Better planning in logging operations should beeconomically attractive for the entrepreneurs, because itwould make more efficient use of expensive machines,increase the volume of usable wood and still maintain thecommercial value of the forest. From an ecological pointof view, better planning is highly desirable because itwould reduce the impact of logging operations, conserveexisting forests and speed the recovery of logged areas.But the timber enterprises are not accepting this logiceasily. “Most of the decision makers are ignorant of theeconomy of forest operations,” says Pokorny. They arelocked into conventional logging practices, looking at theshort term and arguing against the increased costs in

training and planning required in the reduced-impactlogging (RIL) techniques that scientific research hasdeveloped.

The Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research(Embrapa), CIFOR and FFT, the Brazilian subsidiary of theTropical Forest Foundation, have been working on aproject looking at the sustainable management ofproduction forests at the commercial scale in theBrazilian Amazon, funded by the International TropicalTimber Organization (ITTO). In 2000 Embrapa and CIFORpublished a set of technical guidelines for RIL in forests ofthe Brazilian Amazon. Two timber enterprises assistingthe project had already been validating the guidelines. In

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

gust

20

02N

umbe

r 30

Featuring speakers from community forest managementprogrammes in Indonesia, the Philippines, India andCentral America, the panel provided a timely contrast tothe all-pervading stories of gloom and forest destruction.

Arif Aliadi, Executive Director of LATIN, one ofIndonesia’s oldest community forestry advocacyorganizations, presented lessons learned from forestgovernance based on multi-stakeholder dialogue in WestJava. He said that communities’ rights are oftenneglected and stressed the need for a balance of poweramong communities, local governments and privateconcessionaries. He also emphasised the need for

transparency and dialogue, as well as clarification ofrights. He cited an example in the Kuningan district,where forest covers 25 percent of total land area but onlycontributes 2.5 percent of local revenue. The loggingconcession was stronger than the local government andthe local community. As a result the two groups formed astrong alliance to negotiate more effectively with thelogging concession. The most important factor drivingparticipation in the dialogue was that all stakeholderswanted more clarity about rights and responsibilities.

Sith Ying Sanchez is coordinator of the Rio+10 projectat CICAFOC (La Coordinación Indígena Campesina de

Around the world, local communities, vulnerable groups, poor villagers and womenare pursuing grassroots initiatives to secure not only the future of their livelihoodsbut also the future of their forests. At the Fourth Preparatory Conference of theWorld Summit on Sustainable Development, held in Bali in June 2002, CIFORcollaborated with the Department for International Development (DfID), theInternational Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and the Ford Foundation toshowcase ‘Grassroots initiatives in the forests: success stories in sustainabledevelopment.’

(continued on page 5)

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

No gloom in these forests

CIFOR’sseminar ongrassrootsinitiatives at theBali PrepComIV in 2002,attracted alarge and wide-range audience.(Photo by YaniSaloh)

n e w sCIFORGuidelines to monitor reduced-impact loggingin the AmazonApart from its environmental impact, the actual practice of logging natural forests in the Amazon region iseconomically inefficient. Productivity is low and a significant volume of timber is wasted. Most forest workers,administrators and managers of timber enterprises never receive any training. There are no quality standards andeven the operators of heavy machinery work without qualified guidance and control. The whole process is basedon achieving output goals. “Working this way accelerates the destruction of forest resources, because more forestarea is needed to produce the desired quantity of timber and large numbers of trees are damaged or destroyed,”says Benno Pokorny, a researcher in CIFOR’s Brazil office.

(continued on page 3)

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:27 PM Page 1

CI

FO

R2

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sThe report, Making Markets Work for ForestCommunities, issued by CIFOR and Washington—basedForest Trends, finds that improving the lives of individualsresiding in and around forests is vital to forestconservation.

“Excluding poor people from forest markets will not,as some people believe, help to protect forests outsidereserves,” said CIFOR Director General David Kaimowitz,one of the report's authors. “We need to acknowledgethat hundreds of millions of people live in forests andtheir lives depend upon them.”

Attitudes to ownership and control of developingcountries’ forests are changing. Rural communities andindigenous people are successfully asserting control overforestland, now owning or officially administering at least25% of the developing world's forests, or nearly 300million hectares. That trend is expected to accelerateover the next several years. However, despite theirholdings, local communities often lack the authority tofully benefit from their forest assets.

For example, in the Brazilian Amazon, thegovernment recognizes the rights of indigenous groups toabout 75 million hectares of forestland, but timberharvests are banned in the same area. “This restrictioncreates conditions under which illegal logging becomesthe only viable option, with mahogany sold for US$30 pertree to traders, who resell it for upwards of US$3 300,”said Andy White, programme director of Forest Trendsand a coauthor of the report.

“We have to make it easy for small producers tooperate legally,” said Sara Scherr, a senior policy analystat Forest Trends and another of the report's authors.“Existing regulations are hurting the small landholders,not the large plantation owners. There is a need to levelthe playing field.”

Little has been done to help local people use theirforest assets in a sustainable manner nor to benefit fromor cope with the pressures of growing demand for forestproducts.

“For most of these rural communities, commercialforestry is the only viable pathway for improving theirstandard of living,” said Scherr. “Allowing andencouraging opportunities for the rural poor to play a rolein forestry offers an effective way to fight poverty, whilealso providing the incentive to help conserve their ownforest resources.” Forest communities can tackle thesetasks best by forming local producer organizations andgaining business expertise. For example, 256 indigenouscommunities in poor mountainous areas of southernMexico joined forces in 1997 to expand and improve theirforest enterprises. The communities have been able toaccess outside expertise and support to create more than1 400 new jobs and increase annual wood production by60%. They have also improved forest management andestablished 13 500 ha of permanent old-growth reserves.

“The economic, social and environmental payoffsfrom sustainable forest development with local producerscould be significant over the next 50 years, large enoughto attract the interest of national finance andenvironmental ministers,” Kaimowitz said. “We mustpromote a forest market development strategy thatfocuses on community participation and ownership asopposed to subsidizing large-scale, industrial plantationsas a means to forest conservation.”

To improve their market position, small producersmust analyze markets and position themselvescompetitively, as is necessary for any successful business.“We believe businesses investing with local forestproducers will be in a much stronger position in comingyears in terms of supplies,” White said. “An effectivepartnership requires a long-term perspective for businessdevelopment, flexible contract terms, special attentionto reducing business risks and mechanisms to reducetransaction costs.”

