By Jee-hyea Grace Arkoi
Liberia’s Blei Community Forest offers a powerful illustration of this broader understanding of African philanthropy.
Located in Nimba County, Blei became one of Liberia’s earliest community forests when the Forestry Development Authority signed a Community Forest Management Agreement (CFMA) with the Gba and Zor communities in 2011. The agreement represented more than legal recognition of community rights; it affirmed that the people living closest to the forest should have a central role in determining how it would be managed, protected, and sustained for present and future generations.
However, the significance of Blei extends beyond the establishment of a conservation framework. Blei reveals an often-overlooked dimension of African philanthropy and social justice: some of the most meaningful contributions to development are delivered through people investing their time, knowledge, leadership, relationships, and collective responsibility in protecting resources that serve the wider community.
The Generosity We Rarely Measure
Much of the global conversation on philanthropy remains centred on financial resources. Success is often assessed by the amount of funding committed to a cause, while far less attention is given to the countless non-financial contributions that make development efforts possible.
Across the continent, communities have long contributed labour to community projects, resolve disputes, preserve and share knowledge, and provide mutual support during times of need. Although these actions are rarely labelled as philanthropy, they reflect its fundamental principle: the voluntary contribution of one’s time, skills, resources, or knowledge for the benefit of others.
Recognising these forms of generosity is particularly important when examining environmental governance. Forests are often discussed primarily through the lenses of climate finance, biodiversity conservation, and donor-supported interventions. While such investments are essential, they can unintentionally obscure another form of contribution that is equally critical: the daily efforts of communities whose knowledge, labour, and stewardship sustain these landscapes.
Conservation in Blei Community Forest is not sustained solely by policies or external support. It also depends on governance systems that require community members to participate continuously in decisions affecting their shared resources.
According to Blei Community Forest Chief Officer Mr. Saye Thompson, decision-making is intentionally structured to ensure that no single institution governs the forest alone. Community members elect representatives to the Community Assembly, which in turn elects an Executive Committee. The Executive Committee works alongside the Community Forest Management Body (CFMB), which oversees the day-to-day management of the forest. As Mr. Thompson explained, “Decisions taken will affect everybody. Therefore, we do not exclude anyone from the process, by making single-handed decisions in the forest sector.”
Rather than treating participation as a procedural requirement, Blei embeds it within its governance structure. Annual and quarterly meetings provide opportunities for reporting back to the wider community, while the CFMB also holds regular meetings twice each month, alongside emergency meetings whenever necessary. This continuous dialogue reflects an understanding that stewardship depends not only on technical expertise but also on maintaining community trust and accountability.
Community Stewardship as an Act of Philanthropy
Community forestry is often discussed in terms of policies and legal frameworks, but laws alone do not protect forests. Behind every community forest are ordinary people who choose to participate in its governance. They attend meetings after long days of farming, accept leadership responsibilities, monitor forest activities, help resolve disagreements, and devote their time to implementing management plans that benefit the wider community.
When viewed through the lens of African philanthropy, these are not merely governance responsibilities—they are acts of giving. Blei’s governance demonstrates that stewardship is sustained through relationships rather than hierarchy alone. Community members who have concerns about forest management do not have to approach the CFMB directly. Instead, each of the 48 participating communities elects two Community Assembly representatives who serve as the first point of contact. These representatives communicate concerns to the Executive Committee and CFMB, ensuring that decisions originate from community voices rather than being imposed from above.
Mr. Thompson noted, “If you observe anything, or you want to understand how the forest is managed, the first people you get to is the Community Assembly within your community. The Community Assembly will communicate your concerns to us, the CFMB.”
This governance model illustrates that participation extends beyond attending meetings. It creates practical channels through which residents can influence how their forest is managed, reinforcing the principle that stewardship is a shared responsibility rather than the preservation of a few elected leaders.
These contributions rarely appear in donor reports because they cannot easily be quantified. Yet every meeting attended, every concern raised through elected representatives, and every collective decision reached represents an investment in institutions that make community forestry possible. Without these voluntary contributions of time, leadership and accountability, community forestry would struggle to function regardless of the level of external financial support.
Blei’s Journey Reminds Us That Stewardship Is Not Always Easy
It is tempting to present community forestry as a straightforward success story but Blei Community Forest reminds us that the reality is far more complex. There is a need to balance conservation objectives with the livelihood of the community, while navigating competing interests over land and natural resources.
