Rapid appraisal methods are useful for gaining a preliminary understanding of the research area in a relatively short period. The diagnostic tools presented here combine participatory research methods with simple sociological and ecological measurement techniques, using both modem science and indigenous knowledge to present an interdisciplinary picture of human-forest interaction patterns. Information from multiple sources is used to crosscheck and inform the research team. The research process is designed to build on the increased understanding emerging from each field visit by sequentially pursuing issues raised in previous interviews and field observations to verify and elaborate. The approach requires extensive data analysis and debriefings immediately following each data collection activity.
Time spent preparing for diagnostic research can be an excellent investment. Without adequate preparation, research teams may lack an informed orientation to the study site and could waste time collecting information that already exists. Preparation also includes explaining objectives and soliciting the involvement and support of the community and relevant members of the FD, other key governmental groups, and NGOs working in the area.
Past PRA experiences indicate that small, interdisciplinary teams of two to four members usually the most effective units for conducting studies. It is important that each team have at least one member fluent in the local language and at least one woman. Prior to entering the community, the research team should discuss and determine their roles and means of coordinating their activities. It is highly preferable for the PRA team to stay in the village overnight, or at least nearby, to informally socialize, build rapport and facilitate evening discussions.
The research team should be expanded to include a cross section of community members to act as the "resource faculty". Ideally, this group would include men, women, and children from different socioeconomic groups within the community. It may also include individuals with specialized knowledge (i.e., medicinal plants, forest product marketing systems, etc.). In some cases, it may be useful for the outsiders and the village resource faculty to break into sub-groups to further explore special topics.
Studies which are conducted without a clear user group in mind may be poorly focussed and of little relevance. During the research design phase, an effort should be made to involve those individuals and groups that have an interest in forest management in a communication mechanism which ensures the free flow of information, especially learning generated from the field. Normally, these would include senior officers and local field staff from the state FD, community members and leaders, researchers, and possibly local non-government organizations. Early meetings of this Working Group allow opportunities to discuss research design questions and schedules, clarify priority issues, and identify key individuals who might be involved in the research. It is also helpful to reach an agreement among Working Group members regarding how and where the information will be used once collected.
As a first step, the collection of secondary data is important for an understanding of the local and regional context in which the research will be conducted. Academic researchers may have already documented the social and historical conditions in the area. Aside from books and articles, a wide variety of government reports are often available describing social, economic, environmental, and development features. Maps of most areas are available on a scale of 1:50,000 from the Survey of India, while local forest maps can be obtained from the Forest Department. Research teams need to allocate time for collection and analysis of such background documents.
In selecting appropriate research areas for community-forest management studies and programs, it is useful to work with the local District Forest Officer and Range Officer to identify a range or beat with important management problems and possibilities. Researchers should try to choose study areas that reflect a cross-section of institutional, ecological, and economic characteristics and conditions.
To study the social and institutional constraints and potential for community management, it may be useful to choose a site where communities are already active or interested in establishing forest management systems. Areas with strong community leadership and active, supportive FD field staff may present new strategies for village mobilization and collaborative action. Communities with current or past traditional forest (or other resource) management institutions may illuminate ways to integrate indigenous systems into emerging JFM programs. It is particularly important to identify and include communities which are heavily dependent on forest resources.
To understand the economics of forest product volume levels and flows on a per hectare basis, it is helpful if there are well-defined collection areas. If possible within the proposed study area, blocks of forests ranging in size from 25 to 200 hectares can be delineated with clear boundaries on the beat maps. It is also important that the study area has a well defined community of users, so that the human use pressure is more easily quantified.
If the researchers wish to gain insights into how production levels may change as the forest regenerates or degrades, an attempt should be made to choose a number of sites in varying stages of protection and succession, or degeneration. Candidate research sites in different it "protection age classes" should ideally be visited together with local forest guards and selected members of the community to assess specific vegetative and social characteristics. The Check List provided in Appendix 1 can serve as a guide to the socio-ecological site assessment.
