations increases the risk of biological contamination of streams, ponds and lakes (with consequences for human health). Uncontrolled industrial and agricultural use may cause chemical pollution of both underground and surface water (with potentially severe consequences on human health, fisheries and aquatic animals and plants).

A set of indicators for assessing water availability, water quality, and functioning of water supplies and distribution systems at the local level is provided in Table 2.4. This information could be useful in working with communities that are making decisions about the importance of water management initiatives, as well as in evaluating the relevant results.


Table 2.4: Some indicators of water availability, water quality, and functioning of water supplies and distribution systems at the local level

Topic
Indicators
Water availability
  • percentage of households with safe domestic water sources (wells, taps, etc.);
  • average walking time from house to source of safe drinkable water;
  • average number of liters per capita available in the household in different seasons;
  • hourly capacity of springs in different seasons;
  • depth of the water table as measured in different seasons in a sample of wells;
  • regularity of stream flow (overflow after rainfall? dry in summer? etc.);
  • average time spent daily for watering cattle in different seasons;
  • percentage of productive units having access to irrigation systems;
  • surface of irrigated land plots;
  • length of irrigation systems.
  • Water quality (human use only)
  • turbidity, chemical pollution, bacterial pollution;
  • number of fecal coliforms per ml in different water sources and seasons;
  • salt concentration per ml in different water sources and seasons;
  • frequency and appropriateness of chlorinization of wells, tanks, and piped-water systems;
  • percentage of households satisfied with the taste and appearance of water in different seasons.
  • Functioning of water supply systems
  • number of days per year in which household wells or taps are not functioning;
  • percentage of households relying on domestic water harvesting systems;
  • presence and function of local water committee controlling maintenance and support for water supply;
  • number and availability of local mechanics with training to repair wells or taps;
  • liters lost per minute due to major leakages in the supply system;
  • seasonal differences in depth of water table.
  • Community-based initiatives for improving local water management may include:

    • protection of water sources (e.g., building a cement cover and outflow pipes for a spring so that animals and people do not contaminate the source);
    • construction of rain-water harvesting systems (e.g., a system of pipes or channels to capture water from the roof of a house and store it in a cistern);
    • improvement and maintenance of water distribution systems (e.g., providing ideas about the technology of a water system, labor for its construction, and arranging for the training of local mechanics to maintain the system):
    • monitoring of the quality of water for human consumption;
    • building appropriate human sanitation facilities (e.g., latrines, toilets);
    • afforestation, building bunds, and contour plowing for increased soil moisture and groundwater recharge.

    Another important natural resource linked with water is wetlands, e.g., swamps, sloughs and shorelines. Many useful items are extracted from wetlands, e.g., food (fruits, meat, fish), building materials (trees, reeds), water (for irrigation, drinking, washing), traditional medicines, etc. In addition, wetlands are important locations for cultivation and dry-season grazing. For instance, the moist dambo lands along the upper valleys of streams in Malawi are able to produce two crops per year compared to the single growing season on the surrounding eroded and semi-arid hillsides. Wetlands, and the plants and animals which are adapted to such regions, are under tremendous pressure from expanding populations. Drainage for agriculture is estimated to have resulted in the loss of 26 percent of wetlands worldwide (OECD/IUCN, 1996).

    Soil

    Between 1945 and 1990, over one-tenth of the world's vegetated land (approximately 1.2 billion hectares) has suffered at least moderate soil degradation as a result of human activity. Cultivation has reduced the world's pre-agricultural supply of organic carbon by about 15 percent: about 60 billion tons of soil carbon have risen from the soil to the atmosphere as climate-warming carbon dioxide (Engelman and LeRoy, 1995). In recent times, the most widespread soil degradation has occurred in Asia (450 million hectares) and Africa (320 million hectares), mostly because of extending agricultural frontiers, overgrazing and deforestation.

    At the local level, processes of soil degradation may include:

    • decrease in depth of the humus stratum (the unconsolidated mineral and organic material on the immediate surface of the earth, which serves as a natural medium for the growth of plants);
    • decrease of soil fertility and productivity (fewer varieties of plants will grow and their yields are lower);
    • increase of the surface exposed to erosion phenomena (i.e., total wash-out of the humus stratum); and
    • desertification (the extension or development of barren lands in areas previously covered by vegetation).

    Indicators for assessing soil degradation at the local level and for evaluating the implementation of important remedial actions are presented in Table 2.5.


