**1. Introduction**

160 Sustainable Forest Management – Case Studies

Barrow, C. (2006). *Environmental Management for Sustainable Development: Principles and*

Bhuju, D.R. & Ohsawa, M. (1998). Effects of Nature Trails on Ground Vegetation &

Chatterjea, K. (1994). Dynamics of Fluvial and Slope Processes in the Changing Geomorphic

Chatterjea, K. (2006). Public Use of Urban Forest, its Impact, and related Conservation

Chatterjea, K. (2007). Assessment and Demarcation of Trail Degradation in a Nature Reserve,

Florida Trail Association, Inc. (1991). *Trail Manual of Florida Trail*, Florida Trail Association,

Forest Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1991). *Trails Management Handbook*

Gardner, B.D. & Chong, S.K. (1990). Hydrological Responses of Compacted Forest Soils*. Journal of Hydrology,* Vol. 112, No. 3-4, (January 1990), pp. (327-334), ISSN: 0022-1694. IUCN (World Conservation Union). (2006). Protection of Bukit Timah as a reserve, In*: IUCN*

Lynn, N. A. & Brown, R. D. (2003). Effects of Recreational Use Impacts on Hiking

Poon, A. (1990). Competitive Strategies for a "New Tourism", In: *Progress in Tourism,*

Sutherland, R. A.; Bussen, J. O.; Plondke, D. L.; Evans, B. M. & Ziegler, A. D (2001)

Wee, Y. C. & Corlett, R. T. (1986). *The City and the Forest: Plant Life in Urban Singapore*,

World Tourism Organization. (1999). *Guide for local authorities on developing Sustainable*

No. 1, (January-February 2001), pp. (71-86), ISSN: 1099-145X.

Singapore University Press, ISBN:9971691035, Singapore.

Organization, ISBN:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Madrid, Spain

2309.18), Washington, D.C." Government Printing Office.

*Management Category*, 02-03-2006, Available from:

http://sea.unep-wcmc.org/sites/pa/0538v.htm

2003), pp. (77-87), ISSN: 0169-2046.

ISBN:<PHONE_NUMBER>, London

Vol. 18, No. 5, (September-October 2007) pp. (500-518), ISSN: 1085-3278. Dotzenko A. D.; Papamichos N. T. & Romine D. S. (1967). Effects of Recreational Use on Soil &

Understorey Colonization of a Patchy Remnant Forest in an Urban Domain. *Biological Conservation*, Vol. 85, No. 1-2, (July-August 1998), pp. (123-135), ISSN: 0006-3207. Chatterjea, K. (1989). Surface Wash: The Dominant Geomorphic Process in the Surviving

Rainforest of Singapore. *Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography*, Vol. 10, No. 2,

Environment of Singapore. *Earth Surface Processes and Landforms*, Vol. 19, No. 7,

Issues: The Singapore Experience, In: *Challenging Sustainability: Urban Development and Change in Southeast Asia,* Wong T.C. et al, pp. (53-79), Marshall Cavendish

Using GIS: Case of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve. *Land Degradation and Development*,

Moisture Conditions in Rocky Mountain National Park. *Journal of Soil & Water Conservation*, Vol. 22, No. 5, (September-October 1967), pp. (196-197), ISSN: 0022-4561.

*(amended:* FSH 2309.18*)*, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (FSH

Experiences in Natural Areas. *Landscape & Urban Planning,* Vol. 64, No. 1-2, (June

*Recreation & Hospitality Management,* Cooper, C. P., pp. (91-102), Belhaven Press,

Hydrophysical Degradation Associated With Hiking Trail Use: A Case Study of Hawai'iloa Ridge Trail, O'Ahu, Hawai'i. *Land Degradation & Development*, Vol. 12,

*Tourism*, *(Supplementary Volume on Asia and the Pacific)*, World Tourism

*Practice* (2nd Edition), Routledge, ISBN-10: 041536535X, London.

(December 1990), pp. (95-109), ISSN: 0129-7619.

