NTFP-EP launched seven important knowledge products and policy research in its role in providing evidence-based policy support and recommendations as part of the ASEAN-Swiss Partnership on Social Forestry and Climate Change (ASFCC) program.
The NTFP standards gap analysis report was commissioned by the ASEAN Senior Officials in Forestry, through the ASEAN Working Group on Social Forestry (AWG-SF). The analysis report hopes to serve as a reference document to inform and support the ASEAN Member States and social forestry stakeholders on the preconditions and plans to standard development in the region, and in developing their future strategic interventions to gain competitiveness in non-timber forest products trade in the region and globally. Further, the report also hopes to contribute in their effort to improve their forest products to meet market requirements and ensure the quality of products.
Another set of policy research done by NTFP-EP are the NTFP Policy Assessment Reports. Conducted in four ASEAN countries (Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines), the policy studies aimed to assess policies on the harvest, utilization, trade, transport, and management of non-timber forest products in Southeast Asia through desk research and analysis of gathered literature and documentation of policies and programs on NTFPs in Southeast Asia.
Meanwhile, the briefing paper on NTFP sustainable harvest and resource management protocols provides a snapshot of the guideline development process and presents initial findings on NTFP protocols for honey and resin, which are currently being reviewed at the ASEAN level.
These knowledge products were officially launched last February 2020 during the ASFCC Knowledge Sharing & Closing Event last 26 February 2020, held at the ASEAN Secretariat building in Jakarta, Indonesia. The event was hosted by the ASEAN Working Group on Social Forestry, the ASEAN secretariat, Ministry of Environment and Forestry Indonesia and the Embassy of Switzerland in Indonesia.
During this event, NTFP-EP also expressed its commitment to continue to work and collaborate with the AWGSF and ASFCC partner organizations in the future as the ASFCC program officially ends.
All of the mentioned publications can be downloaded for free at the NTFP-EP Publications page.
The NTFP policy assessment studies were produced with the financial support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) under the ASEAN-Swiss Partnership for Social Forestry and Climate Change (ASFCC) program. The contents of this studies is the sole responsibility of NTFP-EP and does not necessarily reflect the views of the SDC.
Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) policy studies were conducted in four countries: Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The policy studies aimed to assess policies on the harvest, utilization, trade, transport, and management of non-timber forest products in Southeast Asia through desk research and analysis of gathered literature and documentation of policies and programs on NTFPs in Southeast Asia.
Definition and classification of NTFPs vary per country. Overall, NTFPs are considered as an important subsector in the forestry sector. However, despite the growing economic importance of NTFPs, it is still not reflected fully in relevant national policies and there is a lack of a specific policy agenda to promote its development, management, and its sustainable utilization. This, in effect, hampers the development of NTFPs as a subsector, particularly on financing and investments.
In the area of community access to NTFPs for harvest, utilization, production, and management, across the four countries, there is a prevailing rule of state ownership of forest resources including NTFPs. However, rules for access and use rights of indigenous communities and local communities are in place. Overall, community access to NTFPs in forest areas are provided and can be deduced from the policies. Despite existing mechanisms (social forestry, Memorandum of agreement, partnerships with concessions etc.), the policies oftentimes only allow for subsistence level of access and will require local communities to apply for permits for commercial or trade purposes.
For NTFP transport and trade, existing regulations for forest products are in place. Generally, local communities may harvest beyond subsistence but require applying for a permit to harvest and transport. The policy framework for business operations for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) are also present in all countries. However, accessing the system still pose an enormous challenge for indigenous peoples and local communities and will only be easy if supported by non-government organizations (NGOs) or the government.
In terms of recognition and protection of indigenous knowledge, systems, and practices (IKSPs) on NTFP use and management, the extent of recognition of IKSPs in general and on NTFP harvesting and development greatly varies across the four countries. Philippines have the most responsive policies and Malaysia have the least responsive policies among the four countries.
For value addition and processing, regulation and protection are in place under various laws beyond forestry such as food and drug safety laws, trade laws, access and benefit sharing and intellectual property rights (IPR) to name a few.
Financing for NTFPs mainly comes from government and NGOs. There is an increasing and accessible capital from microfinance that can be availed of by MSMEs, but procedures and tax and non-tax revenues can still be demanding for local communities and disincentivizes community forestry enterprises.
Lastly, on investments and partnerships for NTFP development and MSMEs, there is not much significant investment on NTFPs that emanate from forestry departments, except for Indonesia and some special cases (e.g. bamboo) in the Philippines. Trade and industry sectors have different programs that support businesses such as shared facilities, financial services support, entrepreneurship promotion center, to name a few, and these are common to all the four countries.
In connection to NTFP development, several barriers to development of community forestry enterprises have been identified. These are issues on community access to NTFPs for harvest, utilization, production, management, and trade. The issue emanates from highly regulatory policy frameworks, with clear rules on commercial extraction of timber and access for private business organizations and limited conditions allowing for community access and use rights. Most of the community access rules are designed for traditional and customary use which is limited or interpreted to be only for subsistence. With the access and use rights issues, community forest enterprises are already starting at a disadvantage. In addition, transport documents are often difficult to secure and unnecessarily costly for community groups. They are unable to legally progress to trading and cannot participate in any investment and partnership for NTFP development and MSMEs. Furthermore, there is lack of data on NTFPs in the formal statistics and data collection is limited to very few major NTFPs. Existing policies also have gaps on provisions to improve the capacity of communities to sustainably manage their resources.
