IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v106y2019ic9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia

Author

Listed:
  • Nhem, Sareth
  • Lee, Young Jin

Abstract

Deforestation has become an issue of public interest and sensitivity in Cambodia. Community-based forestry (CBF) and the accompanying local institutional community forestry (CF) arrangements are increasingly recognized as successful mechanisms to achieve sustainable forest management. However, in most community-managed forestry studies, there has still been no significant exploration of the viewpoints of local people to determine the monitoring and actions needed to enable CBF to achieve sustainable forest management. Therefore this study examines the perspectives of local experts across a range of issues and challenges facing CBF sustainability, using Q-methodology. This paper adapted and used four criteria for sustainable forest management to design the 43 Q-statements to guide examination of the subjectivity of local experts concerning CBF sustainability in Cambodia. The 52 respondents were purposively selected from the 13 Community Forestry sites to Q-sort the Q-statements. The findings revealed that most local experts felt that the environmental condition (criteria I), the loss of forest, is critical but one factor strongly disagreed. Considering socio-economic benefits and needs (criteria II), there were similarly polar views about whether the community desperately needs external finance now or whether they have the collective will to act and need to show that first. Only one of the factors supported further REDD+ projects reasonably strongly; others valued eco-tourism opportunities. None of the factors ranked the quality of community-based forest management practices (criteria III) strongly although there was mild agreement about a lack of CF management accountability. There were contrasting views on the legal, policy, and institutional framework and governance (criteria IV), with disagreement about the importance of local enforcement, and quality of local communication and consultation. All agreed, however, that the current position does not give them meaningful ownership and control over forest resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin, 2019. "Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:106:y:2019:i:c:9
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934118304465
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101961?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. Amare, Dagninet & Mekuria, Wolde & Wondie, Menale & Teketay, Demel & Eshete, Abeje & Darr, Dietrich, 2017. "Wood Extraction Among the Households of Zege Peninsula, Northern Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 177-184.
    2. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    3. Swedeen, Paula, 2006. "Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 190-208, May.
    4. Rahut, Dil Bahadur & Ali, Akhter & Behera, Bhagirath, 2015. "Household participation and effects of community forest management on income and poverty levels: Empirical evidence from Bhutan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 20-29.
    5. Asian Development Bank (ADB) & Asian Development Bank (ADB) & Asian Development Bank (ADB) & Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2014. "Cambodia: Country Poverty Analysis 2014," ADB Reports RPT146839, Asian Development Bank (ADB).
    6. Sunderlin, William D., 2006. "Poverty alleviation through community forestry in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam: An assessment of the potential," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 386-396, June.
    7. Ming Lu & Alin Lin & Jiyi Sun, 2018. "The Impact of Photovoltaic Applications on Urban Landscapes Based on Visual Q Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    9. Philippe Le Billon, 2000. "The Political Ecology of Transition in Cambodia 1989–1999: War, Peace and Forest Exploitation," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 785-805, September.
    10. Line Louah & Marjolein Visser & Alice Blaimont & Charles De Cannière, 2017. "Barriers to the development of temperate agroforestry as an example of agroecological innovation: Mainly a matter of cognitive lock-in?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/258841, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Byrne, Rosemary & Byrne, Susan & Ryan, Ray & O’Regan, Bernadette, 2017. "Applying the Q-method to identify primary motivation factors and barriers to communities in achieving decarbonisation goals," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 40-50.
    12. Agyei, Frank Kwaku & Adjei, Prince Osei-Wusu, 2017. "Representation without accountability in forestry: experiences from the Social Responsibility Agreement in Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 34-43.
    13. Keerthiratne, Subhani & Tol, Richard S.J., 2018. "Impact of natural disasters on income inequality in Sri Lanka," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 217-230.
    14. 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.
    15. Alexander, Kim S. & Parry, Lucy & Thammavong, Phomma & Sacklokham, Silinthone & Pasouvang, Somphanh & Connell, John G. & Jovanovic, Tom & Moglia, Magnus & Larson, Silva & Case, Peter, 2018. "Rice farming systems in Southern Lao PDR: Interpreting farmers’ agricultural production decisions using Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-10.
