The year 2020 was unprecedented. The WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11 March, and in the months that followed no one was spared from its impact. Apart from the existential threat of the disease itself, the resulting
lockdowns, movement restrictions and curtailing of some civil liberties have resulted in a dire situation worldwide. Although vaccines were in rapid development by the end of the year, talks of building back better still seemed superficial and a distant reality. Health, food, climate, biodiversity, and the state of global to local economies during the pandemic were in their rightful places as priority agendas for all nations in the world for what seemed to be a turn for the worse for both people and planet.

The year 2020 was supposed to kick-off a decade of action to 2030 for the SDGs. Before the pandemic, the SDG reports have already shown uneven results. With the pandemic, any progress from previous years were undone with devastating results for food security, nutrition, and hunger. For climate and biodiversity, alarming rates of biodiversity loss, extreme weather, and the highest concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were marked in 2020. The nature and biodiversity goals for the last decade, particularly targets for ecosystem protection, were only partially
achieved. In fact, habitat loss and forest degradation have been found to contribute to the rise of zoonotic diseases.

On that note, COVID-19, as an “emerging infectious disease of probable animal origin”, spotlighted zoonotic diseases as an effect of both climate change and nature and biodiversity degradation. The importance of forests couldn’t have been more pronounced and relevant for the 1.6 billion people in the world (including over 200 million of indigenous population in the Asia-Pacific) who are dependent on forests for food, medicines, shelter, and income. The importance
of forests during the pandemic became pivotal during the crisis period, beyond its seasonal contribution.

Yet these forests are being ravaged by threats fueled by an unsustainable and inequitable economic model, further aggravated by the already life-threatening circumstance of the pandemic. Forests and biodiversity figured as truly essential for the survival and sustainability of all peoples and our planet. The clamor for a shift to more sustainable lifestyles was no small outcry; it was a recurring message throughout the year. Furthermore, such agendas carried through to 2021 as the global talks on food for the United Nations Food Systems Summit, climate and biodiversity for the Conference of Parties, and the development goals for the SDGs continued.

Sadly with the global pandemic, we also saw some national governments taking advantage of the situation by passing controversial laws such as the Omnibus law in Indonesia, the Anti-Terror Bill and the division of Palawan island into three provinces in the Philippines, and other policies which are being amended in the absence of transparency. In India, a farmer’s protest against farm acts passed by parliament in September 2020 have been described as “anti-farmer” by
unions.

Civic spaces continued to shrink and dissenting voices were either silenced or threatened with force and even extrajudicial means. Promoting ICCAs remained challenging, with the appreciation for these territories of life still yet
to gain support from lawmakers. One strategy to overcome this is the active participation of the NTFP-EP in regional and international events on ICCAs and grabbing opportunities that allow for advocacy of ICCAs. In our strategic planning, NTFP-EP concurred with the global message that transformational change is extremely vital now and towards the next decade.

NTFP-EP sees the need for transformational change in the status of IPLCs, women and youth in terms of recognition and defense of their rights, their livelihoods, well-being, and health. Their persistent invisibility in statistics and policies need to be directly addressed. The defense of threatened community forests, natural resources and ecosystems and working towards inclusive conservation, where the link between people and forests were emphasized as part of our key strategic actions in the next decade.

The global message of transformational change resonated well with NTFP-EP. IPLCs, women, youth, and civil society have vital roles and contributions to building a better future for all. We summed this up in our theory of change by enabling communities and elevating Community-based Forest Conservation, Indigenous Knowledge, Systems, Practices & Culture, Gender Equality and Women Rights through the enhancement of capacity and space for IPLC, women and youth leadership, building knowledge and evidence, catalyzing stakeholders’ engagements, modeling and facilitating change, and stabilizing our foundation as we mainstream gender and strengthen the organization in the next 10 years.

To this end, NTFP-EP will continue to work towards realizing its vision: “Resilient Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, with women and youth in Asia, are respected stewards of healthy forests and living securely in their land for generations to come.”

DOWNLOAD PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

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

DOWNLOAD PDF

Click here to download PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

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.

DOWNLOAD PDF

During the last decade or so the extent of natural ingredients used by the cosmetics industry has increased, but there is no comprehensive publication on beauty products based on forest products, although scattered information does exist. By bringing attention to the role of forests in supplying beauty products and the connections with livelihood security and utilization of NWFPs, awareness of the importance of forests and their connection with cosmetics will be raised.

Within this context, FAO and the Non-Timber Forest Products – Exchange Programme (NTFP-EP) Asia have conducted this regional assessment of NWFPs related to the cosmetics and fragrance sector. The study compiled a set of case studies that examined specific NWFPs and the various traditional contexts in which they are collected, processed and marketed. The main objective of this volume is to present the case studies and the emerging synthesis, while encouraging cross-sectoral discussions in Asia on forests and beauty products. The study also provides recommendations on further enhancing equitable arrangements between forest communities and industry players. The initiative also organized a mini-seminar on forest product contributions to the cosmetics industry as part of the Asia-Pacific Forestry Week 2016 in Clark, Pampanga, the Philippines.

