Land Use Shifts, Land Use Mosaics and Policy

“Best bet” Land-use Systems

Country reports

Alternatives to Slash-and-Burn in Cameroon

Unique id: IDAVSSXB

Source file: D:\Projects\ASB\ASB Country and Thematic reports\Cameroom Final Report\Final Report&Synthesis of PhaseII-Cameroon.xml

Authors: J. Kotto-Same, A. Moukam, R. Njomgang, T. Tiki-Manga, J. Tonye, C. Diaw, J. Gockowski, S. Hauser, S. Weise, D. Nwaga, L. Zapfack, C. Palm, P. Woomer, , Andy Gillison, D. Bignell, J. Tondoh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

A core issue in sustainable agricultural development in a rain forest environment, today, is that of mitigating the potential environmental and social costs of economic growth. At the same time that alternatives are being sought to increase the overall performance of agricultural systems, protect the environment and alleviate poverty, appropriate attention has to be given to the potential contradiction among these three sets of objectives. By the same token, the development of alternatives to hundreds-of-years-old slash-and-burn systems in the Central African rain forest has to be based on a field-grounded knowledge of the dynamics and resilience of those systems. This will facilitate the understanding of the realistic range of possibilities and tradeoffs related to land use change and expected land use shifts at a broad scale.

Land Uses and the Notion of Best Bets

To understand Cameroon’s research approach to the notion of “best bets”, one has to keep in mind the structural composition of households’ food, cash and social basket (Figure 10) and the basic structure of the landscape in the humid forest margin (Figure 11). Households’ subsistence and food security needs in the HFZ benchmark are typically met through the integration of multiple crops and tree-based systems, complemented by an array of activities that include monocropping options, fish farming, hunting, fishing, and the gathering of non-timber forest products.

This multi-level system of land use is built upon a kin-based system of nested property and access regimes. So far, the latter has been able to guarantee intergenerational access to natural resources, despite a patrilineal bias concerning women’s access to capital inheritance and evolving conditions of demographic pressure. The biophysical (carbon, GHG, biodiversity) and institutional (property rights) studies carried out in Cameroon have targeted the basic structure of interfaces between different segments of this landscape and human interventions. The economic study has simulated the cost-benefit analysis of environmental, economic, and social conditions pertaining to a selected set of agricultural interventions (Figure 12). The issues of agricultural sustainability, as well as the collective action component of the research on local institutions, have also focused, by their very nature, on agricultural development conditions in the study area. The analysis of impacts and research and policy orientations elaborated by Cameroon’s country meeting have both benefited from, and been limited by, this configuration of biophysical and socioeconomic research at different scales. The policy and action research recommendations following this evaluation of the anticipated impacts of land use shifts are thus based on expert judgement and best-of-knowledge assessment, and not on specific policy research. It is believed, however, that the exceptional scientific mix forming the basis of these evaluations and recommendations is both robust and credible.

The systems identified and submitted to an economic evaluation are improved cropping systems, which are likely to yield differing environmental and social benefits. As such, they are but one component of a mosaic of systems and activities which, together, make up the actual pattern of land use in the humid forest margins. This relationship is described by (Figure 11). The notion of “best bets”, which has been instrumental in the research design of Phase II, needs to be clarified in that respect. In the research framework developed by the Cameroon team, the “best bets” are not conceived as brand new technologies that are going to be developed from scratch, in order to replace current land uses. Rather, they are based on existing systems, of which we know the economic, environmental, and social potential and limitations, and which can, therefore, be the target of specific interventions that could increase the overall performance of the system. It is the anticipation of probable trends in land use changes over time that has provided the basis of the Cameroon team’s approach to the question of “best bets”.

