The Reform of Collective Forest Rights in China and Its Implementation in the Fushun City Region

Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 ANNALS OF FOREST RESEARCH DOI: 10.15287/afr.2014.210 www.afrjournal.org

The reform of collective forest rights in China and Its implementation in the Fushun City Region

S. Jiang, B.J. Lewis, L. Dai, W. Jia, Y. An

Jiang S., Lewis B.J., Dai L., Jia W., An Y., 2014. The reform of collective forest rights in China and Its implementation in the Fushun City Region. Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014.

Abstract. The paper provides an historical overview of the gradual but erratic evolution of collective forest rights in the People’s Republic of China. For- est tenure rights have been subject to numerous changes since the establishment of People’s Republic in 1949. In the most recent decades, use rights for forests have been transferred from collective to individual household-based with the intent to provide benefits to forest farmers. The implementation of the intended reforms has varied considerably from one province to another, with the majority of reform efforts originating in the southern provinces. This article looks at the major effort undertaken in Northeast China. The Fushun collective forest rights reform was analyzed using data obtained through field investigation by the Fushun Forestry Bureau. Initial effects of reform in terms of modes of rights assignment and farmer motivations to conduct forest management activities, as well as farmers’ income and financing conditions, are discussed. Remaining significant challenges are also briefly considered. Keywords Northeast China, collective forests, forest land tenure, forest use rights, Fushun City.

Authors. Shengwei Jiang - Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 72 Wenhua Rd., Shenyang, PRC 110016; Forestry Department of Lia- oning Province, No.2 North Taiyuan Street, Shenyang, PRC 110001; Bernard J. Lewis ([email protected]), Limin Dai - Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 72 Wenhua Rd., Shenyang, PRC 110016; Wei- wei Jia - College of Forestry, Northeast Forestry University, No. 26 Hexing Rd., Harbin, PRC 150040; Yingfeng An - College of Biosciences and Biotechnol- ogy, Shenyang Agricultural University, No. 120 Dongling Rd., Shenyang, PRC 110161. Manuscript received June 09, 2013; revised August 01, 2014; accepted August 04, 2014; online ﬁ rst August 11, 2014.

Introduction power over the past quarter century has been a unique world phenomenon. To cite one ex- China’s transformation into an economic ample, the extreme poverty rate (< $1.25/day) 319 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article has declined from 85% in 1981 to 16% in 2005 vide an overview of how the reform of forest (World Bank 2013). At the same time, this rights has occurred in China in recent decades; transformation has not come without costs, (ii) to describe the efforts undertaken by the among the most noteworthy being the intense Fushun City Forestry Bureau in Northeast Chi- pressure placed upon and signifi cant degrada- na to reform the forest tenure system and trans- tion of the country’s environment, including fer use rights to individual households; (iii) to the country’s 200 million hectares of forests. assess the initial results of the Fushun effort Throughout this period, efforts to sustain the in light of the overall context of the history of forest resource have continued, but have often forest rights reform in China. been overwhelmed by economic pressures. The article fi rst considers the limited but As reported by the 7th National Forest Inven- increasing research efforts devoted to forest tory, 39.4% of the total Chinese forest area is land tenure and associated property rights in State-owned. Collectively-owned forests ac- China. This is followed by an overview of the count for 32.1% of the total forest area, while history of forest land tenure and management private forests – those whose resources (but in China, in effect situating the challenge faced not the land itself) are owned by individual by the Fushun Bureau of integrating its reform households or mixed shareholding groups – effort within the historical context of tenure account for 21.7% of the total forest area (SFA insecurity experienced by China’s rural popu- 2009). Collectively-owned forests dominate lation. Attention then turns to the approach to in the south and State-owned forests are most tenure reform taken by the Fushun City Forest prevalent in the north. Liaoning is the only one Bureau, adopted with the aid of broad guide- of the four Northeast provinces in which more lines issued by the central government. Ele- than half of total provincial forest lands are ments and administration of the tenure reform collectively-owned. Collective owners may program in Fushun City are reviewed, as are be townships, or more typically administrative the program’s initial accomplishments. The villages or village household groups. With re- article concludes with a cautious note of opti- spect to collective forests, major efforts have mism as to how these efforts may contribute to been underway since the turn of the century both the social welfare of the rural population with the ultimate goal of dismantling collec- as well as the ecological integrity and sustain- tive management and transferring forest use able management of China’s forest resources. rights to individual households. Such changes in tenure arrangements have economic, social and political implications, and it is recognized Forest tenure reform – a challenging that the decentralization of forest management research topic in China in China has not always led to improvements in forest management and rural livelihoods (FAO Land tenure may be defi ned as the set of in- 2009). At the same time, secure tenure ar- stitutions and policies that determine locally rangements, including expanded rights to trees how the land and its resources are accessed; and other forest resources, can provide farmers who can hold and use these resources; and for with a more stable foundation upon which de- how long and under what conditions they may cisions to engage in viable forest management be used (Naughton-Treves and Day 2012). For activities may rest; and whether these occur in collectively-owned lands in China, the deci- turn will ultimately affect the long term eco- sion-making authority, typically one or more logical viability of the forest resource (Wang villages, can decide whether and how to dis- et al. 2007, Olsson et al. 2004). tribute use rights for residence, farming, forest The objectives of this article are: (i) to pro- uses, and other purposes to farmers or other