“The key is creating a model for forest managementthat offers communities a chance to make a profit, but ina way that is compatible with environmental concerns,”said Kaimowitz. “It makes sense for the internationalcommunity to increase attention and financial investmentin forestry beyond purely subsistence goals.”

This article was adapted from a Future Harvest report(www.futureharvest.org ). See also www.forest-trends.org.

Indigenous and local groups control 25 percentof developing world's forests The fate of the world's forests is inextricably linked to the fate of more than 500 million of the world's poorestpeople. When forest communities have the opportunity to generate income by marketing forest products andservices, they are motivated to protect their forest assets.

A young Kayapo girl walks Litey’s medicinal plants trail. (Photo by Mauri Rautkari,WWF)

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:27 PM Page 2

No gloom in these forests, continued

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0

CI

FO

R

3n e w sAgroforestería Comunitaria), a regional indigenous peopleorganisation in Central America. Presenting a study of theworld's largest community-managed forest certified bythe Forest Stewardship Council, she said communityforest management resulted in poverty education, thegeneration of approximately 40 000 jobs and a reductionin social conflicts. She proposed the formation of anumbrella certification mechanism for community forestmanagement.

Yvan Biot, coordinator of the DfID MultistakeholderForestry programme in Indonesia, has been working intropical forests and tropical soil science in Asia, Africaand South America for over fifteen years. He saidsuccessful self-initiated efforts for community-basedforest management are challenging the myth that thepoor degrade their environment. He stressed the need toprovide communities with opportunities to use andmanage their resources and environment. Yvan alsoemphasised the importance of joint forest management,capacity building in legal systems and multistakeholderdialogue.

Jose Andres A. Canivel is the Executive Director forthe Environmental Legal Assistance Center (ELAC) in thePhilippines. Jose reported how villagers in the Philippinestackled high-powered interest groups to successfullymake claims on forest land and products. A 3 200 ha areaof forest near Puerto Princesa City, Palawan was a criticalbiodiversity site and source of city water supply. It wasplagued by illegal logging, conflicts with migrantcommunities and local government. ELAC spearheadedthe development of community paralegals who had theknowledge of selected aspects of law and basic legalprocesses and the ability to prepare basic legaldocuments. In June 2001, the community together withELAC paralegals seized 1 300 board feet from illegalloggers and in November 2001, seized a logging truck andits illegal cargo. The community paralegals conductpatrols during the holiday season and their actions haveregulated destructive practices.

The ELAC initiative has demystified the law and madelegal processes accessible to underprivileged sectors ofsociety. It has also enabled better communityparticipation as the community appreciates the value ofthe resource and gains confidence in asserting their rightsand responsibilities.

Ashok Babu is the director of Vasundhara, an NGO inIndia that is playing a leading role in self-initiated forestprotection efforts as important examples of sustainableresource management systems. Right until mid-80s, theunmindful exploitation of Dhani by the State for revenueand by the locals for survival led to complete denudationof forest. This resulted in a shortage of fuel-wood, evenfor funeral pyres, lack of timber for domestic use, adiminishing flow of NTFPs, reduced stream flows,increased soil erosion and the disappearance of wildlife.

Five villages came together to revive the 840 ha Dhaniforest. All the elders from all households of five villagesformed an association. They developed scientific rulesand regulations on harvesting, benefit sharing, grazing,

patrolling, forest fire control, conflict resolution andpenalties. The State responded by introducing in 1993 aJoint Forest Management programme. The community’seffort means it can now meet its NTFP, fuelwood andtimber needs. The forest now has 250 species of plantsand 40 species of birds while soil erosion is declining andstreams are rejuvenated, thus improving localagriculture. Migration has been checked as livelihoodsecurity has increased. Perhaps best of all, there are nowself-sustaining and dynamic community groups lookingafter local interests.

It is these sorts of success stories, largely unreported,that show that working from the grassroots level up isoften the most effective way of generating significantimpact amongst the people who need it most—the forestdwellers and the farmers depending on the forests for alivelihood.

CIFOR Conference - Germany 2003Rural livelihoods, forests and biodiversity2003 marks the 10th Anniversary of CIFOR. One of the key eventscommemorating this significant occasion will be CIFOR’s Conference onRural Livelihoods, Forests, and Biodiversity, to be held in Bonn, Germany,in May 2003. Attending will be the world’s leading authorities in forestrymanagement, the environment, and international development.

A key aim of the conference is to build on global awareness of theimportant role forests play as a home and critical source of livelihood formillions of poor people in developing countries.

By targeting the media and decision-makers, CIFOR’s RuralLivelihoods, Forests, and Biodiversity conference will inform those bestable to both influence and implement policies. This is crucial to ensuringforests remain a sustainable source of income for forest communitiesaround the world and a sustainable habitat for the rich biodiversity theycontain.

This innovative conference will present cutting-edge research on howforests resources can be both preserved and utilized to save rural peoplefrom poverty, and demonstrate how this can be done without harmingforest biodiversity and the ecological role forests fulfill.

Organized in collaboration with Germany’s Ministry of EconomicCooperation and Development (BMZ), the German Foundation forInternational Development (DSE) and Deutsche Gesellschaft fürTechnischeZusammenarbeit (GTZ), the conference will host 120participants from developed and developing countries.

Papers presented at the conference will be grouped into six topiccategories:

· Forests as safety nets. · Non-timber forest products (NTFPs), small-scale logging, and rural

livelihoods. · The contribution of plantations and agroforestry to rural

livelihoods. · Livelihood improvements and biodiversity protection: Compatible

or competing goals? · Forest certification and rural livelihoods. · International forestry agreements, national policies, and rural

livelihoods.CIFOR will soon issue a call for papers to be presented at the

conference. Visit CIFOR’s website for details http://www.cifor.cgiar.org

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:27 PM Page 3

CI

FO

R4

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sIllegal logging in IndonesiaBribes are cheap, the likelihood of getting caught is very small, and the chance of being prosecuted and foundguilty even smaller. This simple economic equation is at the heart of illegal forest activities in Indonesia.

Elements of illegal logging

Logging without authorisationExtracting more timber than authorisedObtaining logging concessions through bribesDuplicating felling licencesGirdling or ringbarking to kill trees so that they can be

logged legallyContracting with local entrepreneurs to buy logs from

protected areasLogging protected speciesLogging in protected areasLogging outside concession boundariesLogging in prohibited areas such as steep slopes, river

banks and water catchment areasRemoving under- or oversized trees from public forests

Source: FAO(Photo by John Turnbull)

“Illegal activities are one of the most pressing problemsfacing the Indonesian forest sector,” says Luca Tacconifrom CIFOR. “They reduce government revenues, cheatlocal communities of income, foster a vicious cycle of badgovernance and destroy the forest.”

