IPSI Case Study Summary Sheet
Basic Information
Title of case study
Historical changes of co-management and biodiversity of community forests: A case study from S village ofDong minority in China, 1950-2010
Submitting IPSI member organization(s)Centre of Forestry, Environmental and Resource Policy Study, Renmin University of China

Other contributing organization(s) (IPSI members and/or non-members)

Author(s) and affiliation(s)Minghui Zhang, Boya Liu, Jinlong Liu (Renmin University of China)
Format of case study (manuscript or audiovisual) Manuscript
Language
Keywords (3-5 key concepts included in the case study)
biodiversity, co-management, community forests, forestry policy, Dong minority, China
Date of submission (or update, if this is an update of an existing case study)
22 December 2015
Web link (of the case study or lead organization if
http://www.ruc.edu.cn/enEnglishavailable for more information)

Geographical Information
Country (where site(s) or activities described in the case study are located – can be multiple, or even “global”)
ChinaLocation(s) (within the country or countries – leave blank if specific location(s) cannot be identified)
Hunan Province
Longitude/latitude or Google Maps link (if location is identified)
https://www.google.com/maps/place/26%C2%B008'00.0%22N+109%C2%B030'00.0%22E/@26.1333333,108.3
815832,8z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d26.1333333!4d109.5?hl=en
Ecosystem(s) (please place an “x” in all appropriate boxes)
Forestx
Grassland
Agricultural
In-land water
CoastalUrban/periDryland
Mountain
Other (Please specify)
urbanSocioeconomic and environmental characteristics of the area (within 50 words)
S village is a traditional hamlet of the Dong ethnic minority. It is located 26°08’N, 109°30’E; along theboundaries of Guangxi, Hunan and Guizhou provinces of southern China at an average altitude of 1150 meters
above sea level. It has nearly 800 hectares forestland and 60 hectares farmland, supporting not only 800
people living but also hundreds of kinds of plants and birds, sometimes wild boars and wild goats.
Description of human-nature interactions in the area (land-use, traditional resource management practices etc. – within 50words)

As a traditional Dong minority village, forests have been multiple meaningful since ancient time and there are somespecial customs related to forests. For over 300 years, the villagers have survived by using self-subsistence paddy farming
systems and lived in wooden houses. They also believe in “Fengshui forests”, which can bring fortune to the community
and its people, so that it had an ancient cutting ban for protecting it natural status since Qing Dynasty.

Contents
Status (“ongoing” or “completed”)
Completed
Period (MM/YY to MM/YY)
2012-2015
Rationale (why activities or policies described, or information shared in the case study are needed – within 50 words)
As the most important strategy to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), protected areas areunderstaffed, underfunded and beleaguered in the face of external threats and have made some negative
impacts on local poverty. However, many traditional forests scattered in Chinese villages with no staff and few
funds have preserved various species as “community based nature reserves”, even in the background of quick
social changing, such as growing of human populations, expending in agricultural land uses, increasing in urban
migration and rising in market value of plantations during the recent 60 years.
Objectives (goals of activities or policies described, or of producing the case study)
This paper tries to illustrate a case study on different forest co-management regimes in S village where there
are community forests and a “community based nature reserves”, from the year of 1950 to 2010 with greatsocial-economy transformations, in order to find out: Are there any approaches that impact the goodbiodiversity conservation of community forests in co-management regimes?
Activities and/or practices employed

From June 2012 to January 2015, we conducted totally 7 visits comprised of 75 days of grounded fieldresearches in S village, living, eating and working with the villagers and trying to learn their language. In thefield, our team emphasized on the principle of helping without disturbing – with a value of respects, equality,nature-and-ecology friendliness, to understand social locations in the landscape arrangement, details in thehistory, and meanings in the culture of the village.
Results
Based on the analysis of comparing the traditional and nowadays in status, technologies, institutions of forestry andbiodiversity in S village, a summary can be given right now to show what approaches may influence the role of comanagement in biodiversity conservation.

Lessons learned (factors in success or failure, challenges and opportunities)
Coercive external interventions may damage local biodiversity. Weak internal capacity may also result inbiodiversity loss after decentralization. Spontaneous internal capacity building of landscape protection may
benefit local biodiversity conservation. Respectful external advices may enhance local concerns of biodiversity.
Key messages
Article 8(j) of CBD emphasized the important roles of “in situ conservation” and traditional knowledge whilemore local participation and benefit sharing may be the crucial to achieve the Aichi Target in the future 5 years.
Co-management of community forests as “community based nature reserves” may become the key to meetgaps of networks among protected areas in aspects of both geographic location and financial matters.
Relationship to other IPSI activities (if the case study is related to any other IPSI collaborative activities, case studies, etc.)
This case study originally appeared in the Satoyama Initiative Thematic Review v. 1.
Funding (any relevant information about funding of activities or projects described in the case study)

Contributions to Global Agendas
CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets (https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/)
The table below shows based on the self-evaluation by author(s).  and  indicates the “direct” or “indirect” contributions to theCBD’s Aichi Biodiversity Targets respectively to which the work described in this case study contributes to.

Strategic Goal A

Strategic Goal B

Strategic Goal C

Strategic Goal D

Strategic Goal EUN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs)
The table below shows based on the self-evaluation by author(s).  and  indicates the “direct” or “indirect” contributions to theSDGs respectively to which the work described in this case study contributes to.
