Concluding Remarks

Abstract

Social forestry had been tried as an approach to forest management and a way for governments to devolve authority to local communities. It had been used in the attempt to halt deforestation in tropical countries, and add more value to forests in developed countries. The idea behind social forestry, which is to make the forest resource more responsive to the needs of society, and to make society more responsible for the forests, is such an attractive one that it has been used to hide a multitude of failings: the lack of thoroughness of some research, the lack of muscle of international development agreements, the deficiency of governments to muster enough financial resources and political will to manage forests better. In the final analysis, the execution of social forestry tends to fall on those who are meant to benefit most, the poorer members of society who live in or close to forests. There is nothing wrong with this occurrence, but there seem to be an ongoing problem with the channeling of resources for this better use and management of these forest areas to the actual implementers. This is despite the fact that, if and when a social forestry program is properly carried out, the larger society reaps the benefits.