\documentclass[english,german]{scrartcl}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{geometry}
\geometry{verbose,a4paper,tmargin=1.75cm,bmargin=2cm,lmargin=2cm,rmargin=2cm,headheight=0.8cm,headsep=0.5cm,footskip=0.5cm}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{url}
\urlstyle{same}
\newcommand\email{\begingroup \urlstyle{same}\Url}\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{units}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wasysym} % enable use of \permil instead of \textperthousand
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{arabtex}
\usepackage{hyphenat}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{mdwlist}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\relax}
\usepackage{index}
\newindex{key}{kdx}{knd}{Keywords}
\newindex{author}{idx}{ind}{Authors}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\fancyfoot{}
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
%\usepackage[activate]{pdfcprot}
%\usepackage[owner=Tapioka, print=true, copy=true, edit=false, annotate=false,set]{pdfcrypt}
%encryption: not supported any more (since pdftex 1.10)
\usepackage[pdftex]{thumbpdf}
\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={Dichotomies in Forest Management: the Contrasting Perspectives of Communities, Managers and Scientists},pdfauthor={Lucy Rist, Charlie Shackleton, R Uma Shaanker},pdfsubject={Tropentag 2010: Abstract},pdfkeywords={Collaborative management, conservation, forest, livelihood, rural development},pdfpagemode=None,colorlinks=true}
\else
\usepackage{ae}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\fi
\begin{document}
\ifpdf
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2010.jpg}}}
\else
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2010.eps}}}
\fi
\hfill
\parbox[b]{13.4cm}{\centering \large{\textbf{Tropentag, September 14-16, 2010, Zurich}}\\[1ex] \Large{``World Food System  ---\\A Contribution from Europe''\\[2ex]}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\Large{\textbf{Dichotomies in Forest Management: the Contrasting Perspectives of Communities, Managers and Scientists\footnote{\textbf{Contact Address:} Lucy Rist, Umea University, Sweden, Ecology and Environmental Science, Umea University, SE-90187~Umea, Sweden, \mbox{e-mail}: \email{lucyrist@gmail.com}}\\[0.8ex]}}
\normalsize{\textsc{Lucy Rist$^{1}$, Charlie Shackleton$^{2}$, R Uma Shaanker$^{3}$}}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize*}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{1}$Umea University, Sweden, Ecology and Environmental Science, Sweden}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{2}$Rhodes University, South Africa, Environmental Science, South Africa}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{3}$Atree, India, Na, }}}
\end{itemize*}
\index[author]{Rist, Lucy}
\index[author]{Shackleton, Charlie}
\index[author]{Uma Shaanker, R}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1.1cm}
\textbf{Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
\normalsize{
It is clear that integrating resource users and local communities into natural resource management is desirable in striving for biologically and socially sustainable conservation yet the management implemented in many forest areas is often at odds with livelihood objectives. In many locations both social and environmental outcomes remain less than optimal and in some instances tensions between management institutions and local communities remain high despite efforts towards implementing collaborative management systems. There is frequently a dichotomy between the interests and perspectives, as well as bodies of knowledge and cultural backgrounds, of the different groups involved; managers, communities and research scientists. This dichotomy is well recognised informally yet greater understanding of the factors limiting improved management outcomes in such circumstances is required. The challenge is to overcome the obstacles that this dichotomy presents moving towards a convergence of interests and goals rather than remaining within the current situation of management solutions characterised by compromise. We draw on long"=term experience from several protected forests across Asia, Latin America and Africa where communities have a high level of forest dependence but contrasting management outcomes have been achieved. Community and management perspectives are often at variance with each other, on the nature and urgency of management problems as well as their causes and solutions yet with the correct institutional frameworks and meaningful communication these barriers can be overcome. A synthesis of experiences in these locations and the identification of common underlying factors highlight opportunities for more comprehensive and less unilateral management outcomes in forest management.}

\vspace{0.5cm}
\end{abstract}
\end{center}
\noindent \textbf{Keywords:} Collaborative management, conservation, forest, livelihood, rural development
\index[key]{Collaborative management}
\index[key]{Conservation}
\index[key]{Forest}
\index[key]{Livelihood}
\index[key]{Rural!development}
\end{document}