Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Co-Management of Reserved Forests in Guinea

Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Co-Management of Reserved Forests in Guinea Prepared by Thomas M. Catterson Boubacar Thiam Dantily Diakite Rebecca Ham International Resources Group, Ltd. with the collaboration of Conservation International Prepared for USAID/GUINEA April 2001 Task Order No. 35 Contract No. PCE-I-00-96-00002-00 Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Co-Management of Reserved Forests in Guinea Prepared by: Thomas M. Catterson Boubacar Thiam Dantily Diakite Rebecca Ham International Resources Group, Ltd. with the collaboration of Conservation International Prepared for: USAID/GUINEA April 2001 Environmental Policy and Institutional Strengthening Indefinite Quantity Contract (EPIQ) Partners: International Resources Group, Winrock International, and Harvard Institute for International Development Subcontractors: PADCO; Management Systems International; and Development Alternatives, Inc. Collaborating Institutions: Center for Naval Analysis Corporation; Conservation International; KNB Engineering and Applied Sciences, Inc.; Keller-Bliesner Engineering; Resource Management International, Inc.; Tellus Institute; Urban Institute; and World Resources Institute Contents Foreword iv Acknowledgments v Executive Summary vi Map of Guinea and Its Reserved Forests xiii Acronyms xiv 1. Introduction to the PEA 1 1.1 Importance of Co-Management of Reserved Forests in Guinea 1 1.2 Introduction and Rationale for the PEA 2 1.3 Purpose of the PEA 2 1.4 Description of the Scoping Process 3 1.5 PEA Approach and Methodology 3 1.5.1 PEA Team Configuration 3 1.5.2 General Methodology 4 1.5.3 Report Preparation 4 2. Alternatives Including the Preferred Activity 6 2.1 Description of the Present Co-Management Activities 6 2.1.1 Different Versions of the Co-Management Model 9 2.2 The Proposed Activity and its Alternatives 9 2.2.1 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 10 2.3 No Action Alternative 10 3. Policy and Institutional Framework for Co-Management 14 3.1 Government of Guinea Policy and Institutional Setting 14 3.2 USAID/Guinea Policy and Institutional Strategy 14 4. Affected Environment 18 4.1 Baseline Information on the Country 18 4.2 The Regions for Co-Management 19 4.2.1 Maritime Guinea 19 4.2.2 Middle Guinea 19 4.2.3 Upper Guinea 20 4.3 The Reserved Forests Targeted for Co-Management 21 5. Environmental Consequences of Co-Management 24 5.1 Impact Analysis Framework 24 5.1.1 The Nature of Environmental Assessment 24 5.1.2 The Presentation of Findings 25 ii 5.2 A Technical Assessment of Co-Management 27 5.2.1 Mapping and Sustainability 34 5.2.2 Inventory and Resource Assessment Methods 37 5.2.3 Protection 36 5.2.4 Agroforestry—A Response to Human Pressures on the Forests 42 5.2.5 Silvicultural Implications of Planned Activities 48 5.2.6 An Overall Assessment of Forest Management Planning and Implementation 50 5.3 An Assessment of the Ecological Dimensions of Co-Management 55 5.3.1 Co-Management Goals and Biodiversity Conservation 56 5.3.2 Watershed Stability 65 5.3.3 Wetlands and Agrochemicals—Two Sensitive Topics 68 5.4 Socio-Economic and Institutional Assessment 71 5.4.1 Achieving Genuine Social Consensus and Making the Right Choices 71 5.4.2 Financial and Economic Analysis—A Key Element of Sustainability 79 5.4.3 Institutional Capabilities—Replication on the Road to Sustainability 82 5.5 Anticipated Issues Which Did Not Emerge During the PEA 88 6. Monitoring Measures for Sustainable Co-Management 90 6.1 The Framework for Environmental Monitoring 90 6.2 Genuine Co-Management Means Participatory Monitoring 90 6.3 Operational Implications of Monitoring 91 7. Practical Guidance/Tools for Environmentally Sound Co-Management 98 7.1 The Context for the Guidance and Environmental Review Tools 98 7.2 Next Steps 98 7.3 Potential for Positive Determinations 99 7.4 Using the Environmental Planning Checklist 100 7.4.1 Using the Checklist/Preparing the IEE 101 7.4.2 Pre-Selection Criteria 101 7.4.3 Teamwork in Using the Checklist 102 7.4.4 Participation-Another Objective of the Checklist 105 Epilogue 107 Appendices A Scoping Statement 110 B PEA Team Biographical Sketches and Scopes of Work 126 C List of References Consulted 127 D Team Building Questions 130 E PEA Team Program/Itinerary 136 F List of Persons Consulted 138 G Environmental Planning Checklist for Co-Management of Reserved Forests 143 iii Foreword This report is the outcome of the Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) of the Co- Management of Reserved Forests activities being implemented under the aegis of the Expanded Natural Resources Management Activity (PEGRN) funded by USAID/Guinea, as mandated by the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) prepared for the Mission’s Strategic