Despite these barriers, there are opportunities that can be unpacked for the development of NTFP- based community forestry enterprises. There are movements towards streamlining regulations to facilitate government transactions as well as enable ease of availing technical and financing support for MSMEs in all four countries. There are NTFPs gaining popularity for their medicinal value and due to government programs supporting development of medicine from plants classified as NTFPs. The biggest opportunity for community forestry enterprises is the increasing appreciation towards community-based products, deforestation-free, green, and sustainable commodities, socially conscious manufacturers and customers and increased purchasing power of customers. This market trend is likely to stay and expected to expand more.
From the analyses and findings generated, the paper provides the following key recommendations: (1) Promote and support social forestry schemes anchored in sustainable forest management that integrates sustained contribution in the development of community forestry enterprises; (2) Lobby with the forestry departments and other concerned government agencies to provide clarity on the extent of traditional user rights, customary user rights, and sustainable resource rights; (3) Simplify policies and monitoring protocols to ensure that community forestry enterprises are competitive and well linked to the market; (4) Strengthen the network of agencies, organizations, and people involved and promote NTFPs supported by better data collection and management; and (5) Encourage governments to be aggressive in promoting NTFPs for handicrafts, cosmetics, industrial, and pharmaceuticals uses and to support research and development on NTFPs by communities, scientists, and researchers.
In contemporary times, conservation itself is undergoing a positive change and people working among indigenous peoples are advocating “community-based conservation” as an alternative to mainstream conservation. Photo by Robin Bustamante, NTFP-EP Asia.
As mentioned in previous notes on this subject, traditional knowledge is something quite ‘popular’ as well as something recognized as necessary and needing promotion.
The Convention on Biological Diversity gives it a prominent place as do many other institutions which include donors, civil society groups, state governments, and even international banks. This is quite unfortunate. Because very few of these bodies have the ability or the will to delve into such a subtle but profound area though they have the influence to dominate the discussion, as is shown by the CBD definition. In short, the ‘material’ content is isolated from the whole (of knowledge) in these deliberations.
For instance, ethno-botany, the study of the use of plants, is not embedded in the larger scope and scheme of the indigenous culture that it belongs to but becomes a field in its own right, generating everything from plant lists to heads of departments but, sadly, having little in common with the traditional knowledge we seek. An approximate analogy would be the isolation (and use) of cocaine in place of chewing the entire coca leaf, something which the indigenous people in the Peruvian Amazon did to overcome fatigue, when they walked long distances, in a pleasant state of mind!
Over the years many traditional practices,
like shifting cultivation, were shown to be ecologically sound, and that when
fallows are given sufficient time to recover, there was little danger of soil
degradation and biodiversity loss. As with hunting traditions, especially honey
hunting, which made clear that indigenous communities knew exactly the stages
in the process that led from bee-forage to the mature honey that they looked
for. Such traditions were not simple livelihood practices but embedded in a
cosmology in which the land and the bee and humans and earth-cycles all played
a part, and which linked every small aspect of these activities to each other,
through time. In fact, the kinship traditions and the landscapes mentioned
earlier are a part of these world views. We find that other indigenous traditions
and cosmologies, about the human body, foods, medicine, and so on, are all
intricately woven together as a way of life.
In contemporary times, conservation itself
is undergoing a positive change and people working among indigenous peoples are
advocating “community-based conservation” as an alternative to mainstream
conservation. This is an ‘inclusive’ model, where habitats are viewed along with
the people living there, as is the case in many forest landscapes, and have the
inhabitant people themselves work out a long-term strategy that can sustain
both their livelihood as well as the landscape. However, with the present
scenario of increased populations, modern aspirations, degraded forests and
soils, and the non-cooperation of the authorities, these strategies are not
easy to come by. To fix such a problem, with an eroding indigenous/traditional
knowledge-base, is a further challenge.
The way much of our engagement with
traditional knowledge unfolds on the ground is through our pursuit of various
subjects. There has been work done on indigenous medicine, and their advantages
over mainstream health care; about indigenous food ways, their nutritive
values, and their role in present-day health problems; and indigenous languages,
their grammars and the intricacies of expressions that are rooted in earthy
metaphors. Music, folklore and dance traditions have all been analysed and
documented. Sacred sites have been plotted and their uniqueness understood, in
terms of biodiversity, and how they play a part in the larger ecology of the
landscape. However, these engagements with indigenous knowledge view most of
these aspects by themselves – which is the culture of modern science – which permits
only glimpses of the whole. What we need now is not only the pursuit of these
individual fields but also a consciousness that sees that they are all linked.
Even a moderately capable forest dweller is in some senses a ‘polymath’, adept
in several fields ranging from botany and biology to agriculture and carpentry.
This is quite the opposite of what conventional modern education trains us to
be: specialists in any field of thought or profession!
To conclude: we need to welcome all interest, involvement and studies in the various aspects of traditional/indigenous knowledge but also be alert to it being isolated and susceptible to misinterpretation. In the circumstances we face – where not much of traditional knowledge is alive and working due to external (environmental) or inherent (societal) conditions – this will be the prime challenge. Another trap we need to avoid, which has been mentioned earlier, is ‘fuzzy logic’, which is usually the acceptance of traditional practices without adequate scrutiny, something that is bound to backfire on them in the long run. The latter mistake will not only put these traditions in bad light but also the people who practice them, which would be most unfortunate.
