Since the early 1990s an increasing number of governments at the local, regional or provincial levels have been taking on the role of managing national forests - an area that was once felt better left in the hands of central governments.

In at least 60 developing countries, forest management responsibilities now rest in one degree or another with mayors, town councils and local authorities.

So far, the results have been mixed, sometimes benefiting forests and sometimes not. Finding out what helps and what hinders successful decentralization of forest management were among the key aims at the April 27-30 Interlaken Workshop on Decentralization and Forest Management.

In some cases, greater local control has protected forests against excessive logging, increased public participation in decision-making processes and brought marginal groups into the political loop. In other cases, local élites have exploited decentralisation to their own advantage, leading to increased forest destruction and increasing the poverty of millions of the world's rural poor.

But whatever the outcome, the fact is greater local control of forest management is now more the rule than the exception. According to David Kaimowitz, Director General of the Center for International Forestry Research, -one of the organizers of the workshop, along with the Governments of Switzerland and Indonesia - the international forestry and environmental community must move on from arguing the pros and cons of greater local control of forests.

"The fact is, local councils and state governments around the world will play a greater role in managing national forests. The international community must now focus on helping developing countries find the right balance between central and local forest management - a balance that benefits both forests and the millions of people who rely on them. This will require international support for a whole range of development activities," Mr. Kaimowitz said.

According to the World Bank, 240 million people in the developing world depend partly or fully on forests for their livelihoods. For many of them, forests provide a range of subsistence and commercial livelihood opportunities, including the harvest, sale and personal use of fuelwood, medicinal plants, bushmeats and furniture, handicrafts, and timber for local housing. "The challenge is to ensure neither the forests nor the rural poor are the losers when local governments start making decisions about how to use natural resources," Mr. Kaimowitz said.

The general consensus is that the best way to do this is to strengthen mechanisms that make local and regional governments more accountable to their electorates. When there is no accountability or transparency in making forest decisions, the more politically or financially privileged members of society often dominate the economic opportunities that result from decentralization. Such opportunism often harms local livelihoods and can also prove disastrous for the environment, as often it is the local community that best knows how to sustainably manage the surrounding forest.

Most people do not realize that in many large forested countries, provincial and state governments have been responsible for most forestry matters for a long time. These include Switzerland, Australia, Canada, and India. Countries that have just started to turn more power over forests to the state and provincial governments - like Brazil, Indonesia, Mali - can learn a lot from them.

According to Mr. Philippe Roch, Director of the Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, although Indonesia's decentralization is still in its early years, it has similarities with Switzerland's own experience of decentralized forest control. He says the key to successful decentralization of forest management is in finding the right balance between centralized and regional control.

"Switzerland has a long history in sharing forest and environmental responsibilities between the central and provincial governments. Under current regulations, the cantons, political parties and other relevant stakeholders must be consulted when important decrees and other projects with far reaching effects are prepared. Stakeholders participate not only in the development of forest policies and programmes but also in any major undertaking that involves forests. This is crucial to making appropriate forestry policies. In Switzerland formal consultations are carried out several times a year between the Cantonal Forest Directors and the Cantonal Senior Foresters." Mr. Roch said.

Mr. Roch said his Government was proud to co-host the Interlaken Workshop with the Government of Indonesia and CIFOR. "The Swiss people are concerned about the global environment. Our support for the Workshop is an expression of that concern. Also, I'm sure the workshop will help Switzerland learn about some of the forestry challenges we face."

The Secretary General to the Republic of Indonesia's Ministry of Forestry, Mr. Wahyudi Wardojo MSc, said Indonesia was still in the early stages of decentralizing natural resource management.

"Decentralization is just beginning in Indonesia and we have a lot to learn. But the Indonesian government accepts it is here to stay. That is why we've sponsored the Interlaken workshop - to show our commitment to decentralized forest management and to learn from other countries. Decentralizing forest management in Indonesia has room to improve, as there have been mistakes leading to deforestation. Ultimately, if managed properly, decentralization will benefit both forests and the people of Indonesia. But it must be done in a step-wise approach and through close liaison at all government levels," Mr. Wardojo said.

One of the key issues for Indonesia, according to the Secretary General, is ensuring revenues going to local governments from forestry activities are also used to improve forest management.

A major focus of the Interlaken Workshop included the problems that occur in the transitional phases of decentralization. One of the key aims was to identify why greater local control of forests has worked in some countries but not in others. This required looking at a range of issues, including:

• the environmental role forests play in such areas as watershed functions, biodiversity conservation and climate change, which extend beyond local, regional and national boundaries
• the factors driving conflicts related to forest resources that occur between local, indigenous and other people
• the need to consider the interests of stakeholders at various levels, including local, state and provincial governments
• the policies at the national level dealing with forest rehabilitation, logging practices and illegal logging.

When available, outcomes from the workshop will be published in a future edition of CIFOR News.