Forest management in Blei is guided by a Community Forest Management Plan that determines how resources are used and protected. Community members seeking to harvest non-timber forest products such as bitter kola do not enter the forest independently. Requests are first channelled through their Community Assembly representatives, who notify the CFMB. A forest guide is then assigned to accompany the harvest and ensure that only the approved products and quantities are collected.
The same oversight applies to researchers and external organisations wishing to work within the forest. Mr. Thompson shares that researchers are required to obtain a permit through the CFMB before conducting their activities, with local forest guides assigned to accompany them throughout the research process.
This structured approach demonstrates that stewardship extends beyond protecting trees towards establishing transparent systems for managing access to shared resources.
The responsibility for protecting the forest also rests heavily on community members themselves. Blei currently employs eleven forest guides drawn from the surrounding communities. Their responsibilities include monitoring the forest boundary, observing human activities, conducting biodiversity monitoring, and maintaining records on the condition of the forest resources.
Their work illustrates a form of philanthropy that is seldom recognised. These are local people investing their labour, knowledge and commitment to safeguard a public resource that benefits both present and future generations.
Participation Makes Social Justice Tangible
Social justice is often discussed in terms of access to basic needs like education, healthcare, employment or land. Equally important, however, is whether communities have meaningful opportunities to participate in governance decisions affecting their lives.
Blei’s governance structure demonstrates how participation is translated into practice. Rather than concentrating authority within a single institution, decision-making moves between the Community Assembly, the Executive Committee and the Community Forest Management Body. Community concerns are discussed through elected representatives before decisions are taken, while annual and quarterly reporting ensures that the wider community remains informed about the management of its forest.
This process reflects an important principle of social justice: people are not simply recipients of conservation programmes but active participants in shaping them.
At the same time, stewardship also produces tangible benefits for community members, particularly, employment. Community members are recruited as forest guides, providing paid opportunities linked directly to forest management.
Beyond employment, revenues received by the community are re-invested in local development projects, including schools, nurses’ quarters, a resource centre and educational opportunities for young people. According to Mr. Thompson, these investments demonstrate how community stewardship can generate benefits that extend well beyond conservation itself.
Recognising Communities as Partners, Not Beneficiaries
Blei Community Forest challenges one of the most persistent assumptions within development practice—that philanthropic value flows primarily from donors to communities. The reality is far more reciprocal.
While external funding undoubtedly provides important technical support, capacity strengthening and financial resources, every successful community forestry initiative also depends upon substantial contributions already being made by communities themselves.
No donor can substitute for local legitimacy. No grant can replace community ownership, and no project can manufacture the trust required for collective decision-making. Community members contribute resources long before development projects begin, and they continue to invest long after funding cycles have ended. Their time, leadership, local knowledge and commitment form the foundation upon which effective community stewardship is built.
At the same time, this stewardship is not without significant challenges. Mr. Thompson identifies weak enforcement of Liberia’s forest management laws as one of the greatest obstacles facing community forestry. He argues that competing interests, particularly mining and logging, frequently undermine community conservation efforts. Additionally, poverty and unemployment place additional pressure on communities to support extractive activities that promise immediate livelihoods. He also highlighted the need for stronger coordination among government institutions responsible for land-use planning and natural resource governance.
His observation underscores an important reality. Community stewardship does not occur in isolation from broader economic pressures. Rather, communities often find themselves balancing conservation
commitments against immediate livelihood needs, making their continued investment in protecting shared resources all the more significant.
Seeing Philanthropy Through the Lens of Community Stewardship
Recognising these contributions fundamentally changes how we think about philanthropy. Communities cease to be viewed merely as beneficiaries receiving external support and instead become recognised as partners already investing significant resources of their own in protecting public goods. Financial support does not create this commitment; rather, it strengthens and complements a generosity that already exists within communities.
The story of Blei Community Forest is therefore not simply about conserving trees.; it is about communal responsibility. Every Community Assembly representative who conveys residents’ concerns to the Community Forest Management Body, every forest guide who patrols the forest boundary, every community leader who reports back through quarterly and annual meetings, and every resident who chooses dialogue over conflict contributes something of lasting value. These investments of time, leadership and accountability enable community forestry to function long before external support arrives and long after individual projects end.
The people of Blei Community Forest demonstrate that some of the most significant acts of philanthropy are neither announced at fundraising events nor recorded in financial reports. They are found in the everyday work of ordinary people who choose to participate in community meetings, raise concerns through representative structures, patrol forest boundaries, guide sustainable resource use and remain engaged in decisions that shape their collective future.
Ultimately, the future of African philanthropy will depend not only on mobilising more financial resources but also on recognising, valuing and strengthening the remarkable generosity that communities have quietly practised for generations.