IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v99y2017i4p1008-1026..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Patterns of Market Participation and Resource Extraction: Fuelwood Collection in Northern Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela A. Miteva
  • Randall A. Kramer
  • Zachary S. Brown
  • Martin D. Smith

Abstract

While distance to markets is a key determinant of market participation for households that are dependent on natural resources, the distance to the resource stock is also essential. Thus, a household’s location with respect to markets and the resource stock determines household market participation and associated resource degradation. Applying a discrete-choice framework for fuelwood collection in a developing country, we characterize the spatial pattern of market participation regimes and forest use. All else being equal, autarkic households are closest to the forest and furthest from the market, buyer households are closest to the market and furthest from the forest, and seller households are at intermediate distances. Empirical tests based on survey data from northern Uganda support the predictions from our theoretical model. Our findings have important implications for understanding the spatial patterns of forest degradation and determining the control group when designing impact evaluations of the effectiveness of development and conservation interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela A. Miteva & Randall A. Kramer & Zachary S. Brown & Martin D. Smith, 2017. "Spatial Patterns of Market Participation and Resource Extraction: Fuelwood Collection in Northern Uganda," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1008-1026.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:99:y:2017:i:4:p:1008-1026.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aax027
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bošković, Branko & Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Pelli, Martino & Risch, Anna, 2023. "The effect of forest access on the market for fuelwood in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. William J Burke, 2019. "Evidence against Imposing Restrictions on Hurdle Models as a Test for Simultaneous versus Sequential Decision Making," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1473-1481.
    3. Miteva, Daniela A. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K., 2021. "The effectiveness of protected areas in the context of decentralization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    4. Ignaciuk, Ada & Kwon, Jihae & Maggio, Giuseppe & Mastrorillo, Marina & Sitko, Nicholas J., "undated". "Harvesting trees to harvest cash crops: The role of internal migrants in forest land conversion in Uganda," ESA Working Papers 319838, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    5. Felister Y. Tibamanya & Mursali A. Milanzi & Arne Henningsen, 2021. "Drivers of and Barriers to Adoption of Improved Sun- flower Varieties amongst Smallholder Farmers in Singida, Tanzania: the Double-Hurdle Approach," IFRO Working Paper 2021/03, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Salemi, Colette, 2021. "Refugee camps and deforestation in Sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Spatial model; household sorting; household production; transaction costs; fuelwood extraction; deforestation; forest degradation; sub-Saharan Africa; quasi-experimental research designs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ajagec:v:99:y:2017:i:4:p:1008-1026.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.