(November 1994), pp. (585-607), ISSN: 0197-9337.

Academic, ISBN:13:978-981-210-307-9, Singapore.

Gainsville, Florida, USA.

Property rights for land, including forest land, were introduced in Japan following the Meiji Restoration in 1867. During the Meiji Period (1868–1912), a new land registration system was introduced, and the land-tax system was reformed. Individuals received property rights to forest land at that time. The Meiji Restoration was an important turning point in forest land ownership.

The custom of communal forest management, in which the forest is considered a common forest (*iriairin*), was developed during the Edo Period (1603–1868) in various regions1. Generally, forest land had high importance at that time, because of the necessity of various forest resources such as fallen-leaves and tree branches for agricultural production. Livestock management also required grazing land in common forests. Firewood and charcoal were the main energy resources produced from the common forest. Wood and wood-based products were also necessary as construction material. Therefore, the common forest was an essential resource for agricultural-based communities. In this chapter, the community represents the smallest unit of a village, which can be called a hamlet2.

For a common forest to be sustainable, its users had to manage it carefully (to avoid damaging or destroying it). This included preventing intrusion or utilization of the forest by people from other communities. Thus, the management of a common forest included both internal constraints (*e*.*g*., rules) and external exclusions. During the Edo Period, forest land was one of the major sources of conflict between communities, and in some cases, struggles continued over several decades. As the security of the common forest is directly linked to the livelihood and agricultural production of the entire community, all community members united to protect their common forest. The boundaries of common forests gradually became clear through such struggles, and the solidarity among community members strengthened. As a result, a sense of equality developed among common forest members (Takasu, 1966). A unanimity rule became important within such communities for making decisions on various matters, including utilization of the common forest. For example, when forest management practices commenced, unanimity rule determined who used the specific forest site and how the profit from the common forests was used. A unanimity rule on the common forest is also thought to be important today3.

Recent Problems and New Directions

particularly complicated and difficult.

related to the modernization of common forest policy.

cooperatives was adapted to this planting policy.

**2.2 Establishment of forest producer cooperatives**

property rights6.

for Forest Producer Cooperatives Established in Common Forests in Japan 163

follows. In Article 1, the objective is to increase agriculture and forestry in the common forest5. At the time the Act was enacted, the total area of common forest was estimated to be approximately 2 million ha, which is equal to 13% of the total area of the non-national forest (Iriai Rinya Kindaika Kenkyukai, 1971). Generally, utilization of the common forest was extensive and did not contribute to an increase in income for the residents of mountainous areas, which they obtained from agriculture or forestry. For a long time, broad-leaved trees in the common forest were used as fuel-wood, so the common forest was necessary, but this use of the common forest as an energy source ended in the 1950s and 1960s. Thus, it was important to modernize the rules governing the common forest to promote its utilization. In this Act, modernization meant abolishment of common forest rights, and the granting of

Article 3 of the Act ordained the implementation procedures for modernizing the common forest rights. It was necessary for all rights holders to agree with the abolishment of rights. To this end, they had to be convinced of the importance of the common forest as a custom. To plan the modernization of the system, it was also necessary to record the locations and precise areas of each common forest. These two procedures—getting all rights holders to agree on relinquishing their personal common rights, and the measurement of land—were

After the abolishment of common rights, new property rights were granted, in two different ways: land was either divided equally among all rights holders, or a cooperative organization was established. Both methods were available, but the Forestry Agency recommended establishing cooperatives such as forest producer cooperatives or agricultural producer cooperatives (*noji kumiai hojin*), because equal division allowed for subdivision of the forest land. Generally, in Japan, the unit size of private forest land is so small that management costs are relatively high. Among the cooperative organizations related to agriculture and forestry, the Forestry Agency strongly recommended forest producer cooperatives, under the Forestry Cooperative Act (Act No. 36 of 1978)7. This cooperative organization was actually introduced in the 1951 Forest Act, and the main objective was not

