This guide suggests ways to design and implement forest-based interventions that have the greatest potential to reduce poverty. Areas for action include timber production in both natural and planted forests, non-wood forest products, woodfuel, bushmeat, agroforestry and payment for environmental services. For each topic, the guide outlines key issues, summarizes successful case studies and identifies sources of additional information. The document highlights the importance of using participatory approaches and of tailoring activities to local circumstances. Emphasis is on making changes that will improve the livelihoods of people living in or near forests, and on helping users to gain a better understanding of the forms of rural poverty and of how decisions made at the local level affect segments of poor rural communities in different ways - women, children and the elderly being the most vulnerable. The guide will be of interest to forestry and rural development practitioners and the communities they serve, including district forestry officials, extension workers, local planners and administrators, and owners of small-scale enterprises and their employees.

A "policy brief" derived from the Forum on the Role of Forestry in Poverty Alleviation held by the Forestry Dept. of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations with the support of the UK's Dept. for International Development in September 2001.

Over the past few years there has been a growing interest in the role that forests play in supporting the poor, in reducing their vulnerability to economic and environmental shocks, and in reducing poverty itself. International workshops in Italy, Scotland, Finland and Germany have focused on the contribution of forests to livelihoods and the policies needed to strengthen that contribution. At the same time, Forestry Ministries, though they are now beginning to feel challenged to demonstrate the ways in which forests contribute to poverty reduction, are for the most part moving only slowly to collect new kinds of data to meet this challenge. There are two main reasons why the role of forests in poverty reduction has not so far been reflected in any significant way in either national level Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) processes or in national forest programs (NFPS). First, most countries have little data available to illustrate how forests contribute to the livelihoods of poor households. Second, the data that does exist rarely gets presented in ways that are meaningful to those designing PRSPs and NFPS. On the poverty side, there is a tendency to underestimate the contribution of forests and off farm natural resources in general, to livelihoods. On the forestry side, reporting is typically in terms of the physical resource (trees planted, forest cover improved, timber sold) rather than livelihoods, with the sole exception of recording the number of people formally employed in the forest sector. Such reporting sheds no light on the contributions made by forests to the lives of the poor. Their previous experience of data collection has not prepared them for this. The objective of the partnership was four-fold: first, to devise a rapid methodology for appraising forest-livelihood linkages from field exercises; second, to undertake more extended research through a series of case studies in six countries; and third, and most importantly, the objective was to devise ways by which locally gathered data could enrich national level and in due course national level processes such as PRSPs (Poverty Reduction Strategy Processes) and NFPS. Finally, the availability of this data would better equip countries for international country reporting on forests, and for participation in the international dialogue on forests. This toolkit is the key product from the partnership. It has been tested in Indonesia, Tanzania, Cameroon, Ghana, Madagascar and Uganda, with the help ...

The link between poverty and deforestation in developing countries is of increasing global concern. The authors of this clear, hope-filled book explore the diverse causes of tropical deforestation and offer remedies appropriate to the biology and culture of different regions. They show how modern forestry techniques enable us to alleviate poverty without destroying forests.

This paper examines poverty and deforestation in developing countries as linked problems and focuses on policies that can favour poverty alleviation in forested regions. The paper encompasses two elements: analysis of the spatial coincidence between poverty and forests, and proposed policy options for reducing poverty in forested areas. It is assumed that three key frames of reference must be borne in mind in order to produce the best possible policies: (1) the location of the rural poor and types and levels of poverty in relation to forest resources; (2) variations in the density of forest cover in relation to distance from urban areas (the von Thünen scale); and (3) variations in forest cover over time (high, low, then partial restoration) in relation to a country's forest transition experience. There are three main conclusions linked to these frames of reference. (1) Although relatively few people live in areas of high forest cover, they tend to be characterised by high rates of poverty and they are among the 'poorest of the poor'. (2) Four policy approaches are recommended for lifting people out of poverty: transfer of ownership of forest lands from governments to forest dwellers; facilitation of access to forest product markets; promotion of commercial-scale community forestry and company-community partnerships; and establishment of payments for forest environmental services that are pro-poor. Implementation of these four strategies must take into account the implications of the four von Thünen zones (periurban, agricultural mosaic, forest frontier, and relatively undisturbed forests). (3) One cannot place blind faith in economic growth and laissez-faire for reducing poverty in forested areas. Strategic policy interventions are necessary to assist the process of livelihood improvement.