IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v17y2012icp13-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors influencing the management regime of Nepal's community forestry

Author

Listed:
  • Pokharel, Ridish K.

Abstract

Nepal is one of the first developing countries to adopt community forest management which gives authority to forest user groups to manage forest resources. Over one quarter of Nepal's forests is under community forest management. This study aims to examine whether management regime adopted by the Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs) is pro-poor and also what factors influence the management regime of Nepal's community forestry. The study relies on primary data from 100 CFUGs of three different mid-hill districts of Nepal. A set of questionnaire was developed and administered to a small group of 100 CFUGs. The CFUGs adopt rigid and less rigid regimes to manage the community forests. The CFUGs tend to favor poor by adopting less rigid management regime. The age of CFUGs, number of households using community forests, and percent of sal tree species composition in the forests tends to influence the management regime of CFUGs. A higher age of CFUGs, higher number of households and lower percentage of sal in the forests are likely to increase the CFUGs adopting rigid regime to manage the community forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Pokharel, Ridish K., 2012. "Factors influencing the management regime of Nepal's community forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 13-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:17:y:2012:i:c:p:13-17
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111001304
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.08.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    2. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela & Di Gregorio, Monica, 2004. "Overview [in Collective action and property rights for sustainable development]," 2020 vision briefs 11 No. 1, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Ribot, Jesse C., 1995. "From exclusion to participation: Turning Senegal's forestry policy around?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(9), pages 1587-1599, September.
    4. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela, ed. & Di Gregorio, Monica, ed., 2004. "Collective action and property rights for sustainable development," 2020 vision focus 11, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Roy Gardner & Elinor Ostrom & James M. Walker, 1990. "The Nature of Common-Pool Resource Problems," Rationality and Society, , vol. 2(3), pages 335-358, July.
    6. Edmonds, Eric V., 2002. "Government-initiated community resource management and local resource extraction from Nepal's forests," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 89-115, June.
    7. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 9, pages 178-203, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Adhikari, Bhim & Di Falco, Salvatore & Lovett, Jon C., 2004. "Household characteristics and forest dependency: evidence from common property forest management in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 245-257, February.
    9. Ridish K. Pokharel, 2008. "Nepal's Community Forestry Funds:Do They Benifit the Poor?," Working Papers id:1643, eSocialSciences.
    10. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62, pages 124-124.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Satyal Pravat, Poshendra & Humphreys, David, 2013. "Using a multilevel approach to analyse the case of forest conflicts in the Terai, Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 47-55.
    2. Paudyal, Kiran & Baral, Himlal & Burkhard, Benjamin & Bhandari, Santosh P. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2015. "Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 81-92.
    3. Clare, Stephen M. & Ruiz-Jaen, Maria C. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2019. "Assessing the potential of community-based forestry programs in Panama," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 81-92.
    4. Lacuna-Richman, Celeste & Devkota, Bishnu P. & Richman, Mark A., 2016. "Users' priorities for good governance in community forestry: Two cases from Nepal's Terai Region," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 69-78.
    5. Chunying Ning & Rajan Subedi & Lu Hao, 2023. "Land Use/Cover Change, Fragmentation, and Driving Factors in Nepal in the Last 25 Years," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Lund, Jens Friis & Baral, Keshab & Bhandari, Nirmala Singh & Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Larsen, Helle Overgaard & Nielsen, Øystein Juul & Puri, Lila & Rutt, Rebecca Leigh & Treue, Thorsten, 2014. "Who benefits from taxation of forest products in Nepal's community forests?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 119-125.
    7. Pokharel, Ridish K. & Neupane, Prem Raj & Tiwari, Krishna Raj & Köhl, Michael, 2015. "Assessing the sustainability in community based forestry: A case from Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 75-84.
    8. Toft, Maja Nastasia Juul & Adeyeye, Yemi & Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "The use and usefulness of inventory-based management planning to forest management: Evidence from community forestry in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 35-49.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bluffstone, Randy & Robinson, Elizabeth & Guthiga, Paul, 2012. "Deforestation and forest degradation are estimated to account for between 12 percent and 20 percent of annual greenhouse gas emissions. These activities, largely in the developing world, released abou," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-11-efd, Resources for the Future.
    2. Bluffstone, Randy & Robinson, Elizabeth & Guthiga, Paul, 2013. "REDD+and community-controlled forests in low-income countries: Any hope for a linkage?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 43-52.
    3. Mekonnen, Alemu & Bluffstone, Ramdall, 2008. "Is There a Link between Common Property Forest Management and Private Tree Growing? Evidence of Behavioral Effects from Highland Ethiopia," RFF Working Paper Series dp-08-29-efd, Resources for the Future.
    4. Gebreegziabher, Zenebe & Mekonnen, Alemu & Gebremedhin, Berhanu & Beyene, Abebe D., 2021. "Determinants of success of community forestry: Empirical evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Vostroknutov, Alexander, 2015. "The social and ecological determinants of common pool resource sustainability," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 38-53.
    6. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2014. "The Impact of Common Property Right Forestry: Evidence from Ethiopian Villages," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 395-406.
    7. Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio, 2014. "Cooperation in common property regimes under extreme drought conditions: Empirical evidence from the use of pooled transferable quotas in Spanish irrigation systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 482-493.
    8. Aldashev, Gani & Vallino, Elena, 2019. "The dilemma of NGOs and participatory conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Chand, Narendra & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Bigsby, Hugh, 2015. "Production efficiency of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 172-179.
    10. Bennett, Abigail & Basurto, Xavier, 2018. "Local Institutional Responses to Global Market Pressures: The Sea Cucumber Trade in Yucatán, Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 57-70.
    11. Ansink, Erik & Bouma, Jetske, 2013. "Effective support for community resource management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 94-103.
    12. Achim Schlueter & Roger Madrigal, 2012. "The SES Framework in a Marine Setting: Methodological Settings," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 3(60), November.
    13. Tirtha Raj Dhakal & Brian Davidson & Bob Farquharson, 2018. "Factors Affecting Collective Actions in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems of Nepal," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-11, June.
    14. Ana María Peredo & Helen M. Haugh & Marek Hudon & Camille Meyer, 2020. "Mapping Concepts and Issues in the Ethics of the Commons: Introduction to the Special Issue," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(4), pages 659-672, November.
    15. Sarker, Ashutosh & Itoh, Tadao, 2001. "Design principles in long-enduring institutions of Japanese irrigation common-pool resources," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 89-102, June.
    16. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    17. Vallino, Elena & Aldahsev,Gani, 2013. "NGOs and participatory conservation in developing countries: why are there inefficiencies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201318, University of Turin.
    18. Paudel, Jayash, 2016. "Community-Managed Forests and Household Welfare: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235481, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Bocci, Corinne & Fortmann, Lea & Sohngen, Brent & Milian, Bayron, 2018. "The impact of community forest concessions on income: an analysis of communities in the Maya Biosphere Reserve," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 10-21.
    20. Robert O. Keohane & Elinor Ostrom, 1994. "1. Introduction," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(4), pages 403-428, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:17:y:2012:i:c:p:13-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.