The modernization of common forest policy was also affected by Article 12 of the Forestry Basic Act. This article included various policy measures, including the modernization of rights to the common forest, to realize the expansion of small-scale private forest management in Japan. As the area of common forest was generally broader than that of private forest, the transformation from common forest to cooperative organization conformed to the policy direction subject to Article 12 of the Forestry Basic Act. After the 1960s, the planting policy changed to increase coniferous trees to secure future domestic forest resources for industrial round wood; the land owned by the forest producer

Under the Act for modernizing common forest rights, subsidy programs to promote the modernization of rights started in 1967. The following is a statistical summary of this 43 year program, which ran from fiscal year 1967 and to fiscal year 2009 (Forestry Agency, 2011b): 6,651 places were given permission to modernize rights. The total number of common forest rights holders before modernization was 432,906, and 423,618 were granted property rights after modernization. The total acreage8 of common forest whose policies were modernized was 575,125 ha. After the modernization procedure, 52.4% of the land was

During the Meiji Period, the property rights system was introduced to law in Japan, and how the common forest was organized and managed needed to change to fit into this system. This problem was extremely difficult from the beginning of land reform4. This is discussed further in this chapter. However, due to space constraints, only the most important points are explained. The most important right pertaining to the common forest was that people living in a specific area had a conventional right. It must be paid attention to that the right is based on the convention, which is, in most cases, originated from the Edo Period. According to Articles 263 and 294 of the Civil Law of 1896 (Act No. 89), any common forest rights must first consider the customs of a given area.

Common forests with no property rights in modern law gradually decreased in Japan after the Meiji Period. During the early Meiji Period, part of common forest was considered national forest land. In 1889, the concept of the municipality was introduced, and part of common forest became the property of newly founded municipalities. In 1910, the Public Forest Reorganization and Unification Project started and continued until 1939. Under the policy program, the common forest was considered municipal property. However, some people with rights to the common forest took various countermeasures to protect their rights, in some cases, registering the area under his/her name or that of other members, or as a shrine or temple. The management of conventional rights to common forests in the modern legal system has proved challenging. Regardless of whether the land was registered as national, municipal, or private property, rights for common forest may still exist. In such an instance, the important legal point would be the historical fact regarding conventional forest management, including utilization.

After World War II, the common forest faced another economic problem. In 1964, the Forestry Basic Act (Act No. 161 of 1964) was enforced. According to Article 2 of the Act, the main objectives of forestry policy are to increase timber production, timber productivity, and the income of forestry workers. Under the Act, the Forestry Agency strongly promoted the change in species composition throughout Japan, from broad-leaved trees or natural forests to planted forests of coniferous trees such as *Cryptomeria japonica* and *Chamaecyparis obtusa* in the 1960s and 1970s. As the main species of the common forest were broad-leaved trees, the forest was considered a good site for the change in species composition.

In 1966, a new act related to the common forest was enacted, and many forest producer cooperatives, which are called *Seisan Shinrin Kumiai*, were established and started forest management practices. This type of cooperative organization is the main topic of this article. In section 2, the contents of the act of 1966, the policy programs under the act, the founding of forest producer cooperatives, and the current management problems of these cooperatives is explained. Their management is now facing extreme difficulties, and some of the cooperatives have undergone liquidation or soon will do so. However, this has sparked a new movement among some cooperatives. In section 3, three such cooperatives (located in Hyogo, Mie, and Fukui Prefectures) are described, including a brief summary of each cooperative, the major problems they are now facing, and the new movement they are involved in. Section 4 discusses the differences and similarities among these three examples, and section 5 presents our conclusions.


*Advances in Bioenergy Production Using Fast Pyrolysis and Hydrothermal Processing DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105185*

non-condensable gaseous products. In the absence of oxygen, combustion cannot occur; instead, pyrolysis happens. Pyrolysis processes can be classified as torrefaction, slow pyrolysis, intermediate pyrolysis, fast pyrolysis, flash pyrolysis, microwave pyrolysis, and hydrothermal processing. These pyrolysis processes differ from one another based on the operating conditions such as residence time, heating rate, and pyrolysis temperature, which in turn affect the yield of products (gas, bio-oil, and biochar) [3, 4]. Moderate temperatures and short residence times tend to produce more liquids. The operating conditions of these different thermal conversion processes, along with their product distribution and biomass feed particle size needed, are shown in **Table 1**.

