Visit CIFOR News onlineat www.cifor.cgiar.org M

ay 2

003

Num

ber

32

C e n t e r f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l F o r e s t r y R e s e a r c h

“Each year the fires in Indonesia cause economic andhealth costs to the region, from the remote villages ofBorneo to the densely populated cities of Singapore andKuala Lumpur. Now the rainy season is beginning to endand we’re seeing land clearing fires happening again inplaces like Pontianak and the Riau region of Sumatra,”Tacconi said.

“Much of the fire and smoke problem could beovercome if peat lands were better managed. The fact is,if degraded peat lands are not rehabilitated andappropriate measures are not enforced to protect intactones, there is little chance the region’s smoke hazeproblem will cease anytime soon. And it is unlikely the

2002 ASEAN Agreement on Trans-boundary Haze Pollutionwill be of much benefit to any of the countries in theregion affected by smoke haze.”

Better management of peat lands will not only reducethe fires that cause much of the haze affecting the region,but will also benefit the global community. Peat landsstore considerable amounts of carbon that is released inthe atmosphere when the peat burns.

Tacconi said the contribution of peat fires to totalglobal carbon emissions is so significant that considerationshould be given to tabling the conservation of peat landsat future Kyoto Protocol discussions.

Manage peat lands to prevent forest firesA new European Commission funded report argues better management of peat lands will help eliminate the majorcause of smoke and haze in Indonesia. Luca Tacconi, author of the CIFOR report, says the fires in 2003 are a starkreminder that governments, industry and the broader community are yet to fully address the underlying causesof smoke haze in Indonesia.

(continued on page 9)

n e w sCIFORHundreds of millions of people in the developing world rely fully or partly on forests to earn their living. Yet theworld is losing some 12 million hectares of forest every year. The causes of deforestation are many and complex.Agricultural expansion, logging, hunting, over-grazing and forest fires are all destroying or degrading forests andreducing the contribution that forests make to people's livelihoods.

According to David Kaimowitz, the Director General ofthe Center for International Forest Research, nationalpoverty reduction strategies and government policiesoften overlook the importance of forests in sustainingthe lives of millions of rural poor.

“Many policymakers still think of forests as anenvironmental issue. Or they think of forestry only interms of national economic growth. This is a failure ofvision.” says Kaimowitz.

“Too many policymakers are unaware of the crucialrole forests play in rural livelihoods. And those who areaware tend to think not much can be done from a policyperspective. But they are wrong.”

The important role forests play in rural livelihoods indeveloping countries is evident in so many facets ofrural and forest life - economically, nutritionally, sociallyand culturally.

About two billion people use fuelwood and charcoalas their main source of energy for cooking and forheating their homes. Rural households in developingcountries collect food, fuel, medicinal plants and

construction materials directly from the forest. Tens ofmillions of people supplement their cash incomes bycollecting and selling such materials. Others sell timberfrom their traditional lands to logging companies, ormake and sell furniture and handicrafts, just so theyhave enough income to support themselves and theirfamilies.

“And like it or not,” says Kaimowitz, “Industriallogging provides jobs to one and a half million people indeveloping countries. Especially in Brazil, China, India,and Indonesia.”

Forests also have many indirect links to livelihoods.Forests provide soil nutrients and forage for crops andlivestock. They also help to reduce soil erosion,pollinate crops and protect them from the elements.

The challenge facing the world is to find the rightbalance between forest income and forest destruction.Deforestation and logging destroy wild plants used forfood and medicines and may also increase certaininfectious diseases such as malaria and yellow fever.

Governments must act on forests and livelihoods

(continued on page 5)

CI

FO

R2

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

Dynamic team and future for CIFOR

Following a global search over six months, and a review of 350 applications, CIFOR has appointed three of theworld’s leading forest experts to head the center’s recently restructured and revitalized programme areas.

Joining CIFOR in 2003 are Assistant Director GeneralYemi Katerere, Director Forests and Governance DorisCapistrano, and Director Environmental Services andSustainable Use of Forests Markku Kanninen.

In restructuring CIFOR and searching for the rightleaders to lead the Center through this period of change,CIFOR has capitalized on past hard work while embarkingon a new vision for the future.

The new members to CIFOR’s management team willplay a key role in overseeing the direction of CIFOR’songoing successful activities while working with staff toidentify and develop responsive initiatives to new areasemerging in forest research.

CIFOR has consolidated its research into threeprogram areas to better fulfil its mission of enhancing thebenefits of forests for all people, especially the ruralpoor. The areas are: • Environmental Services and Sustainable Use of

Forests oversees research on biodiversity, carbon,fires, watershed functions, and the sustainablemanagement and harvesting of forest products.

• Forests and Governance examines the process ofmaking and implementing decisions about themanagement of forests by people and organizationsbeyond the scale of the individual household or smallenterprise.

• Forests and Livelihoods closely investigates howforest resources and their management, use and tradecontribute to the livelihoods of the rural and urbanpoor.

CIFOR's management teamDirector General - David Kaimowitz Prior to becoming Director General in August 2001, DavidKaimowitz was CIFOR's Principal Economist and workedon research related to the causes of deforestation,decentralization of natural resource management, andthe links between natural resource issues and violentconflict. Before joining CIFOR, he held research ormanagerial positions at the Inter-American Institute forCooperation in Agriculture in Costa Rica, theInternational Service for National Agricultural Research inThe Hague, and Nicaragua's Ministry of AgriculturalDevelopment and Agrarian Reform. David has written orco-written seven books and published more than 100other scientific publications. He holds a Ph.D. inagricultural economics from the University of Wisconsin.

Assistant Director General - Yemi KaterereYemi Katerere joined CIFOR from IUCN, where heheaded the regional office for Southern Africa. Yemi is aZimbabwean forester with 20 years experience in forestmanagement and research, including six years as theChief Executive of the Zimbabwe Forestry Commission,and four years as Chair of the ICRAF Board of Trustees.Yemi's forestry background encompasses both develop-ment and commercial forestry. In development forestry,Yemi has provided leadership in the areas of forestryresearch, forestry training, forest extension andindigenous forest management. His commercial forestrywork has included business leadership in expandingplantation forests, processing plants and retail outletsand assisting with the Forestry Commission’sprivatization. Yemi has authored or contributed to some70 publications and holds a PhD in Forest Resources fromthe University of Idaho.