320 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ... individual households. Such use rights fall search effort emerged following the 2003 within the broader domain of property rights, policy statement of the central government en- recalling Demsetz’s classic article in the fi eld couraging provinces to experiment with land (1967) which describes property as a ‘bundle tenure reform. Between 2006 and 2007, the of rights’ pertaining to the control, ability to Environmental Economics Program of Peking derive income from, and the transfer of prop- University (EEPC), with funding from the erty. Schlager and Ostrom (1992) elaborated World Bank, the Ford Foundation, the Rights on this idea, identifying basic rights pertain- and Resources Initiative (Washington, D.C.) ing to property in terms of access, exclusion, and support from the State Forestry Admin- withdrawal (of products from the resource), istration of China, conducted the fi rst large- management (in the sense of regulating use scale, quantitative analysis of the forest ten- patterns and transforming the resource), and ure reforms in China to date, focusing on the alienation (selling or leasing the resource). period from 2000-2006. Two surveys covered With the above distinctions in mind, ‘tenure more than 3000 randomly selected households reform’ in this article basically refers to the re- in 288 randomly selected villages in 8 provinc- assignment of rights other than ownership of es where a majority of the forest is collectively land. In China, the State maintains ownership owned. Again these provinces were all located of all land as the bedrock of State control. The in Southern China, with the notable exception major feature of land ownership is the right to that Liaoning province in Northeast China was alienate – i.e., sell or otherwise dispose of the also included. The surveys gathered informa- land. With the exception of the right to alienate tion on demographic, economic and social that belongs to the State, all other rights could characteristics of villages, as well as land man- theoretically be transferred from the collective agement practices and any tenure reforms ef- to individual households. forts that had been conducted to date. Research on property rights, and in particu- Results from this study found that from 2000 lar land tenure, in China was quite limited to 2006 villagers across the eight surveyed prior to the turn of the century, often being ad- provinces reduced collectively managed for- dressed in passing in studies of reform poli- ests by about 2.5% (Xu et al. 2010). Individ- cies or institutional changes or treated as back- ual household management increased in four ground assumptions in various policy analyses provinces, including Liaoning. In that province (Walder & Oi 1999). Results of the fi rst major slightly more than half of surveyed households effort to synthesize research on property rights were found to have rights defi ned in terms of in China were released in 1999 (Oi & Walder individual household tenure, while 7%, 3%, 1999). The focus of this work was exclusively and 12% held tenure in the form of partner- on rights related to State enterprises. Rights ships, village clusters, or contracts to outsid- addressed included those related to manage- ers, respectively. This left 23% of surveyed ment control of enterprises, the right to income households with forests under strict collective fl ows therefrom, the right to assign ownership management. However, the study remarked to other parties, and how the above rights were that, surprisingly, given the government rheto- specifi ed and enforced. Five types of owner- ric on land reform, there had not been a strong- ship arrangements were examined – traditional er shift towards household-based forest tenure State or collective ownership; management in- arrangements in the six-year period covered centive contracts; government-managed part- by the survey. While household-based tenure nerships; leased public assets; and privatiza- increased in 7 of the 8 provinces, only an aver- tion (Oi & Walder 1999). age of about 7% of collective forests was real- With respect to forest land, the major re- located to other tenure types (Xu et al. 2010).

321 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article

The above study concluded that while the full and capitalist modes of ownership were also effects of these initial reforms on land owner- recognized (Table 1). This arrangement was ship, livelihoods and local governance remain short-lived, however, as almost immediately undetermined, the reforms offered encourage- government emphasis shifted toward a more ment and potential for increasing incomes, ac- socialist management arrangement for pri- celerating reforestation, and reducing confl icts vate lands, with farmers offi cially encouraged emanating from unstable and often ambiguous to form cooperatives in managing household situations with respect to forest land tenure. It forest lands. By 1958, with the launch of Mao also cautioned, however, that a next ‘genera- Zedong’s ‘Great Leap Forward,’ individual tion’ of reforms will be needed both to protect (i.e., ‘private’) ownership of farmland and for- households from more powerful actors at the ests was no longer allowed, and management local level and to enable them to access credit thereof was assigned to advanced cooperatives markets as a tool for increasing production and and ultimately, large communes. In effect, col- enhancing incomes (Xu et al. 2010). lective ownership became the sole alternative to State-owned land and forests. This dual cat- egorization was ultimately embedded in the 2nd An overview of the history of forest land Constitution of the PRC in 1975. tenure in the People’s Republic of China The 1958 campaign also included a national effort to spur industrialization. Dependent on The evolution of forest land tenure and man- fuelwood for their operation, more than a half agement in China since the establishment of a million furnaces for the production of iron the People’s Republic in 1949 is uneven and and steel sprung up in villages across the coun- sporadic. Table 1 presents the succession of try, consuming vast amounts of fuelwood and different laws and resolutions affecting the contributing to a major period of deforestation nature and structure of forest rights that have in the country. This was accompanied by an emanated from the central government over even-more disastrous agricultural failure and the course of the country’s history. Forest land famine from 1958-1961 in which millions per- reforms have historically followed those in ished (Yang 2012). One consequence of this the agricultural sector, which has always set catastrophe for land tenure arrangements that the pace since the trend for tenure liberaliza- occurred in 1962 was that the management tion begun in the 1980’s. Three distinct periods of large communes and communal forests can be identifi ed along the historical evolution was shifted to smaller production teams. This of forest tenure since the establishment of the marked a fi rst step in the gradual devolution of People’s Republic of China. forest tenure and management to lower levels than the broad commune, a trend which did The first three decades (1949-1979) not accelerate signifi cantly until more than a decade later. At the same time, collective own- Land reform in China was initiated at the time ership remained the most prevalent form of the PRC was established in 1949. At that time agricultural and forest land and resource own- lands owned by the many feudal landlords ership until the end of the Mao era in the late were distributed to farmers, with full owner- 1970’s. ship of agricultural and forest land accorded The fi rst three decades of the PRC were tu- to households. In 1952, the Constitution of multuous in many ways, and among the many the PRC was adopted, and four categories of repercussions was the shaping of the mindset land ownership were sanctioned; in addition to of the rural population with respect to forest state- and collective-owned lands, individual- land and resource tenure. For the broad shifts