Madhu Ramnath
is the coordinator for NTFP-EP India. He has been immersed in the
subject of barefoot ecology, wild forest foods in Asia and traditional
cultivated plants. His other areas of interest include nutrition,
health, indigenous land tenure, nurseries and reforestation. He has
authored several books, including “Wood Smoke and Leaf Cups” and “Wild
Tastes in Asia: Coming Home to the Forest for Food”.
Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights
Lakshmi Devi (56), a Bhil Adivasi woman from Kanpur village in Udaipur district in Rajasthan has not been able to harvest a single grain from the three kilograms of pulses she sowed on her 2 acre farm this year.
“Look at my field, it has completely dried up because there is no water in the wells or hand pumps for me to irrigate my crops. If there was water, I would have got a proper yield. Without any food or water, how are we to survive?” she said.
Kanpur is a village located in the periphery of the Zawar mines, an underground zinc mining operation owned by Vedanta-Hindustan Zinc Limited in Udaipur district.
The mines have turned their water sources scarce and completely unfit for use, say the Adivasi residents of the surrounding villages. Most affected by the environment pollution caused due to the mines are women farmers, for whom agriculture is the main source of livelihood and sustenance.
Zawar mines are known to be one of the oldest zinc smelting sites in the world with sources dating its existence to the 13th century AD. Spread over an area of 3620 hectares, these mines are located in the fifth schedule area belonging to the Bhils and the Meena tribes of Udaipur district in Southern Rajasthan. Adivasi communities in the region depend on the Kewra reserve forests that surround the Aravali mountain range.
The mines, once owned by Hindustan Zinc Limited (HZL), a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU), were partly acquired by the Vedanta Group during the Government of India’s disinvestment drive in 2002. HZL is now a subsidiary of multinational company Vedanta Resources, which was registered with the London Stock Exchange (LSE). In October 2018, Vedanta Resources delisted from the LSE after farmers in Zambia who were affected by their operations registered a case against them in the Supreme Court of UK.
In 2017, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, gave an environment clearance
for increasing the production capacity of Zawar mines from 1.5 million
tonnes per annum (MTPA) to 4 MTPA for a period of 15 years after an
Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Report was submitted by Hindustan
Zinc Limited in 2016. In June 2020, the company submitted another EIA report to the MoEFCC to obtain clearance for further expansion of the mines to 4.8 MTPA.
There has been a subsequent rise in environmental violations, with the expansion of mines over the past 5 years. This has further eroded the use of land and resources by the local Adivasi communities.
Adivasi women in the villages surrounding the Zawar mines have been mobilising to protect their natural resources and demanding liability from Vedanta-Hindustan Zinc Ltd for the damages they have suffered.
Impact of Mining on Adivasi Women around Zawar Mines
“Earlier, when we switched on the motor, we had enough water to fill in our tanks. We used it for irrigation and household use,” recalled Kanta Bai (42), a farmer from Kanpur village around the Zawar mines.
“Now, water does not reach even up to our fingers with so much mining underground. What we do get is sewage like water which damages our crops. Our wheat doesn’t grow anymore,” she said.
Such testimonies from the women farmers and residents of the villages around the mines contradict the claims made in the EIA report. Their voices remain unheard as women affected by mining who are not consulted during public hearing proceedings, find themselves excluded from processes of environment decision making.
The recent introduction of the Draft EIA 2020 bill which seeks to dilute the process of EIA and public hearings will further reduce the space for women affected by mining to access information and articulate their concerns.
Hindustan Zinc Limited, in their EIA report submitted
to the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 2016, claimed minimal
environmental pollution since Zawar mines are an underground operation.
“No land degradation would take place on account of underground mining operations,” said the report. It further added that “most of the dust produced during blasting will settle down underground and get diluted by ventilating air before being exhausted.”
This however doesn’t account for the interconnected linkage of ecosystems where the excavation and blasting processes followed in the underground mining has a subsequent impact on the ground water sources, topography of the land and soil quality in the region.
Underground mining processes have exhausted and contaminated the surface water (natural streams) and groundwater sources (handpumps, boring wells, tanks). As a semi-arid region with scant rainfall, these villages are already facing a severe water crisis.
The EIA report also fails to assess the water and
air pollution caused by its overground operations such as the tailing
dam and the captive thermal power plant which are located very close to
two directly affected villages-Kanpur and Nevatalai.
The tailings dam, an embankment which stores a mix of crushed rock and processing fluids after extraction, is located on a hill right next to Kanpur village. Despite the community resistance, a new dam has been proposed next to the existing dam. The finer particles from the tailings dam are carried by the wind in the dry season and deposited on the agricultural fields increasing the salinity of the soil.
Pipelines carrying mine waste to the tailings dam near Kanpur village. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights
The natural stream running through Kanpur and Padla villages which was once the main source of water for drinking and cooking purposes is now unfit for use by the community. The water was found to have high levels of cadmium and zinc during a water quality test organised by the residents of Kanpur in 2016.
The contaminated stream that flows through Kanpur village which has been polluted due to the tailings dam nearby. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights.
“When we make chai with this water, the milk splits. Even dal doesn’t get cooked properly,” said Janki Devi (45), a resident of Kanpur village.
After agitation by the residents, Vedanta arranged for water tankers in Kanpur village. These tankers, however, are irregular and have only increased women’s burden of collecting water. This limited supply has meant that women have to ration their water usage for cooking, washing, cleaning and feeding of cattle.
Thermal captive power plant in Nevatalai which provides electricity for the Zawar Mines was setup in 2016. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights.