Estimates of the extent of illegal logging highlight theenormity of the problem. Between 55 and 75% ofindustrial wood production is thought to be illegal,resulting in a loss of anywhere between US$1 billion andUS$1.9 billion in tax revenue. Official imports of timberinto Sabah in Malaysia are about ten percent of estimatedactual total imports.

CIFOR and Indonesia’s Forest Research andDevelopment Agency (FORDA), in partnership with PionirBulungan in East Kalimantan and the Centre for Social andEconomic Research on the Global Environment, have beenresearching illegal forest activities with funding fromDfID.

It is clear illegal logging continues unabated despiteofficial statements about the will to do address thesituation, hence the need to research to understand thecomplex driving forces, the stakeholders involved andtheir interests, and ways to intervene.

Recent policy changes legalizing small-scale logging inproduction forests have not had the desired effect ofreducing illegal logging. In many cases these activities arenot controlled by local communities, but by commercialinterests that continue to carry out illegal activities.

“Illegal logging provides incomes to people with fewother alternatives,” says CIFOR consultant KrystofObidzinski. “Since manual small-scale extraction byrural people is probably one of the least destructive formsof illegal logging, an argument could be made forlegalizing such activities and in the process co-optingrural people as forest guardians.”

However, recent experience from Indonesia showsthat changes in the regulatory framework to allow small-

scale extraction by rural people were manipulated todivert rents to the rich and powerful, leaving the localcommunities with a lower share of timber value.

A ban on exports of logs was introduced in October2001. But recent fieldwork in Kalimantan and Malaysiashows it has not been effective in reducing illegalharvest and exports.

“Economic forces are a fundamental driver of illegalforest activities,” says Tacconi, “The incentives anddisincentives, including the cost of being caught andbeing prosecuted, faced both by illegal and legaloperators, need to be researched to understand howpolicies could be use to make the legal market moreattractive than the illegal one.”

Law enforcement in itself is not sufficient to addressthe problem. Where corruption is endemic, majorimprovements in surveillance, such as remote sensing,log tracking, and monitoring by third parties, are likelyto be more effective than increasing penalties. Thiscould also reduce corruption because bribes need to behigher and may fail more often.

Weak governance and political patronage play a rolein illegal logging and foster a cycle of corruptionwhereby rich individuals can acquire and hold on topowerful positions by carrying out illegal activities.

The range of actors involved in illegal activitiescomplicates the situation. These include largeconcession companies, small logging operators, largeand small sawmills, rural people, central and districtgovernment officers, politicians, and governmentofficers in other countries, as well as foreign companies.

“Unless the potential rewards from illegal activitiesfor the various actors are reduced, it is unlikely that thecomplex chain of illegal activities that links the variousactors from the forest to the national and internationalmarkets will be broken,” concludes Tacconi.

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:27 PM Page 4

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0

CI

FO

R

5n e w s1999 Juruá Florestal Ltda. started using the RILtechniques on 400 ha of its annual cut of 2 000 ha,increasing the area to 900 ha and 2 000 ha in 2000 and2001. The other enterprise, CIKEL Brasil Verde S.A.applied the guidelines on 5 000 ha of its 8 000 ha annualcut in years 2000 and 2001. “Over the last two years,both companies have found that RIL considerablyimproved the quality of their harvesting operations,”says Natalino Silva, the Brazilian coordinator of theEmbrapa/CIFOR cooperation.

Now, after two years of RIL application, project staffhave made an in-depth evaluation of the RIL guidelinesbased on the enterprises’ field experiences and theassessments by enterprise staff, researchers andcertifiers. “There was a high degree of acceptance ofmany of the RIL guidelines,” said Pedro Bernardo,research assistant of the project. “Especially thoserelated to pre-logging activities, technicalimplementation of plans, as for example theconstruction of roads or tree felling, and generalguidelines related to the protection of preservationareas and the use of protection equipment.”

Other RIL guidelines were not so easily accepted.

Those related to harvesting planning, skiddingtechniques and maintenance of harvestinginfrastructure were partly ignored because the technicalwing of the enterprises could not see any benefit,neither for the enterprise itself, nor for theenvironment. Instead they preferred to adapt their ownexperience and practical knowledge. In some cases thecompanies had not invested sufficiently in the necessarytraining equipment and materials.

“The key to the convincing logging companies to putRIL into practice will be finding ways to explain thebenefits,” says CIFOR’s Cesar Sabogal. Researchers havealready demonstrated that RIL, although requiring additionalinvestment in planning and coordination, can be moreprofitable than conventional logging. But the decisionmakers are not accepting these positive results becauseof the results’ experimental nature, site specificity orbecause they simply do not understand them. “Our mostrecent results, showing the strengths and weaknesses ofthe existing guidelines, will allow the researchers toimprove their recommendations,” says Pokorny, “This inturn will produce even more powerful tools to convincemore logging enterprises to adopt RIL techniques.”

Guidelines to monitor reduced impact logging, continued

This is an important concept because the ACMprogramme has put a heavy emphasis on collaborativeresearch. Feedback has developed and improvedmethods, and analyses made together with partnershave given insights into research progress, allowing bothsides to learn. For example, the ACM project has beenworking in Cameroon since 1996. Most of the 11-personteam had been involved with CIFOR before 1996, sothey are using expertise gained from previouscollaborations to develop an adaptive and collaborativeapproach to management. The six main ACM study sitesin Cameroon are working with local partners to build upthe capacity of stakeholders, including communities,government, conservation and logging enterprises. Thepartners include the International Union for theConservation of Nature, Tropenbos, the NetherlandsDevelopment Organization, l’Office National de Forêts,Cameroon and the International Institute for TropicalAgriculture. The extensive network of people involved inthe activities from the start bring with them extremelyrelevant experience that is making the process muchmore effective.

At Paser, East Kalimantan, the ACM project workswith a local non-governmental organization called PADI,which interacts with many local government officials,

timber industry personnel and community groups. Muchof the project work increases the capacity of thesegroups in planning, researching, cooperating and self-evaluation. The effectiveness of this capacity building isbeing incorporated into CIFOR’s research approachbecause the ACM team are themselves learning andchanging their approach in what is really a 2-waylearning street.