322 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ...

Table 1 Signifi cant laws and policies related to forest tenure and use rights in the PRC: 1949-2010 Confi scated lands to be converted to common land and 1950 Land Reform Law of PRC gradually distributed to peasants Stipulated that ownership of means of production included: Constitution of the 1952 National (public); cooperative (collective); individual People’s Republic of China laborer; capitalist Resolution on Developing Peasants should construct mutual aid teams to manage 1953 Agricultural Cooperatives forests; land still owned by individuals Means of production (land, forests, livestock, etc.) to be Resolution on Establishing 1958 managed by commune; individual ownership of land and People’s Commune in Rural Areas forests abolished & replaced by collective ownership Revised Draft Law Guiding Management of communal forests transferred to smaller 1962 Rural People’s Commune production teams Individual & capitalist ownership categories canceled; 1975 Constitution of the PRC (2nd) only public and collective ownership remained production responsibility system initiated: contracting of use rights for collective forest lands to farmer households; Resolution on Issues Concerning 1981 family plots: use rights for degraded forest lands and Forest Protection & Development ownership rights to trees on them allocated to households; First issuance of property certifi cates Offi cially distinguishes land use rights from land ownership; 1984 No. 1 Document of 1984 Collective forest land use contract lengths: 15- 70 years Ownership and inheritance of planted trees Legalized use rights for forest lands and ownership to forest products; lacked rules regulating such rights Forest Law of the PRC 1984 Required issuance of a forest rights certifi cate to affi rm (amended 1998) individual rights to forests and forest land; Strict limits on harvesting privately-owned trees Farmers’ land rights are specifi ed as “contracting and operation rights” to farmland, forests & grassland 2002 Rural Land Contracting Law Rights to collective forestland may be allocated to households for a term of 30 years or longer Emphasizes stabilization of contracting relationships for Decision on Accelerating 2003 collective forest lands allocated to households; Restricts Forest Development collective seizure of such lands Guidelines on Fully Promoting Promoted nationwide reform of collective forest rights 2008 Collective Forest Tenure System system with goals: Innovate management structure; clear Reform ownership rights; regulate transfer system; ease tax burden in policy outlined above were experienced as a from households to advanced cooperative in constant stream of shifting arrangements that 1956 and further to commune in 1958; com- left little evidence of stabilizing over time. The mune back to households in 1961; households tenure situation faced by the average farmer to production team in 1969; production team to may best be exemplifi ed by a description of the households in 1971; households to production history of change regarding the ownership of team in 1977; and production team to house- fruit trees in a county in Yunnan province dur- holds in the late 1970s” (Liu 2001). Such a pat- ing this period: “Ownership … was transferred tern of policy shifts was common throughout 323 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article the country, instilling a pervasive sense of in- by a great deal of uncertainty throughout the security among the rural population regarding rural population regarding the actual status of forest land and resource tenure. their forest tenure and ownership rights, the process had begun and the mechanism was in The middle decades (1980-1999) place for lasting reform. At the same time, to complement the newly It was in the following decade, under Mao’s sanctioned household-based management at a successor, Deng Xiaoping, that the fi rst signifi - time when demand for timber was increasing cant set of forest reforms in the PRC began to rapidly, the government had signifi cantly de- be implemented. While collective ownership regulated forest harvesting by the mid-1980s. of non-state forests remained in effect, the Given the aforementioned rural mindset re- separation of use rights from land ownership garding tenure insecurity and the newfound began to crystallize. Reforms in agriculture opportunity for unconstrained harvesting, it is that had led in the late 1970’s to the emergence not surprising that a period of widespread de- of household-based ‘production responsibility forestation followed soon thereafter. By 1984, systems’ (PRS) were not only adopted nation- the government rescinded its earlier relaxation ally for agriculture in 1982, but also endorsed of constraints and established strict regula- as appropriate for forest lands in the 1981 Res- tory controls on forest harvesting, which in a olution on Forest Protection & Development. few years expanded to include harvest quotas, The PRS had ensured the eventual shift in ag- harvest and transport permits, and a monopoly ricultural land management from the collective on wood purchases by fi rms controlled by the to the farmer via the transfer of use rights to forestry bureaus. That same year harvesting farmers on a contractual basis, while also al- restrictions were included in the country’s fi rst lowing farmers to sell some of their crops at Forest Law, which also gave legal status to use market prices. Economic historians have come rights for forest lands (offi cially recognized as to see the production responsibility system as distinct from land ownership in the most prom- the fi rst of several ‘marginal revolutions’ that inent policy document of that same year) and paved the way for China’s ultimate transforma- to the ownership of forest products, albeit with tion from an impoverished socialist economy little guidance as to their enforcement. These to state-controlled capitalism and, eventually, controls generally remained in effect through- the world’s second-largest economy (Coase & out the 1990s. Wang 2012). It also exemplifi es the manner in By the end of the century, non-state forest which forest tenure reforms were gradually en- lands remained collective property, but use acted prior to the turn of the century – i.e., as rights to them, including ownership of trees extensions of those fi rst introduced for agricul- and other resources thereon, had often been tural farmlands. allocated to households. While the overall pic- By 1983, the aforementioned Resolution had ture regarding forest tenure had evolved since allowed for use rights to collective forests to earlier decades, the pace of diversifi cation had be allocated to households via contract, and slowed during the 1990s. Household-based ten- for production responsibility systems to be ure arrangements were more widespread in the introduced into household-based forest man- Southern provinces than elsewhere; but geo- agement operations. This could also be ac- graphic variations in adoption rates, with occa- companied by the issuance of formal property sional instances where forest management had certifi cates to which use rights would be appli- reverted to back to the collective from house- cable. Although this did not occur uniformly holds, had not fully alleviated the longstanding across the entire country and was accompanied lack of trust in the government’s interest in or