Additionally, the fly ash from the 80 MW coal-fired captive power plant set up by Hindustan Zinc in the centre of Nevatalai village has left the entire village covered in black dust causing distress to the residents. Women complained that this black dust sticks on their bodies and comes out of their noses when they sneeze. Their water sources for consumption and irrigation have also turned black causing damages to their agriculture and health.
Manju Devi standing next to her sick cow on her fields in Nevatalai village. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights.
Manju Devi is a 65 year old woman farmer whose 2 acre farm is located right next to the power plant, separated by a boundary wall. This boundary wall has pipes built into it from where the water that is used to wash the coal is regularly released on her field, turning it black and parched. In the past five years, her agriculture yield has reduced by over 80 percent of its original output. In the past two years, the corn she sowed on her field has completely dried up. With reduced crops from her own fields, she is forced to buy food from the open market.
Her cattle have lost all their hair and weight as a result of feeding on the toxic grass on her field. Due to increased cases of cattle sickness and death, women farmers are finding it hard to sustain their alternative source of livelihood through cattle rearing.
Unable to make any dairy products from the low-quality milk, women farmers find it difficult to
provide adequate nutrition for their children. Their expenditures have
also increased with increased veterinary costs of the sick cattle.
All this has led to women being caught in cycles of debt. Male members of their families are also forced to migrate after loss of jobs for local people in the mines, forcing many women to fend for their land and families on their own. Adivasi women farmers find their future even more uncertain.
Women And Children Suffer Health Issues
Women in the villages bordering the mines also suffer from skin infections, stomach issues, gynaecological complications and reported miscarriages. Due to work on the contaminated soil, women have painful blistered feet and rashes on the hands. Many of the children in the area are born with deformities, which community members say, are linked to high levels of zinc found in the water sources.
A woman farmer’s blistered hands due to working in the contaminated fields. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights
Despite the health impacts of mining, the health facilities in the region are woefully inadequate. The only hospital built by Hindustan Zinc Limited in the Zawar mine township lies dysfunctional, with one nurse as the only staff on duty. Even then, the nurse only attends to general checkups for the staff working in the mines. Women however have to travel a distance of 40 kms to Udaipur city to access medical services.
Vedanta, through its CSR initiatives, have established model Anganwadis called ‘Nandghars’ and Self Help Groups (SHGs) under a program known as ‘SAKHI’ for the socio-economic empowerment of women in the villages around Zawar mines. Yet, these offer little space for women to discuss their issues and raise demands.
They do not recognise women as equal stakeholders whose health, livelihoods and food security has been directly affected by the mining operations.
Women Speak Out Against Vedanta
In 2017, Adivasi women from the villages affected by the Zawar mines started mobilising to air their grievances and concerns. With the support of a local woman human rights defender (who wishes to remain anonymous due to safety concerns), they sought to understand their rights, constitutional safeguards and laws that guarantee their self-determination.
These include laws such as PESA, Forest Rights Act, the Samata Judgement which guarantee the self determination of Gram Sabhas (local elected village councils) and recognise their right to free, prior and informed consent in case of large scale infrastructure projects such as mining.
With a recognition of their legal rights, women from affected villages began to file complaints directly to the District Collector and others in the district administration. After a lack of response from the government, they chose to address their complaints to Vedanta directly.
Affected women presenting their demands at the public gathering at the Vedanta headquarters. Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights.
Around 800 women from affected villages across several Panchayats gathered for a sit-in protest in front of the Vedanta office, on 5th February 2019, to demand redressal for the violations by their mining operations. They demanded restoration of groundwater sources, provision of irrigation facilities and repair of houses demolished by blasting. They also demanded employment for local people in the mines.
After this gathering, Vedanta-HZL constructed a pipeline and water tank in Kanpur village. However, women have reported that water supply continues to be irregular and the water from the pipelines is released only once a month.
“How can a pipeline or tanker provide us with relief when the entire groundwater has dried up? They have dug so deep below that they have interrupted the groundwater channels” says Sunita (37) an Adivasi woman farmer from Kanpur village.
Women in
the affected regions have rejected these temporary measures that do not
address the massive scale of the ecological destruction.
Women’s movement in the Zawar mines has demanded that any rehabilitation must take into account the rights of local communities over their existing natural resources on their land rather than relying on handouts offered by companies.
Intimidation of Adivasi Women
The public gathering was a historic
moment for the women from the villages around Zawar mines however it was
followed by a period of backlash and intimidation.
“In an area where community resistance has been curbed for quite a while, the mobilisation of Adivasi women certainly challenged the status quo on various levels. Political interlinkages have also divided the community between those who benefited from the mines and those made poorer because of it,” said the local human rights defender.
These vested interests include local political representatives, contractors and other intermediaries who viewed this gathering as an attempt to challenge the mining operations.
Shortly after the gathering, a few local groups organised a smear campaign against the women and the local woman human rights defender accusing them of violence and destruction of property.
As Vedanta started to lay off local mine labour due to the mechanisation of the mines, women resisting against the company were blamed for the job losses. Women who are a part of the SHG federation were questioned about their involvement in the gathering by local NGOs who facilitate Vedanta’s CSR initiatives.
These slew of intimidations saw the movement scattered since it began.
DMF Ka Hissa Campaign
While the ongoing pandemic and the restrictions have made it harder for women to gather, they have come together to support each other in the time of crisis. Relief activities by the government and Vedanta remained out of reach for many single and widowed women.
With agriculture in the area being completely destroyed by mining, the limited access to food heightened their vulnerability. The local woman human rights defender has been working to provide seeds to the women farmers and connecting them to alternative sources of livelihood for their sustenance.
