American forestry professionalism in the third world: Some preliminary observations

Abstract

Forestry, with its fulsomely developed and articulated worldview, provides an excellent case study of cultural and professional biases in projects intended to aid developing countries. Much of the forestry professional's received wisdom is defined by the ideology of the progressive era conservation movement: a preeminent emphasis on technical expertise as the basis for decision making; a related tendency to prefer comprehensive government planning and to denigrate the expertise and priorities of local resource users, who are seen as political advocates serving their own interests; a preference for managing trees, for lumber and as distinct from other forest and tree uses. This mindset leaves the forester in a poor position to understand the uses which forest users in other cultures see as important, to utilize the expertise of locals in the design and implementation of proposed aid programs, and to enquire meaningfully into alternative systems of land and tree tenure which will determine the success of those programs. Foresters are not the only professionals with trained incapacities; however, greater sensitivity to the settings in which aid projects will succeed or fail would be especially useful for western-trained foresters working in nonwestern forests, and for local foresters trained in western concepts and priorities.