|
|
|
Scientific Research and Essays Vol. 2 (10),
434-445, October 2007
ISSN 1992-2248
© 2007 Academic Journals
Full Length
Research Paper
Decentralized governance and
ecological health: why local institutions fail to moderate deforestation
in Mpigi district of Uganda
Abwoli Y. Banana1*, Nathan D. Vogt2, 3, Joseph
Bahati1 and William Gombya-Ssembajjwe1
1Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Makerere
University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda.
2School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana
University, Bloomington, Indiana, 47405 USA.
3Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and
Environmental Change, Bloomington, Indiana, 47405, USA.
*Corresponding author. E-mail:
banana@forest.mak.ac.ug.
Accepted
20 August, 2007
|
|
|
|
The outcomes of decentralization policies on the delivery of forestry
sector services and ecological health remain ambiguous. Several scholars
warn that there is insufficient empirical data to support the assumption
that decentralization of forest resources results in better or worse
forest governance. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of
local institutions crafted during the implementation of decentralization
reforms of the mid-1990s in Mpigi District of Uganda to moderate forest
degradation. We observed cases of both institutional success and failure
in forestry management within the district following the
decentralization reforms suggesting that decentralization of authority
over forests to local user groups, traditional leaders, or officials of
local governments may not always produce incentives to prevent a decline
in forest extent or condition in the entire landscape. The outcomes of
decentralization reforms in the forest sector may be more a function of
factors such as 1) the nature of the forests, location, patchiness, and
production of external environmental goods and services; 2) the level
and strength of market signals for both forest products and crops grown
on forest soils; and 3) the diversity of stakeholders and their values
and dependence on specific extents and condition of the forest patch.
Key words: Decentralization, forests, deforestation, governance,
forest rule enforcement compliance. |
|