University of Basilicata
Viale dell'Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza
有助于对方法进行记录/评估的项目名称（如相关）Catastrophic shifts in drylands (EU-CASCADE)
有助于对方法进行记录/评估的机构名称（如相关）University of Basilicata - Italy
Management plan for silvopastoral areas with a ten year intervention plan
Aims / objectives: The management plan is a legally binding document which outlines an analysis of the current situation of the forest and pastures and gives indications on the best future interventions to ensure their sustainable future management.
The MFMP provides prescription to: cutting periods and tree ages, forest cultivation care, opening of firebreaks and their maintenance, allowance of grazing animals in the forest area, etc.
Methods: This legislative instrument, provides provisions and directions wich have to be followed and wich are legally binding in the local territory the plan covers. Any violations of the plan will result in sanctions.
Stages of implementation: The MFMP is a commitment of the municipality imposed by the Region. The Region provides funds to both to build and implement it when it has been approved. A specific forestry committee is appointed by the Region who provides the technical support to approve the MFMP presented by the municipalities.
Role of stakeholders: Stakeholders participate in drawing up the plan (at a municipal level) which is then approved at a regional level.
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities
The land-use plan has the general objective of managing public forests and rangelands.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The management plan aims at a correct, rational and sustainable management of woods and silvo-pastoral areas.
The Forest Management Plan applies exclusively to public lands and so does not affect private property in any way.
The technologies aim at preventing fires. However, in public woodland, which makes up the majority of the territory, no-one has a “vested interest” in carried out fire prevention actions and, as such, interventions must be made compulsory under law.
Treatment through the SLM Approach: The management plan, being legally binding, forces the implementation of the two technologies associated with this approach.
There is minimal participation of women because of the nature of the implementation work.
Municipal Technical Services Department
|启动/动机||被动||Municipality, region, relative associations|
|计划||互动||During the planning phase local land users help the specialists in identifying the problems facing the territory and in the choice of best technologies to improve land mangement|
|监测/评估||无||State forest service|
Both during the drafting of the management plan and in the selection of technologies to implement the specialists consulted with land users.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists
Name of method used for advisory service: Publication in the Regional Official Gazette.; Key elements: Local stakeholders presentation, Distribution of MFMP copies to whum is concerned; When approved, the MFMP is published on Regional Official Gazette. Implementation responsible is the Municipal thought its technical department and forestry services who is also responsible for updating and upgrading it periodically.
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; the forest service constantly monitors the implementation of the management plan and in cases of violations applies sanctions
- dissemination of paf
area treated aspects were regular monitored by other through observations; indicators: State forest service
There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation
Approach costs were met by the following donors: local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (70% region, 30% municipality): 100.0%
Since the region adopted the Forest Management Plan for each municipality the management of woods and silvo-pastoral areas has been much more sustainable compared to the past.
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
Larger owners adopted some measures of the path although they were not obliged.
Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
With the Forest Management Plan the income from the sale of woods is much more stable and constant over the years.
Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
|The Forest Management Plan was first viewed with suspicion as another example of red tape but then during its implementation land users saw the benefits it brought and even private land owners began implementing the same technologies on their own land. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: They rely on public funding for implementation.)|
|The Forest Management Plan plays a vital role in local land management. It is revised and renewed every ten years which allows for a periodic re-assessment of changes to economic and environmental conditions. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Public funding must be guaranteed for actions as interventions aim at protecting public resources. )|
The only disadvantage is the high initial costs to draft the plan.
After the first 10 years the costs for updating the plan are greatly reduced so that costs are ultimately spread out over the long term.
|The only thing which garantees the adoption of the plan is public funding.|