According to CIFOR’s scientist Lini Wollenberg,ACM’s efforts to understand the impacts of devolutionpolicies in China, India and the Philippines, involvedconsiderable sharing of idea and opinions betweencolleagues. “Colleagues shared views of how to assessoutcomes of devolution policies and so built their andCIFOR’s collective capacities to develop assessmentcriteria of local management from a wider perspective.We came to appreciate how similar the governmentprogrammes were in serving forest department needs.This was particularly true in regards to forests managedand organizational structures promoted to serve theseneeds, and how consistently villagers’ perspectivesdiffered by emphasizing livelihood needs.”

This new way of looking at capacity building willstrongly influence the way it is approached andultimately judged.

Capacity building is a two-way streetMost reports of capacity building describe the number of people trained or number of workshops held. But this isonly measuring output, not outcome. “Unless we are sure that somebody has become better at doing something,we can’t say we are building capacity,” says Carol Colfer, leader of CIFOR’s Adaptive Collaborative Management(ACM) programme. “However, determining what has built up the capacity and finding out who has profited fromit becomes quite difficult. To determine this, a feedback loop is required.” Based on CIFOR’s observations, capacitybuilding is usually most successful when the process involves co-learning. And for co-learning to be successful,the process of conducting the activities, equity and empowerment of the partners are extremely influential.

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:27 PM Page 5

Because outgrower schemes have a lot of unrecognizedpotential, CIFOR's Plantation Programme started lookingat various schemes and identifying the key elements forsuccess. The Centre worked with the College of Forestryand Natural Resources, the University of the PhilippinesLos Baños and the Faculty of Forestry at the BogorAgricultural University.

There is a huge diversity of contract arrangementsamong outgrower schemes. In one approach, plantationcompanies provide the local people with all of theplanting materials and inputs to establish and maintainthe trees. Members of the communities are paid to workin the areas and they also share in the profits from thesale of the timber.

The primary benefit to the company or licensedconcession holder is the increased supply of naturallygrown timber. The schemes also reduce the company’splantation supervision costs, for example in preventingforest fires, since the local people have a vested interestin protecting the plantations.

The government benefits from the schemes by anincrease in the area of plantations and rehabilitation ofdegraded forest lands. Conflict over resources can bereduced by clear agreements on rights.

Landholders and local people in their turn benefit.Idle land is turned to a profit, providing employment andincreased income. The people have a reliable source ofincome from wage earning as well as a secure long-terminvestment. Their land rights are recognized and theyhave a higher socioeconomic status than non-treegrowers.

In the past, plantations have not attracted the interestof local communities as they did not see them as a way togenerate income. In fact, the schemes generate newmarkets that are stable and guarantee a return at aminimum price for a relatively long-term investment. Thisis one of their strengths that could be further promoted.For example, in Jambi and Lubuk Linggau in Sumatra, thepeople living next to a processing plant soon realised thatplanting timber trees could provide them significantfinancial benefits by selling the produced timber to themill.

The period of 8-10 years from first planting untilharvesting has been a problem for communities with fewalternatives to earn income. In the Philippines, thecompanies solve this by providing options like assistingwith credit for other activities to meet the basic needs ofthe local people. In some areas, competition with otherland uses (e.g. palm oil planting) has created disputes overland occupation and tenure with the palm oil company.These disputes increased the community’s interest inplanting timber trees as the schemes strengthen thelandholders’ claim to the land.

Organising outgrower schemes can be time consumingand costly. Cooperatives and farmer groups usually havelimited experience in negotiating and managerial skills.Establishing clear land rights can also be difficult.However, as CIFOR researcher Ani Adiwinata Nawir says,“These costs may be outweighed by the benefits ofreducing social conflicts and secure operations inside theplantation areas.”

The research has found some common elements insuccessful outgrower schemes. Mutually beneficialcontract agreements are crucial. Research findings showthat the most successful collaborations occur whencompanies negotiate transparently with communities toachieve a win-win situation. This helps secure a longterm commitment from outgrowers. Local groups alsoneed secure land ownership and there should be littlecompetition for the use of land.

The company needs to deliver clear information onthe potential risks and consequences to the tree growersas well as planning reinvestment mechanisms well. Theymust be able to offer a fair price for the timber, becausethe long-term viability of the schemes will depend on treegrowers making a good profit from the first harvest.

Plantations will never guarantee the future for naturalforests, but overall, outgrower schemes can provideopportunities for more social and culturally orienteddevelopment of plantations. Experience has shown thatthere are many obstacles in the process but, as Nawirsays, “This research should go a long way towardsensuring the success of future outgrower schemes, both inAsia and in other forested areas of the world.” For moredetails contact Ani Nawir at a.nawir@cgiar.org

CI

FO

R6

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sMaking outgrower schemes workForestry plantations are controversial because they almost inevitably involve large, corporate-ownedmonocultures. Even so, establishing plantations on cut-over forest has some advantages over natural regeneration.An alternative way of developing plantations is through outgrower's schemes, where local people grow treesunder contract to sell to plantation companies based on a profit sharing agreement. In this way the schemesincorporate plantations into a mosaic of land use and promote small-scale farming.

An outgrowerscheme inJambi growsAcaciamangium tosupply thelocal pulp millwhile alsofostering goodcommunityrelations.(Photo by Ani Nawir)

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 6

CI has a goal of zero biodiversity loss. We have a two-pronged strategy towards attaining this goal. First, wefocus our efforts around the world on 25 biodiversityhotspots, these are regions that have outstanding levelsof endemism (>1 500 endemic plants) as well as a highdegree of threat, each hotspot by definition having lostmore than 70% of native vegetation. The hotspotstogether hold more than 60% of Earth’s terrestrialbiodiversity in a mere 1.4 percent of the land surface ofthe planet. The second component of CI’s strategyaddresses the need to conserve the world’s majortropical wilderness areas, where over 70% of originalhabitat remains. Both strategies rely on the protectionof remaining primary forests as the single most efficientway to prevent species extinction.

This said, we do agree that less than pristine habitats(including secondary forests) have a role to play.Secondary forests help maintain connectivity infragmented landscapes by providing the opportunity toexpand or connect existing protected areas. As well,they help preserve ecosystem services such as soilconservation and watershed protection. As noted in theCIFOR article, secondary forests can often providehabitat, even for large mammals, although in manyinstances it is a sink habitat for several more specializedspecies.

Consequently, conservation strategies designed by CItake into consideration the role of second growth forestsin several regions. In the Philippines, for example, CI isimplementing a carbon offset project focused on themanagement of secondary forest to meet conservationgoals in the Sierra Madre. Other corridor levelconservation strategies involve supporting shade growncoffee in Mexico, where we facilitated an agreementbetween Starbucks and coffee growers. We areexploring how sustainable cocoa production can supportbiodiversity corridor management goals in West Africa.In the Brazilian Atlantic Forest of Southern Bahia,complete protection of second growth forests as amethod to expand the total area forested in this highlyfragmented region is addressing biodiversity persistenceissues for many threatened endemics.