Director Environmental Services and Sustainable Use of Forests - Markku KanninenA forester from Finland, Markku Kanninen has some 25years experience in forests, research and development.Markku previously worked with CATIE, a highly regardedLatin American institute overseeing regional researchand graduate programs in agriculture and sustainablenatural resource management. As CATIE's DeputyDirector General, Markku was responsible for researchand academic activities of the institution. His areas ofspecialization include forest ecology, silviculture, forestmanagement, and global change. Markku has served onnumerous national and international environmentalboards, with the past ten years seeing him join anumber of international committees dealing withforests and climate change. Markku has some 200publications to his credit and holds a Doctorate inScience (Forestry) from the University of Helsinki.

Director Forests and Governance - Doris CapistranoFormerly the Ford Foundation Deputy Representative forIndia, Nepal and Sri Lanka, Doris Capistrano has over 20years professional experience in teaching, research,development and grant making. During that period shehas worked on a range of forest and natural resourcesissues, from village through to national and globallevels. Her duties at the Ford Foundation also includedresponsibility for the strategic direction of theFoundation's community-based Natural ResourcesManagement programme. As an active member of theTechnical Panel of the Millennium EcosystemsAssessment, Doris has been closely involved in assessingthe relationships between ecosystem change and humanwell-being. From the Philippines, Doris has a substantialpublications record and holds a PhD in Food and

Yemi Katerere Markku Kanninen Doris Capistrano

May

200

3 N

umbe

r 32

CI

FO

R

3n e w sResource Economics from the University of Florida.

Director Forests and Livelihoods - Bruce CampbellProfessor Bruce Campbell has worked with CIFOR invarious capacities for the past eight years. Before joiningCIFOR full time, Bruce was the Director of the Institute ofEnvironmental Studies at the University of Zimbabwe,where he was responsible for academic and administrativemanagement. Bruce's 20 years of work embraces a diverserange of environments, including tropical savannas andforests, mangrove swamps, Mediterranean regions,mountain catchments, smallholder farming areas and low-income urban areas. His areas of specialty includemultidisciplinary work in environmental goods andservices, institutional arrangements for resourcemanagement, livelihoods, and modeling. Bruce hasauthored, edited or contributed to almost 200publications. He holds a PhD in Ecology from Utrecht.

Director of Information Services - Michael HailuMichael Hailu joined CIFOR in 1999, bringing with him20 years of experience managing information andcommunications in support of research anddevelopment. Michael is responsible for overseeingCIFOR's global communications and knowledgemanagement requirements. He serves as the DeputyCoordinator of the International Union of ForestResearch Organizations' Task Force on Global Forest

Information Services. Before joining CIFOR, Michael wasthe Head of Information Services at the InternationalCentre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) in Kenya.While at ICRAF Michael also coordinated 'AfricaLink', aproject providing e-mail and internet access to nationalagricultural research programmes and networks inAfrica. Michael is an Ethiopian national and holds aMaster of Science in Information Systems from theUniversity of Pittsburgh (USA).

Deputy Director General Corporate Services - NormanMacdonaldNorman Macdonald joined CIFOR in 1994. Norman'sprincipal responsibilities are serving as CIFOR's ChiefFinancial Officer and as the management committeemember responsible for human resources, generaladministration, campus operations, staff security andlegal services. An important element of Norman's role isto provide a focal point for CGIAR and other externalactivities. These include contributing to the CGIAR'sGender and Diversity programme, participating in theCGIAR Deputies forum and serving on the Board of theAssociation of International Agricultural ResearchCenters. Norman joined CIFOR after 13 years with theInternational Development Research Centre in Ottawaand New Delhi. He holds a BA in Economics from theUniversity of Western Ontario and is a CanadianChartered Accountant.

Conference themeHundreds of millions of rural people depend on forests.Forests provide a wide variety of goods for use in thehousehold or to sell for cash income. These includetimber, fuelwood, charcoal, rattan, game, fruit,medicinal herbs and many other products. Forests are animportant 'safety-net' for the poor in developingcountries. They provide a source of emergencysustenance during times of crop failure, conflict ornatural disaster. Clearing forests for farming or timberharvesting may provide some economic benefits, butoften undermine local livelihoods. At the same time,forest loss threatens biodiversity and the environmentalservices that forests provide.

Scheduled key note speakers and presenters include:• Ian Johnson, Senior Vice President, The World Bank

and Chairman of the Consultative Group onInternational Agricultural Research (CGIAR)

• Achim Steiner, Director General, International Unionfor the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

• Claude Martin, Director General, Worldwide Fund for

Nature (WWF) • David Kaimowitz, Director General, Center for

International Forestry Research (CIFOR) • H.E. Henri Djombo, Minister of Forestry, Republic of

Congo • Roy Phrang, Assistant President, International Fund for

Agricultural Development• Alberto Chinchilla, Central American Indigenous and

Peasant Coordination of Communal Agro-forestryAssociation (ACICAFOC)

• Angela Cropper, Chair-Elect of the Board of Trustees,Center for International Forestry Research

• Erich Stather, State Secretary, Federal Ministry forEconomic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

• Jagmohan Maini, Chairman of the Board of Trustees,Center for International Forestry Research

• Dr. Popp, Director General, InWEnt• Pekka Patosaari, Head, United Nations Forum on

Forests

ObjectivesThe objectives of the conference are not only to survey

International conference on rural livelihoods, forestsand biodiversity 19-23 May 2003, Bonn, Germany CIFOR is proud to be hosting one of major international forestry events for 2003. To be held in Bonn, Germany,19-23 May, the conference will feature leading authorities from around the world presenting papers on forests,rural livelihoods and biodiversity in developing countries.

(continued on page 10)

CI

FO

R4

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

Knowing what sort of group you are dealing with maymean the success or failure of a forest managementproject. Unsuitable political conditions, lack ofinfrastructure, varying education, low timber prices,corruption, tenure conflicts and a lack of adaptabilityand collaboration can all interfere with the processesthat lead to sustainable forest management. Involving asmany groups as possible and taking account of theirviewpoints is essential in negotiating successfulagreements in forest management. This is the strengthof participatory planning. But a weakness is that classicalparticipatory approaches only focus on conflictinginterests, neglecting contrasting perceptions of realityand underlying cultural biases in the people involved.

Sociologists in the '80s and '90s identified four basicforms of social relationship: hierarchist, egalitarian,individualist and fatalist They linked these four forms ofsocial organization with cultural perspectives. BennoPokorny, a forester working in CIFOR's Brazil office,together with Heiner Schanz, from the Forest and NatureConservation Policy Group of Wageningen University, theNetherlands, thought it might be possible to associateindividuals with the four social types.

“People of a specific social type generally have thesame belief systems,” said Schanz, “So we would be ableto anticipate biases, and actual or potential conflicts.These conflicts, indicated by different political cultures,are otherwise not recognizable and remain under thesurface, even when having an important influence on therealization of certain forest management systems.”