Click here to download the publication

Written by Madhu Ramnath and Ramon Razal, Wild Tastes in Asia gives us a glimpse into the array of factors that go into the collection of food in the wild. Apart from skills, these factors include the knowledge to identify species, the spaces and times when particular foods become available, the resources necessary to collect certain foods (like traps and diggers), the norms involved in gathering and sharing food, and the traditions that ensure sustainable harvests of resources.

How to order a copy

Interested in a copy of Wild Tastes in Asia? Contact us at info@ntfp.org so we can arrange a delivery to you or your organization. Certain partner organizations and institutions are entitled to a free copy of the book as well.

We are currently working on making the book available in e-commerce platforms and book shops. We will announce soon when this is available.

Reviews

Here’s what the experts have to say about Wild Tastes in Asia:

Dr. Jeremy Ironside

NTFP-EP trustee and McKnight Foundation consultant, with interest in sustainable agriculture and communal land and natural resource management

This book represents a truly important effort to understand the access to and use of wild foods in South and Southeast Asia. One key lesson from it is the significant variety of foods which forest peoples have relied on for centuries. This stands in significant contrast to modern diets which are based on a limited number of industrially produced staple foods. It also confirms recent research which shows the importance of food diversity for gut and general health.

As an Agta elder points out in the book “Medicinal plants are not the reason why the Agta are healthy. We get our strength from the food we eat, particularly the food which we learned to eat from our ancestors.” A further important lesson from this book is the way communities manage their local areas for sustainable food production. This includes the replanting of yams after some have been dug out, bans on collecting bamboo shoots at certain times of the year, festivals before opening the collection of certain fruits, the maintenance of sacred areas, etc. The French have a term called ‘terroir’ which describes the combination of the soil, climate, topography, etc. and how these are managed to create a particular wine, coffee, tea, etc. Perhaps in the forest/wild food context this concept of terroir can help to illustrate the connections local people build with their territories through their belief systems and then manage them for a range of foods using their traditional knowledge.

Madhu and Ramon’s book gives us a small opening into the extreme complexity of these traditional management practices and the way territories are sustainably managed for peoples’ livelihoods and for preserving diversity. Unfortunately the book also points out the dangers which we now face both from the loss of forest areas and also the loss of the accumulated knowledge which has enabled their sustainable management. This book is therefore more than anything a wake up call both to protect forest areas and also the knowledge of the people who call these forests their home.

Dr. Denise Margaret Matias

Research Scientist at the Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE) Germany and Fellow of the Sustainable Use Assessment of IPBES

I first read the Wild Tastes in Asia book during its launch at the quadrennial wild honey bee conference “Madhu Duniya.” During this online launch in the time of COVID-19, discussing wild foods becomes even more important as wildlife consumption bans are contemplated and/or enacted by governments. The book reminds us that wild foods in Asia do not only contribute to food security of indigenous peoples but are also repositories of knowledge and culture. This is a good reference book for those who are wishing to learn more about opportunities as well as threats from wild foods of indigenous peoples in Asia. Lastly, this book will also be helpful to the ongoing thematic assessment on sustainable use of wildlife of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Giovanni Reyes

Sagada-born Kankana-ey, Western Mountain Province, Cordillera Administrative Region. President, Philippine ICCA Consortium (BUKLURAN, Inc.) Philippines. Member, Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group-Global Environment Facility, Washington DC. Council Member, The ICCA Consortium, Geneva, Switzerland 

The book Wild Tastes in Asia by Madu Ramnath and Ramon Razal is not just about “coming home to the forest for food.” It’s a living story enriched by a variety of ‘food treats’ mainly from indigenous peoples’ traditional territories others call ‘gene banks.’ The 181-paged book wriggles us through from plants, to fruit trees to root crops, meat and fish, their means of planting, production, time of harvest, food gathering and cooking, or slow food, so to speak. One is satisfied at the end – because it shares understanding about indigenous peoples and the link between food, food security and food sovereignty with the control and use of land and water bodies determined largely by their indigenous knowledge, systems and practices.