Land use history and present configuration in the HFZ clearly demonstrate intercropping and cash production strategies dominated by small-scale farms and household needs in the general framework of a collective and common property system of land and natural resource allocation. This strategy is shaped by household structure (family labor and gender relations, in particular) and preferences, land and natural resource configurations, and the institutional make-up of property and access rights in the rural landscape. It is very unlikely that any policy or technological innovation, however radical, would drastically alter those patterns and trends in the near future. The changes that are most likely to produce lasting impact are those that take place within that mosaic of multiple use and complementary production systems. They are themselves developing parts of the system and, as such, they can modify its evolutionary path. It is within that realm that technological innovation and improvements-- “best bet” systems for which environmental, economic and social implications are predictable -- can be targeted for research, development and policy efforts.

Evaluation of Problems Associated with Anticipated Shifts

A key criterion for making research and policy choices is the balance of social benefits and costs that can be expected from the development of alternatives.

Who is likely to benefit or suffer from the development of oil palm plantations or the implementation of community forests? What do the history of cocoa expansion in Cameroon and the initial phase of development of plantation systems tell us in that regard? How do those systems compare with improved food crop fields on short fallow rotation and forest cucumeropsis fields with regard to their beneficiaries and potential social biases? What are the other promising land use or cropping systems, which, for various reasons, are not the most likely to emerge as dominant in the landscape? What could be their impact and what can be done to integrate their positive features into alternative strategies?

What are other negative implications of expected land use shifts with regard to environmental, social and economic variables? What are the various scenarios and options and how can their social impact be anticipated?

The very nature of the research approach taken –“best bets” as an improvement of smallholder plantations and actual land use systems in village communities -- points broadly at small farm households and communities as potential beneficiaries of those options. Communities, however, are not homogenous, while various social interests, outside of the communities, are also at stake. Social options also need to be weighed against other types of benefits within and across systems.

In addition, the different constraints and problem areas identified with regard to each of the selected production and resource management options indicate trends that depend, to a different extent, on the way institutions, markets and policies will actually behave in the near future. Another essential factor to consider is the relative heterogeneity of the humid forest margin itself, with its gradient of environmental conditions, agricultural intensification and human pressure on the resource base.

Stakeholder Analysis of Potential Benefits and “Losses” from the Anticipated Shifts in Land Uses

Schematic presentations for the stakeholders who are most likely to be affected by “best bets” development follow. The presentations summarize the basic context or assumptions related to the land uses considered and indicate the expected patterns of benefits, risks and losses. In the case of community forestry, where the direction of change is most sensitive to conditions external to the control of communities and small farmers, two alternative scenarios are provided. In that case, the contextual differences would notably affect not only stakeholder groups but also the development -- expansion or contraction -- of the system itself.