Schanz and Pokorny undertook a pilot study near thetown of Tailândia, some 250 km southwest of Belém, thecapital of Brazil’s Pará State. The study involvedstakeholders typically found in the Amazon forests:managers of timber enterprises, government officials,local people living near forests and researchers. Althoughit was difficult to classify these individuals into the fourtypes of political culture, their responses toquestionnaires and interviews revealed clear differencesbetween their attitudes (Table 1 and Box 1).

The results of the study might allow the researchers todevelop more effective forest management systems,which could resolve conflicting views of reality andhandle a clash of underlying political cultures. Forexample, it would be possible to place a person’s ownviews into the framework of society’s values and predict

their interests and positions on an issue.“Applying this anticipative method could supplement

classical participatory approaches. It would helpanticipate the positions of people who are sociallyinactive yet important to the implementation ofstrategies and plans,” said Pokorny. “It might also alert usto possible friction between the different stakeholders.”

This would make negotiations more efficient and evenallow forest management strategies to be adapted tomake them attractive to different groups before theywere implemented.

“There is still a long way to go to realize the benefitsof this approach,” said Pokorny, “But the results of thepilot study are promising.”

Understanding people to solve forest problems Forest resource managers are increasingly confronted with problems that do not have right or wrong answers, onlymore or less useful solutions. Deep in the jungles of Brazil, a group of dedicated researchers tested ways to classifythe people working in forests to predict their perceptions of sustainable forest management.

"A neighbor wants to build a private radio station in hisgarden. He must therefore cut down some beautiful,protected trees. What do you think?"Hierarchist

Someone should report this to the policeEgalitarian

The neighbor should show more consideration forothers

IndividualistUnfortunately the landowner can do whateverhe wants with his land

FatalistIf someone wants to cut the trees there’s no sensetrying to stop them

"What should the most important aspects of forest usebe?"Hierarchist

Ensuring that forest use is always efficientlycontrolled

EgalitarianEnsuring that the next generation will be able to usethe forest

IndividualistEnsuring that the forest produces efficiently

FatalistBeing able to react to whatever happensto the forest

Box 1. Examples of the questions and answersused to indicate specific types of political culture

EgalitarianCreate a good worldEquality of result Trial without error

Individualist Willing, with character Equality of opportunity Trial and error

FatalistCoincidenceNot on this earthLuck

HierarchistRespect the orderEquality before the lawAnticipation

Freedom of choiceIdeal of fairnessLearning style

Indicator Expected characteristics

Table 1. Examples of the indicators used to determine political culture

Governments must act (continued from page 1)

May

200

3 N

umbe

r 32

CI

FO

R

5n e w s

Not so, say many sceptical forest officials, who do notthink local communities can manage forests the way theway the should be. Many of them argue that localcommunities do not necessarily have the expertise andare prone to many of the same problems and mistakesfound in more centralized forest management systems.

However, according to Wil de Jong, a social foresterworking for CIFOR, history shows that communal forestrydoes work. “Local groups living in the remoter corners ofAsian countries have been practising communal forestryfor centuries. Communities from China, India, Indonesia,Nepal, the Philippines and Thailand were managing theirforests long before colonial times. But the record shows ahistory of denial of this fact by forestry departments inorder to justify dispossessing the local people of theirforests.”

The stories seem to follow a similar patterneverywhere. Until the late 19th century, colonial powershad little control over huge forests in the Asian countries.Then demand surged for new products and higherrevenues from the colonies. The colonists ignored therights of local communities and began to exploit the

forests for their own gain. Independence did little to change the situation. The

private interests of the power elite became theunderlying principle guiding forest policy. State agenciesclaimed control over the forests and ignored the rights ofnative inhabitants and their centuries-old experience inplanting and nurturing forests.

Now the winds of change are finally reaching theworld’s forests. Decentralisation is increasingly a globaltrend, with regional and local governments gaining theauthority to run their own affairs. Indonesia and Thailandstarted bringing in laws in the 1990s to devolve power tolower levels of government. In the Philippines, by 1997almost 3 million hectares of forest land in more than 600sites were under community control. In West Bengal,India, the process leading to the genuine communalstewardship of forests has become a true collaborationbetween all key stakeholders.

In other areas, however, not all local communities arebenefiting. For example, contrary to developmentselsewhere in the Philippines, lower-level authorities in

Community forestry - if then, why not now?

(continued on page 9)

The debate over who should hold the stewardship of the region’s tropical forests has been going on for 30 years.There are many who say putting people in charge of the forest they live in is a more than reasonableproposition. After all, they have the most to gain from conserving the habitat where they make a living. Andconsidering the destruction that corporate exploitation of tropical forests has caused, often with governmentsupport, it seems sensible to put local communities in charge of tropical forests.

The over-exploitation of timber products eventuallymeans there is less wood to cook meals and fewer rawmaterials for small-scale entrepreneurs and artisans touse for generating income.

Similarly, incomes and the environment arethreatened when local people lose access to forests infavour of commercial farmers, ranchers, or when loggingand mining companies move onto their land. In manycountries government policies frequently favour thesegroups with concessions, licenses, permits and newroads, while denying similar rights to poorer inhabitants.

Declining markets and increasing competition fromforeign producers also threaten the contribution thatforests make to the day to day income of the world'spoor or less advantaged. Trade liberalization has ledmany small farmers and forest-based micro-enterprisesin countries like China, India, and Mexico to lose theirsources of income because they cannot compete withcheaper imports.

Kaimowitz says government policy-makers and thosedesigning poverty-reduction strategies can implement arange of measures to ensure forests remain a vitalsource of livelihood.

These include giving local communities control overforest resources and encouraging the equitabledistribution of those resources, avoiding policies that

encourage forest destruction, andaddressing the causes of conflict thatdrive people out of forests. They alsoinclude the providing financial, marketingand technical services to villagers andsmall forest enterprises to increase theirefficiency, and bringing livelihood andlandscape approaches into conservationefforts, so that forest dwellers do not loseaccess to their resources.“Policymakers must acknowledge the link betweenunsustainable forest management and rural poverty. Ifthey don't, the loss of forests will also mean the loss ofan important source of livelihood and protection againstpoverty,” Kaimowitz says.

“The policies that need to be adopted are neithernew nor startling. Organizations like CIFOR have beenadvocating them for years. It's time policy makersstarted implementing them.”

CIFOR Livelihoods Program focuses on the contributionof timber and non-timber forest products to the cashincomes and subsistence uses of the world’s rural andurban poor.

Scientists usually do the same research in different placesso they can make comparisons and draw generalconclusions. But earlier work by CIFOR work has shownthat different contexts require gathering different kindsof data, addressing different issues and implementingdifferent analytical approaches.