#### **Table 1.**

*Operating conditions of various pyrolysis processes and their product fractions (bio-oil, biochar, and gas) [2].*

The three pathways char formation, depolymerization, and fragmentation describe the primary conversion of biomass during the pyrolysis process. Intra- and intermolecular rearrangement reactions generally favor char formation resulting in higher thermal stability of the residue. The formation of benzene rings and the combination of these rings into an aromatic polycyclic structure characterize char formation. The release of water or non-condensable gas (devolatilization) generally accompanies these rearrangement reactions. The breaking of polymer bonds characterizes depolymerization, a dominant reaction during the initial stages of pyrolysis. When the temperature is sufficiently greater than the activation energies for the bond dissociation, depolymerization occurs, increasing the concentration of free radicals. It is followed by stabilization reactions producing monomer, dimer, and trimer units. These volatile condensable molecules at ambient conditions are found in the liquid fraction. Fragmentation involves breaking polymer bonds and even monomer bonds, resulting in the formation of non-condensable gases and a range of organic vapors that are condensable under ambient conditions [4, 31–33].

The decomposition of three lignocellulose components (hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin) releases condensable vapors and non-condensable gases. The condensable vapor includes methanol, acetic acid, acetone (mainly from hemicellulose), anhydrous monosaccharides, hydroxyacetaldehyde (mainly from cellulose), phenols, and heavier tars (from lignin decomposition) apart from water vapor. The waterinsoluble heavier tars contain larger molecules obtained from splitting ether and C-C bonds in lignin. The condensable vapors are condensed to form bio-oil (a dark brown and free-flowing organic liquid mixture). It usually contains 15–35 wt.% water resulting from the original moisture and as a pyrolysis product. Pyrolysis temperature determines the degree of devolatilization of biomass. There are significant differences between the pyrolysis behaviors of hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin, which are responsible for most physical and chemical property modifications during the pyrolysis process. Hemicellulose and cellulose decompose over a narrow temperature range. Lignin decomposes over a wider temperature range than hemicellulose and cellulose [4, 31, 32, 34, 35].


*4.1. The Necessity of Characterizing Fungal Microbiomes in MOR and AOF Samples*

MOR and AOF are derived from the roots and fruits of plants, respectively. They are susceptible to fungal contamination during pre- and post-harvest processes owing to the lack of standard management. In our study, all 18 samples were contaminated with fungi. The relative abundances of fungi were varied in different samples. Ascomycota, Eurotiomycetes, Eurotiales, and Aspergillaceae were generally dominant at the phylum, class, order, and family levels in AOF and MOR samples, respectively. In general, *Penicillium* and *Cladosporium* were the dominant genera. In our previous studies, the predominant genus in four seed herbs (Platycladi Semen, Myristicae Semen, and Cassiae Semen) was *Aspergillus* [33–35]. The relationship between dominant fungi and herbs has not been well explained, owing to the complex factors that influence the fungal community. The storage conditions and matrix composition of CHMs may be responsible for the difference in fungal microbiomes between MOR and AOF. Moreover, the fungal microbiomes between moldy and non-moldy samples are different. All samples were clustered based on the presence or absence of visible molds in UPGMA, thus indicating the meaningfulness of grouping. *Cladosporium* and *Penicillium* were dominant in moldy and non-moldy samples, respectively.

