problem that has been cited in most critiques of community studies. Murphree (1999) argues that since the application of the concept of ‘community of place’, ‘community of interest’ or ‘community of use’, all pose challenges for common property theory, the definitions should be more functional, while still recognizing the significance of boundary delineation in Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM). The arguments that underlie the struggle with the con- cept of community are based on the knowledge that generalizing communities, and thus creating an image of homogeneity, masks real differences within such population groups (Turner, 2000).
In SFP case, they chose to work with a ‘community of place’. This has made greater the issues that SFP, as a private entity, had to deal with when engaging a community as partner rather than an established business outfit. The community concept in this case was conceived to fulfil a certain function i.e. to help win the state-owned forest assets, and at the same time create the opportunity for the mostly rural residents to enter into the running of the local economy. Because the forest assets are scattered over a large area covering parts of two provinces, as we illustrate below, and because the criteria for identifying communities depended on location of the forest assets, this meant that the communities were scattered and found in different corners of the project area. SFP reports that this factor is a barrier to effective engagement. Secondly, wide differentiation exists in these areas determined by factors such as language and culture. Such issues later affected the way that the community trusts functioned.
Attempts at definition of community for both SFP and SQF did not take into account social boundaries. In the SQF area, local residents considered social ties rather than spatial ones to define their identities. Hence many people identified with others beyond their geographic boundaries, but who had similar social ties, rather than those within their neighbourhoods. Among the Zulu people, the surname is retained along the lineage, and clans are organized under a traditional system governed by a chief. In most cases, these communities can be found within one geographic area. However, there has also been significant movement in the past especially during apartheid, and the haphazard nature of these move- ments interfered with such spatial units. It is now common to find certain small
communities with similar familial ties located in other spaces away from their traditional lands. Although there has been some degree of integration, the tendency to identify with the original social ties is still greater than the geo- graphic ones. In fact, in Zululand for instance, when people meet for the first time, the older person would normally ask for the others surname rather than his or her place of origin, as the surname itself is supposed to tell not only one’s place of origin, but kinship ties as well
External actors on the local scene may not all need a detailed understanding of groups of people to execute their business, but when it comes to engaging communities, relying on geographic boundaries alone is inadequate to understand the local social dynamics. Such knowledge is necessary in projecting what activities can be successful at the local level, and which ones are most likely to face difficulties due to certain local beliefs or preferences. The differences in the Eastern Cape for SFP were more numerous than those in northern KwaZulu- Natal. Although, as mentioned before, the traditional authority is still more influential in KwaZulu-Natal, the Eastern Cape north forest region managed by SFP is characterized not only by numerous administrative boundaries in certain areas, but by different languages and cultures as well. The eastern side of SFP area lies on the flexible borders between Zulu land and Xhosa land. Even administratively, these borders were not clearly defined and one could drive one direction from an area designated as being in KwaZulu-Natal province, move farther west into the Eastern Cape Province and once again come across bill- boards welcoming you to KwaZulu-Natal. The overlapping nature of these boundaries does not pose any unmanageable logistical problems for SFP, but may serve to illuminate the possible issues that inform the manner in which groups of communities may define themselves.
