994
edits
Ethiopia: Deforestation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Misdirected foreign aid and de-emphasis of indigenous knowledge=
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
The advent of cash cropping has also played a hand in deforestation. In some areas industrial-style agriculture was introduced to supply export markets for cash to fund modernisation projects, e.g. coffee, resulting in the clearing of large areas of forest and the introduction of intensive, often non-sustainable agricultural practices. Cash crops also reduce the amount of cultivated land available for subsistence farming and hence encourage migration into more marginal areas or the settling of evicted smallholder farmers in forest settlements which leads to further clear felling.<ref name="Dessie" /> | The advent of cash cropping has also played a hand in deforestation. In some areas industrial-style agriculture was introduced to supply export markets for cash to fund modernisation projects, e.g. coffee, resulting in the clearing of large areas of forest and the introduction of intensive, often non-sustainable agricultural practices. Cash crops also reduce the amount of cultivated land available for subsistence farming and hence encourage migration into more marginal areas or the settling of evicted smallholder farmers in forest settlements which leads to further clear felling.<ref name="Dessie" /> | ||
==Misdirected foreign aid and de-emphasis of indigenous knowledge | ==Misdirected foreign aid and de-emphasis of indigenous knowledge== | ||
This goes hand-in-hand with the rise of cash cropping, as well-intentioned aid foreign programmes and World Bank-imposed Structural Adjustment Programmes have laid stress on modernising the Ethiopian economy and incorporating it into the global economy through the farming of monocultural crops for world markets, such as the aforementioned coffee, and cereal crops for export. This has exacerbated forest clearance for fresh fertile land that is in many cases quickly exhausted without the liberal application of chemical fertilisers. The same process also tends to de-emphasise customary agricultural and forestry practices through which some equilibrium between livelihood, environmental sustainability and resource exploitation was maintained in the past. | This goes hand-in-hand with the rise of cash cropping, as well-intentioned aid foreign programmes and World Bank-imposed Structural Adjustment Programmes have laid stress on modernising the Ethiopian economy and incorporating it into the global economy through the farming of monocultural crops for world markets, such as the aforementioned coffee, and cereal crops for export. This has exacerbated forest clearance for fresh fertile land that is in many cases quickly exhausted without the liberal application of chemical fertilisers. The same process also tends to de-emphasise customary agricultural and forestry practices through which some equilibrium between livelihood, environmental sustainability and resource exploitation was maintained in the past. | ||
| Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
Ethiopia has seen a number of changes in the regulatory frameworks governing land ownership which continue to provide uncertainty to the farmer and to rural communities. Up until the late 19th century land ownership was generally ruled by a caste system, but as Ethiopia adapted to the Western notion of the nation-state and various territories were incorporated into the country different land tenure systems began to be used. Assefa and Bork<ref name="Assefa" /> discuss the introduction of the “gabar” system in the south-west through which land was provided to central government officials, priests, civil servants and the high-ranking military officers. The sources of land were forest tracts that were then cleared and used for agriculture. Nation-building, the establishment of a standing army and the infrastructure and roads needed to facilitate the two also exerted pressure on the natural forests. During their occupation of the country from 1938 to 1943, the Italians tried to curry favour among the local people by revoking the “gabar” system and giving the land to those who had previous served the “gabars” (landowners). Those who had legal permits to extend their land did so by felling trees. | Ethiopia has seen a number of changes in the regulatory frameworks governing land ownership which continue to provide uncertainty to the farmer and to rural communities. Up until the late 19th century land ownership was generally ruled by a caste system, but as Ethiopia adapted to the Western notion of the nation-state and various territories were incorporated into the country different land tenure systems began to be used. Assefa and Bork<ref name="Assefa" /> discuss the introduction of the “gabar” system in the south-west through which land was provided to central government officials, priests, civil servants and the high-ranking military officers. The sources of land were forest tracts that were then cleared and used for agriculture. Nation-building, the establishment of a standing army and the infrastructure and roads needed to facilitate the two also exerted pressure on the natural forests. During their occupation of the country from 1938 to 1943, the Italians tried to curry favour among the local people by revoking the “gabar” system and giving the land to those who had previous served the “gabars” (landowners). Those who had legal permits to extend their land did so by felling trees. | ||
Once the Italians left, private individuals took over many of the forests in Ethiopia, which led the way to large-scale mechanized agriculture, resulting in the wholesale clearance of forests. But following the ascendance of the Marxist regime in 1974-75, the land tenure system changed dramatically when all land became the property of the state and farmers were left with only usufruct rights. Farmers thus had no incentive to invest in long-term land development “and therefore they did not plant trees for fear that the land might be appropriated by the government and redistributed to others”. <ref name="Assefa" /> Before 1974 about half of the forestland was privately owned or claimed, and approximately half was held by the government, though there was next to no government control of forestry operations prior to the revolution. The 1975 land reform under the Marxist government nationalised forestland and sawmills, which were concentrated in the south. The government controlled harvesting of forestland, and in some cases individuals had to obtain permits from local peasant associations to cut trees. But this measure encouraged illegal logging and expedited the destruction of Ethiopia's forests.<ref name="Ofcansky" /> In addition, the Derg regime’s management of land was so resented by farmers that once the government collapsed in 1991 the farming population vented their anger by clearing trees that had been planted as part of an afforestation programme promoted by the former regime. The intentions of this programme had been well-placed and had been instituted in response to the massive famine of the mid-1980s, resulting in tree planting on 400,000 ha of land. But it was a top-down initiative that lacked genuine community participation and had largely been undertaken on land previously used for grazing purposes.<ref name="Assefa" /> Thus it had no popular support which led to the removal of those forests and poor management of existing forests by extremely weak institutions and legal frameworks during the tumult of the 1991 regime change. | Once the Italians left, private individuals took over many of the forests in Ethiopia, which led the way to large-scale mechanized agriculture, resulting in the wholesale clearance of forests. But following the ascendance of the Marxist regime in 1974-75, the land tenure system changed dramatically when all land became the property of the state and farmers were left with only usufruct rights. Farmers thus had no incentive to invest in long-term land development “and therefore they did not plant trees for fear that the land might be appropriated by the government and redistributed to others”. <ref name="Assefa" /> Before 1974 about half of the forestland was privately owned or claimed, and approximately half was held by the government, though there was next to no government control of forestry operations prior to the revolution. The 1975 land reform under the Marxist government nationalised forestland and sawmills, which were concentrated in the south. The government controlled harvesting of forestland, and in some cases individuals had to obtain permits from local peasant associations to cut trees. But this measure encouraged illegal logging and expedited the destruction of Ethiopia's forests.<ref name="Ofcansky" /> In addition, the Derg regime’s management of land was so resented by farmers that once the government collapsed in 1991 the farming population vented their anger by clearing trees that had been planted as part of an afforestation programme promoted by the former regime. The intentions of this programme had been well-placed and had been instituted in response to the massive famine of the mid-1980s, resulting in tree planting on 400,000 ha of land. But it was a top-down initiative that lacked genuine community participation and had largely been undertaken on land previously used for grazing purposes.<ref name="Assefa" /> Thus it had no popular support which led to the removal of those forests and poor management of existing forests by extremely weak institutions and legal frameworks during the tumult of the 1991 regime change. | ||
==Consequences== | ==Consequences== | ||