“In our research into gender and diversity in managingforests, we accepted knew different field teams wouldhave to choose their own methods for dealing with genderand diversity issues,” leader of CIFOR’s AdaptiveCollaborative Management Programme, Carol Colfer said.

The gender and diversity research first began in 1999in Nepal, Indonesia and the Philippine, followed byCameroon and Zimbabwe. Bolivia, Brazil, Ghana andMalawi got underway in 2000, while work in Kyrgyzstanbegan in 2001.

GenderMen’s and women's roles vary greatly from one place toanother. Forest management planning must take existinggender roles into account and look at such topics asdivision of labour, costs and benefits of planned actions,and the division of benefits within households andcommunities. Greater understanding of these localfactors can be obtained by formal study, and by directlyinvolving rural women and men of all locally relevantsocial categories in the planning process.

For example, Zimbabwe-based CIFOR consultantNonto Nemarundwe looked at formal and informaldecision-making in Zimbabwe. After working closely withthe communities she found men’s views hold greater swayon the management of woodlands, while women haveattained some formal rights to manage communitygardens.

Sushma Dangol of Nepalese NGO, NORMS, workedclosely with Nepali women of varying castes and ethnicgroups - women whose voices were not heard in theofficial context of forest management. Working slowly, incooperation with elites and men, the communitydeveloped ways to help women have greater input intoforest management. In the course of their work together,

much decision-making was devolved from a central, maleand elite-controlled committee to smaller, hamlet-basedgroups where women felt freer to speak. Over time thereemerged a climate of acceptance of women’s input.

DiversityThe use of different techniques in areas as diverse asBrazil, Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, and Peru hasrevealed important, recurring issues, such as ownership,participation, avoidance of manipulation, empowerment,caste and ethnic diversity.

Chimere Diaw, CIFOR’s ACM leader in Cameroon,found his group obtained much more valuable data bylooking at the responses of various stakeholder groupsindividually, rather than trying to draw broad conclusionsby combining all the responses. “We were able to showthe importance of power imbalances among stakeholdersas indicators of unhealthy and inequitable forestmanagement, and found out how to assess suchimbalances,” Diaw said.

Smoothing out imbalances was also the objective fora group in Indonesia, but using a completely differentmethod. Along with her fellow CIFOR scientists, NjauAnau worked with local communities to map theirboundaries in the Bulungan Research Forest in EastKalimantan. But the process involved difficultnegotiations, both within and between villages. Eachvillage seemed to have different concerns about the sameprocess that demanded a different approach from theresearchers each time to enable negotiations to continue.Skill in facilitation was most important in resolving theconflicts that inevitably occurred when trying to manageresources equitably.

Lessons learned“Results so far in this project are a potpourri of valuablefindings and methods from which we can draw importantgeneral principles. This will help create a fairer situationin the tropical forest,” said Colfer.

Participatory action research is a broad andcomparatively long-term mechanism where the voices ofmarginalized groups can be heard. A central feature ofthis technique is involving local communities directly inidentifying problems, planning, monitoring and re-planning, in a cyclical loop over time.

Workshops within and between stakeholder groupscan be potent tools to arrive at equitable goals, shareresponsibilities and distribute benefits. If the weakergroups are intimidated, it may be necessary to first holdseparate workshops, so the disempowered feel free tospeak.

Some of the approaches include raising awarnessamong the more powerful players of the needs, interestsand desires of the powerless and increasing the self-confidence of the powerless to try to change things.Creating a safe environment for dialogue between thepowerful and the marginalized, by using facilitators and

CI

FO

R6

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

Different routes to the same answerMany forest dwellers belong to marginalised communities who have very little say in the management of theforests they depend on for their livelihoods. In trying to bring these dispossessed stakeholders into the decision-making process, a team of forest researchers coordinated by CIFOR has resisted conventional scientific wisdomto obtain valuable insights into the role of gender and diversity in forest management.

Sometimesit pays forscientists tothink outsidethe square.Such anapproach byCIFOR’s ACMteam haspaiddividends forseveral forestcommunitiesaround theworld.

shared rules of behaviour, is one approach to increasingconfidence.

Collective action among the powerless groupsincreases their influence, as does networking amongthemselves and with the powerful. Increasingly, involvingthird parties, such as non-governmental organisations asadvocates and links between stakeholder groups,increases the impact of the initiatives.

“These approaches complement one another,”concluded Colfer. “No one approach is enough on its own.

But in combination they can increase equity in forestmanagement for women and other disadvantaged groupsin the forest.”

Fuller accounts of these stories will be available laterthis year in an as yet untitled collection on strengtheningequity in forest management, edited by Carol J. PierceColfer. The collection is to be published by RFF and CIFOR,in a new series on Adaptive Collaborative Management.Visit CIFOR's web site over coming months for furtherdetails or e-mail c.colfer@cgiar.org after June 2003.

May

200

3 N

umbe

r 32

CI

FO

R

7n e w s

Learning from past rehabilitation efforts

The study is part of a larger forest rehabilitation researchproject supported by the Government of Japan, known as“Review of rehabilitation initiatives - Lessons from thepast”. It will involve CIFOR working with national partnersto review ongoing and past rehabilitation initiatives and todisseminate lessons learned.

The study will focus on rehabilitation in Indonesia,Vietnam, Philippines, China, Peru, Brazil and will beexpanded by the World Wild Fund into a number of othercountries, including India. The participants in the studywill include governments, forest research anddevelopment agencies, non-government organizations,local communities, industries and donors.

Unna Chokkalingam, co-ordinator of the SoutheastAsian component of the study, says evaluation of pastrehabilitation initiatives is well over-due.

“There has been all sorts of research and action intorehabilitating degraded forest areas. Until now thoseefforts have not had much assessment made of theirimpact or of how they might be improved. It is critical todraw strategic lessons from past experiences and use themto plan and guide future efforts.” Chokkalingam says.

“Our aim is to increase the chances of success offuture rehabilitation initiatives. We will do this byidentifying approaches which contribute to longer-termsustainability and which have had minimal negativeimpact on different stakeholders. Of particular interest toCIFOR is the impact of forest rehabilitation on locallivelihoods. We want to know if the impact has beenpositive or negative and under what situations.”

One feature of the project is its examination of thesocio-economic and institutional aspects of rehabilitatingforests. “Often it’s the absence of supporting social orgovernment action that prevents rehabilitation projectsfrom successfully re-growing trees on degraded land,” saysTakeshi Toma, task manager of the CIFOR/Japanrehabilitation research project.