Notably, all samples were contaminated with a potential toxigenic fungus, namely, *Trichoderma atroviride*. Additionally, four non-moldy samples were contaminated with another toxigenic fungus (*Fusarium equiseti*). Trichothecenes and zearalenone, which disturb hormonal balance and cause numerous diseases in the reproductive system, can be produced by *F. equiseti* [36,37]. The findings of our study are consistent with another study; potential mycotoxin-producing fungi were detected in non-moldy and moldy Ziziphi Spinosae Semen samples [38]. Similarly, Wei et al. detected AFs and OTA in six moldy and nine nonvisible moldy *Glycyrrhiza uralensis* samples collected from China [39]. Therefore, the safety assessment of CHMs should not depend on whether macroscopic molds are present or not. Characterizing fungal microbiomes, especially potential toxigenic fungi, in MOR and AOF samples is essential, which is providing an early warning for mycotoxin contamination.


**INFLAMMATION, CHRONIC DISEASES AND CANCER – CELL AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, IMMUNOLOGY AND CLINICAL BASES**

Edited by **Mahin Khatami**

**INTECHOPEN.COM**

#### **Inflammation, Chronic Diseases and Cancer - Cell and Molecular Biology, Immunology and Clinical Bases**

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/1219 Edited by Mahin Khatami

#### **Contributors**

Julia Schumann, Ascensión Marcos, Jorge Raul Mujico, Fátima Pérez De Heredia, Sonia Gómez-Martínez, Hiroshi Nakanishi, Iyad Issa, C. E. Pang, Tamar Aprahamian, Marianna Kulka, Priyanka Pundir, Francisco Blanco-Favela, Luis Chávez-Sánchez, Karina Chavez-Rueda, María Victoria Legorreta-Haquet, Eduardo Montoya-Díaz, Mahin Khatami, Joziana Muniz De Paiva Barçante, Thales Augusto Barçante, Walter Lima, Ana Paula Peconick, Luciano Pereira, A. Valance Washington, Omar Lazaro Esponda, Yaliz Loperena, Gladiany Ramos, Sabrina Brechard, Eric J Tschirhart, Véronique Schenten, Martin Rottenberg, Berit Carow, Debbie Gardner, Bailin Liang, Patricia Rafferty, Yonca Aydin Akova, Sirel Gur Gungor, Karina Ckless, Joshua Jabaut, Tarcilia Silva, Gustavo Garlet, Sandra Fukada, Celso Queiroz-Junior, Mila Madeira, Andreza Aranha, Elcia Silveira, Andreia Vieira, Liam Heaney, Izhaq Masih, Tanya LeRoith

#### **© The Editor(s) and the Author(s) 2012**

The moral rights of the and the author(s) have been asserted.

All rights to the book as a whole are reserved by INTECH. The book as a whole (compilation) cannot be reproduced, distributed or used for commercial or non-commercial purposes without INTECH's written permission. Enquiries concerning the use of the book should be directed to INTECH rights and permissions department (permissions@intechopen.com).

Violations are liable to prosecution under the governing Copyright Law.

Individual chapters of this publication are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License which permits commercial use, distribution and reproduction of the individual chapters, provided the original author(s) and source publication are appropriately acknowledged. If so indicated, certain images may not be included under the Creative Commons license. In such cases users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. More details and guidelines concerning content reuse and adaptation can be foundat http://www.intechopen.com/copyright-policy.html.

#### **Notice**

Statements and opinions expressed in the chapters are these of the individual contributors and not necessarily those of the editors or publisher. No responsibility is accepted for the accuracy of information contained in the published chapters. The publisher assumes no responsibility for any damage or injury to persons or property arising out of the use of any materials, instructions, methods or ideas contained in the book.

First published in Croatia, 2012 by INTECH d.o.o. eBook (PDF) Published by IN TECH d.o.o. Place and year of publication of eBook (PDF): Rijeka, 2019. IntechOpen is the global imprint of IN TECH d.o.o. Printed in Croatia

Legal deposit, Croatia: National and University Library in Zagreb

Additional hard and PDF copies can be obtained from<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Inflammation, Chronic Diseases and Cancer - Cell and Molecular Biology, Immunology and Clinical Bases Edited by Mahin Khatami

p. cm. ISBN 978-953-51-0102-4 eBook (PDF) ISBN 978-953-51-5232-3


*2.2. Collection of Plant Material*

The fresh whole plant was collected from the Kanyakumari district of Tamil Nadu state in India. Dr. R.P Pandey, Plant taxonomist of Tropical Botanical Garden and Research Institute (TBGRI), Trivandrum, India, identified and authenticated the specimen. A voucher specimen was placed at the herbarium of TBGRI (TBGRI 65616 dated 24 December 2010) for future reference.


