 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FORGENMAP, Royal Forest Department, Thailand |
|
|
|
Martin Greijmans, Ecological Participatory Monitoring Officer |
|
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
|
The Forest Genetic Resources Conservation and Management Programme (FORGENMAP) is based on bilateral co-operation between the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives (MOAC) of Thailand and the Danish Co-operation for Environment and Development (DANCED). The executive agency is the Royal Forest Department (RFD) and the Forest Research Office the implementation agency. Technical assistance is provided through a contract with Danagro A/S, with short term consultancies being provided through DANIDA (Danish International Development Agency) Forest Seed Centre. |
|
|
|
Objectives |
|
|
|
The provision of genetically suitable seed and plant material of good physiological and physical quality from selected seed sources of both indigenous and exotic woody species to meet present and future needs for tree seed in Thailand in a sustainable way by strengthening national institutional capacity. |
|
|
|
The main issues for FORGENMAP are considered to be the following: |
|
|
|
Conservation and sustainable management of forest genetic resources |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance, protection and rehabilitation of biodiversity |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Establishment of a sustainable supply of good quality seed |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Awareness raising of the benefits of using good quality seed |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eleven major outputs identified of being FORGENMAP's contribution to biodiversity and
environmental sustainability:
Development of environmentally sustainable criteria for selection of priority species for
Industrial Wood, Non-Timber Products, Water and Soil Conservation, Local Wood,
Biodiversity and Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources
Selection of 10 priority species with 20 back-up species per seed zone from each of the
above mentioned end use categories.
Conducting a two-week training course on biodiversity management for key persons
involved in the planned FORGENMAP pilot projects (see below).
Establishing in situ and ex situ conservation sites for selected priority species.
Establishing seed sources for priority species.
Making available seed of the priority species at FORGENMAPs or other seed centres.
Making available seedlings of the priority species at the nurseries.
Co-operating with related projects in Thailand and in the Southeast Asia region.
Involving stakeholders from the Government, Public sector, NGO?s, Research agencies,
Communities and Private sector.
Establishing pilot projects on in situ, ex situ conservation and seed source management with
involvement of stakeholders (see below).
Establishing a National Integrated Seed Supply Strategy, incorporating the above aspects. |
|
|
|
Partnerships in Conservation a pilot study |
|
|
|
In workshops involving government and non government organisations (NGO) and local communities Priority Tree Species identification have been carried out focussing on the above mentioned options. Last year the focus was placed more upon in-situ conservation in 4 pilot study sites in which the RFD and the Agricultural Land Reform Office (ALRO) manage degraded forest areas. Around those areas communities are using the natural resources within, both legally and illegally. An initial training course/workshop was held in all sites last February/March which focussed on the possibility of a participatory conservation effort between government organisations, NGOs and the local villagers for each pilot site (see below). Following from the workshops subsequent forest inventories are/will be undertaken focussing on land use, user rights, status of the forest, forest boundaries and types of vegetation. A team of villagers, forestry, ALRO and FORGENMAP officials is undertaking these surveys, each bringing in a different range of information and comments. |
|
|
|
Out of the workshop, called 'Extension Methodologies and Materials', it was found that villagers are eager to work together on conservation issues, as they recognised the environmental problems mentioned. Lacking knowledge, misunderstandings and different responsibilities however, explain partly why current problems exist. Forestry officials react more reluctant as Bangkok offices have to decide on matters like peoples participation, which is often viewed as people being rewarded with land, which is not the case here. The biggest challenge is raising awareness about the roles of the parties involved, and making the meaning 'Partnerships in Conservation' more transparent. |
|
|
|
These matters have a positive site too, as it was recognised that communities should be more depending on themselves and even initiate conservation efforts, partly to gain respect from the government officials, but also to make sure that their situation is not getting worse. RECOFTC (Regional Community Forestry Training Centre) who co-organised these workshops together with FORGENMAP used their experience to clarify current attitudes of all parties involved in the project, and that the whole exercise may fall or stand with officials and peoples motivation. The building of trust is the most important factor in order to make further activities possible. By doing preliminary monitoring assessments this is possible as in-situ observations are made and discussions about the forest use can be a start for better understanding and mutual respect. |
|
|
|
Training Course on
In situ Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources and Rehabilitation of Biodiversity |
|
|
|
Held at the Royal Forest Department in Bangkok, Sakaerat Silvicultural Research Center, Nakhon Ratchasima province, the Northeast, Khong Chiam In-situ Gene Conservation Station in Ubon Ratchatani in the Northeast and at Mae Sanaam Pine Improvement Centre in Chiangmai province, the North, August 23 September 3, 1999 |
|
|
|