Such link, for Indigenous peoples’ communities in the Cordillera Region of Northern Luzon of the Philippines where I come from, for example, have no worries about food shortage in crisis situations. This link has been sharpened when age-old practices of food storage systems like “Agamangs” or rice granary and local practices of lockdowns like “ubaya” or “tengao” were reactivated in the face of a global lockdown triggered by Covid19. This practice tells us, in a manner of speaking, that today’s consumption is last year’s harvest. I myself experienced eating rice kept for 40 years in an agamang! An agamang exists because of the idea that no Igorot should suffer from hunger. For a race that carved the Cordillera mountains into rice terraces and creating colossal food stairways above the landscapes – an unparalleled feat, that when stretched end to end, these rice paddies could reach half the globe’s circumference – to go hungry whether under pandemic or war is considered “inayan” or taboo. This brings us to the idea of “food security” which to many has come to mean “vulnerability to lack of food supply.” It connotes “inevitable hunger” due to problem of production and distribution of crops triggered by “land conversion.” For others, it has come to mean non-accessibility of food either because of “non-availability” or “affordability.” All these, in the face of takeover of markets through trade in goods and services that tells us what to buy, eat and consume because it’s good for us. But among front-liners in defense of environment, health and nutrition, these occurrences are largely a combination of market-led ‘solutions’ and state-implemented maladaptation. For indigenous peoples, food production and distribution is about food sovereignty. From time immemorial, we have learned to equate food systems with LIFE-PRINCIPLES, that is to say – life is not only satisfactory when food is available, adequate, accessible and acceptable to indigenous peoples, but rather, when we have access to and control over our land and resources.

In the Philippines, some 20-25 millions Filipinos including lowland farmers living adjacent to ancestral domains benefit from ecological services like water. Since rice production is dependent on water supply, threats to indigenous peoples’ lands and resources means threats to the country’s food sovereignty.

I recommend translation of the book in languages understandable to indigenous peoples, and thrust the same for official adoption in the mainstream of agriculture policy. We can’t be “new normal” with the “old normal” market-led state-implemented maladaptation practices.

Maria Rydlund

SSNC Senior Policy Advisor Tropical Forest at SSNC, ecologist, doing policy work a rights based approach acknowledging the role of indigenous peoples and local communities; in partnership with civil society organisations in tropical countries, based in Sweden.

Wild Tastes in Asia beautifully and timely reminds the reader about what should always be the way we see forests – the richness they provide in terms varieties, food, culture and raw material for a number of non-timber products. The role of forests as a place for food gathering is seldom even brought on the table when value and governance are being discussed. The fact that many people see their forest as a pantry has been neglected. Instead, the value of forests tends to be measured in terms of the number of cubic meters.

The book guides the reader through the history of forest in the six countries covered (Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam and India), the value for indigenous peoples and feeds the curiousness for wild food well with a good mix of colour photos and informative text, also with the scientific names. The latter adds yet another value to the book and still it stays very readable and interesting for any reader, no matter level of knowledge.

The intricate systems of norms and means is a section that deepens the way forest are managed and utilised by indigenous people. The cultural value, customs and rituals are vibrant also in forests as well as in other places but maybe less known by many. The farmer’s almanac is more often referred to maybe and the book covers many interesting aspects that deepen the understanding of the values of forest. It also raises questions such as if knowledge will continue to be transferred to youth if interest is declining, a relevant question of course. Ways to revoke interest and knowledge for something that constitutes the most optimal food web and food sovereignty has certainly been alerted given the current situation with pandemics. The future of forests lay in our hands, but our survival depends on environment and healthy environment. The way the subtitle puts it – Coming home to the forest for food – might capture it in the very best way.

It is a very nice piece of work and a unique theme that should be widely shared with many. After reading the book one will never walk through a patch of forest without looking for edible plants, berries, mushrooms – for food – no matter wherever in the world that forest is! 

Elena Aniere

South East Asia and Pacific Regional Director of Slow Food, a global network of local communities founded in 1989 to prevent the disappearance of local food cultures and traditions and counteract the rise of fast food culture. Since its founding, Slow Food has grown into a global movement involving millions of people in over 160 countries, working to ensure that everyone has access to good, clean and fair food.

This book, Wild Taste in Asia, could not be released at a more appropriate time than now, during a global COVID 19 pandemic, where food is at the centre of our conversations. Whether it be the question of food safety, food insecurity, food choices, food waste, food distribution and/or food as medicine, like the pandemic, people globally are being affected with these food issues.

This book highlights the symbotic relationships between the indigenous people, wild foods and the cultural identity in 6 Asian countries: Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, India, Cambodia and Malaysia. Where the forest is home, free to gather or forage wild foods, recognized to contribute to diet and food security through enhancing the availability of local, diverse, and nonmarket food sources. Thus wild foods are linked to diet, food security, and cultural identity.

Wild Tastes of Asia is a rich and valuable resource, identifying wild foods that have been a source for nutrition and medicinal purposes for the repsective indigenous communities and highlights the commonalities and difference in usage of the same plants.

It is with thanks to the NTFP Exchange Programme, which has a presence in these countries, that has now begun to concern itself with the health and nutrition of the indigenous peoples that it works amongst, and empowering the voices and capacity of women not only as care givers but also as key culture bearers and knowledge masters in their communities.

As we strive to regain a balance in our food, our planet and our future, this book is a great resource to understand how we can learn from indigenous cultures to be as one with nature, as she provides all that we need!