240 likes | 375 Views
Macroeconomic, political-legal and institutional frameworks of small and medium forest enterprises : The Case of Mexico. Camille Antinori. Community Forestry Enterprises: Subset of Forest SMEs. 22% of forest in developing countries Maybe 80% of Mexican forests
E N D
Macroeconomic, political-legal and institutional frameworks of small and medium forest enterprises: The Case of Mexico Camille Antinori
Community Forestry Enterprises: Subset of Forest SMEs • 22% of forest in developing countries • Maybe 80% of Mexican forests • In Mexico, organization at “community” level • Collective action over multiple benefits • CFEs (and SMEs) engage resource with significant public and private benefits
Differing Perspectives • Important, prevalent but under-invested • CP v. private v. public property • Forest stewards v. productive orgs. • Community- v. market-oriented decisions • Democratic v. decentralized v. community
Questions in Talk • Meaning of “CFE” for Mexico and beyond? • To analyze meaning, I will look at structure and process of governance over the activities in question • How emerged in Mexico and who benefits? • Look at primary data from field projects • How integrated into policy and markets? • Overview of data and reports
Linkages GLOBAL STATE REGIONAL COMMUNITY
Mexican CFE • In Mexico, “community” has a specific legal meaning: The ejidos and comunidades of the agrarian reform
How did CFEs emerge? • Post-revolutionary laws gave rights over forests to agrarian communities. • Community governance structure was in place and eventually acquired authority over forests.
Pre-existing factors conditioning further vertical integration • Institutional capital to organize • Size and quality of resource • Past skills and experience
Owners: Community members Managers: STF CBC Gerentes NGOs Government Monitors: General Assembly Advisory council Auditors NGOs Government Structure of a Productive Organization
Owners Managers Decisionmaking Process Patterns of influence? Do they meet? Give reports? Share information? Enforce rules? Monitors
Who Benefits from CFE? Depends on: • Governance structure and process • Opportunities for voice and exit (Hirschman 1970) • Market demand Precise estimate awaits incidence study, SAM, value chain analysis (e.g. Taylor and Adelman (1996), Ribot)
State Policies • Emphasize public goods and HK • Less on physical or working capital • VI achieved with little credit or subsidies • Rely on own funds or arrangements with private firms
Programs • PRONARE: reforestation • PROCYMAF: institutional capacity, technical assistance • PRODEFOR: About 6500 projects funded, about 4000 of those for management, mainly thinnings, fire prevention, and management plans • PSAH: ecosystem services outside of forestry sector
Back to Governance: Legal Institutions • Communal v. private v. public property • Agrarian law ambiguous re forests • Creation of legal shares to forest • Outside ownership of shares possible • Potential for risk sharing • Not implemented • Unclear rules
Regional Institutions and Unions • Motivation: political, services, market power • Achieving power and scale? • Need to balance interests of members
Global Market • Link between international demand and local supply? • Possible shift in demand from international to domestic after peso devaluation 1994 • Some export • Still learning to compete on global scale. • Need quality of product and service
Emigration • Logger: maybe $30/day in Mexico + repartos + public goods • Ag worker: about $100/day in US • Average of 24 communities surveyed is that 50% of village population receive remesas. • 12 said that remesas were ½ or a little more than ½ of families’ yearly income.
Concluding Remarks: CFE as Local Institution • Mexico had property rights and process in place. • Path dependency? • Difficult to recreate without radical movement. • Study of control and ownership could suggest other configurations and mechanisms for local stakeholders to participate and benefit from management of that resource. • Need more theoretical frameworks for collective action and accountability
Concluding Remarks: CFE as Productive Organization • “Community” in structure and process. • Organization affects benefit distribution. • Linkages exist at all levels. • Redefinition of property affects wealth. • Tradeoffs?