THE THEORY OF SOCIAL FORESTRY INTERVENTION - THE STATE-OF-THE-ART IN ASIA

This study focuses on the major issues in current thinking about the t heory of social forestry development in Asia. The first of these issue s concerns the cause of deforestation. The governmental view is that d eforestation is a gradual process driven by community-based factors, w hereas the community view is that deforestation is a stochastic proces s driven by external, political-economic factors. The two explanations have different implications for where the 'problematique' of social f orestry is located - in the forest community or in the forest agency - and how, therefore, it is to be addressed. A second issue concerns ho w and when social forestry interventions are carried out. The concept of a 'window-of-opportunity' for intervention reflects a widespread be lief that it is important when interventions are carried out - with bo th the costs and benefits of intervention increasing as it is timed ea rlier and decreasing as it is timed later. A key determinant of the be st time for intervention is the receptivity of the forest agency and t he broader society. The purpose of intervention is to strengthen recep tivity and other factors conducive to change, to hasten extant process es of change, and to minimize the possibility of a reversal of directi on. A third issue is whether the focus of social forestry intervention should be on state lands or on community lands. While there are logic al reasons for either foci, the continuing vacillation between them su ggests the lack of a theoretical perspective with sufficient breadth t o encompass them both. Whatever the focus, attitudinal change within t he forest agency is usually mandated in social forestry interventions, but it is rarely accompanied with intervention in the underlying powe r relations, reflecting a continuing difficulty in viewing the forest agency sociologically. This lack of sociological perspective also is s een in the tendency to focus on adding resources perceived to be in sh ort supply, instead of removing institutional obstacles including thos e within the forest agency - to the proper use of existing resources. The final issue involves the unintended consequences of social forestr y intervention. These include redirection of the intervention as a res ult of bureaucratic resistance or negative feedback, and secondary con sequences stemming from the dynamic responses by forests, forest commu nities, and forest agencies to changes in their relationship.