Laws will be amended in regard to natural resource management: NRSA member

AFTER THE NATIONAL REFORM COUNCIL (NRC) WAS DISSOLVED, HOW HAS THE NRSA’S NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE BEEN TAKING THE WORK FORWARD?

The NRSA is tasked with steering the reform plans of the NRC, so we brought all the studies to the table and prioritised the work. We applied some criteria in prioritising, which included creating a sense of urgency and a degree of seriousness, gauging the degree of impact of the problems, and judging the possibility of success, something that we would not have achieved in a normal situation. But it will be possible during this transitional period.

As we came up with criteria to prioritise our work, we then grouped natural resources into three main groups: forestry and land use management, water resources, and marine and coastal resources. 

These three sectors together cover the most critical resources that people rely on.

 

HOW IS YOUR WORK PROGRESSING ON FORESTRY AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT?

We looked at the root of the problems again to see whether we had started at the right points. We found that our forests have been critically shrinking in the last 30 or 40 years. Our forests, in addition, have a unique aspect in that they are a home to many people. That made solving the problem more complicated. Our land use of forests is not well managed, and all these factors pose a critical challenge to our fast-shrinking forest areas. How could we restore them to meet the goal of increasing the forest area by 40 per cent in the next 10 years.

We have come up with a strategic reform plan to guide the further development of mechanisms to deal with the problems. Of course, it will significantly be about creating legal instruments, and a part of this is a new Cabinet resolution to address the problems at a policy level, and the enactment and amendment of related laws.

Besides, new monitoring and regulating of the land use system is to be developed and put in place. We’ll also have a new fund to support efforts on forest conservation. Declaring new protected areas is also part of our strategy for better protection of forest areas.

 

WHICH WORK AREA HAVE YOU GIVEN THE MOST WEIGHT TO?

Developing legal instruments to help us manage forests is probably the biggest challenge. We plan to amend two laws – the Wildlife Protection Act and National Park Act – while we’ll come up with another act on community forests.

We need to improve the first two acts so that they can cope with the challenge, especially in regards to simmering conflicts between forest residents and forest officials. The existing National Park Act is vague and forest officials often find themselves in a dilemma as they have no clear guidelines on best practices.

From now on, the act will be a better guide for them based on scientific evidence. 

It’s likely that forest areas will be zoned based on ecological values, and we will then look to what extent people can coexist with the environment. That means, if the areas are ecologically fragile, we may have to implement intensive conservation for such a zone, but if people can coexist, then the management can be flexible. But first and foremost, officials need some tools to help draw lines and make things clear.

As for the Community Forest Act, that could help open space for participation by communities in conserving our forests and coexisting with them, if possible. As such, we need tools to help provide a framework to work together in the future, and with this we hope that we can also increase our forest areas.

We will also come up with a new Cabinet resolution to give us a holistic policy in regard to forest management. 

The June 30, 1998 Cabinet resolution was put in place to deal with the forest occupation problem, but it did not give a clear timeframe and stopped short of addressing necessary directives to settle problems. For instance, it did not say how the state would compensate people if they needed to be moved out of the forest to protect ecological values. So, we really need a new policy to help address the issue in a more clearcut and comprehensive manner.

If we cannot solve this problem, other work will be difficult to achieve. For instance, it will be difficult to increase protected areas if we cannot settle the forest occupation problem. Actually, these legal instruments also need to be pushed along with other measures including a new fund to create incentives for people to live in harmony with the forests and help protect them.

 

IF WE HAVE ACCOMPLISHED ALL OF THIS, CAN WE SAY THAT WE HAVE MANAGED TO REFORM OUR EMBATTLED FOREST MANAGEMENT?

I actually would like to call it the beginning of our forestry reforms. As you may know, problems related to our forests are very hard to tackle. But with some legal instruments developed or improved, they can help open the way for further implementation.

For people working in this field, developing legal instruments is fundamental to the success of forest management. But it is the most difficult part of our work, crucially because of politics. If policies were easily changed or unattended, like in the past, the work would hardly progress. During this period of time, however, it has become possible.

 

YOU WOULD HAVE ABOUT FOUR MONTHS LEFT AFTER THE CHARTER CAME INTO EFFECT IF IT PASSES THE REFERENDUM, SO WILL THIS AFFECT THE WORK?

The shortened period of time would not affect the work, as we had actually planned to finish it within this year. With legal amendments and a new policy developed, we can then proceed with other necessary measures including monitoring mechanisms, probably in the form of new committees, and so on.

Much of the work afterwards will be about following up.

 

WHAT WILL WE SEE FROM THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE?

I hope we will be able to see our forests more effectively managed, and used appropriately, based on their true ecological values, which have a scientific basis. This would benefit further economic development, as the forests are fundamental to other resources. If they are healthy, so are other resources, including water.

So, you will see that we base our work on the national benefit, not the benefit of any particular group. Some people may not understand our intention, but we would have to make a decision to do something so that we can manage our resources before it’s too late. It’s national benefit that comes first, and that’s the reason why we are not afraid of making a decision.

 

WHAT ABOUT WATER AND MARINE RESOURCES?

For these two resources, the main idea is similar to forest management: we need some legal instruments to help us manage them. We need an act for water resources, which will enable us to have comprehensive water management. It’s likely that we will see a sort of a new Strategic Water Resources Management Act formulated. There would be a similar act for marine resources, to ensure our utilisation of our marine and coastal resources is sustainable while conserving them if necessary.

So, I count this as another leap of reform in the field of our natural resources. With all these, things that need to be changed will start to be changed, and ultimately utilisation and conservation of our natural resources could be brought back to the balance again.