“For example, there may not be sufficient interactionbetween industry and local people to ensure there is amarket for the end products coming out of therehabilitated forests. Or tenure of land may be so insecureit discourages long-term management investment.”

CIFOR and partners will focus on rehabilitationactivities undertaken on formerly forested lands with

inhibited natural forest recovery, such as Imperatagrasslands, scrub, and barren land. Bringing back forestson barren lands or scrub may be important in reducingpressure exerted on remaining forests.

The assessment looks at all rehabilitation methods thatinvolve trees, including agroforestry, plantations andassisted natural regeneration. The assessment also coversa diversity of ecological and socio-economic rehabilitationscenarios and works closely with a representative range ofstakeholders.

“The study will look at government-driven watershedreforestation, private company plantations, integratedlivelihood projects, and spontaneous private tree farming.We hope to identify where stakeholders have benefitedfrom each of these and other initiatives,” Chokkalingamsays.

Toma says it is important to examine the broadestpossible range of factors that determine the success offorest rehabilitation initiatives. These include the scaleand duration of past initiatives, their underlyingobjectives, the key actors involved, and actionsundertaken.

“It’s crucial that assessment of rehabilitation effortstake an across-the-board approach. Unless we address allof the identifiable factors and variables that affect forestrehabilitation, the same mistakes may happen again infuture projects,” says Toma.

According to Cesar Sabogal, co-ordinator of the LatinAmerican component of the study, a key element of theresearch is its applicability to countries across the tropics,whether in Asia, Africa or Latin America.

“Often the underlying concerns and motivationsdriving rehabilitation efforts are similar throughout thetropics. So the experience gained during an olderrehabilitation scheme on one side of the world may behighly relevant to a similar scheme starting up on theother side. The lessons learned should be shared,”Sabogal says.

The study could not be more timely, as it will feed intopolicy processes underway in many of the study countries.For example, Indonesia may soon review its rehabilitationprogram while China has several reforestation programsand is looking at incentives to ensure longer-term

National governments, international donors and private agencies have invested in numerous forest rehabilitationprojects in the tropics over the past three decades. But there has been very little assessment of the differenttypes of projects and their impacts. This is all about to change with a recently undertaken lessons-learned studyby CIFOR.

CIFOR willdevelop astep-by-stepguide forplanning,implementingandevaluatingfuturerehabilitationprojects thatwill betargeted at projectfunders,developersand managers

(continued on page 8)

CI

FO

R8

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

“Conventional wisdom is a funny thing,” says David Kaimowitz, CIFOR’s Director General, “Many people in theforestry community have repeated the same ideas for so long about sustainable forest management thateveryone assumes they are true. In fact, they may not be.”Kaimowitz suggests we think more critically, especiallywhen ‘received’ wisdom is used to justify giving control ofpublic forests to small groups of wealthy people, ratherthan the large numbers of communities and smallholdersthat might otherwise benefit from them.

The first bit of wisdom Kaimowitz critiques is the notionthat secure tenure of the forest will encourage forestdwellers to manage it better.

“Secure tenure is not a necessary or sufficient conditionfor sustainable forest management. Managing naturaltropical forests sustainably is rarely as financially profitableas rapid and uncontrolled logging,” Kaimowitz says.

Under most current circumstances, companies willmanage tropical natural forests sustainably only if externalregulators force them to. If it is more profitable for thecompanies to comply with the regulations than not, theywill comply, regardless of tenure.

But if complying with regulations is unprofitable, mostcompanies will ignore them. Companies with ten, twenty,forty, or a thousand years of tenure, will do exactly thesame thing. With serious regulation, sustainable forestmanagement can be achieved without secure tenure.Without serious regulation, sustainable forest managementcannot be achieved, even with secure tenure.

Another myth Kaimowitz takes aim at is the belief thatincreased efficiency will necessarily reduce pressure onforests. “No,” says Kaimowitz, “In many situations moreefficient production is just as likely to increase pressure onforests, not reduce it.”

More efficient technologies usually increase theprofitability of logging. This may encourage more logging bymaking it more profitable than alternative investments andby providing expansion capital. Frequently, more efficientwood processing technologies allow the profitable use ofsmaller diameter timber and species that previously had nocommercial value. Logging becomes financially viablewhere it was not previously profitable to do so. Thisencourages loggers to re-enter areas of previously littlecommercial interest.

Convention also dictates that higher timber pricesencourage companies to implement long-term sustainableforest management strategies. Again, not always true, saysKaimowitz.

“Higher timber prices increase the demand for logs.This means more logging. As long as unsustainable loggingremains more profitable than sustainable forestmanagement, higher timber prices will only lead to morelogging, not to more sustainable management,” Kaimowitzsays. Conventional wisdom is correct that higher prices willencourage investment in plantations and forestmanagement, but it ignores the fact that it will alsoencouraged exploitation of unmanaged forests.

Kaimowitz also queries the widely-held notion thatsustainability would be guaranteed if only companies hadmanagement plans. “Sounds nice in theory,” says

Kaimowitz, “But it doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny,especially in the tropics. The presence of a formalmanagement plan doesn’t necessarily mean a forest isbeing managed sustainably. Even when management plansmake ecological sense, they are very difficult to enforce.”

Kaimowitz says it is relatively easy to make a companyto do its paperwork, but it is not so easy for governmentregulators to ensure companies follow their plans.

“Some sustainable forest management practices, suchas reduced impact logging, are more profitable thanconventional logging techniques. But overall, managingforests sustainably is usually less profitable than managingthem unsustainably. It is highly unlikely a company willundertake sustainable forest management unless there issubstantial monitoring and high penalties to get them to dothose things that are not profitable.”

“But the fact is most tropical countries lack both theresources and the political will for that sort of monitoringand regulating,” Kaimowitz says.

Most logging on government-owned forests, which todaymake up about 80 percent of all the forests in the world,involves some type of subsidy. This is because loggers rarelypay the government the full value of the logs they harvest.Given this simple fact, Kaimowitz asks why a few wealthyindividuals and companies should have access to thesesubsidised resources rather than the millions of poor andmarginalized people living in or near forests? Industrialloggers are at least as likely to destroy the forest assmallholders, communities and indigenous people.

“Large-scale industrial logging can be improved andmade more sustainable,” says Kaimowitz. “By the sametoken, sustainable practices don’t belong to the exclusivedomain of large companies, as conventional wisdomstrongly implies. It is high time we started giving poorpeople greater access to public forest resources.”

sustainability. Brazil also has a number of government-sponsored programmes that would benefit from thestudy.