Conservation of ecosystems outside the protected area system has not been very successful in Thailand. Often the reason for this is the ongoing conflict over the use of land and its tenureship between the government and local people living near and/or in forests and using its products. At present government officials are becoming more aware of the role they can play in collaborating with local communities depending on forest ecosystems. The needs of these communities are becoming increasingly urgent with ecosystems declining and degrading, populations growing and rural economies suffering. It seems that the time is here for both parties to work together in order to alleviate these concerns. This will take some time and effort from both sides, but negotiations at an equal level with all stakeholders involved should require mutual understanding and respect. Communication is the key, using Participatory Rural Appraisal and Rapid Rural Appraisal techniques RFD officials are trained to approach local people in a less official manner to retrieve valuable information about the concerned area and its people. By involving all stakeholders in all stages of the process in drafting up a management plan for the forest ecosystem mutual agreements lead to more successful conservation. In evaluating the state of an ecosystem, rapid surveys need to be carried out. Attention placed on disturbances and threats to the ecosystem, dominant species and regeneration are key components for basic understanding of the quality and problems of a forest. This information of the remaining ecosystem and the acquirement of species specific autoecological information are important to rehabilitate degraded forest ecosystems. Significant also is to remember that genetic diversity must be focussed upon in order to retain a save broad range of biodiversity for future choices. |
|
|
|
Training Course on Extension Methodologies and Materials |
|
|
|
Held at the Regional Community Forestry Training Centre in Bangkok, the Agricultural Land Reform Office Ban Lanmanai in Nakhon Sawam province in the West; Khong Chiam In-situ Gene Conservation Station in Ubon Ratchatani in the Northeast and at Mae Sanaam Pine Improvement Centre in Chiangmai province, the North, Februari 28 March 31, 2000 |
|
|
|
Forest Genetic Resources Conservation and Management is normally reasoned to be the responsibility of government agencies since most areas belong to the state. In reality many areas are not 'used' by the government but by its local inhabitants. 'Use' in the eyes of local people is understood to be an active operation, and 'non-use' is often believed a waste and doesn't give an area any value. On the other hand, this 'non-use' is interpreted being a management objective by officials when conservation or protection is the aim. Because of local peoples understanding 'use' is often not sustainable as the area doesn't belong to the people or they are not responsible for its condition. Valuation of a natural area, such as a forest ecosystem, is important to give it a reason to survive, or to maintain its current status or even to rehabilitate. |
|
|
|
When forestry officials urge these 'active users' that they cannot cut trees or create paddy fields in the middle forests they often don't offer any alternatives or little compensation. Peoples activities are not likely to stop in this way and they may even get less interested when relations between officials and people are worsened. |
|
|
|
These problems are not new and FORGENMAP realised this too and decided to promote the building of partnerships between local communities and government officials involved in the area and natural resources. Some good contacts exist already in some of the areas and many officials have experience in outreach work. However, in order to show them and all involved groups that Bangkok offices have an active interest in the area further motivation to conserve natural resources is aimed for. |
|
|
|
Using RECOFTC's experience in outreach and extension programs a start was made to reach out to officials of the RFD, ALRO, NGO's and local people to facilitate the exchange of ideas and to create mutual understanding. The Outreach Program of RECOFTC uses a strategy to create a process of relationships building. A base training course was therefor held in Bangkok for involved organisations in order to build skills and knowledge to work with communities. In 4 pilot study sites (rather than pilot project sites, which description seems not to fit in the Forest Research Office but rather in a Community Forestry Division) a workshop/seminar was held with all groups involved. The aim was to build participation between partners involved in conservation management and to prepare action plans for the selected sites. The course was designed to fit FORGENMAP?s Terms of Reference contracted to RECOFTC. |
|
|
|
An often heard complaint of having another project in the study areas is that they are often short-lived or its people not committed or no continuity within the projects exists. The installment of equal partnerships might well be an alternative to share responsibilities and securing the long-term aims for the conservation of forest genetic resources. |
|
|
|
During the workshops it was the intention to identify common interests between all stakeholders. For a successful continuation of the study in the sites a better understanding of definitions used between all the parties should be agreed upon. The most important terms much used in both the training course and subsequent workshops, cover biodiversity, partnership or participation, sustainability, conservation and protection, forest genetic resources, multi purpose use of forest and forest products and alternative professions. After this an operational management plan or management options can be drafted which is acceptable to all involved stakeholders. These plans should include fire management, relevant extension activities, alternatives in profession of local users, further research and monitoring to test activities in order to achieve the set objectives and rehabilitation designs and levels of conservation in different zones. |
|
|
|
In order to get the full involvement of all parties they have to pull their fair share and have to be motivated. In the case of the officials this is only possible with the full support and clear policy from the RFD and ALRO bases in Bangkok. It was understood that the study should show the most interest at local level where the actors are playing, rather than at high level. However, the main RFD and ALRO offices should be seen as part of a steering committee or advisors and not as the actual players. Decisions should be made at local level, and the local managers should develop management options, when given the chance. This requires lobbying at the high level in the RFD and ALRO and perhaps at the highest level to obtain a new category within the protected area classification system, such as 'Managed Nature Reserves' (International Union for the Conservation of Nature, IUCN category 4). |
|
|
|
Keywords: Biodiversity, Participation, Rehabilitation, Forest Genetic Resources, Conservation |
|
|
|
Go Home |
|