Despite our extensive work in and on secondaryforests, the point of CIFOR’s article is not lost on us.Relatively little is known about the conditions underwhich secondary forests can achieve significantconservation objectives. Much scientific work is neededbefore we understand the habitat and connectivityvalues for the survival of threatened species. Furtherwork is required to uncover least-cost conservationstrategies and to determine where biodiversityconservation makes economic sense.

The looming extinction crisis in the hotspots forcesus to prioritize conservation resources and actions. ForCI, this above all means protecting the primary foreststhat are home to most of the world’s biodiversity. We

recognize that to avert the extinction crisis, we mustwork within the matrix of land uses. We can onlyachieve this by partnering government institutions,research organizations such as CIFOR and ICRAF,businesses, and local communities. Conservation ofthese systems will require working together throughoutthe landscape matrix in order to ensure secondaryforests are not a neglected resource.

*This article was contributed by the following ConservationInternational staff:Artemio Antolin, Manager, Sierra Madre Biodiversity CorridorTom Brooks, Director for Biodiversity Analysis, Center for Applied

Biodiversity ScienceJake Brunner, Senior Director for Mainland AsiaGustavo Fonseca, Senior Vice President for Science, Conservation

International, and Executive Director, Center for AppliedBiodiversity Science

Daniel Juhn, Program Manager and Analyst, Regional Analysis –Center for Applied Biodiversity Science

James Peters, Manager for Economics in Asia and the Pacific Michael Totten, Senior Director, Center for Environmental

Leadership in Businessrly Vynne, Program Manager,Conservation Priorities – Center for Applied BiodiversityScience

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0

CI

FO

R

7n e w sSecondary forests – a conservation perspective*

The lead story in CIFOR News No. 29, “Secondary Forests – a Neglected Resource” created considerable interestamong readers at one of the many partners CIFOR works with, Conservation International (CI). Below is CI’sthoughtful response.

Coffee harvesting in a secondary forest. (Photo by Eva Wollenberg)

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 7

CI

FO

R8

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sParticipatory forest management – learning from experience Devolving control over natural forest resources is a positive step for the government and local people in SouthAfrica. But in the Dwesa-Cwebe Forest Reserve in the former Transkei region of the Eastern Cape, things are notgoing to plan. “Despite 7 years of negotiations, largely over land, the real question of who has the power overdecision-making is still unanswered,” said Isla Grundy of the University of Stellenbosch. “No participatorymanagement system is in place and the future survival of the forests as significant biodiversity and forest productsreserves remains unclear.” Yet some good is coming from the situation, because it demonstrates that successfulparticipatory forest management needs strong support from both government and the community.

Isla Grundy, who has been working with CIFOR and nationalpartners in Dwesa-Cwebe, describes a management systemwith little hope of success in the absence of seriousinstitution building. “The government authority previouslyresponsible for management is demoralised, with fewresources and lacking power,” she said, “Enabling nationallegislation to establish common property institutions is inplace but the new community institutions that have beenformed lack local legitimacy.”

The traditional leadership, which is the most respectedlocal institution, has been weakened and its authority overthe allocation of land and resources has been challenged.The newly formed local Communal Property Associationsdo not have clear mandates. Neither does the TransitionalRural Council.

In the case of Dwesa-Cwebe Reserve, its trees and landare now owned by the community. In the near future theywill be leased by the Government to be managed as abiodiversity reserve. This differs from standardparticipatory forest management by increasing the abilityof the communities to become the decision-makers, whilethe government takes on a mentoring and technicalmanagement role. At present there are plans to buildcapacity within the local communities to increase theirrole in management of the Reserve in the future. “Butwith no legitimate local management institution in place,the communities are likely to be mere figureheads incharge while the resources continue to be depleted,” saidCIFOR’s Bruce Campbell, who is involved in the work.

The potential for conflict between the newgovernment-backed so-called democratic institutionalcommunity structures and the existing traditionalleadership presents one of the greatest threats to thesuccess of the participatory initiative at Dwesa-Cwebe.This pattern of conflict has arisen in several newlyindependent countries where democratic structures havebeen imposed by government onto already existingsystems of traditional leadership – in Tanzania for example,and in Zimbabwe. A solution to the conflict in some areashas been to integrate the traditional leadership within thenew structure.

“Our study presents a clear example of the potentialconflict between conservation and utilization of natural

resources,” said Rehema White from the University ofTranskei. “The local communities will only agree tosustainable use and ultimate conservation of the resourcesif they can see tangible benefits for themselves.” Thatshould not be an obstacle in this case because the CPAs atDwesa-Cwebe will receive a rent for the conservation ofthe Forest Reserve, as long as the rents are sufficientlylarge and equitably distributed. But ensuring that theReserve generates enough benefits to satisfy theinstitutional and community needs may not be so easy.

“Local expectations of improved livelihoods based onthe new land acquisition are high,” said Norman Ngamilefrom the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry in KingWilliams Town. “The pivotal question is, will the overallcommunity gain more than it forfeits?” The future of theforests will depend on the answer to this question. Forestusers will weigh up the communal benefits they receive inreturn for reducing their individual demands for forestproducts, and decide whether to support any collaborativeagreement.

So the question is: if the Reserve’s biodiversityrepresents a valuable national asset, but the localsdisagree, should the Government be relinquishingmanagement of these resources? In other similarsituations, maintaining biodiversity resources has becomea national or international responsibility.

The communities at Dwesa-Cwebe span geographicaland administrative boundaries, include peoples with verydifferent economic situations and encompass diverseethnic and religious groupings. There is also a history ofcommercialization and anarchy. As the community’spower groups go from unity against the government overland claims and more to deciding how forest benefits areshared, there is a genuine risk of internal conflictemerging.

“The essential components for the true devolvement ofpower over contested resources from government to localinstitutions include financial investment, intensivefacilitation, adequate and well-trained human resources aswell as time,” said Isla Grundy, “There have been somehard-won successes over the years in southern Africa butthe process continues to be a learning experience for allconcerned.”