A. Oil-palm systems
Context/Assumptions: (1) Strong spread of oil palm systems in the benchmark; (2) Dominant smallholder monocrop system based on the industrial ‘SOCAPALM’ model (Oil palm associated with food crops in the first three years, followed by monocroping).
Beneficiaries		Benefits			Risks/Losses
Farm households Social elite Palm oil industry Government Urban consumer Regional consumer		Increased revenues from sales (men mainly) and artisanal processing (women included) Increased revenues, prestige and money Greater profits (privatization of process), steady supply at favorable prices Increased tax revenues Mitigate the monocrop Soca model Better supply of oil palm products and by-products/ ‘Urban bias’ through seasonal quotas on exports (hidden tax)			Reduce women’s influence on HH decisions Loss of common property forest lands Concentration risk against capital-poor households. Producers’ dependency on the industry (tied loans for inputs) Rural producers’ loss of market advantages and revenues during low-season Some loss in environmental benefits
Options: Develop and promote improved varieties. Mitigate environmental, concentration and gender biases through “mosaic” management strategy. Develop small-scale processing. Maintain seasonal quotas for resource preservation (?)
B. Cocoa systems
Context/Assumptions Likely to remain stable in present conditions, following structural adjustment programs that cut subsidies and state services. Recent increase in world and producer market prices for cocoa might result in a renewal of the activity but not in a dramatic expansion of the system throughout the landscape. Considerable increase in the quantity and quality of cocoa production could result from appropriate policies and the availability of affordable technologies to control pests, particularly, black pod fungal disease.
Beneficiaries			Gains			Risks/Losses
Farm households Farmer organizations Government International cocoa sector and chocolate industry Global consumers			Increased revenues New occupational niche in marketing sector Fiscal benefits and rents Biggest profit from the sector’s growth			With no control on world prices, the producer is mainly a price-taker; Intensification might induce bias against poor farmers Information and position in regulatory bodies still weak Lower benefits than desirable under present international terms of trade
Further conditions: Fair international share of the cost of environmental conservation. Internal policies supporting plantation renewal and the strengthening of farmer organizations. Increased representation of farmers in regulatory bodies.
Community Forestry (CF)--Scenario 1: No change in present policy orientations Weak implication of traditional tenure institutions
Context: 1994 Forestry Reform – Includes provisions for granting ‘community forest’ concessions to communities represented by ‘legal entities’ taken from a pool of farmer organizations, which acquired legal status through the 1990, 1992 and 1993 laws on associations, common interest groups and economic interest groups. These organizations can play a strong proactive role in conservation and development. They do not, however, have the community mandates required in matters of tenure and devolution. Anthropological institutions, which are not considered by the reform, such as lineages, clans and village councils, retain these functions.
Beneficiaries	Position/Power			Benefits			Potential Risks/Losses
Communities	Medium:little information, can participate but only through legal entities			Small tax & logging-related revenues			Loss of forest & forest-related revenues; risks of social restructuring
Local elite	Strong:main beneficiary ofInformation asymetries			Rent capture of logging-related revenues & taxes			Conflicts harmful to influence in community
Farmer organizations (GICs)	Intermediate:can be recognized as legal entity; low information & legal limits to economic benefits						GICs a potential vehicle of vested interests
Farm Households & lineages	Weak: family institutions not recognized as legitimate stakeholders						Low returns from forest exploitation, loss of agricultural lands, weakening of traditional authority
National and international logging interests	Strong: bargaining position; have the technical & financial capacity to fulfill inventory & logging requirements in CFs			Quick-profit Low-cost logging in community forests			Unsustainable logging, small size of CFs (5000 ha) Loss of environmental & economic benefits
National public interests	Intermediate: limited influence through NGOs & other private & public bodies
Government	Strong: Retain main decision-making power for recognition, design & monitoring of CFs						Loss of long-run fiscal revenues, negotiation failure
Global consumers							Loss of global environment benefits, non-sustainable consumer benefits

C. Community Forestry—Scenario 2: Adoption of reform at implementation stage Empowerment of customary tenure institutions; Flexible adaptation of criteria related to size of Community Forests (CF); Adaptive management plan that takes into account the relation between forest and agricultural cycles.
Beneficiaries	Position/Power	Benefits	Potential Risks/Losses
Communities	Strong, can participate through all institutions and organizations	Balanced revenues from agriculture, small-scale logging, gathering and domestication of NTFPs, use of other natural resources; tax revenues from logging
Local elite	Intermediate: Benefit from information but not institutional asymetries.
Farmer organizations	Strong: can participate & play a proactive role	Reinforced collective action for poverty alleviation and forest-related alternatives
Farm households and lineages	Strong: family institutions recognized as stakeholders	Increased household’s welfare
National and international logging interests	Intermediate: have the technical & financial capacity to invest CFs, but this influence is subordinated to larger community interests	More local accountability & economic discipline of logging; sustainable logging based on genuine stakeholder negotiation	Higher short-term transaction costs
National public interests	Intermediate: some influence thru NGOs and other civil interests	Forest conservation & increased availability of forest-related products
Government	Strong, Main supervision power in recognition, design & monitoring of CFs	Long-term economic & environmental benefits & fiscal revenues.	Loss of short-term tax revenues
Global consumers	Intermediate: through donors & international agencies	Gain of global environment benefits at sustainable consumer prices

