Ostrom 1994 (Dales ) ( ) Ostrom() ( ) Kijima () ( ) Sakurai () Sakurai

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Ostrom 1994 (Dales ) ( ) Ostrom() ( ) Kijima () ( ) Sakurai () Sakurai"

まいかおえづか
5 years ago
Views:

1 (UNCED) (SFM: Sustainable Forest Management) (UNCED ) UNCED (SFM) SFMSFM (Blomley, Ostrom ) ( ) ( ) (Feeny et al., Ostrom & )

2 Ostrom 1994 (Dales ) ( ) Ostrom() ( ) Kijima () ( ) Sakurai () Sakurai

4 SFM ( ) (SFM) I ( ) ( ) I I ( )

5 , p. I () %,ha., ha. ha.,ha, ha. %. % ,000 25,000 %,m,m,m m,m,m. %. %. % ,000 15,000 10,000 5,

6 , m,.%,,.%,.%,,,.%,,.%,.%,,,,.%,,.%,.%,,,,.%,,.%,.%,,,,.%,,.%,.%,, 1, , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,

7 . %. %. % ha ha. %. %. %.. %,,,,. %,,. %,,.. %. %,,. %. %. % (), ha,,,,. %,..,.,. %,...,. %,...,. %,...,,,,. %,. %,,. %,. %,,,,. %,. %,,. %,. %,,,,. %,. %,,. %,. %,,,,. %,. %,. %,. %

8 9,000, ,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000, () ha ha.... % ha. (). % ha ha. % haha ha ha. % ha ha, ha ha, ha

9 300, , , , , , , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, , ha, ha, ha

10 ,, -,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, - -,,,, - -,,,, -,,,,,,,,, -,,,,, - -,,,,, - -,,,, - -,,,, ,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,,, - - -, -,,,,,,, - - -, -,,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,,, - -, -,,,,,,, - - -, -,,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,,, -, -, -,,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,,, - -, -, -,,,,,,, - -, -, -,

11 ha km km

12 ,,,,, p. %. %,, ()

13 (), ) ) ) )

14 ha () () (),,. %, (), ha, ha.ha. % () (), ha ha. %, ha haha haha ha. %,,

15 - (m ),. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. % %,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. % %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. % %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. % %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. % %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %,,. %. %. %. %. %. %. %. %

16 % % % % % (VO) (NPO) ()(a, b, ) km,,,, ( ),

17 .ha,.. ha. ha.ha.ha

18 . ha,,,, () ha () () (), C, ( )

19 (Feeny et al. ) ( ) ( ) (a,b) () ( ) Ostrom() Ostrom() Ostrom() ( ) ( ) (Oakerson ) ( ) ( ) ( ) () () () () () ()

20 () () () () () () () () () SFM [ ] (), [ ] Blomley, D. W. ed. (), Making the Commons Work-Theory, Practice, and Policy-, ICS Press [ ], () :, [ ] Dales, J. H.(), The property Interface, Robert D. and Nancy S.D. ed., Economics of the Environment, W W Norton&Company, pp. - [ ] Feeny, D., Berkers, F., Mccay, B. J. & Acheson, J. M.(), The Tragedy of the Commons: Twenty- Two Years Later, Human Ecology,. : -,,, : - [ ] () ( ),,. : - [ ] () ( ),,. : - [ ] (), [ ] (),,,,, pp. - [] (), [] (), : - [] () [] (),, ( ): - [] Kijima, Y., Sakurai, T. & Otsuka, K.(), Iriaichi: Collective vs. Individualized Management of Community Forest in Post-War Japan, manuscript [] (), [] (), [] (),, : - [] ()

21 [] (),, - [] (),,,,, pp. - [] Okarson R. J. (), Analyzing the Commoms: A Framework, Blomley, D. W. ed., Making the Commons Work-Theory, Practice, and Policy-, ICS Press, Ch., pp.- [] (),, : - [] (), [] Ostrom, E. (), Isuues of Definition and Theory: Some Conclusion and Hypotheses, in NRC., Proceedings of the Conference Property Resource Management, National Academy Press [] Ostrom, E. (), Governing the Commons, Cambridge University Press [] Ostrom, E. & Schroeder, L.,ed. and Wynne, S. (), Institutional Incentives and Sustainable Development, Infrastructure Policies in Perspective, Westview Press [] Ostrom, E. et al. (), Rules, Games, and Common- Pool Resources, The University of Michigan Press [] (), [] (), [] (),, : - [] Sakurai, T., Rayamajhi, S., Pokharei, R. & Otsuka, K.(), Private, Collective, and Centralized Community Management: A Comparative Study of Timber Forest and Plantation Management in Inner Tarai of Nepal, manuscript [] (), [] (),, : - [] (),, : - [] (), [] (), [] (a) ( ), : - [] (b),,. : - [] (),,. : - [] UNCED(), Non-Legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests, gopher://gopher.undp.org//unconfs/unced/english /forestp [] (), [] (),,,,, pp. - [] WCFSD(), World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development, Annual Progress Report, Geneva, Switzerland [] ()

22 Abstract The Evaluation of Sustainability for Utilization of Forestry Resource in Japan: The Comparison of Property Regimes (Market, State, and Commons) as the Sustainable Resource Management System Shunji MATSUOKA Associate Professor, Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima , Japan ipc.hiroshima-u.ac.jp Tsukasa WATARI Researcher, Chugoku Regional Research Center 4-33 Komachi, Nakaku Hiroshima, Japan Reishi MATSUMOTO Research Associate, Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University Hiroaki SHIRAKAWA Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University This review evaluated Japanese forest management from a viewpoint of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM). Furthermore three types of forest; private, state, and communal forest were analyzed from physical and financial aspect. The outcome of this research suggests that all types of forest can not achieve SFM. For private forest, the numbers of individual forest owners who are engaged in management of forest have been decreased. Therefore forest area which need proper management increased. Moreover the Forestry Agency which manages state forest does not have the sufficient ability to control forest due to heavy debt burden. The numbers of forest cooperatives that manage the communal forest and sell the timber have been decreasing. The seriousness of the problem to manage Japanese forest is that, no matter what type of property regimes or what purpose of management, forest is managed by commercial forestry. To meet with the diverse public needs for forest resources, its need to choose specific property regimes for particular resource utilization to achieve particular social purpose. However, traditional property regimes have limitations. In the last section, we examined the modern communal management which is a new concept of participatory management by forest owner and NPO (Non Profit Organization) or VO (Voluntary Organization). Journal of International Development and Cooperation, Vol.6, No.1, 2000, pp. 1 22

地域共同体を基盤とした渇水管理システムの持続可能性

地域共同体を基盤とした渇水管理システムの持続可能性 I 1994 1994 1994 1,176 1,377 1995, p.21; 1999 Kazuki Kagohashi / 10 1 1 1991 drought water bank 2013 466-8673 18 E-mail:kagohashi@gmail.com 1 355 10 2 Kondo 2013 136 2015 spring / No.403 2 1 1994 1995,