State Property Regime Versus Common Property Regime

Abstract

"This paper presents results on whether or not demarcated state forests in Zimbabwe (as state property) can be readily converted to common property. The results are based firstly, on secondary research and the examination of relevant literature on traditional and conventional forest management approaches and forest legislation and its bearing on these approaches. Secondly, the results reflect on the findings of a primary research based on Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) workshops conducted in five villages abutting Fuller forest, using six different PRA tools. During the pre-colonial era the current demarcated forests were managed as common property under the guidance of traditional institutions. Rights accrued to specified user groups. Non-members were excluded. Rules defined the rights and duties of members with regards to access, use and management. Sanctions were in place to ensure compliance. The management practices ensured sustainable forest conservation. After gazetting, the forest became state property with rights of ownership and management vested in the Forestry Commission. The gazetting process alienated the local people by extinguishing traditional use rights to the forests. This has resulted in local resistance to the Forestry Commission authority. Forest margin communities currently illegally use 23 different forest products. State control has failed to halt or reduce forest resource degradation and in some cases complete loss of the forests. The objective of this paper is to test the reliability of theory that state forests as state property can be sustainably managed under a model of a common property regime to satisfy the needs of rural households without compromising the conservation values of the forests."