    16. Cheng, Antony S. & Danks, Cecilia & Allred, Shorna R., 2011. "The role of social and policy learning in changing forest governance: An examination of community-based forestry initiatives in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 89-96.
    17. Chuang, Tsai-Jen & Yen, Tian-Ming, 2017. "Public views on the value of forests in relation to forestation projects—A case study in central Taiwan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 173-179.
    18. Zabala, Aiora & Pascual, Unai & García-Barrios, Luis, 2017. "Payments for Pioneers? Revisiting the Role of External Rewards for Sustainable Innovation under Heterogeneous Motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 234-245.
    19. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    20. Jalilova, Gulnaz & Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Vacik, Harald, 2012. "Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 32-43.
    21. Armatas, Christopher A. & Venn, Tyron J. & Watson, Alan E., 2014. "Applying Q-methodology to select and define attributes for non-market valuation: A case study from Northwest Wyoming, United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 447-456.
    22. Moffat, Steverson O. & Cubbage, Frederick W. & Holmes, Thomas P. & O'Sullivan, Elizabethann, 2001. "Characterizing the sustainable forestry issue network in the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3-4), pages 307-318, July.
    23. Babigumira, Ronnie & Angelsen, Arild & Buis, Maarten & Bauch, Simone & Sunderland, Terry & Wunder, Sven, 2014. "Forest Clearing in Rural Livelihoods: Household-Level Global-Comparative Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 67-79.
    24. Jean Huge & Katherine Vande Velde & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Jan Harold Japay & Behara Satyanarayana & Mohammad Nazrin Ishak & Melissa Quispe Zuniga & Bin Husain Mohd Lokman & Sulong Ibrah, 2016. "Mapping discourses using Q methodology in Matang Mangrove Forest, Malaysia," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/246478, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    25. Beauchamp, Emilie & Clements, Tom & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2018. "Exploring trade-offs between development and conservation outcomes in Northern Cambodia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 431-444.
    26. Worku, Adefires & Pretzsch, Jürgen & Kassa, Habtemariam & Auch, Eckhard, 2014. "The significance of dry forest income for livelihood resilience: The case of the pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in the drylands of southeastern Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 51-59.
    27. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Komar, Ewa & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2018. "Discourses on Public Participation in Protected Areas Governance: Application of Q Methodology in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 401-409.
    28. Caballero, Gonzalo, 2015. "Community-based forest management institutions in the Galician communal forests: A new institutional approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 347-356.
    29. Scheidel, Arnim & Work, Courtney, 2018. "Forest plantations and climate change discourses: New powers of ‘green’ grabbing in Cambodia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 9-18.
    30. Clements, Tom & John, Ashish & Nielsen, Karen & An, Dara & Tan, Setha & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2010. "Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: Comparison of three programs from Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1283-1291, April.
    31. World Bank, 2007. "Poverty and Environment : Understanding Linkages at the Household Level," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6924, December.
    32. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    33. Pätäri, Satu & Tuppura, Anni & Toppinen, Anne & Korhonen, Jaana, 2016. "Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 38-46.
    34. Agarwal, Bina, 2009. "Rule making in community forestry institutions: The difference women make," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2296-2308, June.
    35. Angelsen, Arild & Jagger, Pamela & Babigumira, Ronnie & Belcher, Brian & Hogarth, Nicholas J. & Bauch, Simone & Börner, Jan & Smith-Hall, Carsten & Wunder, Sven, 2014. "Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 12-28.
    36. Liu, Ziming & Rommel, Jens & Feng, Shuyi, 2018. "Does It Pay to Participate in Decision-making? Survey Evidence on Land Co-management in Jiangsu Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 199-209.
    37. Rakatama, Ari & Pandit, Ram & Ma, Chunbo & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2017. "The costs and benefits of REDD+: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 103-111.
    38. Nijnik, Maria & Nijnik, Anatoliy & Sarkki, Simo & Muñoz-Rojas, Jose & Miller, David & Kopiy, Serhiy, 2018. "Is forest related decision-making in European treeline areas socially innovative? A Q-methodology enquiry into the perspectives of international experts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 210-219.
    39. Bredin, Yennie K. & Lindhjem, Henrik & van Dijk, Jiska & Linnell, John D.C., 2015. "Mapping value plurality towards ecosystem services in the case of Norwegian wildlife management: A Q analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 198-206.