D. Improved Food Crop and Long Fallow/Forest Fields
Context/Assumptions: Significant labor constraints restrict the possibility of a large portfolio of food crops and forest fields per household. Under present technological conditions, a large-scale spread of these systems is likely to happen only with the multiplication of farm households, as a consequence of demographic growth. These two types of fields are complementary within households’ agricultural cycles Their improvement is dependent upon research and technological innovation (short fallow & multi- trata systems, IPM, plant health management, etc.)
Beneficiaries	Gains	Risks/Losses
Women for food crops Men for forest fields Farm households in general National and regional consumers	Increased revenues from increase in marketed surplus Increase in farm household food security Increased food supplies and improved regional food security	Lack of marketing infrastructure and difficult market access limit farmer incentives to intensify. Small market size and inelastic demand leads to decrease in farm prices and fall in farm revenues. Increased profitability of extensive long fallow systems leads to an increase in resources allocated to this land use system , increasing its relative extent and depleting forest resources. Enhanced rural technologies and increased profitability of slash-and-burn farming along forest margins leads to influx of rural migrants. Marketing infrastructure remains underdeveloped.

Other important areas for mosaic strategic options

Dry -season inland valley systems (asan)

Fish/horticulture farms under Integrated Resource Management (crop-livestock-fish)

NTFPs domestication in cocoa plantations

Small-scale processing in home gardens and off-farm enterprises

Rationale: occupy all the natural resource and man-made niches across the landscape.

Emphasize system-driving, revenue-generating enterprises, associated with land-saving technologies and sustainable natural resource management systems.

Integrate with strategic policy choices

Mitigation of Problems Associated with Anticipated Shifts

To improve the performance of expanding land uses and lift the obstacles to the development of other promising systems, our best option is to mimic farmers’ integrative strategies, while improving individual components of the system. Our main bet is thus to develop an improved mosaic within a strategy of Integrated Landscape Management (ILM). Technological development and natural resource management in socially integrated African farming and resource use systems can, in no way, be a zero sum game. The model of land use specialization inherited from the European tradition of agricultural development may not be best suited for the development of agricultural and natural resource systems of the type found in the HFZ. This was partially recognized by farming systems research two decades ago.

The mosaic approach to integrated landscape management recognizes the positive features of this research tradition and goes beyond it. Particularly adapted to the configuration of multiple use, nested rights and multiple eco-niches on which production systems have been socially built in the African rain forest, this approach reconciles agricultural development objectives with environmental and social concerns, and individual benefits with community needs, as well as anchors technological and management innovations in a traditional substratum. The ILM approach goes further, and integrates key factors both upstream and downstream of the production process. For primary production alternatives to develop their full potential and to create positive spin-offs onto the overall development-conservation nexus in the forest, a host of interconnected initiatives will have to be taken simultaneously, or, at worse, in a close sequence. Research conducted in the HFZ (Ndoye, 1998) indicates that revenue increase in conditions of expanding markets for non-timber forest products will not allow for resource preservation, unless the pace of species domestication is accelerated and information is adequately disseminated to farmers. Cocoa plantations, which our research has targeted for best-bet improvement, are presently the main domesticated reserve for NTFPs in the HFZ. Research and development work on cocoa plantations would thus fit naturally with on-going endeavors related to the marketing and domestication of NTFPs. The development of post-harvest systems and peri-urban enterprises, which are a focus of the new Ecoregional Program for the Humid and sub-humid Tropics of Africa (EPHTA), are also necessary to reduce post-harvest losses, and to benefit from the added-value of small-scale rural businesses and the proximity of expanding urban markets. Such enterprises could generate rural wealth while deflecting some of the anthropic pressure on land and forest. Oil palm systems are a “natural” candidate for these post-harvest enterprises, as small-scale palm oil processing technology can be readily made available to farmers at a large scale. The deflection feature of these “off-farm” alternatives cannot be neglected as we aim at mitigating the negative environmental impacts of any single technological option. This holds, at the landscape level, for the mix of integrated systems, which all have their pluses and minuses. In order to achieve the objectives defined above, appropriate policies would have to be designed and institutional constraints to the availability of research results, the development of infrastructures and market access, lifted.

