JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Collective Forest Management System in Japan: a Case Study in Osawa Property Ward Forest
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Collective Forest Management System in Japan: a Case Study in Osawa Property Ward Forest
De Zoysa, Mangala Premakumara; Inoue, Makoto; Yamashita, Utako; Hironori, Okuda;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Iriai an Indigenous forest management system in Japan from the viewpoint of "common pool resources" was a success resilient institution and resulted with sustainable production system and environmental conservation. This study was conducted in Osawa of the Nagano prefecture through group discussions, field observations and an in-depth field survey. Osawa Property Ward Forest is managed under the concept very much similarly to traditional "Iriai". This study firstly examined the changes of collective forest management system in terms of awareness and interest in forest management; forest management activities; role of forest; and collection of forest products. Then it analyzed the current threats for collective forest management have been identified as: land abandonment due to loss of benefits and lack of active community participation; deterioration of forest environment particularly the micro-climate and aesthetic values; conflict with local government authorities restraining the use of money in property ward forest and conflict with outsiders on damping of the garbage. Community cantered forestry management rules; livelihood contribution; protection of environment; local initiatives for protection and economic activities are the prevailing opportunities for collective forest management. The main requirements for revitalization of collective forest management are explained as local reciprocity; imposition of community based forest rules; encouraging local innovations; and building partnerships with stakeholders. Collective forest management system addresses the limitations of conventional forestry models, which had invalidated traditional 'iriai' institutions, and key to restoring sustainable use of forest and environmental resources. Cross-institutional collaborations together with responsibilities of local communities would ensure the revitalization of forest resources.
 Keywords
collective forest management;threats;opportunities;revitalization;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
Curtis D. 2007. Active citizenship, forest governance institutions and the public or common good. Discussion Paper150, Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University, Japan, 32.

2.
Forest Agency. 2009. Forest and forestry statistics handbook 2009. Tokyo, Japan.

3.
Forestry Agency Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Government of Japan. 1998. Asia-Pacific Forestry Sector Outlook Study Working Paper Series, Working Paper APFSOS/ WP/15, Japan - In-Depth Country Study, FAO Bangkok 67-74.

4.
FAO. 1978. Forestry for local community development. FAO Forestry Paper 7, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 58-64.

5.
Goto K. 2007. Iriai forests have sustained the livelihood and autonomy of villagers: experience of commons in Ishimushiro hamlet in northeastern Japan. Working Paper Series 30, Afrasian Centre for Peace and Development Studies, Ryukoku University, Shiga, Japan. 32.

6.
Illich I. 1982. Silence is a Commons. Proceedings of Asahi Symposium Science and Man - The computer-managed Society," . (http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/Silence.html. Accessed 28 Jul 2012.

7.
Kambu A, Nishi M. 2008. Satoyama Conservation in Southeast Asia and Japan; United Nations University, Tokyo Japan. http://www.ias.unu.edu/sub_page.aspx?catID=130&ddlID=475. Accessed 18 Jun 2012.

8.
Kijima Y, Sakurai T, Otsuka K. 2000. Iriaichi: Collective versus individualized management of community forests in postwar Japan. Economic Development and Cultural Change 48: 867-886. crossref(new window)

9.
Marten G. 2005. Environmental tipping points: A new paradigm for restoring ecological security. Journal of Policy Studies (Japan) 20:75-87.

10.
McKean MA. 1991. Defining and dividing property rights in the Japanese commons; presented at the annual, meeting of the International Association for the Study of Common Property, Winnipeg, Canada, 26-30. Http://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/archive/00002625/01/Defining_and_Dividing_Property_Rights_in_the_Japanese_Commons.pdf. Accessed 28 Jul 2012.

11.
Mitsumata G, Murota T. 2007. Overview and current status of the Iriai (commonage commons) system in the three regions of Japan from the Edo era through the beginning of the 21st century. Discussion paper 07-04 http://common-threads.org. uk/html/facts/pdf/japan.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2012.

12.
Murota T. 2003. Common-pool Resources in Japan and Worldwide from the Historical and Contemporary Perspectives; The Doshisha University Research Center for World Wide Business (RCWOB), Japan. http://www.rcwob.doshisha.ac.jp/review/5_1/5_1_129.pdf. Accessed 16 Jun 2012.

13.
Pagdee A, Kim Y, Daugherty PJ. 2006. What makes community forest management successful: a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Society & Natural Resources 19: 33-52. crossref(new window)

14.
Torigoe H. 2007. Land ownership for the preservation of environment and livelihood; Working paper series 29, Afrasian Center for Peace and Development Studies, Ryukoku University, Shiga, Japan 26.

15.
Yamashita U, Balooni K, Inoue M. 2009. Effect of instituting "Authorized Neighborhood Associations" on communal (Iriai) forest ownership in Japan. Society & Natural Resources 22: 464-473. crossref(new window)