**7. Responsibilities of communities to the management of forest reserves**

Fringe communities do not only have rights but also have the duties and roles in protecting forests within their areas, under the law and Constitution of Ghana. Section 19 of the LI 1649 places upon the land owner a responsibility not to allow the use of unregistered chainsaw for cutting trees or sawing timber on his or her land. As such, communities have the obligation to control the extent of forest exploitation so that the very important roles played by the forest resources can continue [25]. Households views were therefore sought on what they think are the responsibilities of community members to the management of forest reserves. **Table 6** shows the responses on what households perceive as responsibilities of their communities toward management of forest reserves.

The study showed that only three management activities namely boundary clearing, fire control and planting of trees in the reserves were admitted by the majority of households' respondents as the responsibilities of their communities toward the management of forest reserves (**Table 6**).

Similarly, responses from the key informants' interviews with the district forest managers, Forest guards, chiefs, assembly members and magazias revealed fringe communities' roles in the management of forest reserves to be provision of labour for plantation establishment and contract boundary clearing. These results are not surprising since these are the activities that FSD usually involves community members as reported by Husseini et al. [4].

Communities seeing these activities as their responsibilities are a positive condition that can be used as a means to awaken their interest and commitment to the collaborative management of forest reserves. That notwithstanding, it can be realized from **Table 6** that majority of the households do not regard the remaining four activities (Weeding, nursing of seedlings, boundary patrol and boundary planting) as their community responsibilities. This mind set defeats the very purpose of the revised forest and wildlife policy (2012, p. 27) which has in its policy strategic direction 4.1 Subsection 4.1.1 clause d; to "support local communities, non-governmental Organizations including women and youth to receive training that allow them meet their objective and assume optimal management responsibilities."

The implication is that in the absence of contract boundary cleaning or fire outbreak, and in the absence of plantation programs like the Modified taungya system in the reserves, communities do not bear any responsibility toward the management of forest reserves. Lack of shared responsibilities among the communities and forestry department coupled with communities' perception that forest reserves belong to the state, is likely to hinder any effort toward collaborative management. Collaborative forest management is most beneficial if both parties take on responsibilities that maximize their capacity ([28, 29], pp. 55–77).

**District**

**91**

 **Weeding as a**

**Boundary clearing as a**

**Nursing seedlings as a**

**Boundary patrolling**

**Fire control as a**

**Boundary planting as**

**Planting trees as a**

**responsibility**

**community**

 **members**

 **of**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93550*

**responsibility**

**community**

 **members**

 **of**

**responsibility**

**community**

 **members**

 **of**

**as a**  **community**

 **members**

**responsibility**

 **of**

**responsibility**

**community**

**community**

 **members**

**members**

 **of**

**a** 

**responsibility**

 **of**

**responsibility**

**community**

**Yes (%)**

Damango

 32

39

54 (24.2%)

 17 (11.6%)

 12 (11.8) 59 (22.0%)

(19.5%)

Tamale

 78

131

103

106

49

160

68

141 (62.1%)

136

73

72

137

123

86

*Rights and Responsibilities: The Reality of Forest Fringe Communities in the Northern Region…*

(47.6%)

Walewale

 24

18 (8.7%) 29 (13.0%)

 13 (8.8%) 16 (15.7%)

 26 (9.7%)

 22

20 (8.8%)

 40

2 (2.6%)

 24

18 (8.3%) 39 (14.2%)

 3 (3.1%)

(15.7%)

(13.6%)

(15.4%)

(14.6%)

Yendi

 30

18 (8.7%)

 37 (16.6%)

 11 (7.5%)

 25

23 (8.6%)

 31

17 (7.5%)

 47

1 (1.3%)

 31

17 (7.8%) 45 (16.4%)

 3 (3.1%)

(20.3%)

(16.0%)

(21.7%)

(24.5%)

(18.3%)

**Table 6.** *Household*

 *perception*

 *about* 

*communities'*

*responsibilities*

 *to forest reserves.*

(63.6%)

(46.2%)

(72.1%)

(48.0%)

(59.7%)

(47.5%)

1

46.3%)

(96.1%)

(47.1%)

(63.1%)

(44.9%)

(89.6%)

(19.0%)

 **No (%)**

 **Yes (%)**

 **No (%)**

 **Yes (%)**

 **No (%)**

 **Yes (%)**

 22

49 (21.6%)

 71

0 (0.0%)

 26

45

67 (24.5%)

 4 (4.2%)

(17.0%)

(20.7%)

(24.1%)

(15.4%)

 **No (%)**

 **Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%)**

 **No (%)**

 **Yes (%)**

 **No (%)**

 **members**

 **of**



*Rights and Responsibilities: The Reality of Forest Fringe Communities in the Northern Region… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93550*

royalties, those whose forests have been designated for permanent protection and for environmental benefits do not receive any. The lack of social responsibility benefits for fringe communities is a hindrance to their allegiance to any effort toward CFM. Among the reasons for community participation in CFM is to secure access to a given forest and use rights as well as create new sources of income for communities [6]. Therefore, the rights of fringe communities in Northern region have to be secured if their commitment in the collaborative management of forest

**7. Responsibilities of communities to the management of forest reserves**

protecting forests within their areas, under the law and Constitution of Ghana. Section 19 of the LI 1649 places upon the land owner a responsibility not to allow the use of unregistered chainsaw for cutting trees or sawing timber on his or her land. As such, communities have the obligation to control the extent of forest exploitation so that the very important roles played by the forest resources can continue [25]. Households views were therefore sought on what they think are the responsibilities of community members to the management of forest reserves. **Table 6** shows the responses on what households perceive as responsibilities of

The study showed that only three management activities namely boundary clearing, fire control and planting of trees in the reserves were admitted by the majority of households' respondents as the responsibilities of their communities

Similarly, responses from the key informants' interviews with the district forest managers, Forest guards, chiefs, assembly members and magazias revealed fringe communities' roles in the management of forest reserves to be provision of labour for plantation establishment and contract boundary clearing. These results are not surprising since these are the activities that FSD usually involves community mem-

Communities seeing these activities as their responsibilities are a positive condition that can be used as a means to awaken their interest and commitment to the collaborative management of forest reserves. That notwithstanding, it can be realized from **Table 6** that majority of the households do not regard the remaining four activities (Weeding, nursing of seedlings, boundary patrol and boundary planting) as their community responsibilities. This mind set defeats the very purpose of the revised forest and wildlife policy (2012, p. 27) which has in its policy strategic direction 4.1 Subsection 4.1.1 clause d; to "support local communities, non-governmental Organizations including women and youth to receive training that allow them meet their objective and assume optimal management

The implication is that in the absence of contract boundary cleaning or fire outbreak, and in the absence of plantation programs like the Modified taungya system in the reserves, communities do not bear any responsibility toward the management of forest reserves. Lack of shared responsibilities among the communities and forestry department coupled with communities' perception that forest reserves belong to the state, is likely to hinder any effort toward collaborative management. Collaborative forest management is most beneficial if both parties take on responsibilities that maximize their capacity ([28, 29],

their communities toward management of forest reserves.

toward the management of forest reserves (**Table 6**).

bers as reported by Husseini et al. [4].

responsibilities."

pp. 55–77).

**90**

Fringe communities do not only have rights but also have the duties and roles in

reserves is to be guaranteed.

*Environmental Issues and Sustainable Development*