324 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ... ability to effectively guarantee tenure security. jian and Jiangxi, had experimented with trans- Such concerns were exacerbated by the regu- ferring use rights of forest lands to individual latory burden and market restrictions imposed households, and successful results obtained on households with respect to forest manage- there encouraged the CPC Central Committee ment. By the early 2000s, resentment by farm- and State Council to issue the “Decision on ers and villagers at strict regulatory controls, Accelerating the Development of Forestry” in along with lingering suspicion regarding the 2003. Intended as a more explicit national-lev- viability of any tenure arrangements in which el policy framework, this broad policy focused forest use rights were so restricted, had boiled on increasing forest production across China over into public protests. This led to signifi cant within a broader context of property rights re- actions by the central and provincial govern- form. ments intended to clarify and stabilize forest The two major components of the Decision tenure arrangements and relax the severe con- were that use rights for forest lands were for- straints on the ownership and management of mally recognized, and management rights were forest resources. to become freely transferable. The announced reforms reached villages through various levels The contemporary era (2000-present) of government over a period of years. Encour- aged by this national policy statement, more As the new century dawned, some signifi - than 10 provinces have been implementing a cant changes had already been underway for new round of forest tenure reforms in village the forestry sector in China. Foremost among collectives since 2004. As described below, these was the establishment of a national for- in 2005 Liaoning Province adopted collective est classifi cation system, introduced in 2000 forest right reforms based on the 2003 guide- and implemented nationally three years later, lines with central themes of “clear property in which two major categories of forest lands rights, expand management rights, and regu- were defi ned – commercial and ecological late transfer of management rights.” (General welfare forests (EWF) – the latter being so Offi ce of Liaoning Government 2005). Liaon- designated in order to protect the nation’s natu- ing was the fi rst province in Northern China to ral forests, which had been severely depleted initiate this reform. during the previous two decades of the coun- By 2008 the future of China’s forest lands try’s economic expansion (Dai et al. 2009). had become the focus of national attention Harvesting was prohibited or severely limited at the highest levels of government (Jiabao in EWFs, with the ironic effect that any collec- 2009). In that year the CPC Central Commit- tive forests that were classifi ed as EWF were tee and State Council issued a rule specifi cally also now off limits to harvesting. This only addressing the collective forest rights system served to further infl ame the aforementioned on a nationwide basis. The current aim of republic protests in the early 2000s. form efforts regarding collective forest rights In early 2000, the State Forest Administra- is to clear established ownership, encourage tion began to encourage provinces to experi- active exercise of management rights, nor- ment with tenure reform. As of 2003, about malize forest land transfer procedures, reduce 5 percent of the country’s state-owned forests taxes, further enfranchise and develop forestry had been devolved to other types of manage- productivity, and promote change in tradi- ment, including collective and private; while tional forestry to modern forestry (CPC Cen- about 20% of collective forests had been de- tral Committee and State Council 2008). The volved to private management (FAO 2009). government envisioned a 5-year period within Several Southern provinces, most notably Fu- which to complete the basic reform of clearing

