Thesis (PhD (For))--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study aims to evaluate the effects of forestry policy on the sustainability of forest resources in Southern Africa. However, the study has confirmed that forestry policy does not operate independently of other policies. Its scope is defined by overarching framework legislation and policy, while it functions within a complex mesh of crosscutting and sectoral policies. Therefore, the implications of these external policies for forest conservation have also been assessed. The method used employs predominantly qualitative assessment of documentary data, which constitute the main contents of the three case studies: South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia. This qualitative information has been transformed into quantitative data, using a scoring scale of one to five for certain indicators of sustainable forest management (SFM). The average score for each country makes up a forest conservation index (FCI), which provides a comprehensive insight into the performance of a country's forestry and other resource conservation policies. South Africa's FCI is estimated at 3, while Tanzania and Zambia's indices have been rounded to 2 each. As South Africa's forestry policy and other biological resource conservation policies came into existence as recent as the mid- and late 1990s, this index suggests that these policies will lead to SFM subject to satisfactory implementation. Indeed, South Africa has a congruous forestry legislation whose regulatory mechanisms are appropriately blended with financial and framework incentives. Its overarching framework legislation and policy define forestry policy, while the crosscutting policies reinforce it. However, the country's performance on intergovernmental and intersectoral policy co-ordination is poor, as well as on the economic valuation of its natural forest resources. Furthermore, the formulation of South Africa's forestry policy was not founded on up-to-date forest resource data. Contrary to the South African case, Tanzania and Zambia's indices indicate the likelihood of unsustainable forest use and management. These countries' existing forestry and other resource conservation policy-making processes are narrow-based and gender-insensitive, rendering them unpopular among policyaffected and policy-connected stakeholders. These inappropriate policies and their blunt instruments distort markets for forest resources, i.e., create situations in which benefits are dissociated from costs, prices from scarcities, rights from responsibilities and actions from consequences. Both forestry policies and their governing tools were not founded on contemporary forest resource data, i.e., they are not issue centred. The countries' framework laws have also failed to institutionalise environmental impact assessment, monitoring and evaluation, intersectoral policy co-ordination, participatory approaches to natural resource management and ownership of environmental assets such as land and forest resources by local communities. The administration of forestry policy requires competent professional and technical staff. South Africa has adequate human resources in the forestry sector, although the personnel appear to lack the necessary skills for participatory forest management for poverty reduction. Tanzania has adequate but ineffective forestry personnel, resutting in lack of law enforcement and corruption while Zambia lacks professional staff to interpret and implement the existing forestry policy. The ineffectiveness and the lack of professional and technical staff, inter alia, is reflected in the high rates of deforestation, which have been estimated at 91,000 halannum for Tanzania and 851,000 halannum for Zambia. Unlike South Africa, both Tanzania and Zambia's sectoral policies fail to cultivate concerns for forest conservation. This situation is aggravated further by the pervasive lack of intra- and intersectoral policy coordination among biological resource conservation divisions and departments. The coherence of South Africa's forestry and other resource conservation policies is attributable to the scarcity of natural forests in the country. Approximately, 7.0% of South Africa's landscape is under forest cover, while Tanzania and Zambia have 37% and 42%, respectively. Decreasing supplies of forest coupled with the increasing demands for forest resources causes the value of forest resources to appreciate. Naturally, there is a stronger need for the forest-scarce South Africa to pursue prudent conservation policies to protect its limited forest than Tanzania and Zambia whose governments treat their respective vast land and forest resources as a safety valve for economic hardship without adequate investment in SFM. In summary, forest resource use and management in Tanzania and Zambia are littered by market and policy failures. It is envisaged that the opportunities and constraints identified in each market and policy failure will inform future forestry and related policy-making process, not only in the concerned countries but also in other African countries experiencing similar forest conservation problems. