Partnership promotor for mutual benefit from public-private partnerships
It has taken a long time from different parties operating with vested interest in forestry and related activities to realise, that they can achieve more by working together than competing or fighting against each other.
The message of partnership, which my teams have advocated in various master plans and other development projects, is only slowly getting understood and adopted. But even mighty forestry corporations are now starting to realize, that secured availability of raw materials and prevention of environmental impacts are not enough to sustain and prosper the business in the long run. Also social sustainability in localities where they operate is among the crucial factors, which need to be taken care when long-term interests are at stake.
The resources, which were previously used to confront the opponents are much better used for seeking active cooperation of the adversely affected ones. As a result, the image of the company and its brand can be enhanced while the former opponents and now new partners in business (local population, their advocate NGOs and the civil society at large) are working for shared goals. Similarly, when the threshold of mistrust is passed, the previously fierce protesters can become partners and even shareholders of the companies they used to regard as enemies.
Mozambique
The government in my latest project in Mozambique (Forestry Entrepreneurship and Joint Forest Management Project) actively promoted joint management of the forest concessions by entrepreneurs and the local people who live in the forest. Among the main instruments were small grants to villagers and credit funds with competitive interest rates to the SME (Small and Medium size Entreprises). All project interventions must support sustained forest management. The main partnership need to be established between the entrepreneurs and the local people. The government agencies and we consultants play the role of facilitator.
Bangladesh
I worked as Community Development Advisor/Team Leader on a daily basis with several NGO-partners, which were contracted by the Bangladesh Water Development Board and the Forest Department to help them in community development and afforestation. The strength of NGOs was in gaining confidence of rural poor acting as their advocates and in patience to deal with government officials and local influentials. The contributions of my team included training the NGOs in afforestation, PRA-, and community development techniques. We helped them to learn systematic planning, budgeting and the timely implementation of the plans. Our task was also to inspect the quality and the quantity of the field work done under NGO guidance and check the financial claims of the NGOs and train their accountants in bookkeeping. The training was planned and executed according the findings from the field. Although initially suspicious and reserved, the partners learned over time to work together for the benefit of the poorest, destitute women, and landless embankment settlers.
Laos
In Laos, which is still a socialist country, the World Bank and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland had put together a project concept, which was very radical. The aim was to empower the villagers to utilize, manage and even sell the excess of the forest produce in free market in partnership with the military-led government agencies. The task to open space for private, community-based business was very delicate in those circumstances. We had to seek all possible alliances and use the bargaining power of the donor agencies while developing working methods on the ground. There were no domestic NGOs in early 1990s in Laos. Some international NGOs started to gain acceptance and were followed by some regional NGOs – mainly radical fractions from Thailand. It was a delicate time to defend the role of NGOs there. Our project could not proceed effectively without NGO cooperation, however. The breakthrough came when we were allowed to contract CARE to help the project in various village development schemes. Nowadays the NGO activities have been accepted in Laos and they are doing a good job in close cooperation with GOs in many fields. The same donors continue supporting the work we initiated in 1994. Now the project is called SUFORD.
Thailand
In Thailand the leading strategy, which we proposed in the Forestry Sector Master Plan was promotion of various partnerships between the state, private companies and the NGOs. The government could not launch the much-needed land reform but adopted a policy to financially support tree planting, which has now resulted in a significant resource base for local forest industry. Relations between NGOs and GOs were and still are strained. Despite of it, NGO participation in the master planning process was very fruitful. Moderate NGOs worked directly with our teams. The radical ones contributed through a heavy criticism. The input of both the radical and moderate NGOs was most significant in the field of community forestry, protection of forest resources, forest-based rural development, conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity and watershed management.