    40. Sotirov, Metodi & Blum, Mareike & Storch, Sabine & Selter, Andy & Schraml, Ulrich, 2017. "Do forest policy actors learn through forward-thinking? Conflict and cooperation relating to the past, present and futures of sustainable forest management in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 256-268.
    41. Khatri, Dil B. & Marquardt, Kristina & Pain, Adam & Ojha, Hemant, 2018. "Shifting regimes of management and uses of forests: What might REDD+ implementation mean for community forestry? Evidence from Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 1-10.
    42. Spruijt, Pita & Knol, Anne B. & Petersen, Arthur C. & Lebret, Erik, 2016. "Differences in views of experts about their role in particulate matter policy advice: Empirical evidence from an international expert consultation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-52.
    43. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.
    44. Howard, Rebecca J. & Tallontire, Anne M. & Stringer, Lindsay C. & Marchant, Rob A., 2016. "Which “fairness”, for whom, and why? An empirical analysis of plural notions of fairness in Fairtrade Carbon Projects, using Q methodology," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 100-109.
    45. Khundi, Fydess & Jagger, Pamela & Shively, Gerald & Sserunkuuma, Dick, 2011. "Income, poverty and charcoal production in Uganda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 199-205, March.
    46. Skutsch, Margaret & Balderas Torres, Arturo & Carrillo Fuentes, Juan Carlos, 2017. "Policy for pro-poor distribution of REDD+ benefits in Mexico: How the legal and technical challenges are being addressed," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 58-66.
    47. Roberts, Wade & Bilginsoy, Cihan, 2016. "Risking life and limb in the global economy: Scrap metal price and landmine/UXO incidents in Cambodia," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 1(C), pages 15-22.
    48. World Bank, 2007. "Poverty and Environment : Understanding Linkages at the Household Level," World Bank Publications - Reports 7744, The World Bank Group.
    49. Subhan Mollick, Abdus & Khalilur Rahman, Md. & Nabiul Islam Khan, Md. & Nazmus Sadath, Md., 2018. "Evaluation of good governance in a participatory forestry program: A case study in Madhupur Sal forests of Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 123-137.
    50. Markova-Nenova, Nonka & Wätzold, Frank, 2017. "PES for the poor? Preferences of potential buyers of forest ecosystem services for including distributive goals in the design of payments for conserving the dry spiny forest in Madagascar," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 71-79.
    51. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin & Phin, Sopheap, 2017. "Sustainable management of forest in view of media attention to REDD+ policy, opportunity and impact in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 10-21.
    52. Nordhagen, Stella & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2017. "Feeding the Household, Growing the Business, or Just Showing Off? Farmers' Motivations for Crop Diversity Choices in Papua New Guinea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 99-109.
    53. Chomba, Susan & Treue, Thorsten & Sinclair, Fergus, 2015. "The political economy of forest entitlements: can community based forest management reduce vulnerability at the forest margin?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 37-46.
    54. Pandit, Ram, 2018. "REDD+ adoption and factors affecting respondents' knowledge of REDD+ goal: Evidence from household survey of forest users from REDD+ piloting sites in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 107-115.
    55. Alemagi, Dieudonne & Kozak, Robert A., 2010. "Illegal logging in Cameroon: Causes and the path forward," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 554-561, October.
    56. Ying, Zhang & Gao, Minxue & Liu, Junchang & Wen, Yali & Song, Weimin, 2011. "Green accounting for forest and green policies in China -- A pilot national assessment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 513-519, September.
    57. Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe, 2016. "Barriers to policy implementation and implications for Zambia's forest ecosystems," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 40-44.
    58. Dash, Madhusmita & Behera, Bhagirath & Rahut, Dil Bahadur, 2016. "Determinants of household collection of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and alternative livelihood activities in Similipal Tiger Reserve, India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 215-228.
    59. Adhikari, Sunit & Kingi, Tanira & Ganesh, Siva, 2014. "Incentives for community participation in the governance and management of common property resources: the case of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-9.