Objective 1 in 1998. It should be noted that this PEA was never construed nor was it carried out as an evaluation of the co-management activities of the PEGRN. Nevertheless, owing to the fact that many of the most salient steps in the co-management process for the second phase were completed for the Suti Yanfou and Bakoun in 2000, the PEA was the first real opportunity for a comprehensive overview of these activities. Despite what may seem like an overwhelming array of issues, the PEA Team would like to first reiterate its strong convictions that co-management represents an excellent opportunity to use forest management for real development needs and purposes for the benefit of the local people and of the country. It is the team’s hope that the discussion of the issues and the conclusions and recommendations related to each will be a useful contribution to much hard work that has gone into the development of the model. iv Acknowledgments As the list of people consulted (Appendix F) will readily attest, many people have contributed to the execution of this PEA. By its very nature, the co-management model in Guinea involves thousands of people, including the villagers who depend in part on these reserved forests for their livelihoods and subsistence. The PEA Team would, therefore, like to acknowledge the warm welcome it received on the part of these villagers on every occasion. It was a fine example of the graciousness and traditional hospitality for which the rural areas of the country have always been known. The PEA Team recognizes as well, however, that this warm reception was due in large measure to the efforts of the many PEGRN staff—DNEF, Winrock, NGOs and others—whose commitment, dedication and earnest efforts to assist these villagers is constantly evident. Several people also deserve special mention for their encouragement and kind support over the long course of this PEA, starting in 2000. Allen Fleming and Son Hoang Nguyen of USAID’s Office of Natural Resource Management were unfailingly forthright and supportive throughout the PEA exercise. Martin Bush and his entire Winrock Team also gave generously of their time, efforts and understanding, which proved crucial to the PEA Team’s comprehension of the co- management model and its methods and achievements. The PEA Team is also grateful to Mr. Mathias R. Haba, National Director of Waters and Forests, and his DNEF staff who responded with great collegial demeanor to the many demands of the exercise and the need for professional information. v Executive Summary Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Co-Management of Reserved Forests in Guinea The natural resource endowment of Guinea includes more than 100 reserved forests (foret classée). The primary responsibility for the management of these forests lies with the national government. The National Directorate of Waters and Forests (DNEF) has the mandate to manage these forests. However, because of a shortage of the necessary personnel and other resources, they are unable to properly control the use of these forests and to provide for their sustained yield, multiple use management. The communities of herders, farmers and other local populations living around these forest reserves want to have access to these areas for a variety of uses. They recognize that it is in their long-term best interest to control the level of exploitation of the forests and to limit their conversion to other land uses and eventual degradation. Communities value the water resources, grazing reserves, potential cropland, wildlife populations, timber and other non-wood forest products, as well as the various environmental services provided by the remaining natural forests of Guinea. By the mid-1990s, USAID and other international development assistance agencies were funding programs to support the DNEF in its efforts to promote the collaborative management or co- management of these reserved forests with the surrounding local communities. A community- based participatory approach to forest management was initiated with USAID funding in the 10,000 hectare Nialama Forest Reserve, and soon thereafter plans were made to prepare co- management plans for several other forest reserves in the surrounding region of Guinea. By 1999, USAID and DNEF had set a target of bringing 100,000 hectares of forest reserves under co-management over a five-year period. In order to comply with USAID environmental regulations and special provisions established to conserve biological diversity and tropical forests, an environmental assessment was carried out for the Nialama Forest in 1997. In consideration of the need for an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of co-management activities in each of the forests targeted by the USAID funded program, and of the lengthy process and results of the environmental assessment

Load more