Transkei, SouthAfrica: Delegates

attend theclosing ceremony

of the 2001Participatory

Systems AnalysisWorkshop.(Photo by

Bruce Campbell)

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 8

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0

CI

FO

R

9n e w s

Board Chair honouredJag Maini, CIFOR’s Board Chair, was awarded The Order ofthe Golden Ark from His Royal Highness Prince Bernhardof the Netherlands during a ceremony held at theSoestdijk Palace in April 2002. The Order of the GoldenArk established in 1971 by His Royal Highness PrinceBernhard to recognise people dedicated to theconservation of nature.

CIFOR Affiliate Scientist honouredProfessor Fu Maoyi, a senior researcher with the ChineseAcademy of Forestry, and a CIFOR Affiliate Scientist, hasbeen appointed “Principal Scientist” by the ChineseAcademy of Forestry in a ceremony in Beijing on June 2.

“This is a rare and very prestigious scientificappointment in a culture that values scholarship andlearning,” said CIFOR scientist Brian Belcher.

In a note to Brian, Professor Fu wrote, “There are 16Principal Scientists appointed in our Academy after twocycles of evaluation and a vote by a Committee. I am the“youngest” one in the 16 … The title of CIFOR “AffiliateScientist” certainly helped me.”

“This is a well-deserved honor. Prof. Fu is anexcellent and very well-rounded scientist, recognizedinternationally for his expertise in bamboo biology,ecology and management, and latterly in economic andpolicy issues as well. He has been a great collaboratorover the years and a good friend of CIFOR, ” saidBelcher.

A first step in promoting the use of “Future Scenarios” incommunal forest management was the publication ofguidelines by CIFOR scientist Lini Wollenberg*. Recently,CIFOR organised a workshop** in Bolivia from 7 to 11 May2002, to train promoters and researchers active incommunal forest management projects to use FutureScenarios in their work.

“A team of specialized experts might includerepresentatives from local government grassrootsdevelopment workers, villagers with in-depth indigenousknowledge, or others that need to make decisions on howto manage their forests,” said Nontokozo Nemarundwe, aCIFOR scientist stationed in Zimbabwe, who traveled toBolivia to participate as a facilitator. Participants at theworkshop came from a range of institutions operating inBolivia and included five different nationalities.

“As facilitators of this workshop, we struggled withhow to conduct a Future Scenario training,” admitted deJong, “We decided to pay attention to three components.First, we needed to explain the concept of FutureScenarios. Second, participants needed a feel for what itis like to develop their own Future Scenarios. Thus, weused imaginary and real cases and asked participants tobuild their own Future Scenarios, taking the role of localforest managers.”

The third component, facilitating meetings withcommunities, is probably the most difficult aspect ofconducting Future Scenario exercises. After a shortintroduction, the participants took on different parts in a‘fish bowl’ role-playing exercise representing typicalsituation. Those not participating observed and evaluatedthose doing the role-play. “At several points we stopped

the role-play to discuss and evaluatethe particular ways the ‘facilitators’were dealing with the ‘community’and to discuss the relevance of thesituation,” said Peter Cronkleton, aCIFOR scientist working in Bolivia.“The role-playing led to a greatnumber of useful observations andconclusions on the sorts of thingsthat one has to pay attention towhen facilitating a Future Scenario meeting.”

The grand finale of the training workshop was apractice exercise. Three community groups near thetraining site volunteered to allow the workshopparticipants to come and practice developing a scenario.The workshop participants spent most of the previous daypreparing and organizing their team and defining roles.“We had made it very clear to the communities that thiswas just an exercise, but even so, a number of people inthe community groups became enthusiastic and fullyinvolved in the exercise,” said de Jong. “This was maybethe best learning experience for the participant, whocould observe directly how motivating a Future Scenarioexercise in a community can be.”

For a full report from the workshop contact: w.de-jong@cgiar.org; p.cronkleton@cgiar.org or n.nemarundwe@cgiar.org.

* Wollenberg, E., Edmunds, D., Buck, L. 2000. Anticipating changeas a tool for adaptive forest management: A guide. CIFOR, Bogor.**The workshop was supported by funds from the Swiss DevelopmentCooperation under the grant ‘Stakeholders and biodiversity in theforests of the future.’

Managing forests in Bolivia – with a crystal ball

If we could understand the consequences of our actions in the future, we would make better choices today.Looking into the future used to be the preserve of astrologers and sorcerers, but now foresters also have a crystalball, known as “Future Scenarios”. The “Future Scenarios” approach was originally developed in the businessworld to make informed choices about company strategies and to prepare for possible future situations, basedon the specialized knowledge of teams of experts. But as CIFOR’s Wil de Jong said, “We believe that FutureScenarios is a useful tool for forest managers and local level policy decision makers.”

Participants inthe training

workshoppracticedpreparing

Future Scenariosthemselves.

They alsoworked on how

to facilitatecommunal

meetings anddiscussed the

theory of FutureScenarios.

(Photo by CIFOR)

News and notes

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 9

ObituaryDr Tim Whitmore leading rain forest expert

Tim Whitmore died this year, aged 66, one of the mostprolific writers of his generation on tropical rain forestplants. In 1953 he went from the Friends’ School at SaffronWalden to St John’s College, Cambridge, where he was aMajor Scholar in 1954-57. He took up research on tropicalplants and for his PhD he went to what was then Malaya.He set out to understand how various types of barkdevelop. For this he was awarded the Rolleston MemorialEssay Prize at Oxford.

For foresters and ecologists working in the extremelyspecies-rich tropics, a basic need is a guide to identify themany kinds of tree, preferably giving also their uses andrequirements. Whitmore’s work satisfied this need. AsGovernment Forest Botanist, based in Honiara in 1962-65,he wrote his Guide to the Forests of the British SolomonIslands (1966). Then, based in the Forest ResearchInstitute of Malaya 1965-72, he planned the four-volumeTree Flora of Malaya, edited Volumes 1 and 2 (1972-73)and wrote much of the material. As a side-line he wrotePalms of Malaya (1973). Back in Britain in 1972-74, againsupported by St John’s, he wrote Tropical Rain Forests ofthe Far East (1975). This was a masterly synthesis ofknowledge and understanding to that date. He had a giftfor isolating the essential issues and crafting a succinctaccount, with due emphasis on evidence. The revisededition of 1984 is still much in demand.

