Response of forest management institutions to health-related shocks. Learning from the Busitema Forest Reserve of Uganda during the COVID-19 outbreak

ABSTRACT

There is extensive literature on forest management institutional responses as a function of socio-economic and political factors, albeit limited evidence on responses triggered by health shocks. To bridge this gap, this paper analyses forest management institutional response approaches around the Busitema Forest Reserve in Uganda, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a case. Household surveys (n = 135), focus group discussions (n = 4) and key informant interviews (n = 8) provided the relevant data. The results indicate that compliance with formal and informal institutions increased during the pandemic; this was attributed to fear and uncertainty about the mode of spread of the COVID-19 virus, which was flagged by mainstream media as a zoonotic disease. Formal institutional enforcement agents, therefore, used the pandemic to forward their agenda and reinforce rules that aim to exclude local people from resource appropriation in this reserve. The response was further manifested through the transposition of existing institutions to new functions, changes in rule application and the introduction of new rules. These responses paved the way for formal institutions to tighten their control of forest resource use by allying with informal institutions. The study provides complementary evidence on institutional change with an emphasis on COVID-19 as a health-related trigger.

KEYWORDS:

• Access rules
• forest resources
• institutional compliance
• protected area
• sanctions
• state agents
• zoonoses

Acknowledgements

Great thanks to the elders of the communities and the respondents who provided information for the development of this paper. Additional thanks go to Mahamoud Mukaya, Oshekituku Jacob Mugisha Moses and Zakaria Kinobe for their assistance during the fieldwork in Uganda.

Disclosure statement

There is no known conflict of interest and personal interests that could have shaped the findings reported in this paper.

Data availability statement

Supporting data that informed the findings of this research are presented within the article (see supplementary material).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2023.2212701.

Notes

1. The 2003 Tree Planting and Forestry Act of Uganda distinguishes between two types of reserves: Central forest reserve (also called major forest reserve) and local forest reserve). Both forests are state forests which are managed under The NFA (Central/Major) or District Forest Service (local).

2. The village council is recognized as the lowest collaborative unit of the state but performs most of the traditional functions in these communities – giving it an attribute of an informal structure. Membership into the village council is by election and/or co-optation.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the DFG Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [437116427].