While there is no single solution to increase community involvement in forest

While there is no single solution to increase

This preview shows page 20 - 24 out of 24 pages.

While there is no single solution to increase community involvement in forest management and certification, it seems clear that successful natural resource conservation and sustainable development begin with more effective governance mechanisms and opportunities for local economic actors. By identifying unique social and ecological systems and common pool resource management arrangements existing in Oaxaca’s forest communities and elsewhere, researchers, civil society groups, policy-makers, and others can determine how to best contribute to and promote forest conservation. 20
Image of page 20
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN FOREST CERTIFICATION Tables and Figures Figure 1. Ostrom’s Eight Principles of Design for Managing the Commons (Cox et al. 2010) 1. Define clear group boundaries for rightful users and the resource base 2. Match rules governing use of common goods to local needs and conditions 3. Collective-choice arrangements 4. Monitoring to enforce the rules 5. Graduated sanctions for those who violate the resource use rules 6. Easy and rapid access to conflict resolution mechanisms 7. Local appropriators have the right to organize 8. Build responsibility for governing the common resource in nested tiers from the lowest level up to the entire interconnected system Figure 2. Comparison of FSC and PEFC (Meidinger 2002; Overdevest 2010) Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) -Market-based certification scheme -Formed in 1993 through the efforts of global environmental NGOs, WWF, human-rights organizations, and timber users -Operating in 84 countries worldwide -10 central principles and 56 criteria to evaluate applicants -Mexico was one of the first countries to become FSC certified in the early 1990s -European-based organization -Formed in the late 1990s by landowner groups, expanded internationally in the early 2000s -Encourages bottom-up approach to forestry management, emphasizes use of local political processes and regulations to support certification -Plantations -Greater state involvement -Does not operate in Latin America Figure 3. Comparison of FSC and MFCS Standards and Criteria (García-Montiel et al. 2017) 21
Image of page 21
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN FOREST CERTIFICATION Figure 5. Map of Comaltepec Municipality (Wilshusen et al. 2002) Figure 4. Map of Ixtepeji, showing forest types in region (Ruiz et al. 2012) 22
Image of page 22
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN FOREST CERTIFICATION References Berkes, F. (2007). “Community-based conservation in a globalized world.” PNAS . 104(39): 15188- 15193. Bray, D., Duran, E., and Oscar Antonio Molina-Gonzalez. (2012). “Beyond harvests in the commons: multi-scale governance and turbulence in indigenous/community conserved areas in Oaxaca, Mexico.” International Journal of the Commons . 6(2): 151-178. Cox, M., Arnold, G., and Sergio Villamayor Tomás. (2010). “A review of design principles for community-based natural resource management.” Ecology and Society . 15(4): 38. Delgado-Serrano, M.M., Oteros-Rozas, E., Vanwildemeersch, P., Ortíz-Guerrero, C., London, S.,
Image of page 23
Image of page 24

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 24 pages?

  • Summer '20
  • Dr joseph
  • Forest, Sustainable forest management, Forest Stewardship Council, Forest Management, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes