Cameroon : Indicators

In theory, when one looks at the current mechanism of permits attribution in Cameroon, one can conclude that to some extent, it is transparent. In fact you have two categories of titles in Cameroon: those granted by auctions (Forest concessions and Sale of standing volumes) and those granted by mutual agreements (Timber Recuperation Permit), title for special products, personal title…).
For the first categories of titles, the process is quite transparent. In fact, areas to be opened for logging are delimited, a call of tender is advertised, technical and financial offers are scrutinized and forests are attributed to highest bidders. There is also an Independent Observer monitoring and reporting on the attribution process. In practice, forests are not always given to best offers and complicity has sometimes been suspected between the Independent Observer and the Ministry in accepting breaches of the regulations on transparency and accountability in the allocation process. As one high ranking forest officer put it: “forests are attributed to those we want to”. In fact, the first rounds of allocation in 1998-1999 illustrated the limitations of the transparency of the process, with some companies receiving the concessions or sales of standing volumes without deserving them.
For the second category of permits, it is attributed either by the minister in charge of forests or by an inter-ministerial commission. This category is also highly associated with illegal logging and there are ongoing advocacy activities to ban these titles.

In addition to logging permits, are there any permits for conservation activities, environmental services (e.g. water conservation, or carbon storage), or eco-tourism services provided by forests?  Read the report...

Do permits exist for all uses / services?

For now, most permits are for logging activities (logging concessions, sales of standing volumes, council and community forests, Timber Removal Authorisation (AEB) and Timber Recovery Permit (ARB) ), Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP) and wildlife (special permits for NTFPs, hunting licences, bush meat gathering permits...). There are no permits for conservation areas, environmental services (water conservation and carbon storage...) or eco-tourism. Read more...

Is there a 'pool' of forest, owned by the state or others, for which permits or user-rights are potentially available?  Read the report...

Is information on any forest land unallocated or not under any type of concession published?

MINFOF with its partner Global Forest Watch produces mapped information on all forest land status of the southern part of the Country. These maps show already attributed and unallocated areas. These unattributed spots of forests include Forest Management Units (FMU) not yet attributed and intended for conservation, and forests in non permanent forest estates on which local communities exert their usage rights. Read more...

The first step in the allocation of permits is to decide where: Are there clear, documented, and understood steps for deciding to allocate permits, for example when to allocate which parts of the state forest to logging, mining, carbon, ecotourism or other concessions?  Read the report...

Is it clear how the decision to start a round of permit allocation is made?

Procedures for allocating permits are clear and codified in regulations especially for FMUs which are already delimited in the zoning plan (113 FMUs in Cameroon). Each year, a number of these areas set aside for FMUs in the zoning plan are given out for allocation through a bidding process. Concerning mining, the ministry in charge of Mining has data concerning existing reserves of mineral resources. Companies apply for research permits, and the location is decided jointly by the company and the ministry.
Concerning land, the requester applies for a specific location, and the final decision is made after negotiations between the Government and the company.
There are no permits issued for ecotourism or for carbon use of forests. Read more...

At the time an area of forest is identified for allocation to any sort of concessionaire, are stakeholders (other than the forest owner) consulted, for example on any conditions to be attached to the permit?  Read the report...

Is there a stakeholder consultation process prior to permit allocation?

Prior to permit allocation, there is no stakeholder consultation. The procedure is controlled by the ministry of Forest with an Independent Observer reporting on the process. The Independent Observer does not represent stakeholders and his report has to be validated by MINFOF. Read more...

When an area of forest is identified for allocation to any sort of concessionaire, is this publicly advertised so that the opportunity for new permits / user rights is open to anyone?  Read the report...

Are the areas assigned for each round of permit allocation advertised?

With regards to logging concessions and sales of standing volumes, areas opened to logging are advertised on the notice board in the central MINFOF administration and in the website of MINFOF. This year (2010), MINFOF has opened 47 sales of standing volumes for logging and the auction process in going on. However, areas for small titles are not advertised. Read more...

Prior to the final allocation of any area of state forest to logging, mining, carbon, ecotourism or other concessions are there "due diligence" checks on the eligibility, suitability, or (technical and/or financial) capability of applicants, and is this analysis made public?  Read the report...

Is there transparent independent verification (due diligence) of the eligibility of any applicants for forest permits?

Once bidders have applied for forest permits, an inter-ministerial commission including the Independent Observer scrutinizes and check applications on eligibility (financial and technical capacity, prior payment of taxes, etc.).. Thereafter, a checklist is issued and advertised of bidders who do not fulfil all requirements together with the failing or missing documents. It is worth to note that although most applicants have complete application packages, these documents are not all genuine. Read more...

Is the final decision to allocate any permit made in way which allows citizens to assure themselves that the correct process has been followed? – is the process documented and published?  Read the report...

Is the final permit allocation decision-making process transparent?

Citizens cannot know if the permit allocation procedure was followed. Although MINFOF advertises information on applicant files, reports of the Independent Observer who took part in the process are not published and are sometimes validated months after the attribution process has been concluded. Read more...

Have there been recent attempts to make improvements to the permit allocation system? Have there been recent changes to the system to accommodate ‘newer’ forms of permits such as conservation, carbon storage, or ecotourism? If so please give details. Were these successful?  Read the report...

Has the permit allocation system improved?

Last year, the circular note No 0924/MINFOF/SG/DF was issued on 23 September 2009. This circular aims at improving the attribution system of small titles. The innovation is that the attribution of small titles is done by auction through an inter-ministerial committee. However, there are considerations for banning or suspending these small titles to avoid current situation of illegal logging. The forest policy is under reform and there are expectations that they will include permits such as conservation, carbon deal and storage, ecotourism. Read more...

Are all contracts / concession agreements / permits in the public domain? If so, which law or regulation specifies that they should be? Are they entirely in the public domain or are certain ‘commercially confidential’ clauses hidden?  Read the report...

Are the final permit / contract documents made public?

The final decision of the inter-ministerial commission is pasted on the board in the MINFOF central office. However, contracts/concessions agreements/permits signed between MINFOF and the beneficiary are not published. There are cases where due to conflict between the logging companies and the local populations, or for companies on the process of forest certification, the signed documents were made public. Read more...

Some types of permit, for example small-scale or Community Forest logging activities might be exempted from submitting an EIA.  Read the report...

Are all forest operations required to carry out an EIA?

In Cameroon, all forest operations are required to carry out EIA but at different degrees. FMUs and Sales of Standing Volumes are required to carry out detailed EAI while in Community and Communal Forests, only summary EIA are asked. Explicitly, it is not required for ARB and AEB to carry out EIA, but is implicitly done within the frame of the development project to which these titles are linked to. The harvesting of special products or NTFPs is not associated with EIA. Thus goes from the fact that only parts of trees are collected with little impact on the environment. The issue now is whether environmental management plans emerging from these studies are implemented. Read more...

Where an EIA or similar is a requirement for any concession, is it published? Is there any public consultation during the EIA, or any public presentation of the conclusions and recommendations?  Read the report...

Are any environmental / social impact assessments for forest operations available to the public?

EIA reports are not made public. Yet they are not confidential and can be obtained upon request at the Ministry of Environment. EIA studies have two main steps in which local populations are involved: public consultation and public hearings. During public hearings, summaries of EIA reports are distributed to participants including local populations and they also have the opportunity to consult the whole report printed only in 20 copies. So, the public does not have copies of the report simply because of duplication costs which are very high. Thus, it is difficult for local populations to verify if their recommendations and amendments made during public hearings are taken into consideration in the final version of the EIA reports which are criticised to be written in style and languages not familiar to local populations. Read more...