View/Open - Sokoine University of Agriculture

forest (Vatn and Vedeld 2011). How well the payment system and institutionalstructure reflects this will also affect the outcomes and the success of the new regime.2.3.5 Forest Property RegimeWhen it comes to resource regimes for forests, particularly in developing countries,they are often the subject of a weak tenure system and/or disputed property rights, aninsecurity which is often associated with deforestation and forest degradation (Vatnand Angelsen 2009). In many instances this dates back to the colonial era, andcontinued into postcolonial times where the state took ownership of forests withoutrecognizing the rights of people living in or adjacent to the forests. Thus many forestdwellers have claimed and still claim customary rights to their forests and often rejectstate control over forests which they see as their own. In addition, there are instanceswhere there are contested property claims between user groups within communities,particularly between forest dwellers and farmers. While forest dwellers claimcustomary rights over the forest, peasants or wealthy agriculturalists might clear theforest, either spontaneously or as a planned action, as they see it as unclaimed“wasteland”/unclassified public land, or as a way of demonstrating and defendingtheir property claims. Conflicts often arise from this, and the ones who eventually getstate recognition as having formal rights to the area is more often than not the morepowerful group, leaving indigenous and marginalised people on the losing side (Vatnand Angelsen 2009).As a resource regime is the sum of rights and restrictions for access and use of theresource, these rights and restrictions can range on a continuum from a pure privateregime where local communities and other groups are completely excluded from allforest products; to state regimes where local communities might be excluded from alltimber and nationalised non-timber products but might be allowed to harvest nonnationalised non-timber products; to community regimes where people living in thecommunity have access to all products but are often limited to certain quantities andharvesting times; and to an open access regime where there are no restrictions of anyforest products on anyone (Kant and Berry 2001). However, it is important todistinguish between a de jure (formal) and a de facto (informal) condition. Thisentails mainly the ability to control access and use. For instance, while the state might48