To ensure the research findings achieve maximumimpact with key groups, the study includes a thoroughoutreach strategy. Lessons learned from past projects andadvice in designing and implementing future projects willbe disseminated through seminars, workshops, policybriefs, news articles, website postings and networkingactivities. CIFOR’s work will also interlink with otherimportant initiatives into forest rehabilitation led byWWF, IUCN (The World Conservation Union), theInternational Tropical Timber Organization, the WorldAgroforestry Centre (ICRAF), the ASEAN-KoreaEnvironmental Cooperation Project, the Asia ForestPartnership and the Food and Agriculture Organization.

Learning from... (continued from page 7)

The flawed wisdomof sustainable forest management

While smoke haze pollution attracts a large share ofpublic and media attention, escaped fires can also causeconsiderable damage to forests. According to the report,Fires in Indonesia: Causes, Costs and Policy Implications,over 2 million hectares of lowland forest burnt during 1998in East Kalimantan alone. This probably resulted from firesstarted in plantations as well as from livelihood activitiessuch as agriculture, turtle hunting, and fishing.

In contrast to recent claims that the original estimatesof the area of land burnt in Indonesia 1997/98 wereexaggerated, Tacconi’s study shows 11.7 million hectaresof Indonesia’s forest and land were burnt, much morethan first thought.

Tacconi also argues that in many instances fires are asimple manifestation of government land allocationpolicy. “When governments decide to allocate forestareas for other land uses, such as oil palm plantations,this ultimately leads to deforestation. Fire is merely aland management tool implemented after the decision ismade to allocate forests for alternative uses,” Tacconisaid, “When plantations are involved, concerns aboutdeforestation should focus on land use managementrather than fires.”

The fires that produce smoke haze pollution andforest degradation are the result of economic andgovernance factors. Using fire to clear land forplantations is cheaper than using mechanical equipment,so unless the fires generate pollution, they should beallowed. According to the report, Indonesia’s fire problem

can be improved with better legislation and stricter lawenforcement.

“Firstly, laws need to be implemented that recognizethe economic and financial needs of the country. Even ifthe current law that completely outlaws the use of firesin plantations could be enforced, it would requirecompanies to make a very heavy financial investment inother land clearing methods,” Tacconi said, "Usedproperly, fire is a very useful tool. It would be far betterto ban only those fires that have a significant haze effect,such as fires used to clear peat lands.

“Secondly, law enforcement needs to be moreeffective. Clear punitive examples need to be made tomake companies change their use of fire. If they arefound guilty, the penalty needs to be large enough todeter them and other companies from again using fireillegally.”

But when fires are used by villagers pursuinglivelihood activities, Tacconi argues that laws will havelittle effect.

“If national, regional and district governments reallywant small-scale farmers and local villagers to stop usingfire indiscriminately, they need to implement appropriatelivelihood initiatives for local communities.”

Tacconi is currently undertaking further CIFORresearch on fires in Indonesia. Conducted with a range ofinternational and Indonesian partners, the research willdocument the economic and environmental impact offires and examine policies to address the problem.

Manage peat lands (continued from page 1)

May

200

3 N

umbe

r 32

CI

FO

R

9n e w sCommunity forestry (continued from page 5)

Sabah are reluctant to relinquish control over forest areasand have come up with new guidlines for communal forestmanagement.

In Indonesia, decentralisation since the late 1990s hasgiven much more authority to district governments,including the responsibility to generate a much largershare of their own revenues. In forest-rich districtsgovernments often promote oil palm plantations andlogging, both legal and illegal, to generate thoserevenues. This political reform has created legalopportunities for small communal forest concessions towork with outside timber traders. In many cases theresult is a level of damage to Indonesia’s remainingforests on a scale seen only when corporate loggingexisted.

“Nevertheless, local communities in most places aremaking gradual progress towards increased stewardshipover the forest, despite the problems of reluctant localgovernments and greedy local elites,” says de Jong.

Handing over authority has to be considered alongsidetwo other trends. One is that forests are increasinglyvaluable to a larger number of constituencies. Second,Asia’s tropical forests are being increasingly degraded bylogging, which may limit the interest of communities incontrolling them.

Today tropical forests are becoming valuable to amuch wider range of people worldwide because of the

biodiversity they hold, thecarbon they store and theireffects on the environmentand the climate. Withincountries the demands onforests are also increasing.The middle class in a countrylike Thailand, for example,expects national forests toremain accessible to themfor recreation. These newdemands require morecomplicated negotiations on the rights that direct users offorests hold, what rights they hold over their forestresources, and what rights remain with outsidestakeholders.

Another factor is the condition of the forest.Communities may have little incentive to assumeresponsibilities over forests that have already beenlogged or degraded. Governments will have to identifyways to compensate the investment required to restoreand preserve such forests, especially those that provideenvironmental services for a much wider group ofstakeholders than the local communities themselves.

“Communal forestry will increasingly take the form ofco-management, rather than absolute control overforests by communities alone,” says de Jong.

Fires in Indonesia:Causes, Costs andPolicy Implications is available in PDF format: www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-038.pdf

CI

FO

R10

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

the current state of knowledge on the role forests play, andto enhance public awareness about their significance forrural livelihoods, but also to produce policy lessons and toidentify concrete proposals for action.

Participants will examine how current knowledge andfuture research can best ensure forests help reducepoverty for millions of the world's rural poor whilemaintaining their rich biodiversity.

Fifty selected papers will be presented and discussed inseven thematic workgroups: • Forests as safety-nets • Non-timber forest products, small-scale logging, and

rural livelihoods • The contributions of plantations and agroforestry to

rural livelihoods • Improving livelihoods and protecting biodiversity • Forest certification and rural livelihoods • International dimensions of forests and rural livelihoods • Community forestry and rural livelihoods

Some 30 people or organizations have been selected topresent their work in the form of posters, which will be on

display throughout the conference.The results of the conference will be conveyed to the

4th United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF), to be held in2004.

The organizersThe Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) andInWEnt (Capacity Building International), in collaborationwith Germany's Ministry of Economic Cooperation andDevelopment (BMZ), 'Deutsche Gesellschaft für TechnischeZusammenarbeit' (GTZ) and the World Agroforestry Centre(ICRAF).

Other SponsorsUnited Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF), SwedishInternational Biodiversity Programme (SWIBP), CentreTechnique d'Agriculture et dévelopment rural (CTA),International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

International conference... (continued from page3)

Central to CIFOR’s mission of promoting sustainableforest management to reduce poverty is acommunications strategy that reaches all of itsidentified stakeholders. A key component of CIFOR’scommunications is to increase awareness of CIFOR andits research through the mainstream media. Mediastories about CIFOR increase the Center’s profile anddeliver findings to those who can influence the future ofthe world’s forests, including politicians, donoragencies, academics and NGOs.