    Table 2.5: Some indicators of soil loss and soil conservation initiatives at the local level

    Topic
    Indicators
    Soil loss
  • arable/barren land ratio;
  • percentage of land affected by major erosion (gullies, land-slides, etc.);
  • percentage of land abandoned in a given period of time due to low yields;
  • reported changes in cropping patterns due to changes in soil fertility;
  • extent of soil sediments in local streams;
  • frequency of occurrence of problematic soil (e.g., strong acidity, salinity).
  • Soil conservation initiatives
  • percentage of arable land with soil conservation measures implemented (terraces, wind-breaking hedges, etc.);
  • length of terraces, wind-breaking hedges, etc.;
  • surface area under biological and/or physical control of erosion;
  • percentage of productive units implementing soil conservation measures;
  • percentage of productive units using good manuring and cultivation practices;
  • percentage of fallow land recovered for agricultural purposes;
  • percentage of cattle reared in stables.
  • Soil conservation and recovery action is usually undertaken in the framework of extensive public-works programs. Actually, conservation measures usually require a surplus of land or labor, which cannot generally be afforded by small-farmer household economies. Even so, if sound income-generating incentives are provided, relevant initiatives can be implemented at the local level with limited investments. Community-based initiatives for soil conservation and recovery may include:

    • building slow formation terraces on slopes;
    • gully and land-slide control (e.g., by contour farming, small-scale afforestation, planting soil-binding grasses in high-risk areas, etc.);
    • improvement of cultivation practices (e.g., planting wind-breaking hedges, introducing nitrogen-fixing crops);
    • promotion of biological and/or proper chemical manuring;
    • introduction of crop-rotation;
    • improvement of irrigation and drainage systems;
    • introduction of stable livestock-rearing technologies.

    Before introducing new soil conservation technologies, it may be crucial to determine whether the local culture is familiar with techniques and means to control erosion and maintain fertility of the soil. Reviving and strengthening peasant know-how in this area is often the best way of dealing with problems related to soil management at the local level.

    Case Example 2.8: Soil conservation in a dry climate

    Since independence, the Tanzanian government has established a number of integrated land conservation programs in the semi-arid interior of the country, where dry savannah prevails and people depend on pastoral and agro-pastoral economies. In most of these areas, land degradation is a common consequence of excessive grazing and insufficient soil and water conservation measures (all of which arose from the clearing of woodlands done in the first half of this century for tsetse fly eradication).

    In the 1970s and early 1980s such conservation measures ranged from machine-intensive works to labor-intensive construction, from check-dams and woodlots to the relocation of people and outright enclosure of severely degraded areas. Some ecological results were impressive, but local people rarely offered their genuine participation in these measures. At times, they even defied government regulations openly, for instance, by keeping their herds where grazing was illegal, and organizing among themselves to pay the fines collectively.

    More recent soil conservation programs have learned from these experiences. First, local villagers are now involved in negotiations from the beginning, resulting in enclosures that are generally smaller and do not involve resettlement of many households or villages. Second, negotiations take into account a variety of aspects of resource conservation and use, and thus proceed for a longer time but end up in more complex and sophisticated regulations. Third, the Tanzanian Forest and Bee-keeping Division is now taking full advantage of existing local associations and traditional management practices.

    For instance, among the Sukuma people in the region of Shinyanga, there exist traditional grazing reserves (called ngitire), where herds are allowed to graze only during the dry season. Most of these reserves are established on communal land, in hilltops or river valleys, and under the strict control of village leaders. The Forest and Bee-keeping Division negotiates now with local leaders and associations for the extension of these traditional reserves, as well as for de-stocking practices, woodlot management and controlling the use of other resources. Local organizations like the Sungusungu (originally groups of young warriors who protected the herds against theft) are fully enlisted in resource management tasks and capacities, and special funds are created in each village to help them carry out various activities.

    Case Example 2.9: Surviving the winds of change - Karen people live in harmony with World Heritage

    One of the few remaining refuges where the forest-dwelling Karen people have been able to maintain their traditional lifestyle is inside the Thung Yai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary in Thailand. Within the sanctuary, there are six villages which are home to a population of 1,100 Karen people. Government officials from the Royal Forest Department, some conservationists and some academics have been in favor of the removal of the villages in order to preserve the forest ecosystem. The relationship between the Karen people and most outsiders has been marked by mutual mistrust and misunderstanding. The debate over the resettlement of the Karen from Thung Yai intensified when Thung Yai was declared a World Heritage Site.

