Neither the top-down (authoritarian) nor the bottom-up (participatory) approach alone is capable of solving the problem of how to implement sustainable techniques of forest management and use. What is needed is a mixture of both. Top-down development usually is needed to supply the capital for successful implementation, while the bottom-up approach is necessary to ensure that the project is accepted by the people it was intended to help and that it is environmentally sustainable. Community forestry may be an example of an appropriate blending of the two approaches.
The evidence is mixed with regard to the impact of globalization on global poverty (the income of the poor rises, which is good, but disparity between rich and poor increases, fostering embitterment which is bad) and on the well-being of Third World farmers (mostly benefits big farmers, hurts peasant farmers). However, with regard to the forestry sector, the effects of globalization on tropical forests are almost entirely negative. While there may be some short-term benefit in that industrial logging can temporarily ease a balance of trade problem of a country, after the forest is gone, the social and economic problems are worse. Localization results in a much more rational use of forest products because local knowledge and skills can be brought into play.
Was this article helpful?