At this time he also published the first of a series ofpapers that established the importance of major naturaldisturbances in driving the regeneration dynamics of sometropical rain forests. From 1974 to 1989 he was a SeniorResearch Officer in the Oxford Forestry Institute, wherehe pursued studies on forest regeneration in Sabah andBrazil, made extensive studies on the valuable tropicalconifer Agathis and worked on the measurement of lightin the forest undergrowth. He also established with W.George and A. Hallam the Oxford Monographs onBiogeography and edited or co-edited three volumes ontropical regions. In 1989 he moved back to Cambridgeand set up a consultancy in forest ecology andmanagement and the production of forest manuals, withDenis Adler and Peter Burgess. Together they laid thefoundations for a Tree Flora of Indonesia.

He believed passionately that for tropical rain foreststo survive over coming centuries, they must be managedfor timber production and so be manifestly useful to thelocal people. This view brought him into conflict withthose who believe that the forests absolutely must beleft intact and not disturbed by humans.

Whitmore suffered from several serious medicalconditions from his long periods in the tropical forestand endured a painful illness for his last two years, buthe always shrugged off his problems. He was not aworkaholic and enjoyed many outside interests. A greatraconteur, with a fine sense of humour, he was a loyalfriend and real inspiration. He is survived by his wifeWendy, who supported him greatly and by his threechildren.

CIFOR/Japan agreement on collaborationThe Japan Center for Area Studies (JCAS) and CIFOR havesigned an agreement to collaborate in identifying keyresearch topics related to tropical forestry andenvironmental problems.

Professor Fumiko Oshika, Director of JCAS and DavidKaimowitz, Director General CIFOR, signed theMemorandum of Agreement in June 2002. The agreementwill develop cooperative initiatives to produce newinformation and activities, and facilitate exchange visitsby scientists and students. “Our main objective is tounderstand phenomena indigenous to various areas of theworld, especially through comparative studies,” saidProfessor Oshika.

Japan has a long tradition of ‘foreign studies’ that aredocumented from the 7th century, when the governmentbegan sending scholars for periods of residence in TangChina with the goal of introducing advanced socialsystems and culture into Japan. “We hope that JCAS willhelp Japan to strike a previously unrealized balance in itsinternational concerns, and thereby add to ourintellectual maturity as a society,” says Professor MutsuoYamada.

Several CIFOR scientists contributed to a Symposiumthat JCAS organised in November 2001 on Extreme Conflictsand Tropical Forests. JCAS and CIFOR will co-organise asymposium in December this year on “Population,migration, and the social ecology of tropical forests.”

As David Kaimowitz said, “Japanese research centershave a lot to offer when it comes to better understandingthe issues concerning tropical forests. We think this is anexcellent opportunity to take advantage of their expertiseand at the same time provide them with additional linksinto the international forestry community.”

Capacity building withina CIFOR networkXu Daping and Jean-Paul Laclau, two collaborators inCIFOR’s Site Management and Productivity of Plantationsnetwork have just finished their PhDs, both undertakenwithin the framework of the CIFOR network.

Xu Daping was awarded his PhD by Murdoch University,Western Australia in January 2002. The title of his thesiswas “Managing nutrients to increase productivity ofplantation eucalypts in south China.” According to XuDaping’s research, the productivity of eucalyptplantations can be increased significantly through

CI

FO

R10

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sNews and notes

Professor FumikoOshika, Directorof JCAS holds upthe agreementsigned with CIFORto collaborate inidentifying keytropical forestryresearch projects.(Photo byWil de Jong)

Obituarywritten by Dr

David BurslemDepartment ofPlant and Soil

Science, University of

Aberdeen,Scotland, UK

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 10

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0

Bambang Setiono, PhD. was appointed as aResearch Fellow in the Forest, Policy andSociety (FSP) programme in January 2002.He joined CIFOR in April 2001 and willcontinue to do research on issues related to

IBRA's debt resolution process, financial sector policy andprocesses, and industrial restructuring in Indonesia'sforestry sector. Bambang has a PhD. in Accounting andFinance from University of Manchester, UK (1996) and aMasters degree in Accounting from University of Denver,USA (1992). He has 18 years experience in performanceassessments, financial audits and tax audits. Prior tojoining CIFOR, Bambang worked for Badan PemeriksaKeuangan (BPKP, one of two Government of IndonesiaAudit Agencies).

Luluk Suhada began a one-year placementin February 2002 as a Library Assistantwithin the Information Services Group.Luluk has a Bachelor degree in LibrarySciences from the University of Indonesia(2001). She worked for the BritishCouncil Indonesia before joining CIFOR.

Greg Clough became CIFOR’s Communications Specialistin April 2002. Before CIFOR, he was the Media Manager forthe Australian Government’s Overseas Aid Agency(AusAID), where he worked closely with the Office of the

Minister for Foreign Affairs. Prior to AusAID,he managed media and public affairs forthe Northern Territory Government. InJakarta, 1991-96, Greg set up and managedthe Australian Government’s Kang Gururadio and magazine project to promote

Australian-Indonesian relations. Greg has a BA from CurtinUniversity, and a Graduate Diploma in ProfessionalCommunications and a Master of Business Administration,from the University of Southern Queensland.

Makmur Widodo joined CIFOR in April 2002 for a one-yearassignment as a Research Assistant, GIS, with the Forest

Products and People (FPP) programme. Hisprevious experience as GIS/Remote SensingSpecialist includes working for GlobalChange Impacts Centre for Southeast Asia(ICSEA) and ICRAF-SEA Regional Office,Bogor. He has a Bachelor Degree in Marine

Science with specialization in GIS from Institut PertanianBogor, Indonesia.

Julia Maturana joined CIFOR in June 2002.Julia will be a Research Fellow in thePlantation programme. In 1995 shereceived her Bachelor degree in Ecology &Natural Resources Management fromUniversidad Centroamericana, Nicaraguaand in 2000 a Masters degree in Environmental & NaturalResources Economy from Los Andes University, Colombia.Prior to joining CIFOR, she was a consultant/researcher atseveral institutions in Latin America (Centro de EstudiosSociales Solidaridad Cess, Peru; Instituto Para LaPromocion Del Desarrollo Sostenible, Indes; UniversidadAutonoma Americana). She was also a consultant forCIFOR between September - December 2000 working onrural economy and land market dynamics research inPara-Brazil.

Siân McGrath, an Associate ProfessionalOfficer funded by DfID UK, began a 14-month assignment in June 2002 in theForests, Society and Policyprogramme. She will work on theDecentralisation Project as a Policy Adviser

on Decentralisation and Forestry-Related livelihoods. Shejust recently completed a thesis on “Policy Networks:Public Access to Decision-Making for Sustainable RuralDevelopment” at Edinburgh University, and will attendher viva (defence) back in Edinburgh next year. She alsohas an MSc in Policy Studies, and an MA (Hons) fromEdinburgh. Before joining CIFOR, she worked as aconsultant for the UK Forestry Commission. Siân was alsoa Research Assistant with Yale University’s Dept. ofForestry and Environmental Studies, working on policy

CI

FO

R

11n e w s

CIFOR staff

improved nutients management. His research alsorecommends harvest residue retention and coppiceregeneration as operational practices in second rotationsfor eucalypt plantations in South China.