325 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article property rights and contracting forest lands to which was sold primarily to the market, except families, which is the core of the reform. When for a small amount of wood used for building the 2008 policy announcement was issued, the village bridges and public welfare activities. reform program in Fushun City, initially guid- Rights to harvest timber were allocated to in- ed by the 2003 Decision on Forest Develop- dividual households by the committee in strict ment, was in full swing and the more refi ned accordance with a timber quota dictated by guidelines were incorporated within ongoing higher levels of government. In practice this efforts. meant that not all farmers who desire so may receive timber cutting rights each year. The committees generally only carried out simple Implementation of forest rights reform forest management activities – e.g., tending, in Fushun City logging and some afforestation. Several villagers were usually hired as forest rangers, super- Among the four provinces of Northeast Chi- vising a fi xed area, while other villagers did na, where State-administered forest lands are not participate in forest management. Income predominant, Liaoning is the only province in from timber sales was controlled by the village which collective forests represented more than committee and utilized mainly used for roads, half of all provincial forest lands. This was a bridges, sanitation and administrative expens- major impetus for the adoption of forest rights es. When villagers desired to use wood, they reform in the region. While the collective re- had to purchase it from the village committee. form movement was gaining steam in the The Fushun reform program has three major south, Fushun City in Liaoning province took components (General Offi ce of Liaoning Prov- the lead in introducing forest tenure reform to ince 2005). First, use rights and ownership of the North-Eastern provinces. trees and other resources on all collective forest lands (except those reserved as natural ar- Carrying out the reform program eas or subject to controversy over ownership, use rights, etc.) were to be distributed to farm- In December of 2005, under the impetus of er households, with the method of distribution the national Decision on Forest Development (see below) to be selected by each household. issued in 2003 and the relevant requirements The village would provide the offi cial sanc- of the People’s Government of Liaoning Prov- tioning of the assignment of rights. In this ince, Fushun City began a new round of col- way, use and management rights previously lective forest rights reform. The Fushun City controlled by the collective, as well as owner- Forest Bureau (FFB), one of eight forestry ship of the trees and other forest resources on bureaus in Liaoning province, was designated the land, were to be assigned to farmer house- to administer the reform program. At that time holds, households units, or other business enti- most woodlands were managed by village ties. Secondly, farmers would now be allowed committees, a subgroup of the village assem- to plant trees and cultivate other products in bly. The latter consists of all village members their woodlands and retain ownership of such over the age of 18; each individual on the vil- plantings. They could also actively manage lage committee represents between 5-15 vil- their forests, and conduct other business activi- lage households. The committee directed for- ties, all of which may generate income for the est operations, management and disposal of farmer. Thirdly, farmers would now be able to forest products within the village. According formally transfer use rights to forest lands and to the government’s tree cutting policy, village to register any changes in forest rights over committees occasionally harvested timber, time, if they did so voluntarily and according

326 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ... to the law in a fair transaction. Such rights in- effectively implement the reform effort. This clude ownership of planted trees and other for- involved a thorough review of the purpose and est crops. This measure is intended to provide components of the policy; potential ways in the foundation for the establishment of a forest which the reforms might be envisioned from resource transfer market. the perspective of the farmers’ individual situ- Under this reform effort there are four ways ations; effective ways to educate farmers on that collective forest resources may be as- how the adoption of appropriate silvicultural signed to farmers (Forestry Bureau of Fushun practices could lead to benefi ts from the pro- City [FFB] 2011): (i) Free or with a small con- duction and sale of products, including trees tract fee charged during the assignment of col- and understory crops; and a series of steps for lective forest resources to households (here- explaining elements with which famers might after referred to as Assignment of Forest); be unfamiliar or might have too little experi- (ii) Sale of forest resources currently held by ence, particularly those involving fi nancial households, and assignment of the obtained transactions and the basic ideas underlying the money to households (hereafter referred to as transfer of use rights. Teams were also trained Assignment of Income); (iii) A combination on fi eld measurement and boundary establish- of the two methods above (hereafter referred to ment techniques for forests as well as given a as Mixed Method); and (iv) Management of protocol for helping villages to compile infor- the collective forests as a cooperative business mational material for farmers about the forest capable of issuing stock, with a village as the practices. unit, by way of joint-stock forest management The Fushun Forest Bureau allocated six per- (hereinafter referred to as Stock Share). manent staff members familiar with the reform Among the collective forest lands in Fus- policies to carry out the reform effort. Three hun City in 2005, 28,500 ha were classifi ed two-person work groups were formed, respon- as nature reserves or other special use forests, sible for villages in Xinbin County, Qingyuan while management rights for 37,100 thousand county, and Fushun County and Shuncheng ha had already been transferred to nationalized District, respectively. All of these administra- industry or proposed to be allotted to the con- tive areas fall within the broader boundary of struction industry, which did not participate in Fushun City. Three villages were randomly se- the reform efforts for collective forest rights. lected from forest regions in both Xinbin and This resulted in 596,500 ha of forest lands in Qingyuan Counties, and two each from forest- Fushun becoming eligible for inclusion in the ed areas of Fushun County and the Shuncheng reform of collective forest rights (FFB 2011). district of Fushun City proper. When Fushun City’s collective forest reform The work teams went directly into each vil- effort was initiated in 2005, step-by-step train- lage to direct the village committee in carrying ing of forestry staff to be involved in imple- out the reform and provide technical services menting the program was carried out as pre- to the village. Thus reforms in each village scribed in the 2003 national Decision on Forest were to be directed by the village committee Development. This policy dictated that after – representing the village as collective forest a given province had determined objectives owner - but under the guidance of the forest of the reform effort in line with its particular reform work teams. As part of the above proc- geographic and demographic characteristics, ess, from June 2007 through October 2010 personnel to administer the reform were to be the teams conducted in-depth conversations trained in forest bureaus at the provincial and with 50 farmer households in each of the ten city levels. selected villages, gathering information about The forestry staff were trained on how to timber harvesting and/or reforestation activi-