3.1.1. Average Daily Rainfall and Variability

There were 15 rainfall events in SES1 and 31 events in SES2; the difference in events was significant between the two seasons. This situation involves considerable risks associated with rainfed agriculture for this semiarid area, showing that strategies are required that can absorb these wide variations that occur within a 1500 ha field. The daily intraseasonal average spatial rainfall per event variability (ASREV) was significantly different in both seasons, similar to the interseasonal average spatial distribution of rainfall per rain gauge (Table 1). Generally, for most rain gauge stations, higher ASREVs were recorded during SES2 than SES1 (Figure 4).

In SES1, the probability that the rainfall covered the entire village (P100) was zero, whereas the probability of at least half the village (P50) being covered by rainfall was 42% (Table 2). No rainy days were observed for the entire village in SES1. In SES2, the probability of rain for the entire village was more than 40%, whereas the chance for at least half the village (P50) being rained on during one event was 87% (Table 2). These results show that for every 10 rainfall events, at least four events would cover the entire village and approximately nine events would cover at least half the village.

**Table 1.** Analysis of average spatial rainfall (mm) per event within and between seasons.

Note: CV is the coefficient of variation. Statistically significant at 0.05 level is denoted by a star (\*). The average values were calculated by averaging the daily rainfall (mm) for all events in a season to a single value per rain gauge, and then the variations among rainfall averages (mm) for all 38 rain gauges were tested.

**Figure 4.** Average rainfall amounts per event for SES1 and SES2. **Table 2.** Probabilities of daily rainfall coverage.

Note: The P100 and P50 values were calculated using daily rainfall data from 38 stations. P100 is a probability that for each rainfall event, all 38 rain gauges would record daily rainfall. P50 is a probability that for each rainfall event, at least half of the 38 rain gauges recorded daily rainfall. The values were obtained by dividing the maximum possible number of events in a season recorded in any rain gauge out of 38 total gauges by the minimum possible number of events at that gauge.

From the daily rainfall amounts in SES1, the calculated CV was higher (39.6–435.38%) than the seasonal rainfall (14.5%). For SES2, the daily rainfall CVs were between 12.62 and 329.67%, while the seasonal total rainfall was 10.18%, which indicates the significant daily rainfall variability compared to seasonal variability. Figure 5 shows that the daily rainfall in SES1 and SES2 was not normally distributed during many events.

We observed points far outside of the boxes (Figure 5), indicating unusually lower or high rainfall values within the same events, again indicating high spatial variability. However, SES1 shows higher unusual variability than SES2.

Both scenarios, SES1 and SES2, explain the risk of averaging the spatial rainfall per event for fields. We observed significant variations in the gauge station rainfall recorded for all events, and these variations accumulated over the entire season. Consequently, some locations had accumulated deficits resulting in severe shortages in the rainfall amount required to support crop growth, and hence, posing a high risk to crop production. In this study, we found that the accumulated seasonal rainfall amounts recorded over the entire field were significantly different among rain gauges (Table 1). The SES1 rainfall onset varied significantly over five different dates: 14 December 2016; 2 January 2017;

8 January 2017; 15 January 2017; and 30 January 2017. The cessation dates did not vary much as most of the plots (87%) received the least rainfall simultaneously. In contrast, in SES2, we observed that all rain gauges in the field recorded the same rainfall onset and cessation dates, although the rainfall amounts on particular dates varied significantly among gauges (*p* < 0.05).

**Figure 5.** Distribution of daily rainfall (mm) in (**a**) SES1 and (**b**) SES2.