Environmental policy for forest tree biodiversity conservation in Ugandap : a holistic approach to the policy process

Abstract

This thesis addresses the paradox of continued environmental degradation and loss of forest tree biodiversity in Uganda despite the existence of seemingly robust sustainable national development guidance. Central to this is the National Environment Management Policy (NEMP) – the focus of this thesis. NEMP was released in Uganda in 1995, after years of multi‐agency debate and stakeholder engagement. The NEMP outlined guiding principles and objectives for forest conservation and management that have been variously implemented in nearly three decades since adoption. To understand the paradox of why biodiversity loss continues in spite of the NEMP, I engaged different approaches across social and natural science domains. This multidisciplinary research applied both positivism and interpretivism with respective ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions described in five research papers.

Paper 1 provides the analytical framework for applying an interpretive policy analysis of the NEMP. I used Carol Bacchi’s “What is the Problem Represented to be?” approach to policy analysis to critically interrogate how the NEMP forest conservation and management problem was defined, the premises on which the problem rests, and effects, as well as problems that could be nested in the policy problem. Papers 2 and 3 include interpretivism to examine policy formulation and implementation. Paper 2 employs Springate and Sousson’s policy formulation process model to identify key policy formulation influences‐‐ political, social, economic, institutional; national goals and sector priorities; communication and dissemination; and implementing agencies. Paper 3 includes the Institutional Analysis and Development framework to understand how Uganda’s decentralised governance system enabled democratic solving of natural resource management problems. I also examined how systems thinking and decentralized systems components were applied in the policy process. Paper 4 on policy operationalization involves application of both interpretive and positivist research to show the status of forests and tree biodiversity of the different forest categories. Paper 5 further applies both positivism and interpretivism and soft systems methodology to develop a mechanism for monitoring the entire environmental policy process.

Mixed methods cut across all five research papers: document analyses, openended questionnaires, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews. This involved a case study approach in Kalangala district, selected for its rapid change from forest‐dominated landscape to oil palm monocropping agroecosystems. I supplemented textual and interview data with three forest inventories. Fieldwork methods involved observations of the natural environment and photography to complement data collection. Qualitative data from questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups were categorised and quantified for analysis with the Statistical Package for Social Scientists’ (SPSS) software version 18. Descriptive analysis generated frequency distributions. Pearson Chi‐Square was used to compare data from village and district environment committees. Later, I organised and synthesized data in manageable units to determine patterns, and then triangulated that data into primary and secondary findings to assess the policy process. Other methods involved correlation analyses and calculating the Shannon diversity index to explore species diversity in three sites and validity and reliability tests.

Results revealed 18 problem representations in the NEMP to solve the unsustainable management of forest resources. But the NEMP remained silent on major aspects such as definitive implementation and enforcement mechanisms, meaningful participation, funding of conservation activities as well as corruption and bribery (Paper 1). At the policy formulation stage (paper 2), results indicated that 62 percent of interviewees agreed that the policy formulation process was multi‐sectoral, although respondents understood participation as synonymous with the systemic approach. Over 50 percent of respondents questioned available institutional capacity to formulate the environment policy, and 57 percent were dissatisfied with the lack of policy coordination among closely related government institutions. At policy implementation, although local governments were given the mandate for implementation, 73 percent of environment committees in the district could not exercise their mandate, 77 percent of environment committees were not financially facilitated to implement policy, and 70 percent were not even aware of the environmental policy. Institutions such as the police did not support environment committees (paper 3). Results in paper 4 confirmed that all forests were generally degraded, with unprecedented reduction in essential forest ecosystem services and reduced diversity. Mean DBH was less than 50cm for all studied forests, tree diversity ranging from 11 to 16 tree species and some species like Tectona grandis (L. f.) found to be completely lost. Overall, results identified gaps/forces undermining effective forest conservation and management, which were summarised in a checklist (paper 5).

In conclusion, there was limited holistic or systems thinking perspective in the NEMP formulation, implementation and operationalization processes." This created gaps in the respective policy processes that contributed to the continuous forest tree biodiversity loss. The identified silences and other gaps in the NEMP processes require opening new conversations about who and how to legally protect against further biodiversity loss. Thus, the policy process requires application of the principles of coordination, representation, collaboration, meaningful participation and teamwork to improve policy effectiveness.

Denne oppgaven tar for seg paradokset med fortsatt miljøforringelse av og tap av biologisk mangfold blant skogens trær i Uganda til tross for eksistensen av tilsynelatende sterke retningslinjer for bærekraftig nasjonal utvikling. Sentralt i dette er National Environment Management Policy (NEMP) – fokuset i denne oppgaven. NEMP ble etablert i Uganda i 1995, etter mange års debatt mellom flere byråer og engasjement fra forskjellige interessenter. NEMP skisserte veiledende prinsipper og mål for skogbevaring og forvaltning som har blitt iverksatt på forskjellige måter i nesten tre tiår siden den ble tatt i bruk. For å forstå paradokset med at tapet av biologisk mangfold fortsetter til tross for NEMP, tok jeg i bruk forskjellige tilnærminger på tvers av samfunns‐ og naturvitenskapelige domener. Denne flerfaglige forskningen anvendte både positivisme og interpretivisme med de respektive ontologiske, epistemologiske og metodiske forutsetninger beskrevet i fem forskningsartikler.