327 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article ties undertaken during the past fi ve years, any collective forest lands included in the reform, silvicultural practices employed, whether they 39,400 ha are still managed by villages, with planted herbs or vegetables under their forest income used primarily for public affairs of the canopy, forest breeding, and the like. They village, while the remaining lands were distrib- also discussed the reform program with farm- uted to farmers via the four methods described ers, including the aspects related to fi nances previously. and transfer of use rights as noted previously. As noted earlier, individual farmer house- A central theme of these interactions centered holds were able to select which of the four on the willingness of farmers to change their methods of assigning collective forest resourc- forest practices given the novel framework es- es to households would be applied to them. The tablished via the reform program. distribution of forest lands previously managed by the collective following the reform by Resulting structure of rights after the reform method of assignment may be found in Figure 1. Forty-three percent of farmer households ac- With the support of the government and the cepted direct assignment of forest rights; while active participation of farmers, from the end another one-fi fth opted to sell their rights for of 2005 through 2010, 590,000 ha of collec- income. About 28% of farmers chose a com- tive forest lands in the Fushun City jurisdiction bination of these two methods. Shareholder ar- were assigned to households. This amounts to rangements for forest rights were rare, while 89% of the total collective forest land area in 7% of lands available for rights transfer re- the City and 99% of the collective forest lands mained under the management of collectives eligible for reform during this time. Due to (Figure 1). ownership disputes still under investigation, From 2005 to 2010, a total of 268,800 forest 7500 ha of remaining forest lands were not in- rights certifi cates were issued, covering 8.67 cluded in the reform during this period. For million ha of collective forest lands or 97% of such lands eligible for this reform effort. More 30 than 727,000 farmers within 208,000 farmer 43 families participated in the process. Of the 25 500 single-item questionnaires sent to land- owner households visited by the reform team, 20 482 were returned, for a response rate of 96%. 28 Responses were overwhelmingly positive: 458 15 (95%) of respondent farmer families approved 20 of the reform effort; 4% were disinterested; 10 and only 1% disagreed with the reform. The

Forest area (x10,000 ha) vast majority of farmers supported the reform 5 7 because they felt they could now better ob- 1 1 tain the resources of the forest and access to 0 the means of production, and utilize both as a d means toward ﬁ nancial gain. Farmers who did not care about the reform were generally resi- Forests Disputes Forest

Income dents of villages with little forest resources. Collective Stock Share Management Mixed Method Assignment of Assignment of Assignment Thus the reform process provided them with Figure 1 Percentage of forest area in Fushun City no direct benefi ts in terms access to and poten- after reform by method of assignment tial products from forests, and they often have (2010). The values above bars represent diffi culty in managing what they have. Farm- percents. 328 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ... ers who opposed the reform were primarily An early assessment of the consequences of leaders of township governments and villages. rights reform in Fushun City They expressed fear that the transfer of forests from collective to private management would A number of positive prospects have resulted reduce funding available for public welfare from the reform of collective forest rights in programs or that their control over and associ- Fushun City. ated benefi ts from forests in their jurisdictions First, forest tenure structures and bases for would be weakened. Some non-agricultural their retention and transfer have become more residents in rural areas also opposed the re- explicit and stabilized. The issuance of for- form because their own interests are not guar- est rights certifi cates and the ability to trans- anteed. fer such rights to others, including heirs, have After this reform effort, the landscape of provided a much needed reduction in the in- forest management in the Fushun City area, security of forest tenure arrangements that has previously characterized primarily by national plagued China’s rural populace for decades. or collectively-managed units, has shifted to Secondly, through the transfer of the prima- one dominated by farmers. The percentage of ry functions of forest management to farmers, forest lands managed by farmers (71.2%) has preconditions have been created to increase almost tripled from that immediately prior to their interest and involvement in forest man- the reform in 2005, while forests managed agement. Among the information obtained by collective units has decreased from 55.6% from fi eld interviews with farmers during in 2005 to 8.8% in 2010 (Table 2, Figure 2). the latter period of program implementation, Looking back to the early years of the PRC, farmers were expressing greater awareness of the current situation represents an increase in and interest in the potential benefi ts of con- ‘private’ (i.e., household) forest management ducting forest thinning operations, converting in Fushun City from 0% in 1963 to 71% in low-yield forests to more productive ones and 2010. managing their forests for multiple uses in- Farmers have also begun to engage in man- cluding non-timber forest products. agement for multiple uses as, for example, the Thirdly, the reform has created conditions planting of wild vegetables and Chinese me- for forestry investments. Prior to the reform, dicinal herbs under the forest canopy. The area most forest investment originated from collec- of forest lands managed for multiple uses in- tive sources, with a minor contribution from creased by 292% from 47,800 ha in 2004 (pre- government. With the advent of reform, the reform) to 140,000 ha in 2010 (post- reform). government has actively supported forest fi - This includes a 143% increase the area of mul- nancing. In 2007, the Fushun government and tiple use forests from 2007 to 2009 (Figure 3). the city fi nancial agency initiated a program