It will also be necessary to build upon the long-term cycles of land use systems. These cycles, that once permitted the complete reconstitution of a mature primary forest after generations of uses (Figures 12 and 13), have been disturbed by several factors. Most salient among those are the relatively high demographic and land pressure on forest areas in the northern part of the benchmark and the forced settlement of villages along major roads and trails under successive colonial regimes during the first quarter of the century. This second factor applies to the entire research area. It is probably responsible for the pattern of land use sedimentation across lateral bands of forest, agroforests, agricultural and swamp lands which, as participatory maps done in the region indicate, run parallel to the transportation channels across which villages have settled. This means that in "forest rich" areas, the complete reconstitution of the long term cycle that enabled primary forest reconstitution in abandoned village sites (bilig) would imply a return move of habitation into the deep forest (totally improbable) or the abandonment of present agricultural land coupled with the construction of major trails linking habitations to new fields and plantations in the forest (very unlikely).

The present configuration of land use is thus likely to remain, with a probable intensification of anthropic pressures on farm land, agroforests and swamps. If not checked by appropriate policies linking research, development and conservation strategies, these pressures will necessarily, in the long run, coalesce into a frontier front that will ultimately touch and transform communities’ main forest reserves. The latter are presently used as a granary of non-timber tree products and as hunting and fishing grounds. As indicated by Figure 1, they are often located at one end of community landscapes, opposing residential areas.

Research Options, Policy and Collective Action

The first question to rise, with regard to the means of influencing policy changes, is that of the limited usefulness of ‘country action plans’. Not only is most research not timed to fit a protocol leading to the design of such plans, but an influence at the planning level gives little guarantee as to actual implementation. As shown by a recent study of the 1994 forestry law in Cameroon (Ekoko, 1997), the level of policy implementation is critical, as it might result in a significant alteration of principles and orientations carefully designed at an earlier stage. The sociology of the political and civil environments in Cameroon requires that appropriate attention be given to direct linkages with policy-makers and that research results be brought to their attention in an appropriate fashion. In Cameroon, it is expected that this could be effectively done though policy briefs, targeted workshops and individual contacts with high and medium level decision-makers.

It is also foreseen that the particular institutional configuration set up by the decentralization reforms of the early 1990’s have created a favorable environment for community-based collective action. Following the 1990, 1992 and 1993 laws on associations, common interest groups and common economic groups, thousands of grassroots organizations have acquired legal status and have formed large federations and confederations of farmers. These organizations have taken numerous initiatives on their own and are also seeking active collaboration with research institutions and NGOs. In collaboration with the CGIAR NGO committee, IITA, IRAD, ICRAF and CIFOR have initiated talks with two dozen NGOs and farmer federations about a platform of action on common research and development priorities. Such a platform of action could be a powerful vehicle for participatory research and concerted development action, in order to tackle local policy challenges through strategic institutional linkages. This, in turn, could significantly influence higher levels of decision-making. The EPHTA ecoregional program is another forum where a broad group of conventional and non-conventional stakeholder organizations (national and international) have gotten together with the view of linking research with development and extension. Overall, changes in the institutional makeup of the research, development and conservation sectors in Cameroon and Central Africa offer a great opportunity for the emergence of a broad-based alliance of research with a diversity of organizational interests in the region. This alliance could help shape the orientation of land use systems in a manner coherent with ASB’s objectives and results and develop an influence at both the community and state levels of decision-making. Given the global environmental services that would result from the adoption of ‘best bets’, it must be stressed that the level of policy action or lobbying required goes beyond national states, to include the contribution of global interests to the environmental, economic and social alternatives inherent to the ASB program. This also will require appropriate intervention at the appropriate level.