When Policies Problematize the Local: Social-Environmental Justice and Forest Policies in Burkina Faso and Vietnam
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v8i1.34276Keywords:
WPR, Political forest, Social-environmental justice, Community forestry, Payment for environmental servicesAbstract
We examine social-environmental justice in forest governance by asking who is problematized as drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. We adapt Bacchi’s “What is the problem represented to be” approach to the community forest (CAF) model in Burkina Faso and the Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) in Vietnam and examine the implementation of these policies in specific sites through disaggregated focus group discussions (men, women, youth, ethnic minorities). We delve into the discursive, lived and subjectification effects of the policies’ problematizations, highlighting tensions and contestations relating to forest access and benefits. For both countries, what is left unproblematized in the implicit policy focus on the local is a “communal fix” of indigeneity tied to idealized and collective governance of fixed areas of land and exclusionary processes for those that do not fit the ideal. We argue that market-oriented approach in policies such as CAF and PFES absent of the wider underpinnings of the political and historical forest will only exacerbate social-environmental injustices.
References
Assembe-Mvondo, S., Wong, G., Loft, L., & Tjajadi, J. S. (2015). Comparative assessment of forest revenue redistribution mechanisms in Cameroon: lessons for REDD+ benefit sharing. CIFOR Working Paper 190, Bogor. https://doi.org/10.17528/ cifor/005738
Astuti, R., & McGregor, A. (2017). Indigenous land claims or green grabs? Inclusions and exclusions within forest carbon politics in Indonesia. Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(2), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1197908
Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing Policy: What’s the problem represented to be? Pearson Australia.
Bacchi, C. (2012). Why Study Problematizations ? Making Politics Visible. Open Journal of Political Science, 2(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001
Brockhaus, M., Obeng-Odoom, F. & Wong, G.Y. (2024). The Forest-related finance landscape and potential for just investments. In D. Kleinschmit, C. Wildburger, N. Grima & B. Fisher (eds.), International Forest Governance: A Critical Review of Trends, Drawbacks, and New Approaches. IUFRO World Series Volume 43. Vienna.
Cleary, M. (2005). “Valuing the tropics”: Discourses of development in the farm and forest sectors of French Indochina, circa 1900-40. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 26(3), 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9493.2005.00229.x
Cole, R., & Ingalls, M. L. (2020). Rural revolutions: Socialist, market and sustainable development of the countryside in Vietnam and Laos. In The Socialist Market Economy in Asia (pp. 167–194). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6248-8
Coolsaet, B. (2015). Transformative Participation in Agrobiodiversity Governance: Making the Case for an Environmental Justice Approach. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(6), 1089–1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9579-2
Côte, M. (2020). Community-based citizenship: Autochthony and land claim politics under forest decentralization in Burkina Faso. Geoforum, 109, 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.07.012
Côte, M., & Gautier, D. (2018). Fuelwood territorialities: Chantier d ’ Aménagement Forestier and the reproduction of “ political forests ” in Burkina Faso. Geographica Helvetica, 73, 165–175. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-73-165-2018
Dawson, N. M., Grogan, K., Martin, A., Mertz, O., Pasgaard, M., & Rasmussen, L. V. (2017). Environmental justice research shows the importance of social feedbacks in ecosystem service trade-offs. Ecology and Society, 22(3). https://doi.org/ 10.5751/ES-09481-220312
de Koninck, R. (2006). On the geopolitics of land colonization: Order and disorder on the frontiers of Vietnam and Indonesia. Moussons, 9–10, 33–59. https://doi.org/ 10.4000/moussons.1977
Delabre, I., Boyd, E., Brockhaus, M., Carton, W., Krause, T., Newell, P., Wong, G. Y., & Zelli, F. (2020). Unearthing the myths of global sustainable forest governance. Global Sustainability, 3, e16. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.11
Dinh, S. T. (2019). Ethnic minorities and forest land use: a case in Can Tien National Park. Journal of Vietnamese Environment, 11(2), 91–94. https://doi.org/ 10.13141/jve.vol11.no2.pp91-94
Dinh, S. T., Kimihiko, H., & Kazuo, O. (2012). Livelihoods and Local Ecological Knowledge in Cat Tien Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam: Opportunities and Challenges for Biodiversity Conservation. The Biosphere, 261-284. https://doi.org/10.5772/ 33021
Eilenberg, M. (2015). Shades of green and REDD: Local and global contestations over the value of forest versus plantation development on the Indonesian forest frontier. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 56(1), 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.12084
Fisher, M. R., & van der Muur, W. (2020). Misleading Icons of Communal Lands in Indonesia: Implications of Adat Forest Recognition from a Model Site in Kajang, Sulawesi. Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 21(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14442213.2019.1670244
Fraser, N. (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post-Socialist’ age. New Left Review, 212, 68–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/97804707 56119.ch54
Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W. (2005). A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7(3), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339646
Hoang, C., Satyal, P., & Corbera, E. (2018). ‘This is my garden’: justice claims and struggles over forests in Vietnam’s REDD+. Climate Policy, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1527202
Ingalls, M. L., Meyfroidt, P., To, P. X., Kenney-Lazar, M., & Epprecht, M. (2018). The transboundary displacement of deforestation under REDD+: Problematic intersections between the trade of forest-risk commodities and land grabbing in the Mekong region. Global Environmental Change, 50, 255–267. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.04.003
Karambiri, M., & Brockhaus, M. (2019). Leading rural land conflict as citizens and leaving it as denizens: Inside forest conservation politics in Burkina Faso. Journal of Rural Studies, 65, 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.12.011
Karambiri, M., Brockhaus, M., Sehring, J., & Degrande, A. (2020). ‘We are not bad people’-bricolage and the rise of community forest institutions in Burkina Faso. International Journal of the Commons, 14(1), 525–538. https://doi.org/10.5334/ ijc.1061
Li, T. (2010). Indigeneity, Capitalism, and the Management of Dispossession. Current Anthropology, 51(3), 385–414. https://doi.org/10.1086/651942
Loft, L., Le, D. N., Pham, T. T., Yang, A. L., Tjajadi, J. S., & Wong, G. Y. (2017). Whose Equity Matters? National to Local Equity Perceptions in Vietnam’s Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services Scheme. Ecological Economics, 135. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.016
Martin, A. (2017). Just Conservation: Biodiversity, Wellbeing and Sustainability. Taylor & Francis.