Table 2 Forest lands by ownership class in Fushun City, 1963-2010

Total National Household Collective Time forest forest % % forest lands % forest lands lands lands or others 1963 77.96 13.94 17.9 64.02 82.1 0.00 0.0 1975 75.23 13.76 18.3 56.90 75.6 4.57 6.1 1984 78.84 15.79 20.1 60.40 76.6 2.61 3.3 2005 (before reform) 82.73 16.57 20.0 45.99 55.6 20.22 24.4 2010 (after reform) 82.78 16.57 20.0 7.31 8.8 58.90 71.2 Note. Unit: 10,000 ha, Source: Fushun Forestry Bureau, 2011. 329 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article

100 12 90 80 10 70 8 60 50 6 Percent 40

30 4

20 Forest area (x10,000 ha) 10 2 0 1963 1975 1984 2005 2010 0 2004 2007 2009 2010 National Forest Lands Collective forest lands Wild vegetable Chinese herbal medicine Household forest lands Figure 2 Percent of forest lands in Fushun City by Figure 3 Changes in forest area subject to multiple ownership class, 1963-2010 use management in Fushun City, 2004- 2010 entitled “Management Method for Fushun farmer families, a 28% increase from 2006. Forest Rights - Mortgage and Borrow Money” Thus with greater autonomy in managing their which allows farmers to borrow money from forests, farmers’ contributions toward meeting local banks using forests as mortgage. By the annual forest quotas have been spread across end of 2010, banks in Fushun City had issued more forest lands in the area. 758 million RMB ($115 million) in mortgage- Although in the present study we were not backed loans, of which 672 million RMB able to assess changes in income of farmers ($104 million) was extended to farmers. with forest lands as a result of reform program, A broader consequence of the reform of for- other recent studies of forest tenure reform est rights in Fushun City is that the contribu- in China, which included Liaoning province tion of ‘private’ (i.e., household-managed) along with others, have found that as farmers forests to national timber output has increased. acquired direct access to the means of forest The annual harvest quota is a basic component production, they concurrently expanded chan- of the Forest Law of the PRC enacted in 1984. nels for augmenting income. While the total in- Using the county as the basic administrative come of farmer families in surveyed provinces unit, the national annual harvest quota is deter- increased by 68.2% from 2005 to 2009, forest mined every 5 years. It serves both as a target income increased by 113.2%, and forest infor output and an upper limit on the amount come as a proportion of total income increased of timber that may be harvested from an in- by 6.9% compared with that before the reform dividual county in a given year. From 2006 to (Liu and Zheng 2009). Areas in which reforms 2010, the annual harvest quota for collective were enacted earlier displayed greater increases forests in Fushun City was 0.29 million cubic in income than did those where reforms were meters (FFB 2011). In 2006, a total of 4918 adopted later, suggesting that as farmers be- timber cutting licenses were issued, relative came more accustomed to the post-reform envi- to 5323 farmer families. In 2010, 5349 timber ronment, the numbers engaging in active forest cutting licenses were issued relative to 6819 management increased (Lei and Wen 2009). 330 Jiang et al. The reform of collective forest rights in China ...