    The threat to the Karen's continued survival in Thung Yai has been championed by a loose coalition of grassroots and conservation groups. This coalition advocated the Karen's rights to remain in the Sanctuary, which they have occupied for centuries. Meanwhile, various efforts have been undertaken to document and better understand the impact of the Karen's cultural and subsistence practices on their environment, as well as to provide environmental education and basic extension services in Karen villages.

    Anthropologists and agricultural researchers found out that the Karen people have an agricultural management system defined by rules ensuring that their cultivation practices do not deplete the soil. For example, a Karen family never plants more than three plots of land and they select their rice and vegetable plots only after bamboo shoots emerge in order to avoid disrupting the natural forest cycles. The Karen also employ a system of multi-cropping rice with various other crops to balance the nutrients in the soil, plant several rice varieties to protect the crops from pests and diseases, and apply natural fertilizers.

    This documentation of the Karen's environmentally sound agriculture counteracted the Thai government officials' perception that the Karen belong to the category of destructive slash-and-burn agriculturists. Partly as a result of advocates' efforts in documenting the cultural and agricultural practices of the Karen, the Karen people have been allowed to remain in Thung Yai. Uncertainty is still high, however, as to the Karen's permanent status in the Sanctuary, as land and forest policies tend to change with successive governments.

    From: Hulse and Thongmak, 1996

    Forests

    Before the agricultural revolution, forests were the most prevalent biome on Earth (approximately one-third of the total). Currently, only 9.4 percent of the planet's surface is covered by forests. Over the centuries, due to the growing demands for large-scale timber production and agricultural land, forests have been replaced by secondary woodlands, savannah, pasture areas and cultivation. Timbering for local uses and fuel wood has also contributed to deforestation, especially around settlements.

    Today, deforestation continues, despite widespread awareness of the many environmental benefits provided by forests, such as:

    • protection of watershed and regulation of water flow;
    • prevention of soil-erosion;
    • contribution to the balance of the carbon cycle; and
    • giving back moisture to the atmosphere.

    Forests also provide important economic benefits to local communities, such as game, wild fruits, mushrooms, timber, fuel wood and other vegetal products (e.g., latex, dyes, waxes, medicinal plants, etc.), (see Box 2.7 below). Sustainable exploitation of the forests is a basic component of local subsistence strategies, especially in the tropics, where a significant proportion of dietary proteins and micro-nutrients is obtained through hunting, fishing and gathering. In addition, forests supply well over 90 percent of the total energy used for domestic purposes in poorer nations.

    Box 2.7: Variable use of forest resources in three villages in Sri Lanka

    Three villages in close proximity to each other in the Tihagoda district of Sri Lanka's southern tropical rain forest area illustrate the potential for wide variations in the use of a similar set of local resources.

    The Batuwita Village has long supported itself through the production of household items made of bamboo and rattan. The average household receives an income of Rs. 32,000 per year (US$650 in 1993) from the sale of these products. Since the rattan and bamboo supplies in the immediate vicinity of this village have been exhausted, villagers now must travel 45km (by bicycle) to obtain these resources.

    In the Akkarapanaha Village, rattan and bamboo are collected in small quantities from nearby areas, primarily for the village's own use. A more significant source of income is the sale of meat that has been hunted from the forests.

    In the Narangala Village, the public forest is mainly used to collect fuel wood. Villagers collect substantially (50 percent) more fuel wood than other villages in the Tihagoda District. This community reports virtually no income from forest products, but is the only village of the three that uses forest areas for grazing.

    Large-scale reforestation and afforestation are strategies at the national level for improving forests. Frequently, however, these plans clash with the short-term interests and immediate needs of local communities. An important alternative is the community forestry approach (Lee Peluso et al., 1994). In this community-based strategy, local people are actively involved in planning and managing activities that, on the one hand, protect the forest as a whole and, on the other, assure them access to fuel, food and other forest items necessary for livelihood and income-generating activities (a fairly typical example of primary environmental care).

    Case Example 2.10: Involving the stakeholders - Joint Forest Management in West Bengal, India

    West Bengal, which has historically suffered from virtually uncontrollable resource degradation and species loss, is where Joint Forest Management (JFM) has been most successfully implemented (in 75 percent of the forests/woodlands). With the program, the relationship between villages and forest department officials greatly improved. Whereas in the past the forest officers were primarily involved in policing activities, they are now acting more as mediators/public relations officers between community Forest Protection Committees and the upper echelons of the Forest Department.

