Property Rights and Natural Resources: Socio-Economic Heterogeneity and Distributional Implications of Common Property Resource Management
AbstractPoverty, property rights and distributional implications of community-based resource management have become major topics of discussion and debate in recent years. This study tries to examine the contribution of community forestry to household-level income with particular emphasis on group heterogeneity and equity in benefit distribution. The assessment of household level benefits suggests that poorer households are currently benefiting less in absolute terms from community forestry than less poor households. The study makes a number of recommendations to improve community forest management in Nepal, which include, due consideration for community needs in selecting species for community forestry, transferability of user rights, which would allow less endowed households to benefit more, and more and equitable representation of women and disadvantaged groups in forest management committees. [SANDEE WP 1]
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by eSocialSciences in its series Working Papers with number id:840.
Date of creation: Feb 2007
Date of revision:
Note: Institutional Papers
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.esocialsciences.org
property rights; common property resources; heterogeneity; community forestry; forests; forest management; Nepal; Economics; Environmental Economics;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Beck, Tony & Nesmith, Cathy, 2001. "Building on Poor People's Capacities: The Case of Common Property Resources in India and West Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 119-133, January.
- Kant, Shashi, 2000. "A dynamic approach to forest regimes in developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 287-300, February.
- Alexander Karaivanov, 2009. "Heterogeneity, returns to scale, and collective action," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 771-807, May.
- Tsur, Yacov & Dinar, Ariel, 1995. "Efficiency and equity considerations in pricing and allocating irrigation water," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1460, The World Bank.
- Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 1997. "Wealth Inequality and Efficiency in the Commons: Part I: The Unregulated Case," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 451-82, October.
- Marc Jacobson & Joel De Castro & Vianca Aliaga & Julio Romero & MAllison Davis, 1998. "The Role of Tenure Security and Private Time Preference in Neotropical Deforestation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 162-170.
- Varughese, George & Ostrom, Elinor, 2001. "The Contested Role of Heterogeneity in Collective Action: Some Evidence from Community Forestry in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 747-765, May.
- Holden, Stein T. & Shiferaw, Bekele & Wik, Mette, 1998. "Poverty, market imperfections and time preferences: of relevance for environmental policy?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(01), pages 105-130, February.
- Gunnar Köhlin & Peter J. Parks, 2001. "Spatial Variability and Disincentives to Harvest: Deforestation and Fuelwood Collection in South Asia," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(2), pages 206-218.
- Dayton-Johnson, Jeff, 2000. "Determinants of collective action on the local commons: a model with evidence from Mexico," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 181-208, June.
- E. Somanathan & R. Prabhakar & B.S. Mehta, 2002. "Collective action for forest conservation: Does heterogeneity matter?," Indian Statistical Institute, Planning Unit, New Delhi Discussion Papers 02-01, Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, India.
- Kumar, Sanjay, 2002. "Does "Participation" in Common Pool Resource Management Help the Poor? A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of Joint Forest Management in Jharkhand, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 763-782, May.
- Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
- Hill, I. & SHields, D., 1998. "Incentives for Joint Forest Management in India. Analytical Methods and Case Studies," Papers 394, World Bank - Technical Papers.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Padma Prakash).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.