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie studie het ten doel om die effekte te evalueer wat bosboubeleid het op die volhoubaarheid van woudhulpbronne in Suidelike Afrika. Hierdie studie het egter bevestig dat bosboubeleid nie onafhanklik van ander beleidspunte funksioneer nie. Die omvang daarvan word gedefinieer deur oorkoepelende raamwerkwetgewing en beleid, terwyl dit binne 'n komplekse netwerk van oorkruisende en sektorale beleid funksioneer. Daaom is die implikasies van hierdie eksteme beleidspunte vir woudbewaring ook bepaal. Die metode gebruik, wend hoofsaaklik kwalitatiewe beraming van dokumentere data aan, wat die hoofinhoud van die drie gevallestudies, nl. Suid-Afrika, Tanzania en Zambia uitrnaak. Hierdie kwalitatiewe informasie is omvorm na kwantitatiewe data, deur gebruik te maak van 'n skaal van een tot vyf vir sekere indikators van vohoubae bosbestuur (VBB). Die gemiddelde punt vir elke land vorm 'n woudbewaringsindeks (WBI), wat 'n omvatlende insig verskaf van die land se uitvoering van die bosbou- en bewaringsbeleid van ander hulpbronne. Suid-Afrika se WBI is beraam op 3, terwyl Tanzania en Zambia sa indekse elk tot 2 afgerond is. Siende dat Suid-Afrika se bosbou- en bewainqsoeleld van ander biologiese hulpbronne eers so onlangs as die middel- en laat 1990's in werking getree het, stel hierdie indeks voor dat die beleid sal lei tot VBB, onderhewig aan bevredigende uitvoering daarvan. Suid-Afrika het inderdaad 'n gepaste bosboubeleid, waarvan die regulerende meganismes toepaslik vermeng is met finensiele en raamwerk aansporings. Die oorkoepelende raamwerkwetgewing en beleid definieer bosboubeleid, terwyl oorkruisende beleidspunte dit versterk. Die land se uitvoering van interregerings- en intersektorale beleidkoordinasie, is egter swak, asook in die ekonomiesa waardering van sy natuurlike woudhulpbronne. Verder, is die formulering van Suid-Afrika se bosboubeleid nie gegrond op woudhulpbrondata wat op hoogte was nie. In teenstelling met die Suid-Afrikaanse geval, toon die indeksa van Tanzania en Zcrnbia die waCl'skynlikheid van onvomoubae bosbenutting en -bestuur. Hierdie lande se bestaande beleidvormingsprosasse vir bosbou en bewaring van ander hulpbronne, is eng-gebaseer en geslags-onsensitief, wat dit onpopulsr maak onder beleidgeaffekteerde en beleidverbonde insethouers. Hierdie ontoepaslike beleidspunte en stomp instrumente verdraai markte vir woudhulpbronne, d.i. skep situasies waarin voordele gedissosieer is van kostes, pryse van skaashed, regte van verantwoordelikhede en aksies van nagevolge. Beide bosboubeleidspunte en die leidingsinstrumente is nie gegrond op kontemporere woudhulpbrondata nie, d.w.s. hulle is nie rondom die kwessie gesentreer nie. Die lande se raamwerkwette het ook gefaal daarin om omgewingsimpakberamings, monitering en evaluering, intersektorale beleidkoordinering, deelnemende benaderings tot natuurlike hulpbronbestuur en plaaslike gemeenskappe sa eienaaskai van omgewingsbates, SODS grond en woudhulpbronne in te stel. Die administrasie van bosboubeleid verg bevoegde professionele en tegniese personeel. Sui-Afrika het voldoende menslike hulpbronne in die bosbousektor, hoewel dit voorkom of die personeel nie die nodige vaadiqhede het vir deelnemende bosbestuur vir die veligting van arnoede nie. Tanzanie het voldoende, maa oneffektiewe bosboupersoneel, wat 'n gebrek aan wetstoepassing en korrupsie tot gevolg het, terwyl Zambie 'n tekort het aan professionele personeel om die bestaande bosboubeleid te interpreteer en te implementeer. Die oneffektiwiteit en die gebrek aan professionele en tegniese personeel, onder andere, word gerefiekteer in die hoe tempo van ontbossing, wat beraam is op 91,000 ha/jaCl'vir Tenzenie en 851,000 ha/jaCl'vir Zembie. Anders as Suid-Afrika, faal beide Tanzanie en Zambia se sektorale beleidspunte daain om belange vir woudbewaring te kweek. Hierdie situasie word verder vererger deur die deurdringende gebrek aan intra- en intersektorale beleidkoordinering onder afdelings en departemente van biologiese hulpbronbewaring. Die verband tussen Suid-Afrika se bosbou- en bewaringsbeleid van ander hulpbronne word toegeskryf aan die skaarsheid van natuurlike woude in die land. Ongeveer 7.0% van die Suid-Afrikaanse landskap is bedek met woude, terwyl Tanzanie en Zambia onderskeidelik 37% en 42% bedek is. Verlaagde voorraad van woude, gepaard met die toenemende vraag na woudhulpbronne, het tot gevolg dat die waade van woudhulpbronne styg. Natuurlik is daar 'n groter behoefte vir die woud-arm Suid-Afrika om verstandige bewaingsbeleid na te streef om sy beperkte woude te beskerm as Tanzanie en Zambie, waa hulle regerings hul onderskeie ge\Yeldigegrond en woudhulpbronne behandel as 'n veiligheidsklep vir ekonomiese ontbering, sonder voldoende belegging in VBB. As opsomming, is die benutting en bestuur van woudhulpbronne in Tanzania en Zambia met mark- en beleidsmislukking besaai. Dit word beoog dat die geleenthede en beperkinge wat met elke mark- en beleidsmislukking ge'identifiseer is, toekomstige bosbou en verwante beleidvormingsproses kan inlig, nie net in die betrokke lande nie, maar ook in ander Afrika lande wat soortgelyke woudbewarings probleme ondervind.