    The Sal Forest is clearly regenerating under the JFM agreements. Villagers can access and use Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) for household needs and as income generators (e.g., sal leaves, gums, edible insects, resins, medicinal plants). Interestingly, this system has succeeded despite a significant increase in human population which took place at the same time and in the same districts where forest regeneration occurred.

    When the 10-year regrowth cycle is completed, villagers fear (and officials anticipate) that there will be a glut in the market as an excessive number of sal poles will be ready for harvesting. Some Forest Protection Committee members would like the sal trees to be left standing and harvested during more economically favorable circumstances. Other villagers and tribal healers are also encouraging further ecological succession and species diversification within the Sal Forest rather than timber harvest after the 10-year cycle.

    Whilst the West Bengal experience in JFM is clearly inspiring, the attitudes and behavior of some forest officers remain problematic. Informal comments by foresters at different levels within the Forest Department hierarchy often describe village tribal people and their FPC as 'ignorant', 'primitive', 'underdeveloped in all aspects' and 'economically irrational'. Similarly, the Forest Department's rigid and state-wide regulations (e.g., on choice of tree species, silvicultural practices and timber harvest time) are at odds with what is required for local-level adaptive planning, which takes into account the diversity of ecological, social and economic situations in forest management.

    The crucial issue which needs to be resolved in the near future basically hinges on how to move from Forest Protection to full Participatory Joint Forest Management. Devolving more responsibility for key silvicultural and income-generation decisions to village institutions may be essential to achieve the twin goals of conservation and local livelihood security.

    From: Pimbert, 1994

    Forestry management can be an opportunity for community development. Since a forest is better protected as a whole than in isolated patches, forestry activities offer the rationale for organizing (e.g., in a local users' association) to distribute the benefits that come from the forest (e.g., fodder or water) in an equitable way.

    Case Example 2.11: Ethnic groups and firewood consumption

    The customs of different ethnic groups can greatly influence the use of natural resources. For example, in Nepal, some ethnic groups consume firewood at higher rates than others. Tradi-

    tionally, Brahmin and Chettri ethnic groups never drink alcohol and do not brew liquor in their homes. In contrast, ethnic groups such as Tamang, Gurung, Kirati, and Sherpa in the highlands, and Tharu and Rajbansi on the tropical plains practice home brewing. Interviews with alcohol-brewing and non-brewing ethnic groups in one village found that brewing households consume 20 percent more fuel wood than the others.

    Contributed by Krishna Oli

    The objective of community forestry is to promote sustainable use of forest areas by the local population. Conservation of the forest base thus represents a means of:

    • ensuring availability of fuel, building materials, and other goods (e.g., forest foods, traditional medicines, etc.);
    • providing the environmental stability necessary for food production (e.g., maintaining the water table, preventing erosion, etc.); and
    • generating income and employment.

    To achieve the above objectives, agro-forestry technologies have been developed, often on the basis of local knowledge. These include:

    • semi-cultivation of timber and other valuable species;
    • management of animal and vegetal species important to the local diet;
    • improvement in the efficiency of cooking-stoves;
    • selective cutting of trees for timber and fuel wood;
    • pest and fire control; and
    • development of ecological tourism.

    Indicators for assessing the forest situation at the local level and the results of community-based agro-forestry activities are presented in Table 2.6.


    Table 2.6: Some indicators of forest conservation at local level and community-based agro-forestry activities

    Topic
    Indicators
    Forest conservation
  • percentage of territory covered by primary and secondary forests at different points in time (e.g., current, one generation ago, etc.);
  • annual deforestation rate (hectares cleared per 100 hectares of arable land in one year);
  • percentage of forest effectively protected by the state, local communities or both;
  • frequency of small and large fires;
  • biodiversity of different forest ecotypes (e.g., number and status of different vegetal and animal species, presence of endangered species);
  • existence of business interests involved in or aiming at timber exploitation in the area;
  • existence of communities solely dependent on the forest for food, firewood, income, etc.
  • Agro-forestry activities
  • surface area of new plantations, enrichment planting and natural regeneration;
  • number of species planted;
  • survival rate by species;
  • percentage of households involved in agro-forestry activities;
  • percentage of average household income generated from agro-forestry activities;
  • diversity of forest products being used, appropriateness of harvesting methods and amount of product harvested.

  • <<< BACK CONTENTS NEXT >>>

    Return to the IUCN Social Policy Program home page