Where the power lies: multiple stakeholder politics over natural ...

to manage the implementation of the joint management project in Mafungautsi. She is
not resident in the district and runs the project from the head office in Harare. There is
also a forestry protection unit that is understaffed. There are only six people to monitor
illegal use of products and services from the forest. The state forestry department has
offices at district level in Gokwe. Officers at this level have their own responsibilities
though sometimes they assist in the Mafungautsi project. Though Gokwe is close to the
RMC chosen as a case for this analysis, local people still describe the Forestry Commission
as being ‘as far from us as Johannesburg is from Gokwe (about 2500 km)’. The more
remote the village, the less access the people from that village have to forestry officials
based at the district centre in Gokwe. Officials admitted in key interviews that remoteness
influences their level of interaction with different RMCs and subcommittees.
Local communities and their RMCs
There are 14 RMCs around the forest. Each of these RMCs has different zones for use. Each
RMC comprises of a number of VIDCOs. There appears to be no rational reason for the way
these RMCs were drawn. Batanai RMC is a popular RMC for the FC and is the selected site for
the CIFOR multiple stakeholder work. There are three villages that constitute Batanai RMC.
Representation by village is considered and the results are presented in Table 1.1.
Batanai RMC used to be much bigger but was subdivided because the FC argued that it
was too big for the committee to be effective. The people on the previous RMC were
thought to have been hand picked by the FC without elections. In the current RMC elections
were held, but respondents argue that the FC influenced who should be elected to each
position. They also requested that women be elected. The RMC operates in relation to
subcommittees of particular projects. During the fieldwork only two subcommittees were
operational, the beekeeping and thatch collectors’ groups.
To understand the extent of marginalisation of different groups in the RMC we examine
how the committee is constituted so that we can determine the extent to which the
committee is representative of the three villages (Table 1.2). All the villages in the RMC
are represented on the committee, although the people who hold the two key positions
of chairperson and treasurer are from Mrembwe village. Other members of the committee
indicate that most decisions are made by the chairperson and the treasurer in consultation
with the officials from the Forestry Commission, with little or no input from them.
There are no women on the bee keeping committee (Table 1.3). There are 24 registered
beekeepers in the group. Only one of these is a woman (the traditional leader’s wife in
Mrembwe). The idea of the beekeeping group was not discussed throughout the RMC. A
total of 15 prominent beekeepers did not register with the group. For example, the most
well-known beekeeper owns about 200 beehives and did not participate in any of the
meetings, and is not registered with the group. He is an immigrant from Manicaland. Some
of these prominent beekeepers stated that they were ignorant of the existence of the
group while others did not want to participate because they believe that groups stifle
individual initiative. The chairperson takes advantage of his literacy to influence decisions
made in the committee. He has also travelled extensively for the political party—ZANU PF—
and has a wealth of experience as a retired professional, which sets him apart from other
members of his committee. We believe that the chairperson considers the other members
to be mere ‘passenger participants’ because they do not actively participate and are often
sidelined. The composition of the beekeepers in the group by village is shown in Table 1.4.
The thatch grass collector’s group comprises eight women and one men. Even though we
find no formal organizational structure for this group, it functions as one. In fact the FC
5