Physical and vegetative characteristics across sites should be similar, including the percentage of coppicing species and percentage of good grass stock (especially in semi-arid areas), disturbance patterns in terms of fires, grazing, fodder and fuelwood cutting, topography, soil, and microclimatic conditions. Evaluation of social characteristics might include the presence of a community forest management group, degree of community homogeneity, and presence of any access rules and regulations (although these may not be applicable in an unprotected site). In selecting the final sites, the team should also consider logistical convenience and apparent community willingness to assist the research team with the study.
Establishing the use history of prospective sites is also valuable in comparing regenerating growth patterns across sites. Sites should be selected with similar histories and experiences to facilitate comparisons. The data could be drawn from Forest Department Working Plans for the area, maps, aerial photographs taken at different points in time, interviews with past FD staff familiar with the area, and with older villagers.
The PRA field trials in southwest Bengal were quite successful in identifying regenerating forests of various age classes which were protected by village committees. The researchers selected sites that had no protection, 3 years, 5 years and 15 years of protection. The sites were all within 5 kilometers of each other and possessed similar soils, topographic conditions, and plant species. Each research team can determine the periods of protection they want to use in selecting sites for their studies. In West Bengal, because the JFM program is based on a 10 to 15-year rotation, it made sense to select sites using a five-year interval. It may also be helpful to include additional sites during the first five years of protection, since changes are most rapid during this period. Researchers should work with FD staff to select a number of candidate sites for different age classes of forest (see Figure 4).
Time series plots provide a useful basis for understanding likely trends in the availability of timber, fodder, fuelwood, and other NTFPs as regeneration occurs. PRA trials in Gujarat found that in many areas where there are numerous user communities and many small forest tracts at varying levels of disturbance or stages of regeneration, it was difficult to assess specific levels of productivity for any given tract based on community recall alone. In villages with a range of smaller patches of protected and unprotected forests, some product flow trends were possible to estimate; however, in large forest tracts with multiple user communities, per hectare productivity estimates based on recall were more difficult to calculate. In such cases, population data on individual species productivity or harvest flows will need to be determined using vegetative research.
Ultimately, the Working Group will heed to select study sites that reflect important social, ecological, and economic characteristics affecting forest management in the district or state. Research areas should possess common management conditions so that findings are useful in solving problems and improving programs in neighboring areas.
It is important that the team begin to build rapport with the community prior to data collection. One of the first steps is to clearly explain the study goals and methods to the villagers, including the distinctly different approach of the community members as experts and the researchers as students. The research team should stress that it has come to learn from the community and to help communicate their knowledge, needs and ideas to the Forest Department, providing a basis for negotiations to design improved management systems that respond to community and environmental priorities. The community should understand that the study is meant to help the research support group, community, and Forest Department better understand the ecological and economic status, changes, and potential of the forest. At the same time, the researchers should be careful not to raise community expectations that the research will result in development projects or programs in the area.
Past experiences indicate that each PRA field visit may take three to four days or more. Since this represents a considerable time contribution on the part of community members, at least some of their opportunity costs should be met. While cash compensation may deter a sense of effective participation, the NGO MYRADA suggests arranging meals near the village to be shared by all participants.
In recent PRAs conducted in Gujarat, a number of approaches were used in introducing the research team to the community. On the first day, both formal and informal meetings were held to explain the objectives of the research and enlist community assistance in carrying out the studies. On days two and three, it became apparent that many community members had limited time to meet with the researchers, and that the teams needed to adjust their schedules to minimize the disturbance to the work routine of the village. Strategies to achieve M objective included scheduling meetings in the early morning and later in the afternoon and evening, conducting discussions during rest breaks in the forest or fields where the villagers were working, or holding discussions with special groups, including children, older men and women who were less busy.
Even after the team has been introduced to the village and becomes well-established, when visiting new households or neighboring communities the researchers should remember to introduce themselves and explain their purpose, since the new participants may be unaware of the study's objectives. Each time researchers meet with a new group, time should be allocated for building rapport and creating a conducive social environment for learning about forest use from the people.