**2.5.1 Concerns of responsible bodies**

There are a number of concerns for responsible bodies and these includes the following: (i) whereas it is government policy to promote community participation in forest management

Uganda's Forest Policy is committed to promoting peoples' participation in resource management and a more equitable sharing of benefits from forest resources. One of the strategies of the policy is the promotion of public awareness programs as a positive community building action, to generate raw materials and income while improving the quality of the environment. Sawn timber is conveyed to the big towns and no conscious effort is made to sell lumber to the local people. Besides, huge quantities of off-cuts and sometimes logs are left behind in the forest as "waste". The communities believe that they could profitably utilize the wood and have entered into discussions with the lead forest agencies (NFA and DFS) to collect and use the wood. Their only wish is to have access to such timber to convert into merchantable and profitable products. This is likely to encourage the establishment of forest-based enterprises and generate employment. Ultimately, this will help improve upon the standard of living of forest fringe communities.

**2.4.8 Community contracts jobs through boundary maintenance, seedling** 

Systems are now being implemented under which forest fringe communities enter into contracts to clean forest reserve boundaries in return for cash payments. Additionally some are also contracted to establish green-fire breaks to prevent wildfires from entering into forest reserves. The possibility of involving communities in patrolling is underway and if proved positive that system would also be adopted. Under CFM, some communities under a pilot scheme have been assisted to set up and manage their own tree nurseries to produce seedlings both for planting and sale. Apart from supporting such nurseries through the supply of inputs and offer of technical advice, NFA has been promoting the sale of seedlings from the community nurseries either through their own purchases or linking them up with tree growers to ensure their viability. It is anticipated that more of such nurseries would be set up to supply seedlings for planting in connection with the government's plantation

This programme focuses on three aspects of forest management through a series of workshops and consultations including: (i) involvement of communities in forest management planning; (ii) integrated forest management process; and (iii) revenue sharing from management of forest and forest resources. To this end the issue of rights and revenues from forest management have been reviewed and recommendation made in the review of

This programme involves local people extraction of forest resources largely focusing on the exploitation of NTFPs for household and commercial uses. The programme also target

There are a number of concerns for responsible bodies and these includes the following: (i) whereas it is government policy to promote community participation in forest management

different aspects of NTFPs exploitation, production, processing and management.

**2.4.7 Collaboration in the utilization of timber off-cuts** 

**production, plantation development** 

**2.4.9 Forest reserve management planning** 

**2.4.10 Management of non-timber forest products (NTFPs)** 

programme.

forest legislations.

**2.5 CFM operational concerns** 

**2.5.1 Concerns of responsible bodies** 

on government and private forest land, today participatory forest management initiatives target (rather focus) on Central Forest Reserves. This has resulted into pressure onto the NFA in terms of capacity to meet the demands by communities. It is high time these initiatives started on private forest land and Local Forest Reserves that are managed by local governments; (ii) in Uganda a nine stage process (Box 2) has been developed that has to be followed by communities applying for CFM. This process takes time and leads to anxiety. It is clear that the time and skills are inadequate in NFA for community mobilization and effective sensitization of the communities. Along the process is local political interference that favours illegal activities that applicants often prefer to indulge in illegal activities than undertake an Agreement. Subsequently there are delays in signing agreements which at times causes apathy in community; (iii) there is a general lack of capacity for implementation of CFM-inadequate staffing at NFA and DFS to monitor and give backstopping (support) to field staff. Some decision makers are still sceptical about CFM therefore need for sensitization at all levels;

(iv) Quite often communities are lured to present CFM applications (again by self seeking and self appointed leaders) that do not have good intention for genuine partnerships for collaboration with the National Forestry Authority and other responsible bodies. Some communities think that an Agreement with responsible body is a permit for undertaking unacceptable activities such as charcoal burning and cultivation of crops. Thus responsible bodies are, however, re-orienting their thinking before they undertake the CFM process; (v) good governance in CFM requires sufficient funding. So far there is inadequate funding by NFA and DFS for CFM implementation and sometimes this funding is sporadic. Such delay in funding breaks the momentum of activities in the field; (vi) there are very few Community Based Organizations with experience in facilitating the CFM process and usually these cover a relatively limited area of the country. The National Forestry Authority would be more than willing to establish working relations with such NGOs to role out CFM activities. Many NGOs have created a culture of giving handouts (food and materials) to communities and this has created a dependency syndrome with communities demanding to be given handouts. Whereas this is a positive Social Responsibility approach, it stands to demean the stigma of CFM.
