In “Securing Forests for Peace and Development in Postconflict Liberia,” Michael Beevers analyzes the impact that security and development have had on peace by analyzing the marketization of Liberia’s forests. Beevers argues that international peacebuilders’ focus on security and economic development overlooks other methods of eliminating poverty and ignores broader elements of human security. He further argues that forest reforms in Liberia have been counterproductive in building peace by creating similar conditions that led to corruption and patronage in the past.
Peacebuilding includes finding ways to end war and create an environment for long-term peace. Peacebuilders emphasize poverty alleviation and economic development, as scholarship shows that poverty is a significant risk factor for conflict relapse. Peacebuilders also emphasize security as an essential part of this equation. However, Beevers points out that the extent to which this focus on security and development improves the underlying conditions for peace is unclear. As a case study, he investigates natural resource exploitation in Liberia and concludes that international peacebuilding has been counterproductive to creating conditions for peace in this context.
Beevers uses natural resources as a means of exploring the success of peacebuilding, because natural resources can be both a security threat and a source of economic recovery: natural resource scarcity and dependency can lead to armed conflict, but natural resources can also attract investors, create jobs, and create new revenue. To analyze the success of international peacebuilders on creating the conditions for peace, Beevers first surveys the history of timber marketization in post-conflict Liberia. In 2003, the UN placed sanctions on Liberian timber exports to allow the government of Liberia to establish control over the timber market. The government then created a roadmap to rebuild the Forest Development Authority to manage Liberia’s forests. A committee reviewed existing timber concessions and found that between 1985 and 2004, the government had granted 26 million acres of forest concessions, which resulted in a $64 million loss in uncollected taxes. As a result, in 2006, forest concessions were cancelled and a Forest Reform Law was passed that gave the government sole ownership over forest land and created a system to track and bid on forest timber. UN sanctions were also lifted, so that exporting could begin.
Peacebuilders lauded Liberia’s forest reforms, and timber exports were expected to exceed $100 million by 2011. However, by 2008, only $9 million worth of timber was exported. The government was unable to find qualified companies to extract timber, and forest marketization has not alleviated poverty. Furthermore, because of the focus on forest marketization, the government has failed to implement other opportunities to alleviate poverty. Beevers shows that the government also failed to consult its forest communities about forest policies. Forest communities consider the forests to be collectively owned. Some of these communities will not participate in timber activities because they do not believe the government has the authority to give away forest land. Other communities refuse to acknowledge new government forest concessions because they have the land deeds over the forest. Forest reforms prioritized extraction over community concerns about land rights. A lack of transparency and communication has left forest communities disempowered, because, without land rights, they have lost their ability to access or control the forest according to their own economic and social needs. These communities experienced a long history of exploitation and feel that current policies are putting the power in the hands of the government rather than in their own. This has made timber harvesting more difficult and has led to land disputes and power struggles reminiscent of pre-conflict corruption.
Beevers concludes by suggesting several policy recommendations. First, he points out that it is important to build trust by consulting citizens on how natural resources can benefit all and not just the powerful. Next, he points out that focusing on extractive industries may lead to unintended consequences, and it may be more productive to slow down efforts to rebuild this sector. He ends by asking international peacebuilders to think about “‘whose peace’ they are trying to secure and what kind of development truly supports human well-being and human security.”
NOTE: This summary is produced by the Rule of Law Collaborative, not by the original author(s).