Women from the affected villages around the Zawar mines are now advocating for a proper rehabilitation of the damages they suffered due to underground zinc mining through the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) funds.
The DMF is a non-profit trust established in mining affected districts through an amendment of section 9(b) of the Mines and Minerals Development (and Regulation) Act in 2015. The fund is collected through a percentage of the royalty payments made by mining leaseholders. The allocation of funds and the membership of the DMF trusts are determined via rules made by State Governments. The mandate of the trust is to implement projects for the welfare and development of mining affected communities
In Rajasthan, the implementation of the DMF fund is overseen by a Governing Council, consisting of all MLAs of the district. An amendment
passed by the Mines Department in Rajasthan on June 1st 2018 stated
that MPs of districts would be included as trustees in the DMF governing
councils.
Such a heavy political representation in the membership of the DMF Trusts restricts the space for mining affected communities, especially women, to be involved in the decision making and implementation of DMF projects.
Adivasi women from villages around Zawar mines put up slogans for the “DMF ka Hissa Campaign.” Photo Credit: Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s rights
Women in mining regions are now demanding their representation and voice in the fund allocation process of the DMF through a national campaign called ‘DMF ka Hissa’ (share of DMF). As a part of this campaign, women affected by Zawar Mines have sent representations to the district collector demanding for livelihood support, groundwater restoration, clean-up of water bodies and setting up of health infrastructure with equipment for the treatment of mining illnesses and COVID-19.
One of the slogans they presented during the campaign said “Hua pradushit mera pani, hua prabhavit mera svastha, kya mein DMF ka hissa hoon?” (My water got polluted and my health got impacted due to mines, am I included in DMF?
Despite the challenges to their mobilisation, they continue to reclaim their rights and future from being destroyed by reckless mining activities. In the absence of spaces for their participation, Adivasi women have created their own spaces to demand for their right to life, livelihood and clean environment.
In doing so, they have challenged the patriarchies within their community, the company and the state by asserting their identities as equal stakeholders–as farmers, foragers, knowledge keepers and economic heads of their families.
Article by Vaishnavi Varadarajan, a Research Associate at Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children’s Rights–an NGO working on the intersection of gender and environment justice by supporting local campaigns led by Adivasi and rural women to protect their natural resources, knowledge and culture.
This paper assessed the policies and the regulatory environment of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in the Philippines. The growing economic importance of NTFPs in the Philippines can be seen in the increasing collection of forest charges derived from them. There has been an increasing value of forest charges collection attributed to NTFPs over the past decades. In community-managed forest areas, NTFPs remained to be a viable source of livelihood in the country. To date, there are several policies and legislation issued that involves NTFPs, which have their own strengths and weaknesses. Certain policies provide for rules and regulations governing the disposition, harvesting, development, and utilization of forest products, including NTFPs. These policies allow for more opportunities in the sector.
There are several challenges, however. Most of these policies are either outdated or have limited cover-age. Most of the policies are primarily for permitting and collection of forest charges and management is limited to requirements of harvesting volume, size, and some with inventory. All the policies have prohibited the gathering and harvesting of these NTFPs inside protected areas. At the country level, there is absence of an official classification of NTFPs. A comprehensive policy or a framework for NTFP development is also not in place and has been identified as one of the gaps to the development and sustainability of the sector; there is insufficient baseline data, and advances in research and development is not at par with existing policies.
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is the primary government agency responsible for the conservation, management, development and proper use of the country’s environment and natural resources. Aside from DENR, several government agencies, special bodies (e.g. Palawan council for sustain-able development), state colleges and universities, the private sector, civil society organizations and peoples’ organizations are among the key stakeholders that play an important role in NTFP development and management. An inter-agency technical working group was constituted by the DENR to facilitate the development of a comprehensive NTFP policy framework focusing on standards of production, collection, harvesting and transport of NTFPs. The TWG agreed upon and proposed 5 major classification of NTFPs in the country: (1) Food, beverages and spices; (2) pharmaceutical, cosmetic and medicinal; (3) Industrial, chemicals and biochemicals; (4) Fibers & structural materials; and (5) animal-derived products.
Assessment of NTFP policies and regulations were conducted. In terms of community access to NTFPs for harvest, utilization, production and management, communities’ access to NTFPs in forestlands is linked with existing tenure system and associated rights. DENR issues various tenure agreements in forest-lands. These holders are required to submit to the DENR, management plans and work plans, which includes a socio-economic profile that illustrates the importance or use of NTFPs. In communities under the Community Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA), they have full access rights to forests and forest resources for 25 years renewable for another 25 years, and can designate areas for various uses, including NTFP plantation or processing. In protected areas, organized communities living in multiple use and buffer zones are given 25-year tenure security (PACBRMA) and can harvest NTFPs in non-restricted zones. Access rights to NTFPs is broader in scope for indigenous peoples due to the constitution of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), recognized right of ownership by virtue of native title over ances-tral domains. While policies are generally positive for communities’ access to NTFPs in forestlands, the poli-cies are short on issues of overlap of tenure. Policies and practice are limited to subsistence and traditional or customary use in terms of harvesting and gathering of NTFPs.
Capacities and resources of the community to develop and update their management plan is quite a challenge. Management of NTFPs at the community level in social forestry and ancestral domain areas are in policy and should be in accordance with their management plans.