Martin, A., Coolsaet, B., Corbera, E., Dawson, N. M., Fraser, J. A., Lehman, I., & Rodriguez, I. (2016). Justice and conservation: The need to incorporate recognition. Biological Conservation, 197(2016), 254–261. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.021
Martin, A., Myers, R., & Dawson, N. M. (2018). The Park is Ruining our Livelihoods. We Support the Park! Unravelling the Paradox of Attitudes to Protected Areas. Human Ecology, 46(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-017-9941-2
McDermott, M., Mahanty, S., & Schreckenberg, K. (2013). Examining equity: A multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services. Environmental Science and Policy, 33, 416–427. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.006
McElwee, P. (2022). Shifting policies for shifting cultivation: A history of anti-swidden interventions in Vietnam. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 53(1–2), 153–182. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022463422000194
McElwee, P., Huber, B., & Nguyễn, T. H. V. (2020). Hybrid Outcomes of Payments for Ecosystem Services Policies in Vietnam: Between Theory and Practice. Development and Change, 51(1), 253–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12548
[MARD] Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (2021). Decision Approving the Plan for Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of Cat Tien National Park, period 2021-2030. Decision No. 1375 /QD-BNN-TCLN. Hanoi: MARD.
Newell, P. (2005). Race, Class and the Global Politics of Environmental Inequality. Global Environmental Politics, 5(3), 70–94. https://doi.org/10.1162/152638005 4794835
Nguyen Anh, D., Tacoli, C., & Xuan Thanh, H. (2003). Migration in Vietnam: A review of information on current trends and patterns, and their policy implications. DFID.
Oosterom, M., & Scott-Villiers, P. (2016). Power, Poverty and Inequality. IDS Bulletin, 47(5). https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.161
Pascual, U., Phelps, J., Garmendia, E., Brown, K., Corbera, E., Martin, A., Gomez-Baggethun, E., & Muradian, R. (2014). Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. BioScience, 64(11), 1027–1036. https://doi.org/10.1093/ biosci/biu146
Pasgaard, M. (2015). Lost in translation? How project actors shape REDD+ policy and outcomes in Cambodia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 56(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/apv.12082
Peluso, N.L., & Vandergeest, P. (2001). Genealogies of the political forest and customary rights in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Journal of Asian Studies, 60(3), 761-812. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2700109
Peluso, N. L., & Vandergeest, P. (2020). Writing Political Forests. Antipode, 52(4), 1083–1103. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12636
Pham, T. T., Moeliono, M., Brockhaus, M., Le, D. N., Wong, G. Y., & Le, T. M. (2014). Local preferences and strategies for effective, efficient, and equitable distribution of PES revenues in Vietnam: Lessons for REDD+. Human Ecology, 42(6), 885-899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-014-9703-3
Pham, T. T., Moeliono, M., Wong, G. Y., Brockhaus, M., & Dung, L. N. (2020). The politics of swidden: A case study from Nghe An and Son La in Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 99(103050). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.057
Sanders, A. J. P., Ford, R. M., Mulyani, L., Prasti H., R. D., Larson, A. M., Jagau, Y., Keenan, R. J., & Keenan, R. J. (2019). Unrelenting games: Multiple negotiations and landscape transformations in the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. World Development, 117, 196–210. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.worlddev.2019.01.008
Sikor, T., Martin, A., Fisher, J., & He, J. (2014). Toward an Empirical Analysis of Justice in Ecosystem Governance. Conservation Letters, 7(6), 524–532. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/conl.12142
Skutsch, M., & Turnhout, E. (2020). REDD+: If communities are the solution, what is the problem? World Development, 130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020. 104942
To, P., & Dressler, W. (2019). Rethinking 'success’: The politics of payment for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 81, 582–593. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.landusepol.2018.11.010
Wilcox, P., Rigg, J., & Nguyen, M. T. N. (2021). Rural life in late socialism: Politics of development and imaginaries of future. European Journal of East Asian Studies, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700615-20211009
Wong, G. Y., Moeliono, M., Bong, I. W., Pham, T. T., Sahide, M. A. K., Naito, D., & Brockhaus, M. (2020). Social forestry in Southeast Asia: Evolving interests, discourses and the many notions of equity. Geoforum, 117, 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.10.010
Zhang, H. X., Kelly, P. M., Locke, C., Winkels, A., & Adger, W. N. (2006). Migration in a transitional economy: Beyond the planned and spontaneous dichotomy in Vietnam. Geoforum, 37(6), 1066–1081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum. 2006.05.009
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Forest and Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal which means that all contents is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. An article based on a section from a completed graduate dissertation may be published in Forest and Society, but only if this is allowed by author's(s') university rules. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Forest and Society operates a CC-BY 4.0 © license for journal papers. Copyright remains with the author, but Forest and Society is licensed to publish the paper, and the author agrees to make the article available with the CC-BY 4.0 license. Reproduction as another journal article in whole or in part would be plagiarism. Forest and Society reserves all rights except those granted in this copyright notice