Jean-Paul Laclau (CIRAD-Forêt) defended his PhDthesis at the Institut National Agronomique Paris-Grignon in December 2001. Laclau’s research wasconducted in the Congo where he assessed the effects ofEucalyptus plantations on the chemical properties of thesoil to achieve sustainable production through relevantsilvicultural practices. His research shows thatbiogeochemical cycles in the original savanna ecosystemare deeply modified by afforestation.

Another member of CIFOR’s network, Eko BhaktiHardiyanto of Gadjah Mada University and PT Musi HutanPersada, went twice to Vietnam to assist Vietnamesecollaborators with pre-harvest site measurements (soil

and biomass). All of these are good examples oftransverse cooperation that would have been impossiblein the absence of the CIFOR network.

CIFOR scientist wins awardTendayi Mutimukuru, one of the researchers at CIFOR’sHarare office, has been awarded the Claude AkeMemorial Award of the Africa-America Institute inWashington D.C. Only six African scholars or activists arechosen every year for this prestigious prize. Tendayireceived the award for her proposal “Managing Conflictsfor Sustainable Forest Management: Lessons fromMafungautsi Forest in Gokwe Communal Area”. This is asignificant award and well-deserved. Tendayi received$6 000 to support her research and a 10-day study tourin the United States.

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/26/02 3:28 PM Page 11

CI

FO

R12

Augu

st 2

002

Num

ber 3

0 n e w sISSN:1022-0992

Written and edited by Paul StapletonDesign & Layout by Yani Saloh, CIFOR

Printed in Indonesia by SMK Desa Putera

CIFOR welcomes responses to this newsletter from interested readers.Please address themto the Director of the Information ServicesGroup, Michael HailuE-mail: m.hailu@cgiar.org

Center for InternationalForestry Research (CIFOR)P.O. Box. 6596 JKPWBJakarta 10065, IndonesiaTel: +62(251) 622 622Fax: +62(251) 622 100E-mail: cifor@cgiar.org

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

for Southern andEastern Africa73 Harare Drive,Mount PleasantHarare, Zimbabwe Tel: +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 orcifor.cameroon@iccnet.com

if you would prefer toreceive CIFOR Newsin French or Spanish, please contactNia Sabarniati atn.sabarniati@cgiar.org

Cover photos by:C. Cossalter, J. Poulsen,E. Dounias, L. Yuliani,C. Colfer and M.R. Perez.

research and advice on “Public Involvement Forest Eco-systemManagement”.

Marieke Sassen, Associate Expert from The Netherlands,joined the Biodiversity programme as Research Fellow inJuly 2002. She will be working in Cameroon and Gabon, outof the CIFOR’s Yaounde office. Prior to joining CIFORMarieke worked at the International Agricultural Centre andPlant Research International in Wageningen. Mariekereceived her MSc degree in Natural Resources Management fromWageningen University, The Netherlands (1999).

Joris Siermann joined CIFOR in August 2002 as GIS/DataManagement Specialist under the Netherlands funded AEprogramme. He most recently worked as a softwaredeveloper for GEODAN, a GIS consulting company inAmsterdam. At CIFOR, Joris will work on the research datamanagement system, providing GIS support and participating

in the technical development of the Global Forest Information Systemcoordinated by IUFRO. He has an MSc degree in Geology from the FreeUniversity Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1997).

Moving OnSeveral CIFOR staff left in the first half of 2002. We are proud of theirsignificant contribution to CIFOR and wish them every success.

Joyotee Smith finished her assignment at CIFOR in February 2002. She was aScientist in the Sustainable Forest Management programme. Joyotee and herhusband, Peter, are currently residing in Phuket, Thailand.

Rita Mustikasari, Research Assistant in the FPP programme, resigned in March2002. She can be reached at rmustikasari@cbn.net.id

April 30 was the last day at CIFOR for Ramsey Omar (AdministrationManager). He moved to Asian Development Bank (ADB), Indonesian ResidentMissions to head their Administration Department. He can be contacted atramsey@cbn.net.id (personal) or romar@adb.org (office).

Hari Priyadi, Research Assistant in the Bulungan Research Forest left CIFOR inMay 2002 to pursue his Masters degree in Forestry at Universiti Putra Malaysia.He can be reached at hpriyadi0251@yahoo.com

After finishing her assignment at CIFOR, Mary Milne returned to Australia inJune 2002. For two years Mary worked on the Carbon sequestration project.She can be contacted at milne_mary@hotmail.com

After 1.5 years at CIFOR's HQ, Paul Stapleton left Bogor, Indonesia in July2002. He will still assist CIFOR from his new base in Brisbane, Australia, as aConsultant Writer and Editor.

Grahame Applegate finished his assignment at CIFOR in July 2002. He takeson a new assignment with PT. Dames & Moore in Jakarta before moving toSingapore next year with the same organization. Grahame was the teamleader of CIFOR’s Fire project. His email address is grahame_applegate@urscorp.com

After 3.5 years at CIFOR, Kenneth MacDicken, Director of Research, left inAugust 2002. He moves to Riau, Indonesia to lead the Forestry Research andDevelopment Division at Riau Andalan Pulp and Paper. He can be contacted atkenneth_macdicken@aprilasia.com (office) and kmacdicken@yahoo.com(personal).

CIFOR Board of Trustees

Dr. Jagmohan S. Maini (Canada)(Chair) Intergovernmental Forum onForests United Nations New York, USA

Dr. Christina Amoako-Nuama(Ghana)Ministry for Lands and ForestryAccra, Ghana

Ms. Lael Bethlehem(South Africa)Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, South Africa

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

Mrs. Lucie Edwards (South Africa)Canadian High Commissionerto South Africa

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

Dr. Hadi Pasaribu (Indonesia)Ministry of Forestry Indonesia

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

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

Dr. Pekka A. Patosaari (Finland)Ministry of Agriculture andForestryFinland

Dr. David Kaimowitz (USA)CIFORBogor, Indonesia

Ms. Yumiko Tanaka (Japan) Japan InternationalCooperation AgencyTokyo, Japan

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

News 30 revisi.qxd 9/27/02 10:16 AM Page 12