    60. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    61. Gbedomon, Rodrigue Castro & Floquet, Anne & Mongbo, Roch & Salako, Valère Kolawolé & Fandohan, Adandé Belarmain & Assogbadjo, Achille Ephrem & Glèlè Kakaї, Romain, 2016. "Socio-economic and ecological outcomes of community based forest management: A case study from Tobé-Kpobidon forest in Benin, Western Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 46-55.
    62. Kim, Sophanarith & Phat, Nophea Kim & Koike, Masao & Hayashi, Hiromichi, 2006. "Estimating actual and potential government revenues from timber harvesting in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 625-635, August.
    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. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi & Dong, Jiayun & Liu, Jinlong, 2020. "How communities restructured forest tenure throughout the top-down devolution reform: Using the case of Fujian, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).

    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. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Kazungu, Moses & Zhunusova, Eliza & Yang, Anastasia Lucy & Kabwe, Gillian & Gumbo, Davison J. & Günter, Sven, 2020. "Forest use strategies and their determinants among rural households in the Miombo woodlands of the Copperbelt Province, Zambia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    3. Grimsrud, Kristine & Graesse, Maximo & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2020. "Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Rodríguez-Piñeros, Sandra & Martínez-Cortés, Oscar & Villarraga-Flórez, Liz & Ruíz-Díaz, Alejandra, 2018. "Timber market actors' values on forest legislation: A case study from Colombia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Dimitra Syrou & Iosif Botetzagias, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions Concerning Greek Protected Areas Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, March.
    7. Mazhar Biland & Alam Zeb & Ayat Ullah & Harald Kaechele, 2021. "Why Do Households Depend on the Forest for Income? Analysis of Factors Influencing Households’ Decision-Making Behaviors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Chang, Ruidong & Cao, Yuan & Lu, Yujie & Shabunko, Veronika, 2019. "Should BIPV technologies be empowered by innovation policy mix to facilitate energy transitions? - Revealing stakeholders' different perspectives using Q methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 307-318.
    9. Feuerbacher, Arndt & Rai, Arun & Lofgren, Hans & Sander, Klas & Grethe, Harald, 2021. "Policies to reconcile forest conservation and rural development: A pathway to bridge the forest transition in Bhutan?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Harun M. Kiruki & Emma H. Zanden & Patrick Kariuki & Peter H. Verburg, 2020. "The contribution of charcoal production to rural livelihoods in a semi-arid area in Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6931-6960, October.
    11. Tsegaye T. Gatiso, 2019. "Households’ dependence on community forest and their contribution to participatory forest management: evidence from rural Ethiopia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 181-197, February.
    12. Mugido, Worship & Shackleton, Charlie M., 2019. "The contribution of NTFPS to rural livelihoods in different agro-ecological zones of South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    13. Bierkamp, Sina & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Grote, Ulrike, 2021. "Environmental income and remittances: Evidence from rural central highlands of Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    14. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    15. Macqueen, Duncan & Bolin, Anna & Greijmans, Martin & Grouwels, Sophie & Humphries, Shoana, 2020. "Innovations towards prosperity emerging in locally controlled forest business models and prospects for scaling up," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    16. Okumu, Boscow & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2020. "Welfare and forest cover impacts of incentive based conservation: Evidence from Kenyan community forest associations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    17. Bhaskar Ch. Joshi & Ranbeer S. Rawal & K. Chandra Sekar & Ashish Tewari, 2020. "Assessment of fuelwood resource preference in representative watershed of west Himalaya, India: conservation and management implications," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 1617-1632, February.
    18. Manuela Rozalia Gabor & Nicoleta Cristache, 2021. "Q or R Factor Analysis for Subjectiveness Measurement in Consumer Behavior? A Study Case on Durable Goods Buying Behavior in Romania," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, May.
    19. Díaz, Paula & Adler, Carolina & Patt, Anthony, 2017. "Do stakeholders’ perspectives on renewable energy infrastructure pose a risk to energy policy implementation? A case of a hydropower plant in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 21-28.
    20. Sadeghi, Azin & Zhunusova, Eliza & Günter, Sven & Dieter, Matthias, 2023. "Households' livelihood in restricted forest landscapes: What is the impact of contextual factors?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(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:eee:forpol:v:106:y:2019:i:c:9. 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.