Poverty Dimensions of Public Governance and Forest Management ...

14
Box 4.1 Uses and abuses of environmental narratives – 1
Case Study One: Weila
Weila is a settlement in the northern parkland zone, inhabited mainly by Banda peoples who settled in
this Mo area in historical times. This is a yam producing area. Land is in surplus and there is no
shortage of small trees and coppices for staking out the growing yams.
A few years ago, a group of Sisala migrants came to the area, and were allocated charcoal-production
rights for sale by the chief. This involved an annual payment to allow them access to specified areas to
cut living trees for conversion into charcoal for sale in the urban areas (about 90 percent of urban
dwellers in Ghana are estimated to use charcoal for their fuelwood need). The species in question
(predominantly Anogeissus leiocarpa, Terminalia glaucescens, Pterocarpus erinaceus and Lophira
lanceolata) were not ones of agricultural interest.
The chief’s prerogative was much resented by the local youths. Acting on a policy initiative of Kintampo
District Assembly, they forced through a bye-law to prevent the cutting of live trees to make charcoal,
and to restrict charcoal production only to the transformation of dead wood. They cited the extreme
destructiveness of the migrants’ production methods as justification for their decision. Whether or not it
was valid in these terms, it had differential effects on indigenes (ie. Mo and Banda) and migrants
(Sisalas). Yam farmers have ready access to dead wood on their farms, while the migrants, as specialist
charcoal producers, do not. Having learnt charcoal production methods by watching the migrants, the
indigenes were now in a position to exploit this as a complementary income-generating activity. The
Sisalas found it difficult to gain access to charcoal resources since they now had to compete with local
youth and farmers who gained preferential access over migrants from their relatives. As a result of the
difficulties they experienced in gaining access to charcoal resources, the increasing expense and social
tensions, the Sisala charcoal-burners moved on to other areas where no live wood ban had been applied.
One of the effects of this case has been to increase the level of conflict between the chiefs/elders and the
youths. The former were reluctant to control the charcoal burners as this brought them valuable
revenues. The chief, who feels somewhat outwitted by the youths, is now trying to introduce controls
over indigenes burning charcoal.
Case Study Two: Mansie
At Mansie a similar pattern obtains further down the line. The charcoal burners have gone, charcoal has
become the main income of the youth, and the unit committee and chief are attempting to control and
ban exploitation of charcoal by indigenes, though with little success. Many farmers, whose main
interests are yam are concerned about the effect of increasing charcoal exploitation on yam farming.
The main debates on these issues take the form of environment versus livelihood rights.
Two case studies – conclusion
Interesting questions arise, therefore, concerning the process of policy formulation and the scientific
basis for it; the net effects on agricultural production and the environment, and on the livelihoods of the
various groups involved. In neither case was there any evidence that policy making was evidence-based,
except in the most impressionistic terms. Non-partisan environmental information is not available at
these levels, and neither short-term nor long-term decision-making is premised upon it.
Arguably, the consequences of the new opportunities opened up by political decentralisation have been
less concerned with the promotion of environmental standards than the pursuit of partisan interests. The
evidence is that a ‘grand narrative’ has been commandeered by a particular group to promote its own
interests – only to be subsequently manipulated by others to support their counter-claims.
14