In 2002 CIFOR's research was covered in over 170media stories, at an average of 3.3 per week. Of the 170stories in 2002, all but 33 involved CIFOR's direct input,such as CIFOR staff directly contacting the media,holding press conferences, submitting opinion pieces orproviding information to journalists. This increasinglevel of proactive media liaison throughout the year notonly generated stories in itself, but also enhanced mediaawareness of CIFOR, leading to even more stories.

Forty percent of media coverage was in Indonesia,11% in the media of Zimbabwe, Brazil and Cameroon,where CIFOR’s regional offices are located, 28% ininternational media, and 21% in overseas nationalmedia. Some of CIFOR’s most notable media successeswere with The Economist, Far Eastern Economic Review,BBC World Service, the International Herald Tribune andthe Asian Wall Street Journal.

The areas of CIFOR's research which generated mostmedia interest were in community forestry, forest-related debt, fires and carbon-trading.

CIFOR in the news-2002Geographical coverage:66 stories in Indonesian media (15 in English, 53 in Indonesian)01 story in Zimbabwe media

04 stories in Brazil media13 stories in Cameroon media47 stories in international media (e.g. BBC, Economist, FEER,

IHT, AWS)39 stories in overseas national media (non-CIFOR location

e.g. San Francisco Chronicle)Total 170 stories

CIFOR’S media spotlight

The Food and Agricultural Organization has released acomprehensive training package on community-basedforest resource conflict management. The trainingmaterials will assist in managing the conflicts that oftenarise over the protection, use and control of forestresources. A related goal is to assist local stakeholdersin forest-dependent communities participate moressuccessfully in forest management.

The training materials are targeted at forestworkers, NGOs, development workers and all who findthemselves fulfilling a training role in helpingstakeholders work collaboratively in communityforestry.

The package includes tools and aids for training inconflict analysis and facilitating resolution processes.Also included are case studies, workshop aids and how-to instructions on workshop design.

The materials have been published by the FAO andthe Regional Community Forestry Training Center,Bangkok. For further information, please e-mail:Erik.Nielsen@fao.org

Type of media:38 total on-line, 71 total print, 15 total radio, 22 total TV,24 total wire, total 170 stories.

Toolkit fixes community conflict

CIFOR intern wins award CIFOR intern from Japan’s Waseda University, MotoshiHiratsuka, has been honoured with the university’sAzusa Ono Memorial Award for completing anoutstanding Master’s thesis. Parts of Motoshi’s thesiswere based on work conducted at CIFOR in conjunctionwith CIFOR’s Takeshi Toma. “This award is not only anhonour for Motoshi,” said Toma, “It also implicitlyacknowledges the important work of CIFOR.” CIFOR’sDirector General, David Kaimowitz was equally pleased.“This is wonderful news. I was very impressed withMotoshi’s presentation last year at CIFOR andcongratulate him on his achievement. I look forward toCIFOR’s future collaboration with Motoshi,” Kaimowitzsaid.

Jag Maini wins award Chair of CIFOR's Board of Trustees, Dr. Jagmohan Maini,has been awarded the distinguished “Ordem Nacional doCruzeiro do Sul” (National Order of the Cross of theSouth) from the President of Brazil. The Awardrecognizes Jag's long and outstanding dedication work tothe world's forests and for his close cooperation withBrazilian partners at the Earth Summit in Rio. Ourwarmest congratulations to Jag on a well-deservedrecognition.

Indonesian policy briefs on-lineCIFOR is now producing policy briefs in bahasa Indonesiafor forest stakeholders at the district and communitylevel. Known as Warta Kebijakan (Policy News), the briefsare either written by CIFOR researchers and reviewedexternally, or written in collaboration with otherorganizations. The aim is to deliver key findings fromCIFOR and other research and development institutionsto forest practitioners on the ground.

Past papers have included: • Pengusahaan Hutan di Daerah (Forest Concession

at the District Areas)• Masyarakat Adat (Customary Community)• Hutan Adat (Customary Forest) • Otonomi Desa (Village Autonomy)• Tata Ruang dan Proses Penataan Ruang (Spatial

Planning and Processes for Spatial Planning)• Peran Serta masyarakat dalam Penataan Ruang

(Community Participation in Spatial Planning) • Dampak Desentralisasi dan Otonomi Daerah terhadap

Hutan dan Masyarakat Hutan (The Impact ofDecentralization and Regional Autonomy on Forestsand Forest Communities)

Recent briefs in 2003: • Perdagangan Karbon (Carbon Trading)• Perhutanan Sosial (Social Forestry)

• Pengalihan utang Untuk Pelestarian Hutan (Debt forForest Rehabilitation Swap)

Briefs planned for 2003 include: • Klasifikasi Kawasan Konservasi (Classification of

Conservation Areas)• Konsesi Konservasi (Conservation Concessions) For papers in PDF format, e-mail Dina Hubudin atd.hubudin@cgiar.org

Co-learn maps forest resourcesManaging natural resources at almost any scale isessentially an exercise in trying to harness a complexhuman-ecological system for a restricted but changingset of goals. A DFID, EU and ADB supported softwareprogram from CIFOR is set to help forest stakeholdersmanage this process more efficiently. Known as “Co-Learn”, the software tool is built around an interactivemap that allows the user to access a range of resources.The user can then choose between several options ingetting from one point in an abstract managementlandscape to another, by a route the user selects for himor herself. The map as metaphor approach makes iteasier for stakeholders to know where they are, wherethey are going and what they can expect to discover alongthe way in resource planning. So far the program has beentested by a range of forest users in Indonesia, Zimbabwe,the UK and Australia, including local communities,government officials, NGOs, and university students.Results from these tests have been very rewarding andCIFOR will begin distributing soon. For details contactRahayu Koesnadi at r.koesnadi@cgiar.org.

Indonesian forestersuse CIFOR technologyCIFOR’s Criteria and Indicators Modification andAdaptation Tool (CIMAT) is set to become an importanttool in the Indonesia Ministry of Forestry’s nationalforest management strategy. At a workshop lastFebruary, CIFOR provided MOF officers with training inhow to use CIMAT to develop and assess criteria andindicators for monitoring and assessing its five priorityprogram areas. MOF’s five priority programs arecombating illegal logging, controlling forest fires,restructuring forestry sector, forest rehabilitation andstrengthening decentralization of forestry activities.The Ministry believes CIMAT will help provide its variousforest management units working in each of these areaswith a consistent and coherent framework. Thisframework will provide vital feedback on the success ofthe units’ various sustainable forest managementstrategies. In addition to MOF, CIFOR has provided CIMATtraining to universities, research institutes and NGOs.