In the SFP area, dissatisfaction of the relationship between local people and SFP has sometimes emanated from the feeling that only some areas or social units are considered for employment, bursaries, or other benefits that spin off from this alliance. Within the area falling under Singisi Trust for instance, there is a specific clan called KwaJali. A lady chief who is known by her title name Ndabezitha Jali leads this area. During an interview with Ndabezitha Jali, she had this to say about their involvement with SFP:
SFP approached us as a community that they wanted to have a joint venture. They thought it necessary to tell us what was going on emphasizing that it was important for us to know what would go on in our area and on our land. But when they mentioned job creation, we got interested as this has been the main concern for this community. After this, our community meetings were well attended and even our hall became too small and we would sit outside. The people were particularly happy about this venture and job creation and they were also hoping that they would be supported by the company (SFP) whenever they had projects that need funding support. This community had been concerned that previously, they were not considered for jobs at the saw-mill (when it was run by the state) and they wanted to know if
this would change and they inquired this from the company. The company (SFP) indicated that they were going to give the people from our area first priority when jobs were available. But things have not happened as it was initially promised by the company. Our community members are still unemployed and there are no job opportunities for them at the company. Those who had jobs have lost them and most of the people who are getting employed are people from outside our community. These people could be from other places like Singisi. Washington Jali, a member of the KwaJali chieftaincy and a principal of the local secondary school and also his community’s representative at the Singisi sub-Trust corroborated Ndabezitha Jali’s perspective:
KwaJali is part and parcel of Weza (where SFP saw-mill and main operations offices are located). So we wanted to have something from Weza that could help the community in terms of development. Of course we got promises from SFP that they would work together with us on some of these issues. In our area we have problems of capacity especially finances and this is what brought us closer to the company (SFP) because we wanted to get financial help that could help us fulfill some of our needs as a community. They, SFP, also told us of the 10% shares and that we would receive annual dividends so we had an idea what we were entitled to. Also there is the issue of scholarships and bursaries from SFP. This is a thorny issue for me because I had a child who had applied for a bursary and who quali- fied to go and do engineering so he applied to a technology institute. I followed up with SFP but nothing came out of it. The only person I know who got it from around my area is one person whose father works with SFP. About working with other communities, the area targeted by SFP is big. In our case, we have our neighbors at Weza. When I talk about Weza, it is composed of two traditional areas meaning two chiefs but so far we work together. If it was to go beyond Weza, that would be too big and some people would want to have more power, too many people spoil the broth. SFP is situated in KwaJali area and the other area I am talking about is KwaMaxhi.
From the two statements above, the term community refers to a much smaller unit from which the members draw their identity. The sentiments expressed above also suggest that their trust is built and confined within this cluster of relations. The KwaJali are ready to extend a working relationship to the people of KwaMaxhi, who together with them occupy the Weza area, but any relationship beyond that is believed to expose the community to domination and power dynamics of other areas. The Singisi Trust, of which they are but one among several communities is one such entity that according to KwaJali, such power dynamics are manifest. Secondly, because SFP’s operations offices are located in Weza, which is home to KwaJali and KwaMaxhi, there are feelings of entitle- ment, hence the requests that they be prioritized for jobs and bursaries. The main reason for the complaint is because so far they have not received the benefits such as jobs that they had anticipated; but the forest operations extend to areas further west into Singizi and as far as Langeni in Umtata, hence the people in these areas could also claim similar entitlements. It is due to this extensive scope of the forest assets that SFP’s understanding is not confined to social units alone, but covers a much larger area consisting of several autonomous groups.
As a result, SFP’s relationship with these communities around Weza has not been cordial. One SFP forester clustered them under ‘problem communities’ also indicating that fires arising as a result of arson are more frequent in this area than other forest areas. While SFP’s assessment of this community may be accurate, based on their investigations and knowledge, the KwaJali readily band around their own in solving issues that commonly affect them. Such a militant and united stance may be a problem for SFP whom the KwaJali have accused of making false promises.
Concluding note
Although there were logistical challenges and incapacities within communities to engage with the forest companies, the community-company axis discussed here acts as another arena where power relations predicate the kind of relationships created. Outstanding government policy processes also cause tensions. It is a case of unfulfilled expectations by communities, and for the private forestry, a problematic and complex environment, where they cannot deliver what they had indicated to communities in their operation areas. What is important in both cases is that actors have the opportunity to learn from these new processes, and due to the flexibilities in these relationships, ideas with good potential can be strength- ened while poor ones are discarded or replaced with better ones.
Finally, Figure 10 summarizes the key management styles as discussed, of both SFP and SQF.
Figure 10 Comparative summary of SFP and SQF
SFP - Eastern Cape SQF - KwaZulu-Natal
Primary approach to empowerment
Community as business partner Black entity as business partner
Secondary approach to empowerment
Individual focus in skills transfer through outsourcing activities such as transportation, silviculture and cleaning contracts
Business skills training focusing on individuals from the community through Fukamela incubation scheme
Community support activities geared towards improving local businesses such as craft making Community
representation
Umbrella community Trust (SDT) and two sub Trusts- Langeni & Singisi
One Trust director sits on SFP board of directors
Local committees
Community stake 10% shareholding None Motivation for
community outreach
To reduce cases of arson and improve security around forest assets
Improve on corporate social responsibility
To reduce cases of arson and improve security around forest assets
Improve on corporate social responsibility
Local challenges Identification of local communities
Defining local boundaries
Unresolved land tenure issues
Identification of local communities
Defining local boundaries