In terms of NTFP transport and trade, communities are required to apply to DENR for permits to harvest and transport of NTFPs from forestlands. Regulations on transport and commercialization of forest products and NTFPs are in place. The process is long, costly, and tedious and involves multiple government agencies other than the DENR, for instance the LGUs can also impose taxes and fees. The bureaucratic delay in issuing permit takes 10 times longer than intended in the policy.
On the recognition and protection of indigenous knowledge, systems, and practices on NTFP use and management, Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) are threatened by lack of interest or other priorities of the indigenous peoples youth and the issue of ancestral domains issued with resource use instruments by the DENR that limits the primacy of IP rights.
For value addition and processing of NTFPs, various government institutions, NGOs and academe are involved in research to improve the income stream from NTFPs in the country. However, there is no comprehensive inventory or assessment of NTFPs to support research on value addition. NTFP research and development is limited and considered of low importance. The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) has offices that help on value addition that is accessible to community enterprises.
Meanwhile, forest communities were not able to access the various trust funds to support their forest enterprises and NTFP development due to various technical issues in the national treasury. Some financ-ing for NTFPs is also allotted by the law, for example, the Philippine Tropical Fiber Law. Investment and partnership for NTFPs are government-driven or mandated, but this has not been effective in terms of bringing in needed support for NTFP enterprise development. The growing interests on NTFPs lacked the level of investment and partnership needed for scaling up.
Several cases and examples on the ground where policies provided bottlenecks and facilitated community forestry enterprises, trade and marketing and value addition for NTFPs have been presented. Some of the bottlenecks were experienced by the Samahan ng mga Palaw’ano sa Amas Brooke’s Point (SPABP) in Palawan and Pigteponen livelihood center in Quezon province experienced lengthy and costly permitting. For the Macatumbalen CBFM & Coastal Association MABAFCOMA, a Community-Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA) holder in Palawan, is hindered by the lack of support to update their resource management plan and the lack of human resources for the DENR field office to support them.
Based on the analysis of the policies, the paper provided the following key recommendations to operate, enhance or develop NTFPs: (1) Comprehensive and inclusive resource inventory/assessment of NTFPs across the country with the participation of all community stakeholders; (2) Simplification and harmonization of existing rules and regulations governing the development, processing, management, utilization, transport and marketing of NTFPs; (3) Education and information and capacity building within DENR and key agencies on NTFPs and its economic and socio-cultural importance; (4) continuing the issuance of favorable policies and expanding social forestry/community areas; and (5) creation of a NTFP roadmap covering policy formulation, governance, field practices, capacity building, research and development and marketing of NTFPs.
National policies and the supporting regulations recognise the exis-tence of NTFPs. However, management of these resources lacks closer attention suggesting that awareness of the value and potential of these resources is extremely low among the relevant policy makers.
In the meantime, forest products are being extracted and the lack of official data indicates that the exploitation is not registered and regulated which could result in over exploitation and even loss of government’s revenue.
For example, wild honey is prevalent in the market place both in the rural and urban areas but national data does not provide any information. In the case of Peninsular Malaysia, NTFPs are lumped together under other forest products. It is unclear if the relevant authorities at the districts and states level actually record and quantify the extraction, let alone collect any fees or royalties.
Similarly, the lack of data applies to the two main NTFPs that received the most attention – rattan and bamboo – for their utilization as secondary materials for the downstream timber industry.
This shortcoming in the regulatory framework has been identified by the National Biological Diversity Policy (2016-2025) where it has proposed for the development of mechanisms to value NTFPs so that the resources can be incorporated into national accounting systems and forest management practices. As this policy applies to all 3 regions in Malaysia, it could be a useful policy for the develop-ment and management of NTFPs for the country.
(National accounting system refers to the GDP and there were some quarters calling for the inclusion of the concept of payment for ecosys-tem services to be factored into the GDP accounting.)
In addition, the new forest policy of Sabah clearly noted the need to identify NTFPs with commercial value and is expected to provide a clearer management framework in the near future.
Although Malaysia is a member of the ASEAN which has active discussion on social forestry and NTFPs, the lack of clear national policies illustrating a major disconnect with its commitment at the regional level
NTFP regulation in Indonesia is fragmented into numerous forestry legislation that compliment but also overlay each other. The forestry regulation and policies have primarily had an impact on NTFP development in relation to access or ownership of forest for NTFP collection, harvest, consumption, utilization, management, local trade and exports.
However, under Jokowi’s administration, an overarching paradigm shift has taken place in the forestry sector mainly a) a shift from timber management to integrated forest management or holistic management of landscapes and b) a shift from corporate approach to a more community approach with the main aim to improve equity in land and natural resources. The paradigm shift brought the acceleration of recognition of access and tenurial rights under the social forest and land reform (Tanah Objek Reforma Agraria, TORA) programs. Other regulations that provide access to communities to forest for NTFP harvest and trade includes MOUs that provide traditional zones within protected areas and eco-cultural zonation within forested APLs (areas for other uses). Further, forest partnerships between communities and companies within production forest enables communities to access NTFPs for harvest, utilization and trade and is a tool to address land conflicts. Bilateral MOUs with local Bupatis for conservation and the development of NTFP-based livelihoods for the local communities through low impact economic activities (i.e. NTFP harvesting and processing) has also been established.
Paramount to the sustainable management and conservation of forest and NTFPs for future generations is the Moratorium on the issuance of new concessions within primary natural forest and peat-lands in Forest Areas and APLs.
These various legislative instruments provide a conducive environment for NTFP development. However, the emphasis is on expediting the legalization process. Equal attention is needed for forest-based livelihood development, community-based conservation and incentives for ecosystem service initiatives.
