The poverty of forestry policy: double standards on an uneven playing field

Can policies designed to maximize exploitation by elites benefit the people who live in forests? Forestry policy throughout the developing world originates from European “scientific” forestry traditions exported during the colonial period. These policies were implemented by foreign and local elite whose interest was to maximize and extract profit. In spite of reforms since the end of the colonial period, policies on the environment usually remain biased against rural communities. Even when more recent policies are fair, the rural poor face severe biases in implementation. In addition, they must compete on an uneven playing field of ethnic and other social inequities and economic hurdles. This article examines how forestry policy and implementation maintain double standards on this uneven playing field in a manner that permanently excludes the rural poor from the natural wealth around them—producing poverty in the process. Change that would support poverty alleviation for forest-based communities requires a radical rethinking of forest policy so as to counterbalance widespread regressive policies and structural asymmetries.     

Grassland Fire and Cattle Grazing Regulate Reptile and Amphibian Assembly Among Patches

Fire and grazing are common management schemes of grasslands globally and are potential drivers of reptilian and amphibian (herpetofauna) metacommunity dynamics. Few studies have assessed the impacts of fire and cattle grazing on herpetofauna assemblages in grasslands. A patch-burn grazing study at Osage Prairie, MO, USA in 2011–2012 created landscape patches with treatments of grazing, fire, and such legacies. Response variables were measured before and after the application of treatments, and I used robust-design occupancy modeling to estimate patch occupancy and detection rate within patches, and recolonization and extinction (i.e., dispersal) across patches. I conducted redundancy analysis and a permuted multivariate analysis of variance to determine if patch type and the associated environmental factors explained herpetofauna assemblage. Estimates for reptiles indicate that occupancy was seasonally constant in Control patches (ψ ~ 0.5), but declined to ψ ~ 0.15 in patches following the applications of fire and grazing. Local extinctions for reptiles were higher in patches with fire or light grazing (ε ~ 0.7) compared to the controls. For the riparian herpetofaunal community, patch type and grass height were important predictors of abundance; further, the turtles, lizards, snakes, and adult amphibians used different patch types. The aquatic amphibian community was predicted by watershed and in-stream characteristics, irrespective of fire or grazing. The varying responses from taxonomic groups demonstrate habitat partitioning across multiple patch types undergoing fire, cattle grazing, and legacy effects. Prairies will need an array of patch types to accommodate multiple herpetofauna species.     

Demystifying the EMIS purchasing process and decisions: Look (and plan) before you leap

The proliferation of environmental, health, and safety regulations in recent years has increased the complexity and cost of regulatory compliance for companies. In response to the growing complexities of environmental management, many firms are turning to information systems for tracking, managing, and automating their environmental activities and information. An environmental management information system (EMIS), however, is not an end in itself. A successful EMIS supports and facilitates the integration of environmental management into business functions. Effective planning is essential for placing short-term information system development in the context of a long-range comprehensive environmental management strategy. This article presents specific pitfalls to avoid when purchasing environmental management software. Numerous companies have discovered that the true costs of EMIS implementation stem from the political and organizational costs of getting employees to use systems, particularly when they require alterations in existing work processes. The up-front purchase price often represents less than 50 percent of the total system implementation cost. Failure to adequately research and plan frequently results in costly training, high modification or user fees, incompatibilities with other applications, or vendor dependence. The article then discusses the range of options in the EMIS marketplace and offers many practical suggestions to approach and plan effective implementation of an EMIS.