IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i14p5575-d382900.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Plant-Based Sustainable Development—The Expansion and Anatomy of the Medicinal Plant Secondary Processing Sector in Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Filippo Caporale

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO), University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C., Denmark
    Institute for International Forestry & Forest Products, Dresden University of Technology, Pienner Straße 7, 01737 Tharandt, Germany)

  • Jimena Mateo-Martín

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO), University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C., Denmark
    Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry (TESAF), University of Padova, Via dell’Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Italy)

  • Muhammad Faizan Usman

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO), University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C., Denmark
    Environmental Management of Ecosystems and Tropical Forests (GEEFT), AgroParisTech, 648 rue Jean-François Breton BP 7355, 34086 Montpellier CEDEX 4, France)

  • Carsten Smith-Hall

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO), University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C., Denmark)

Abstract

There is an increasing global demand for medicinal plants. Nevertheless, the nature and scale of processing in national-level medicinal plant production networks, and how this can contribute to sustainable development, are poorly understood. This study (i) uncovers and explains the emergence of the Nepalese medicinal plant secondary processing sector, (ii) characterises the enterprises and identify the obstacles they face, (iii) quantifies the volumes and values of processed species and end markets, and (iv) discusses the potential to contribute to sustainable economic development. Empirical data were generated from key informant interviews and qualitative (n = 13) and quantitative (n = 79) semi-structured surveys of medicinal plant processing enterprises. In 2014–15, the sector purchased 3679 metric tonnes of air-dry raw materials (across 67 products) for USD 4.0 million, producing 494 tonnes of end-products valued at USD 11.2 million. The sector is characterised by small enterprises. Rising domestic demand drove the increase in the number of enterprises. Key business obstacles were export barriers, low access to technology, infrastructure and service barriers, labour challenges, socio-economic and political instability, and the inefficient bureaucracy. The actions required to change from being a supplier of raw materials and producer of lower-value domestic consumer products to integrating into the global economy as an exporter of higher-value products that are sustainably sourced are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Filippo Caporale & Jimena Mateo-Martín & Muhammad Faizan Usman & Carsten Smith-Hall, 2020. "Plant-Based Sustainable Development—The Expansion and Anatomy of the Medicinal Plant Secondary Processing Sector in Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5575-:d:382900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5575/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5575/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chandra Kuniyal & Vinod Bisht & Jagmohan Negi & Vijay Bhatt & Dhan Bisht & Jitendra Butola & Rakesh Sundriyal & Satish Singh, 2015. "Progress and prospect in the integrated development of medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs) sector in Uttarakhand, Western Himalaya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 1141-1162, October.
    2. Louise Staffas & Mathias Gustavsson & Kes McCormick, 2013. "Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Coe, Neil M. & Yeung, Henry Wai-chung, 2015. "Global Production Networks: Theorizing Economic Development in an Interconnected World," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198703914.
    4. Sri Astutik & Jürgen Pretzsch & Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi, 2019. "Asian Medicinal Plants’ Production and Utilization Potentials: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-33, October.
    5. Meilby, Henrik & Smith-Hall, Carsten & Byg, Anja & Larsen, Helle Overgaard & Nielsen, Øystein Juul & Puri, Lila & Rayamajhi, Santosh, 2014. "Are Forest Incomes Sustainable? Firewood and Timber Extraction and Productivity in Community Managed Forests in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 113-124.
    6. David Scheinman, 2002. "Traditional Medicine in Tanga Today : The Ancient and Modern Worlds Meet," World Bank Publications - Reports 10787, The World Bank Group.
    7. Kloos, Stephan & Madhavan, Harilal & Tidwell, Tawni & Blaikie, Calum & Cuomu, Mingji, 2020. "The transnational Sowa Rigpa industry in Asia: New perspectives on an emerging economy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    8. Sanchez Badini, Olivia & Hajjar, Reem & Kozak, Robert, 2018. "Critical success factors for small and medium forest enterprises: A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 35-45.
    9. Larsen, Helle Overgaard & Olsen, Carsten Smith & Boon, Tove Enggrob, 2000. "The non-timber forest policy process in Nepal: actors, objectives and power," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 267-281, December.
    10. Baral, Srijana & Meilby, Henrik & Khanal Chettri, Bir Bahadur & Basnyat, Bijendra & Rayamajhi, Santosh & Awale, Srijana, 2018. "Politics of getting the numbers right: Community forest inventory of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 19-26.
    11. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Sumitra Paudel & Carsten Smith-Hall, 2022. "Empirically derived typologies of environmental product periodic markets and retailers," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(11), pages 13111-13136, November.

    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. Daniela Pasnicu & Mihaela Ghenta & Aniela Matei, 2019. "Transition to Bioeconomy: Perceptions and Behaviors in Central and Eastern Europe," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(50), pages 1-9, February.
    2. Sri Astutik & Jürgen Pretzsch & Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi, 2019. "Asian Medicinal Plants’ Production and Utilization Potentials: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-33, October.
    3. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Dan Costin Nițescu & Valentin Murgu, 2020. "The Bioeconomy and Foreign Trade in Food Products—A Sustainable Partnership at the European Level?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Lisa Biber-Freudenberger & Amit Kumar Basukala & Martin Bruckner & Jan Börner, 2018. "Sustainability Performance of National Bio-Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    8. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    10. Eve Bohnett & Sanju Lamichhane & Yanjing Tracy Liu & Scott Yabiku & Digambar Singh Dahal & Siraj Mammo & Kossi Fandjinou & Bilal Ahmad & Li An, 2023. "The Implications of Community Forest Income on Social and Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-23, April.
    11. Kean Birch, 2016. "Emergent Imaginaries and Fragmented Policy Frameworks in the Canadian Bio-Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Leonard Prochaska & Daniel Schiller, 2021. "An evolutionary perspective on the emergence and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policy: the example of the change of the leitmotif from biotechnology to bioeconomy," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 141-249, April.
    13. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Asada, Raphael & Cardellini, Giuseppe & Mair-Bauernfeind, Claudia & Wenger, Julia & Haas, Verena & Holzer, Daniel & Stern, Tobias, 2020. "Effective bioeconomy? a MRIO-based socioeconomic and environmental impact assessment of generic sectoral innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Christina-Ioanna Papadopoulou & Efstratios Loizou & Katerina Melfou & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis, 2021. "The Knowledge Based Agricultural Bioeconomy: A Bibliometric Network Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-15, October.
    16. Therese Bennich & Salim Belyazid & Birgit Kopainsky & Arnaud Diemer, 2018. "Understanding the Transition to a Bio-Based Economy: Exploring Dynamics Linked to the Agricultural Sector in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    17. Yuliia Maksymiv & Valentyna Yakubiv & Nadia Pylypiv & Iryna Hryhoruk & Iryna Piatnychuk & Nazariy Popadynets, 2021. "Strategic Challenges for Sustainable Governance of the Bioeconomy: Preventing Conflict between SDGs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Giampietro, Mario, 2019. "On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 143-156.
    19. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5575-:d:382900. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.