Indigenous communities have long lived and thrived on NTFPs through its traditional knowledge and local wisdom in relation to the forest and natural landscapes. Hence, the Recognition and Protection of the Rights of Indigenous People (PPHMHA) Bill that was initiated and submitted to the House of Representatives in 2013 would have a positive impact on NTFP development in Indonesia. The bill is crucial as it covers two areas important to the recognition and self-determination of the indigenous peoples in Indonesia and subsequently the recognition of their local wisdom and traditional knowledge.
Finally, the available NTFP-specific legislation and policies can be summarized into the following:
a. Overview of the development of plans for the management and utilization of forests including NTFPs
b. Licensing for the collection of NTFPs in industrial plantation forest (Hutan Tanaman Industri, HTI)
c. Business workplans for the utilization of NTFPs within specific NTFP industrial plantation forest (i.e. sagu plantation forest). Hence, this would be relevant for domesticated or cultivated NTFPs.
d. Administration of NTFPs of national foreste. National strategy for the development of NTFPs 2009 (Based on strategies and policies from 2010 to 2014)
f. Other related regulation and policies that mainly are state financial facilities for the development of the forestry sector including NTFP development or non-tax revenues collected by the state.
The paper aims to provide a policy and institutional review and assess existing policies and regulatory environment on non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in Cambodia. Eighty-five percent of Cambodian people depend on agriculture, timber, and non-timber forest products for their subsistence.
NTFPs are used by most communities as food sources, medicines, building materials or materials for creating other products. Cambodia’s overall policy vision governing forest resources including management, utilization, and conservation of NTFPs is articulated in the the National Forest Program (2010-2029), supported by key policy frameworks and regulations relevant to forestry, protected areas, community forestry, community protected area and land. Forest land owner-ship in Cambodia has implications on rights to use and manage forest resources, including NTFPs.
The assessment of the policies and regulations was conducted using 7 key criteria and the findings are presented below:
A. Community access to NTFPs for harvest, utilization, production, and management
Cambodian policy frameworks (e.g. forestry, community forestry management, protected areas) recognize a broad spectrum of tenure rights ranging from statutory to customary, and tenure holders vary from individual to collective and from local communities to indigenous peoples (IPs). The law is clear on the non-restriction and interference by the State and concessions on the exercise of customary rights. These policy frameworks provide several opportunities for the indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) to ensure their traditional use rights over the land. However, the operational meaning of customary user rights and traditional use of NTFPs is still not defined. The full economic benefits from the community forestry areas are not realized because the procedure to have community forestry is lengthy and complicated and rights are limited. In protected areas, user rights are also limited. Further, existing policies on community access to NTFPs could be disabling rather than enabling community enterprises and is geared towards success of the private industrial forest concessions.
B. NTFP transport and trade
There are supportive policies for improving livelihood of forest-dependent communities, and a policy framework, e.g. the National Forest Program that tackles poverty alleviation through improved livelihood and employment as a primary national objective. However, there are conflicting policies on the rights to harvest, collect and trade NTFPs for local communities. These policy inconsistencies at harvest and transport stages create misinterpretation and confusion. In terms of export or trade outside the country, the tedious policies and process that are currently in place are beyond reach for most community forestry enterprises and often hampers access to transport and trade and scaling up community forestry enterprises. The existing framework and policies also do not include support for commercialization of NTFPs and local capacity development.
C. Recognition and protection of indigenous knowledge, systems and practices on NTFP use and management
There are policies that recognize rights of IPs and their knowledge systems and practices such as the Land Law (2001), but implementation is problematic especially if these rights are pegged with more powerful interests such as concessions as exemplified by the case in the Mondulkiri Protected Forest, where resin tapping is an important economic activity for more than 40% of the people but logged by concessionaires. Situations like this is further exacerbated by the absence of a system that ensures a record of tenure rights and absence of business and human rights principles in practice.
D. NTFP value addition/processing
The NFP reports that local forest product development and marketing is limited and there is a need to create an enabling environment to add value to forest products and create local jobs. There is a sub-program on forest product development and market promotion where the identified means of implementation is a working group set up by the Forest Administration to coordinate activities and cooperate with development partners, NGOs, private sector, and local community involved in forest product development. A study of NTFPs in the Central and Eastern Cambodia listed key issues on NTFP value chain that needs to be worked on such as complicated legislation on NTFP extraction, access to transportation, cost of processing transport permits and other royalties that led to increase in illegal transport of products, and a lack of market channel and market demand information.
E. NTFP financing
The subsector on forest products has identified the following relevant indicators as crucial for sustain-able financing: revenue from forest being reinvest-ed into the sector, and benefits and income from CF activities, including income from sales of forest products. However, there were no reports avail-able for this study to determine how this has been implemented so far. On the other hand, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) have reported to have limited access to finance. Despite high liquidity in the banking sector, many banks find it difficult to give out loans to entrepreneurs in the SME sector due to the thought of their financial records being too poor or the lack of information on whether would-be borrowers have repaid loans and have too much debt. There has also been a relatively weak legal system in place regarding loans with SMEs that make the whole procedure an uncertain one. Given these reports, it can be deduced that micro-small enterprises where most of the NTFP community-based enterprises (CBEs) are categorized, are facing even more challenges about financing than SMEs.
