Conflict over forest resources is one of the major challenges in forest management. Researchers have observed that the number and severity of forest conflicts in Asia has increased over time, and that forest conflicts are now widespread across the region. In Cambodia in 2009, 236 community-outsider conflicts were recorded. In Indonesia, 359 incidents of forest-related community-outsider conflict were identified between 1997 and 2003, with numbers increasing over time. This high concentration of forest conflict makes Southeast Asia one of the ‘hotspots’ of forest conflict in the world.

The principle that indigenous peoples and local communities have a right to give or withhold their Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) to developments affecting natural resources is not new. However, experience using FPIC in REDD+ implementation is still limited in the Asia-Pacific region, and there are few materials that explain and train practitioners in its concepts and practice. There is still subjective understanding of the terms and requirements of FPIC, influenced by both cultural interpretations and interests. 

A collection of practical experiences and lessons on Payments for Environmental Services (PES)

This paper explores the conflicts between badly-affected local communities and logging and mining companies and analyzes how such conflicts can be addressed effectively.

The principle that indigenous peoples and local communities have a right to give or withhold their Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) to developments affecting their resources is not new. However, experience using FPIC in REDD+ implementation is still limited in the Asia-Pacific region. Using relevant examples from a range of locations and sectors, this guidebook provides a basis for developing country-specific guidance on employing FPIC in REDD+ processes.

Recognising that trade drives illegal logging and that poor governance enables it, the European Union (EU) developed the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan. Effective participation of all actors — especially staff from governments, the private sector and civil society — is a must to strengthen forest governance. The EU therefore places participation at the heart of the FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) it develops with timber-exporting countries to address illegal logging and associated trade.

Community forestry has great potential to improve the welfare of the estimated 450 million impoverished people living in and around forests in Asia. But the extent to which this potential is realized depends strongly upon whether communities are able to secure the benefits that community managed forests generate, and whether these actually reach the poorest at the community level. The real benefits obtained in return for the time and energy expended by communities in forest management helps to gain their long-term commitment to sustainable forest management.

Due to growing environmentally and socially aware markets on a global level, as well as on a regional level, and with more recent gains for democracy in the region, companies have to ensure their operations are socially and environmentally acceptable. Today, the timber industry is under immense scrutiny, an example of this is the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) action plan of the European Union5 which makes explicit the importance of measures to address local and indigenous peoples’ rights to the forests.

Decentralization in natural resource management (NRM) is increasingly promoted as it is believed to offer better management. This study explores the positive and negative aspects of the forestry conflict that sometimes increases with decentralization. Drawing upon the results of a case study from Sumatra, this study examines how forestry conflict under decentralization processes was viewed by stakeholders. The conflict involved a logging company and a local community, and centered on a disputed forest boundary.

The Asia-Pacific region is experiencing rapid changes. There is a major need to strengthen capacities to assist countries and forestry stakeholders to respond in ways that benefit both people and forests.

Development projects conceived now are rarely expected to have a life of more than five years, perhaps ten years at most. Looking back over more than twenty years of project experience in community forestry - itself grounded on an integrated development project of a similar time span - is thus a rare opportunity. The project has sought to promote social change in favor of the poor and disadvantaged, and it was recognized both by those involved in the project and by independent evaluators that this is not rapidly achieved