Conclusions preciation to the Forestry Department of Li- aoning Province, Shenyang, PRC for helping It is important to recognize that in China most them appreciate the provincial perspective of national policies are implemented over a pe- the forest tenure reforms underway in Fushun riod of years, often in piecemeal fashion and City. Finally, we greatly appreciate the sugges- rarely as major reversals or changes in direc- tions of the editor and anonymous reviewer(s) tion from the status quo. This is true for eco- regarding both the structure and other details nomic policies as well as those that have been of the article. the focus of this article, i.e., forest land tenure. It was not until 2003 that support for reform of forest tenure arrangements began to gather References substantial momentum at the national level. At that time the State Forest Administration began Broegaard R., 2005. Land tenure insecurity and inequal- ity in Nicaragua. Development and Change 36(5): 845- to actively encourage individual provinces in 864. DOI: 10.1111/j.0012-155X.2005.00438.x. Southern China to experiment with tenure re- Coase R., Wang N., 2012. How China became capitalist. form. This policy thrust was extended nation- Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 256 p. wide by the central government in 2008, and CPC Central Committee and State Council, 2008. Idea about promoting reform of collective forest right sys- by then Fushun City was already underway tem. Beijing. [In Chinese]. with its reform program in Northeast China, a Dai L., Zhao W., Shao G., Lewis B., Yu D., Zhou L., Zhou region where public forests dominate. W., 2013. The progress and challenges in sustainable The Fushun City program has yielded some forestry development in China. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 20(5): encouraging initial results in terms of the offi - 394-403. DOI: 10.1080/13504509.2013.775193. cial transfer and documentation of rights asso- Dai L., Wang Y., Su D., Li Z., Yu D., Lewis B.J., Lin Q., ciated with forest tenure as well as the reduc- 2011. Major forest types and the evolution of sustain- tion of the historically well-founded insecurity able forestry in China. Environmental Management 48: 1066-1078. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-011-9706-4. among China’s rural population regarding Dai L, Zhao F., Shao G., Zhou L., Tang L., 2009. China’s tenure rights for forest lands. A foundation has classifi cation-based forest management: Procedures, been established upon which, with increased problems, and prospects. Environmental Management management autonomy of rural households, 43:1162–117. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-008-9229-9. Demsetz H., 1967. Toward a theory of property rights. both the social welfare of China’s rural popu- American Economic Review 57(2): 347-359. lation and the ecological integrity of the coun- Editorial Committee of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. try’s forest resources may be enhanced. But 2001. Atlas of China vegetation. Science Publishing these ultimate goals will likely take some time House, Beijing [In Chinese]. FAO, United Nations, 2009. Have decollectivization and to attain. At this point in time, we conclude privatization contributed to sustainable forestry man- that in Fushun City the door to collective for- agement and poverty alleviation in China? Forestry est reform has been opened, but crossing the Policy and Institutions Working Paper No. 23, Rome. threshold to social and ecological sustainabil- Forestry Department of Liaoning Province. 2010. Liaon- ing forest resources. Shenyang, PRC. [In Chinese]. ity still requires resolute and decisive action. Fushun Forestry Bureau [FFB]. 2010-2011. Liaoning Province, Fushun City, PRC. General Offi ce of the Liaoning Province People’s Govern- Acknowledgements ment, 2005. Idea about deepening the reform of collective forest property rights. Liaoning Provincial Offi ce, Huanggu District,Shenyang City, China. [In Chinese]. The authors would like to thank the Fushun Harrison S.R., Herbohn J.L., Herbohn K.F., 2000. Sustain- Forestry Bureau for access to data on the able small-scale forestry: Social and economic analysis progress of the collective forest reform effort and policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 247 p. Jiabao W., 2009. Pay great attention to forestry reform and in Fushun City. They also express their ap- development. China Forestry Economy. 2009 (5): 6-7. 331 Ann. For. Res. 57(2): 319-332, 2014 Research article

Jing H., Shen M., Liu D., 2009. Discussion on the problem natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Econom- of farmers’ land-losing after collective forest property ics 68: 249-262. DOI: 10.2307/3146375. transfer in minority areas of Yunnan Province. China SFA (State Forestry Administration). 2010. Condition of Forestry Economy 5: 12-16. [In Chinese]. forest certifi cation in the world. Web: http://www/for- Kram M., Bedford C., Durnin M., Luo Y., Rokpelnis K., estry.gov.cn/portal/main/s/241/content-443812.html. Roth B., Smith N., Wang Y., Yu G., Yu Q., Zhao X., Accessed: 04.2014. [In Chinese]. 2012. Protecting China’s biodiversity: A guide to land SFA (State Forestry Administration), 2009. The 7th Na- use, land tenure, and land protection tools. Beijing: The tional Forest Inventory. Beijing, SFA. [In Chinese]. Nature Conservancy, 257 p. Shang F., Lu Z., Yao R., 2009. The effective analysis of Lei Z., Wen C., 2008. Impacts of collective forest tenure reforms of collective forest ownership systems in Benxi reform on farmer households’ livelihood - an empirical City. Liaoning Forestry Science and Technology (5). [In analysis based on Jiangxi, Fujian, Liaoning and Yunnan Chinese]. Provinces. Scienia Silvae Sinicae 44(7). [In Chinese]. Social Sciences Institute of Fushun City, Records Offi ce of Liu D., 2001. Tenure and management of non-state forests Fushun Government. 2011. “Fushun Yearbook “, Lia- in China since 1950: A historical review. Environmental oning Ethnic Publishing House. [In Chinese] History 6(2): 239-263. DOI: 10.2307/3985086. Walder A., Oi J., 1999. Property rights in the Chinese Liu W., Zheng X., 2009. Infl uence of collective forestry economy: Contours of the process of change. In: Oi J., property rights system reform on farmers’ forestry in- Walder A., (eds.), Property rights and economic reform come. Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry Uni- in China. Stanford University Press, pp. 1-24. versity (Philosophy and Social Sciences) 12(5). [In Wang G.Y., Innes J.L., Lei J.F., Dai S.Y., Wu S.W., 2007. Chinese]. China’s forestry reforms. Science 318: 1556-1557. Naughton-Treves L., Day C., 2012. Lessons about land DOI: 10.1126/science.1147247. tenure, forest governance and REDD+. USAID. Madi- World Bank, 2013. The state of the poor: Where are the son, Wisconsin: UW-Madison Land Tenure Center. poor and where are they poorest? Washington, D.C. Oi J., Walder C., 1999. Property rights and economic Xu J., Siikamäki J., 2012. Forest Tenure Reform in China. reform in China. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Resources (Magazine) 180, Resources for the Future, Press. Washington, D.C. Olsson P., Folke C., Berkes F., 2004. Co-management for Xu J., White A., Lele U., 2010. China’s forest tenure re- building social-ecological resilience. Environmental forms. Rights & Resources Initiative, Washington, Management 34: 75-90. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-003- D.C., 20 p. 0101-7. Yang J., 2012. Tombstone. Farrar, Straus & Giroux, New Schlager E., Ostrum E., 1992. Property rights regimes and York. 629 p.

332