F. Investments and partnerships for NTFP development and micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs)
There is an existing enabling policy to foster and support entrepreneurship. Tax incentives for SMEs are in place, but entails submission and processing of voluminous requirements, which looks daunting for the more micro-small NTFP community-based enterprises (CBEs).
Given the aforementioned analysis and findings, this review recommends the following: (1) Secure clear rights of forest dependent communities to forest resources and NTFPs and clear procedure to be undertaken in cases of conflicting rights to resource use; (2) Expansion of community tenure and traditional rights need simplified application and requirement process. There should be supportive policies and guidelines in place to simplify the process of CF legalization and applications for CF and community-protected areas; (3) Establish clarity on what is customary use and set clear indicators when harvest of NTFPs reaches the level of commercialization in terms of volume and kind, as well as when forest charges and taxation comes in; and (4) Develop a more expansive and inclusive policy and corresponding program that supports enterprise development, value addition, product quality, production system, investment and financing, and technology related to NTFPs with greater attention to benefit micro-small NTFP community enterprises and ad-dress their challenges.
Standardization is a necessary step in the ASEAN Economic Community’s (AEC) plans towards global competitiveness. Though ASEAN has embarked on standardization on many commodities, standards on non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are still in its early stages for many countries. In order to ensure that quality standards are met, protocols for sustainable harvest and management are crucial.
The ASEAN Senior Officials in Forestry (ASOF) has tasked Non-Timber Forest Products – Exchange Programme (NTFP-EP) to assist ASEAN in the development of such protocols.
There is growing market demand for proof of sustainability and conservation of natural resources. For community forestry producers to capture that market, they need to be able to meet such sustainability standards. These guidelines will serve as the first reference for NTFP management protocols in the region to further guarantee sustainable management of NTFP resources for markets and relevant stakeholders.
For a start, five important NTFPs in the region are being piloted, namely rattan, bamboo, resin, honey, and fruits.
This NTFP standards gap analysis was commissioned by the ASEAN Senior Officials in Forestry or ASOF, through the ASEAN Working Group on Social Forestry (AWG-SF). NTFP-EP was tasked to do this study in order to have a basis for future strategic interventions to gain competitiveness in non-timber forest products trade in the region and globally. This study can aide both ASEAN as a regional block and the ASEAN Member States (AMS) in improving their forest products to meet market requirements and ensure the quality of products. The study also seeks to inform social forestry stakeholders of preconditions and plans to standards development in ASEAN.
There is a growing interest in eco labeling and purchasing of green products by national governments (Cambodia, Indonesia), private sector (Vietnam and Indonesia) and important export markets such as the European Union, the United States and Japan. Though some countries have developed some NTFP standards (Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia) which can cater to such trends, most trade is based on buyer/ market specifications.
With the exception of Indonesia and Vietnam, the development of NTFP standards does not seem to be a priority in the larger domain of standard development and standard bodies across ASEAN. An opportunity exists however, with the National Standard Bodies established in most of ASEAN countries. In some countries there are also special technical committees on NTFP development and per specific NTFPs (Indonesia, Philippines). While in other countries there are special technical committees on forest products (Laos) and some specifically on wood (Cambodia, Myanmar). The ASEAN Task Force on Wood based Products (TFWBP) includes bamboo and rattan as products to develop and also presents an entry point for further development and application of NTFP standards at the ASEAN level.
Gaps in standards development are in the availability of knowledgeable and trained personnel to develop and apply NTFP standards, mechanisms and processes. Many well-informed persons are ageing. The availability and financial support for equipment, laboratory facilities and calibration to test against NTFP standards and the research support necessary for the development of standards is often lacking across the region. Finally, there is a need for compliance monitoring bodies and improved information management systems.
That being said, opportunities for the recognition and application of NTFP standards are visible in programs of other ministries and sectors such as the National Council for Sustainable Development in Cambodia, the Philippine Forest Products Research and Development Institute (Department of Science and Technology) and the Ministry of Science and Technology in Vietnam. AMS can also learn from existing standards and certification systems developed for timber and for organic agriculture as in Myanmar. The presence of government funding (Indonesia, Vietnam) and foreign funding for standards development (ISO, development aid agencies) can facilitate the development of NTFP standards in various ASEAN countries. The existing ASEAN Consultative Committee on Standards and Quality (ACCSQ) is a good body on which to anchor future work on NTFP standards.
Some NTFP products have been included in organic standards (Laos) as “wild products” though these standards are still to be applied. Other alternatives such as standards developed through multi-stakeholder efforts in Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) also present opportunities as being tested in trials in Indonesia, Laos and Vietnam. Challenges towards the development of the NTFP sector in ASEAN countries remain. Competitive bidding of commercial NTFP concessions in Myanmar, the quota system for NTFPs in Laos as well as the permitting system for select NTFPs in the Philippines, can be reviewed in the light of developing an enabling environment for facilitating NTFP trade in the region.
In short, the recommendations to address the identified gaps are to develop a multi-stakeholder and phased program in ASEAN on NTFP standards development. Regional cooperation and technical expertise sharing among AMS countries is advisable. ASEAN guidelines on sustainable harvest and resource management protocols should also be developed as many existing NTFP standards only cover aspects of product quality and not of resource management, despite the fact that markets are seeking proof of sustainable NTFP management. Investments and partnerships should also be mobilized for Community Forestry enterprise awareness raising and capacity building in this field. Financial support for testing facilities is also important. The exploration and recognition of alternative standards and certification schemes is wise, especially as they become more acceptable by certain markets. Finally, streamlining permitting and exporting processes is important to improve NTFP trade viability.