CIMAT development was funded by CIFOR, theEuropean Union, GTZ and USAID.

May

200

3 N

umbe

r 32

CI

FO

R

11n e w sAnnouncements

CI

FO

R12

May

200

3N

umbe

r 32 n e w s

ISSN: 1022-0992

Writting and editing byGreg Clough andPaul Stapleton

Design and layout byYani Saloh, CIFORPrinted in Indonesiaby SMT Desa Putera

CIFOR welcomes responses to this newsletter frominterested readers.Pleaseaddress them to CIFOR’sCommunication SpecialistGreg CloughE-mail: g.clough@ciar.org

Center for InternationalForestry Research (CIFOR)P.O. Box. 6596 JKPWBJakarta 10065, IndonesiaTel: +62(251) 622622Fax: +62(251) 622100E-mail: cifor@cgiar.org

Regional Offices:for South AmericaEMBRAPA-CPATU Escritorio do CIFORCaixa Postal 48 66.240Belem, Para, BrazilTel/fax: +55 91 2760041E-mail: cifor@cpatu.embrapa.br or ciforbel@interconect.com.br

for Southern and Eastern Africa73 Harare Drive, MountPleasant Harare, ZimbabweTel: +263 4 369655/369656/301028/369595Fax: +263 4 369657E-mail: cifor-zw@cgiar.org

for Central and West AfricaIITA Humid Forestecoregional Center BP 2008Yaounde, CameroonTel:+237 2237434 or2237522 Fax: +237 2237437E-mail: cifor.cameroon@cgiar.org or cifor.cameroon@iccnet.com

Cover photos by: M.R. Perez, C. Cossalter,H. Soedjito, Y. Ruchiat,Y. Saloh and E.DouniasInside photos by:E. Dounias, Y. Ruchiat, C. Cossalter, C. Kuhn, H. Soedjito, Y. Saloh, C. Colfer and W. Prajanthi

if you would preferto receive CIFOR News in French or Spanish,please contact Nia Sabarniati atn.sabarniati@cgiar.org

Manuel Boissiére joined CIFOR in January 2003 for one-year’ssecondment from CIRAD-Forêt in France to collaborate with CIFORon research in to traditional knowledge and local perceptions of theenvironment. He will be attached to the Environmental Servicesand Sustainable Use of Forests Programme. Manuel received hisPh.D. from University of Science, Montpellier, France.

Yulia Siagian commenced a 12-month assignment in January 2003as a Research Assistant (Socio-Economic) in CIFOR’sdecentralization project. She has undertaken several consultancieswith CIFOR over the last 3 years, including research on carbon,biodiversity, and gender analysis. Yulia has a Bachelor’s degree inForestry from Universitas Winaya Mukti, Bandung, Indonesia.

Ronny Syam joined CIFOR’s decentralization project in February2003 as a Research Assistant and GIS-Remote Sensing Specialist.Prior to CIFOR, Ronny was a GIS Specialist in Riau and was involvedin several WWF Indonesia projects. Ronny has a degree inGeophysics and Meteorology from the Bandung Institute ofTechnology and is completing a Master’s degree in InformationTechnology for Natural Resource Management.

Theodore Zacharias has been working with CIFOR as a consultantfor almost three years. He has just accepted a twelve monthappointment as a Research Assistant and Programmer and will workin CIFOR’s Forests and Governance programme. Theodore has aBachelor’s degree in computer Science from the Bandung Instituteof Technology, Indonesia.

Heru Komarudin joined CIFOR in April 2003 for a 12-monthassignment as a Project Assistant with CIFOR’s decentralizationwork. Heru will assist with research and training, as well asfinancial, communications and information management. BeforeCIFOR, he worked at the EU-Forest Liason Bureau, Jakarta. Heruhas a Bachelor’s degree in Forestry from Gadjahmada University,Indonesia.

F. Agung Prasetyo joins CIFOR for 12-months as a project officerassisting with proposal development and communications for thecenter’s research into illegal logging. Prior to CIFOR, he worked onforest management and certification issues in East Kalimantan.Agung has a Master of Science from the Department ofEnvironmental Science, Forest Ecology and Forest Management,

Wageningen University, the Netherlands.

Krystof Obidzinski, commenced a 12-months assignment in April2003 to work on illegal logging research. Over the last 3 years, hehas been doing consultancies with CIFOR on illegal logging. Justrecently Krystof obtained his Ph.D in Anthropology from theUniversity of Amsterdam in the Netherlands. He also has an M.A inEcological Anthropology from the University of Georgia-Athens.

Moving onSeveral colleagues left in the first quarter of 2003. We would like to thank themfor their contribution to CIFOR and wish them every success.

Cynthia McDougall finished her assignment in December 2002 and has nowreturned to Canada. Cynthia joined CIFOR in May 1998 and during her last periodwith the Center worked as a scientist in the ACM programme. Cynthia can bereached at: pmacoun@hotmail.com

Cut Fathiah Gathom left in February 2003 after more than 9 years of service atCIFOR. Cut worked as a secretary in the Sustainable Forests Management andEnvironmental Services programme. She can be contacted by phone at +62-251638 524.

John Poulsen finished his assignment with CIFOR in April 2003, having first joinedCIFOR as a DANIDA Research Fellow in February 1998. John was a scientist assistingCIFOR's biodiversity research. He can be contacted at: JGPoulsen@hotmail.com

CIFOR Board of Trustees

Dr. Jagmohan S. Maini (Canada)(Chair) Toronto, Canada

Dr. Christina Amoako-Nuama(Ghana)Accra, Ghana

Professor Don Koo Lee (Korea)Seoul National UniversitySuwon, Republic of Korea

Ms. Angela Cropper (Trinidad and Tobago) Trinidad and Tobago

Dr. Walter P. Falcon (USA)Stanford University, USA

Dr. Christine Padoch (USA)The New York Botanical GardenNew York, USA

Ms. Yumiko Tanaka (Japan) Japan International CooperationAgencyTokyo, Japan

Dr. Jacques Valeix (France) CIRAD-Forêt Montpellier, France

Dr. David Kaimowitz (USA)CIFORBogor, Indonesia

Dr. Eugene Terry (Sierra Leone) African Agricultural TechnologyFoundationNairobi, Kenya

Dr. Andrew Bennett (UK) Syngenta Foundation forSustainable Agriculture

Dr. Hadi Pasaribu (Indonesia)Ministry of Forestry Indonesia

Dr. Cristian Samper(US/Colombia) Smithsonian Tropical ResearchInstituteBalboa, Panama

CIFOR staff